What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Need to hear your thought on polyethylene boby mount bushings.

86_M1009

86_M1009

1986 USMC M1009 CUCV K5 blazer
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Posts
23
Reaction score
0
Location
Corona Ca
The body to frame rubber on my M1009 K5 is 30 years old. In fact my tailgate is cracked and the pasenger side latch is misaligned die to left side body sag from blown out bushings. LMC has individual bushings as well as a wide variety of kits. But the botom line is I can get qn entire poly kit for the price of just the very rear mount rubber only. I hate the poly squeak but the guys at Energy Suspensiin swear tjat if you lube em rigjt at installthwy will not squeak. Sounds a lot like doing a break job right vs wrong to me. I also wonder about the bushings maoing the ride harsher and maybe even cracking the body do to rhe rigid vs flexible bolt up.

I would love to hear from people who have experience with poly bushings for the body mount locations as well as supension since that ruber is also old as dirt. So please holler at me.
 
I have an Energy Suspension poly kit on my K5, no lube and no squeaks.
 
I am with both of these guys. In the roughly four years or so I have had the poly mounts in my blazer, which includes lots of wheeling and road time, I have never heard a squeak out of them.
 
Thanks guys. I will see if anyone has em in stock local so I can get em in asap. If not I will have to suck up the shopping with LMC.
 
Found an online store that had the energy poly bushings for all frame to body points shiped for 90 bucks. Can't even do just the rear in oem for that.
 
I have poly bushings on several K5's and love them. I use anti- seize on the bushing and sleeve to keep them from sticking together.
 
Mine haven't squeaked since I put them in maybe 15 years ago?

I question whether they are good or bad, I suspect the rubber helps at least somewhat keep stress from the frame flex from twisting the body up, but I can't definitively say that...even with rubber mounts the frame moves too much.
 
dyeager535 said:
...even with rubber mounts the frame moves too much.
Click to expand...

Yea, I have never owned a GM product in my life. I have always driven toyota trucks because they are hard to measure up to. But I always loved the blazer growing up and wanted one forever. So I decided I had to just get one. When I crawled under to look her over I was bewildered by the puny frame in comparison to a much smaller and lighter duty toyota pick up of the same era. The truck I learned to drive in was an 86 yoda 4wd pickup and that frame is more than twice what I see under the blazer. Kiada shamefull but then again what did I expect from the freeloaders anyway. Still love here, just wish she was built right.
 
86_M1009 said:
Yea, I have never owned a GM product in my life. I have always driven toyota trucks because they are hard to measure up to. But I always loved the blazer growing up and wanted one forever. So I decided I had to just get one. When I crawled under to look her over I was bewildered by the puny frame in comparison to a much smaller and lighter duty toyota pick up of the same era. The truck I learned to drive in was an 86 yoda 4wd pickup and that frame is more than twice what I see under the blazer. Kiada shamefull but then again what did I expect from the freeloaders anyway. Still love here, just wish she was built right.
Click to expand...

GM's theory when they built these trucks was that the flexy frames made for a better ride. It was the technology at the time, and you are talking late 60's early 70's develpment...so you can't really blame it on anything other than what was available at the time for tech. The body style just happened to last so long that by the time GM abandoned it, other makers had put out products that had different design theory. Looking at it one way, the front suspension on these trucks will last pretty much forever. I'll challenge any IFS rig to do the same. But with technology you got fuel injection, better ride (generally), overdrive transmissions/better gearing, more powerful engines, etc. Realistically, thinking about it, the only thing these trucks have over new ones is the solid front axle. Well, and they look cooler. :) There are some cost and complexity factors, but other than that?

The problem for the K5's is that there is no "twist" point. The pickups will twist extensively at the gap between the cab and the bed. The K5 has nothing like that. The body is therefore a structural portion of the entire frame. All the load is transferred to the body.

I'll be boxing my spare frame when I get around to it, because I suspect a LOT of the issues with the K5's have to do with the frame flexing...cracked tailgates, horrid popping of the roof panel, leaking seals for the topper, etc. I intend to make the suspension do it's job. :)
 
I have to disagree with you. Toyota was doing it better back then with available technology. The fisrst gen 4runner also has no bed to provide a flex point but they built the frame like a tank. I know people still wheeling mid eighties 4runers. The real problem with gm and the other two detroit steel trio is they were fat and lazy. There was a long trend of stigmatism towards Americans who jumped the fence and bought comunist automobiles. The detroit motor trio capitalized on this and just kept making the same old junk decade after decade. Auto unions did not help either. Blazers are bad ass and I love them. I hate all three of the so called American car makers though. This blazer is the only non toyota I will ever own. And with 13 years of active duty, my patriotism is hard to criticize.
 
You are comparing a 1984 (right? first year 4runner) model year vehicle to one that debuted in 1973. Heck, how long did we go without convertibles due to rollover issues? Also, which is what killed GM, there was a certain amount of complacency in the 80's from the domestic makers, the imports HAD to try harder, to gain market share.

I can't say GM didn't get cheap or lazy, but these trucks would have been designed while the first gen Camaro's, GTO's, 442's and what not were rolling off the production lines...it wasn't the evil years yet.

I believe Ford and Dodge had different approaches to the frames at the same time, I don't know for certain, I don't care much about them.

I just know that GM advertised these truck frames as having that "feature". There are ads that exist that talk about it, but I can't find one now.
 
84, 86, that mid 80s time frame.. My blazer is an 86 and the toy pickup I learned to drive and wheel in is an 86 and my dads current 4runner is an 87 which is first gen and has the same frame as an 86. Those import frames are imeasuably better in every way. The point I am bashing is "AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ". The tech gm used was outdated in 86 and not even cutting edge or even a great idea when it was new. The corperate american way then and now was to push it out the door no mater how fubar it is. The latest example to come to mind without even thinking is the known issue of luxury suvs throwing spark plugs through the hood. Is it om that it happened, maybe. Is it acceptable they did not learn and fix themselves? Hell no. The sad part is we we never hold them accountable for their bullcrap.

did not inovate for a couple decades. No domestic car company did in that era and they still don't. Nothing any US headquartered car company has done ingenerations is cutting edge. They just try to impliment the stuf the germans ans japaneese do but can't even get that right.
 
One side note about ifs and getting it right. I remeber sitting and watching this deuchebag one day. Brand new 4runner in 1987 end of summer when the dam we used to wheel in was pretty low and had a ton of mud flats and deep mud pits. This jackass was trying to take his bone stock 4runner ocross this mud pit maybe 100 feet across that had bunn dug up by all the big trucks with big tires and lifts. He was not getting very far on 25 inch tires and a little hamster wheel. He kept trying and soon decided to hit it faster and faster every time. There was a slight dip just before the mud and he was getting pretty well airborn. He was probably in third gear cuz he was full on clearing the front section putting the front tires full 30 feet into the mud, landing front first, and stoping dead to be pulled out and try again. We watched for 2 hours and went home. I seen that same 4runner there year after year till I joined the navy and went to Japan for a few years. This ifs on the 86 and up toyotas is as bomb proof as it gets and while does not articulate for crap, I will put against any gm front suspension for durability. I have seen a front coilover riped loose once, but it was a bolt mid travel and the kid ran acrose a ditch full out in 5th. We welded the mount back together on the spot and wheeled the crap outmof it the rest of that thanksgiving weekend.
 
Last edited:
love my poly bushings but lock tight the bolts at least with blue if not red. I ran out and had to pull the bolts and apply some if not they back off
 
I went with LMC, OEM type Rubber , Im old school and did not want to deal with any squeaking, yeah they cost more but quite.
 
FM Keller said:
I went with LMC, OEM type Rubber , Im old school and did not want to deal with any squeaking, yeah they cost more but quite.
Click to expand...

In the end it was the 90 shipped vs 230 plus shipping that had a lot to do with my choice to give poly a shot. I will lube it for good measure and hope my reults are as happy as most seem to be now a day's. The last time I looked into poly was 15 years ago. Maybe they got it dialed in.
 
Last edited:
i havent heard a peep out of the body mounts, now poly stering bushings will make all kinds of noise
 
Do you have to drop the gas tank to do the rear or can it just be lowered a little? I've been tossing around the idea to do the poly with the ord 1" pucks .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom