Tell me again ... why do we hate D60s w/ balljoints?

[Eric M.]

I've been seeing a lot of the D60s (I guess for newer model Fords) with ball joints.

Are the ball joints that much weaker than the king pins that they are the weak link?

I'm assuming they still use the bering and race at the opposite end of the balljoint (at the bottom) and that takes most of the load.

Are there any other differences that would make it weaker than our old favorite D60s?

I know some (if not all) have the unitized hubs. What does that mean? Are the berings and hub one single unit? Can you not swap out the berings if needed? Is the unitized hub any weaker than the regular hubd?


Thanks in advance.

Eric M.

 

[tarussell]

The B/J D60's do not have the bearing and race at the bottom to carry weight like the old style D60 did . From what I have seen the B/J D60's wear out much faster on a diesel equiped truck ( too much weight over the front axle ) than a lighter engined gas burner.
The old body style Fords used a B/J D60 with good old spindles and hubs just like we are comfortable with but the 1999 Super Dutys use a unitized bearing just like all the 1994 on up Dodge D60's with B/J's.

The D60's with B/J's are much stronger than the smaller B/J's used on 1/2 & 3/4 Ton stuff but it does not hold a candle to the king-pin / bearing style D60's for durrability and strength.

HTH , Tom

 

[Eric M.]

The B/J D60's do not have the bearing and race at the bottom to carry weight like the old style D60 did .

Do they use a balljoint at the bottom too?

Eric M.

 

[dave_90_blazer]

Do they use a balljoint at the bottom too?

Eric M.

yes

 

[sweetk30]

wheel bearing unit is sealed and all one thing. held in with 4 bolts or studs per manufacurer design. also thay tend to blow apart faster with 35" and bigger tires. and dont turn truck as tight as old style.

dynatrac has complet change over kit to old style bearings.

and the price of one unitized bearing assemble is not customer friendly.

 

[CyberSniper]

Well, I'd run a balljoint 60 if the only problem was the balljoints.

But, 80-96 Fords have a sh¡tty sixty. The spring perches are way too wide for leaf springs and tires bigger than 33s. The pinion is a solid 4" closer to the tire than a 77.5-79 Ford D60. So you say go to 4 link... which is peachy keen except there is nowhere to weld your links to on the driver's side.

So... we be talkin' about the "other" balljoint 60s. It gets even worse. We'll call these super sh¡tty sixties. There is about 1 year of Dodge BJ60 in the early 90s that was any good. The rest either got center axle disconnect (CAD), goofy carriers, or worse. Then you've got the unit bearings. These things cost a quarter of a real D60 apiece. And they don't last very long. The bearings are way too close together. It's like Jeep/Ford D44s... the bearings are so close together big tires eat them like candy.

I have faith in the balljoints, they're pretty beefy. I have no faith in the rest of the crap (mostly the unit bearings). Since the D60 craze started people began to believe that balljoint 60s are worth a thousand bucks also. If you could pick them up for a few hundred bucks (which is all they're worth IMHO) then I'd consider one.

 

[rjfguitar]

I haven't had any problems with my BJ60 under my Ram Cummins but I run stock tires and my truck has never pulled a gooseneck in it's life. However, my dad's Ram Cummins dually has seen a LOT of gooseneck pulling and recieved , new ball joints, new bearings, and a new hub on one side at 99K. I've heard a lot of bad things about the hubs on the FOrds, and if the Dodge 60's are identical, I won't be going with anything larger than maybe 285's one day.