Front Axle / Front Suspension: Stepped contol arm bushings

[59 lark]

I'm doing a frame up on a 59' lark for the wife. frame is paint and I'm in the process of rebuilding the front suspension.I installed the lower inner control arms bushings they have a nice step on the outer housing.The bushing for the upper inner control arms has taper step, not a define step like the lower inner control arms bushings.I pressed the bushings into the lower control arms.I bent one of the flanges on a bushing. I stuck a screw driver between the control arm and the bushing flange to bend it back and I pulled the bushing out part ways. My questions is are the upper bushing made wrong and are not fitting tight into the control arms.

[JoeHall]

They sound OK. Just be sure to cinch the cap bolts down tight when done. Some folks here like to set the car back on the springs first, and some tighten them while it is still up off the ground. Whatever, just make sure they are tight. Then, after the first 100 miles or so check them again, and again at around 500 mile. After that, check them when you grease the front end every 5,000-10,000 miles.

[59 lark]

I order another set of bushings from a second Studebaker Suppler. I was told that the bushings that I would be receiving are the same as in the picture on the web site.The ones that I received are the same as the first set. Joe, you are saying that the bushing will not turn inside the control arm, when they are tighten.

[41 Frank]

Upper and lower inner control arm bushings should be tight after pressing them in. If not something is wrong, like the hole in the control arm is wallowed out or something is wrong with the bushing itself.

[59 lark]

When I pressed the brushing out of the control arm they were tight and not turning in the control arms. I then glass bead blasted all the parts, and everything looked good.I think the bushing are wrong.

I have the night shift starting today.I'll try to post a pic of the bushing tomorrow.

[41 Frank]

While I do not know where you purchased your upper bushings, if you purchased them from one of us Studebaker parts vendors I have no doubt you would have received the right ones.

When I pressed the brushing out of the control arm they were tight and not turning in the control arms. I then glass bead blasted all the parts, and everything looked good.I think the bushing are wrong.

I have the night shift starting today.I'll try to post a pic of the bushing tomorrow.

[r1lark]

I'm in the process of replacing the inner bushings on a '62 GT Hawk, and I found that I had no more MOOG K3044 (upper inner) bushings left, so had to order a set of 1553430 bushings ($54.50 for 4) from Studebaker International (SI). Also picked up a set of two MOOG K5196 bushings ($10.74 for 2) for '55 thru mid-60s or so Chevrolets to examine, since I've heard of people using these also.

After reading about Willard's (59 lark

[bezhawk]

The serrations are a good thing. They dig in and keep the inner sleeve from turning. They are never supposed to turn on the shaft. The rubber is what deflects or twists, and only the rubber.

[59 lark]

I think what I'm going to do is replace the bushing that I got from "SI" that is loose with the ones from Studebakerparts.com which seem to be the same.If they stay tight, I'll wait til the Lark is up and running to see if the bushings turn in the control arms.If the SP.com bushing do not help than I will try the MOOG bushings. I'll try do a better job updating the Lark project.For some reason I'm having trouble posting pics.

Thanks for the help,and thanks for the images r1lark.

[JoeHall]

Looks like the GM bushing would call for either cutting down dimension 'C' a bit, or increasing the ID of the holes in the arms. It may be ideal, if an arm is seriously wallowed out. But .030" is quite a bit of difference between OEM/repro by SI, and the GM bushings in that, most critical area. Its almost interesting enough to try a set of GM's, just to see what would happen, maybe with a spare 'A' arm.

[bezhawk]

If the Gm bushing is available in urethane, it may be a good upgrade for handling, without going all the way to delrin.

[SN-60]

I'm in the process of replacing the inner bushings on a '62 GT Hawk, and I found that I had no more MOOG K3044 (upper inner) bushings left, so had to order a set of 1553430 bushings ($54.50 for 4) from Studebaker International (SI). Also picked up a set of two MOOG K5196 bushings ($10.74 for 2) for '55 thru mid-60s or so Chevrolets to examine, since I've heard of people using these also.

After reading about Willard's (59 lark) issues with his upper inner bushings, I decided to check dimensions of the SI bushings against the measurements of the MOOG K3044 found on a MOOG Cross Reference/Measurement Chart. Also decided to compare the MOOG K5196 bushings to see how close they come to the original bushing dimensions. (I tried to attach this MOOG document, but it is too large to upload to the Forum.)

Results are in the first image below, double click to enlarge. The SI bushings are very close to the original. Like Willard, I did notice that the 'repro' bushings have more of a 'taper' as opposed to a defined step on the OD. However, the OD dimensions (where the bushing will press into the control arm) of the repros are very close to the MOOG K3044 OD dimension, and actually a few thousands larger (which is good). The other observation is that the ID of the bushing sleeve on the SI bushing is slightly larger than the MOOG dimensions by about .005" (five thousandths).

The MOOG K5196 bushings are interesting. I have heard of people using these, and I'll probably try them on the next front end that I do. A picture comparing the SI bushing to a MOOG K5196 is below, with the SI repro bushing on the left. One observation is that both ends of the MOOG K5196 inner sleeve are serrated; this would concern me on the inner end where the sleeve will touch the step on the control arm shaft. It would probably not be too hard to get rid of the serrations on the inner end of the sleeve. The second observation on the MOOG K5196 that you would have to be careful not to press the bushing in too far, since there is no step to stop the bushing at the correct place.

I’ll update when the SI bushings have been installed into the upper control arms.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21785[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]21781[/ATTACH]

Thanks for posting this bit of info.......Well done!

[r1lark]

Looks like the GM bushing would call for either cutting down dimension 'C' a bit, or increasing the ID of the holes in the arms. It may be ideal, if an arm is seriously wallowed out. But .030" is quite a bit of difference between OEM/repro by SI, and the GM bushings in that, most critical area. Its almost interesting enough to try a set of GM's, just to see what would happen, maybe with a spare 'A' arm.

Joe, I agree with your observation. And of course, as has been pointed out in other posts regarding using the GM bushing, the ID of the inner sleeve will have to be increased to fit over the control arm shaft.

I was hoping that someone who has actually used these GM bushings would see this and chime in here on what they did to install them. Nothing beats hearing someone's actual experiences!

[bezhawk]

One could always chuck the shaft in a lathe and turn it down to fit.