82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post in this forum for topics relating to suspension, steering, and brakes

Moderators: GRNSHRK, ron, bfons

Post Reply
User avatar
Brucey
6 Series Guru
6 Series Guru
Posts: 10077
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by Brucey »

In a nutshell; the centre tie rod often wears on RHD E24s. Replacement requires splitting four ball joints (in my case) using at least two different types of splitter. Although not especially complicated, changing the centre rod it isn?t a very easy job to do. From my observations I now have a hypothesis regarding possible accelerated wear on this part in RHD cars, about which I would welcome the views of others.

The details:

I've recently had to sort my steering out; an MOT failure on the centre tie rod came as no surprise (it had been noted as worn previously) so I ordered a replacement part and set to. (BTW I did notice that the movement in the worn joint during the 'shake' test was far greater than I could produce under the car by waggling the road wheels with the steering lock on, so be warned, this wear is difficult to be sure of before an MOT test unless you replicate their test exactly.)

The centre tie rod has two integral ball joints (one for the idler arm, one for the steering box arm) and also has female taper sockets for the track rod end ball joints. It took me three sessions to sort it out; hopefully you guys can learn from my mistakes and do it far more quickly.

Session #1 revealed that of the six ball joint splitters to hand only a (borrowed) 18mm opening scissor action splitter would have any chance of splitting the track rod joints without damaging the rubber boots. Also this same splitter wouldn't work on the integral joints; a different approach would probably be required, and certainly to avoid boot damage here too.

Session #2 resulted in a second, modified 27mm opening scissor action ball joint splitter suitable for the integral joints. I bought a cheapish one and attacked it with an angle grinder until it fitted. The jaws bear against two small lugs on the forging which are probably meant for hammering; if opened up to 28mm the splitter might well slip off. Access is tight; on axle stands with the battery disconnected and the steering lock off the steering linkage can be positioned for best access. I removed the subframe brace (17mm socket + 15mm flattish wrench) and the upper control arm heat shield (10mm socket on 3/8" drive stubby flex-head) before tackling the ball joints. If the splitter is much over 80mm length measured away from the ball joint centre you may find it difficult to use in the limited space available. On the ball joints you may find 17mm castellated nuts and split pins (on older cars mainly) or (more recently) nylocs or crush nuts.

In any event there are about ten turns of a binding nut to do with limited access. Here I found that a stubby ratchet ring spanner was just the job once the nut was started loose using a more conventional/longer wrench. Needless to say if the nut is binding very much it is an excellent idea to remove it completely before splitting the joint, as otherwise it will be difficult to hold the centre part and stop it from turning.

In all cases the scissor action splitters were at (or slightly beyond) yield point when the joints finally split, despite a good overnight soaking in penetrant and a few helping nudges with a hammer. Normally I would use the 'hammer only' technique for splitting such joints and not bother with a splitter tool, but the access is dreadful here and putting big shock loads through the steering box doesn't seem terribly smart either. IIRC some have resorted to removing the centre rod with both arms attached to it so that they can work on the bench.

Actually if the centre rod is to be reused, a 'pickle fork' or similar can't easily be used with a centre rod like mine; the rubber boots appear to be held in place with crimped rings and may not be easily replaceable in the event of damage.

Between finding the right tools, modifying the splitters etc it took about three hours to get the old part off, during which time I'd managed to smack myself in the face with a self-ejecting ball-joint splitter. My nose bled so much my eyes started filling up with blood as I lay beneath the car turning the air blue... Imagine my joy enhancement when I discovered right after this that I'd been sent a centre tie rod for an E34 not an E24.... It looks very similar, but is about 30mm longer.

My joy was positively unconfined when I discovered that although a good quality inexpensive pattern part (like the E34 one I'd been sent) used to be available for the E24/E28, it isn't any more, so I'd have to pay about three times the cost for another one, as well as put the old one back to be able to move the car, and take it off again.....

Session #3. Finally got the new part fitted OK. It came in a Lemf?rder bag, but (like the OE BMW part it replaced) is actually made by TRW. Apart from the BMW marks (on the ball joint backing plates) on the OE one, the two parts were externally indistinguishable. I did note that the old part had Moly grease in it where the new part didn?t, so I added some moly grease under the rubber boot of the new one, too. I didn't like the look of the new crush nuts that were supplied, and anyway there are only two of them, so I re-used all four old nylocs having crimped them a little to make the nylon collars snug again.

Note that these nuts are a fine thread (M10 x 1mm I think) so replacement nuts of the correct type are not so easy to source. Some careful dressing of the track rod end ball joint threads was required, since these parts were quite badly bruised by the ball joint splitter; the nuts would not have come off or gone back on again without fettling. Other than this it was quite straightforward to get everything back together again.

Now, here's the thing; at first sight it seems perfectly reasonable that the steering arm ball joint always wears out on the centre tie rod, after all it is far more loaded than the idler arm ball joint. BUT on all three rods I've looked at closely (including the worn one) the left side joint (for the idler arm on a RHD car) was preloaded more than almost any other ball joint of similar size I've come across. In all three cases it was certainly not possible to move it by hand, and in one case it took a sizeable thwack with a hammer to move it at all. By contrast on both E24 and E34 new parts, the right side ball joint had far less preload and could be moved easily by hand.

Had this just been one part I would have said 'manufacturing variations' BUT on the TRW-made E24 parts the two ball joints also LOOK DIFFERENT. The left side has a domed backing plate and the right side has a flat one. My hypothesis is that;

1. The preloads are intended to be different on each side, and that on the TRW parts (but it seems not on the pattern E34 part where they must use another technique to achieve the same effect) the flat vs. domed backing plate helps to achieve the correct preload as the joint is crimped into position, and;

2. The preloads are designed for a left-hand drive car, and;

3. No-one makes a RHD specific part with the preloads reversed, and;

4. This is why these parts wear out with monotonous regularity on RHD cars.

My MOT tester has seen everything. He used to work in a BMW dealership when E24/E28 were current models and he reckoned that some cars needed a new centre rod EVERY YEAR. My 150000 miler has had at least three before now so I suppose it could be worse.....

So, has anyone else looked at these joints and tried to measure the preload?
What do you think of my hypothesis? ( I feel I should say that I have not cross-checked all the part numbers, maybe someone else has?)

When I didn?t have the right part to hand, I experimented with re-crimping the right side ball joint. Although a little worn, it seemed that the preload could be increased (temporarily at least) in the joint using this approach. Had the new part not turned up in time I would have submitted the car like this for MOT before the retest time limit ran out?.
If necessary, I may have a go at a revised centre rod with an adjustable preload on the right side ball joint; maybe that will last a bit longer....

cheers
Attachments
tools v3.jpg
tools v3.jpg (68.07 KiB) Viewed 13003 times
Tie rod v3.jpg
Tie rod v3.jpg (43.03 KiB) Viewed 13003 times
details v5.jpg
details v5.jpg (69.94 KiB) Viewed 13003 times
~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TimS

Post by TimS »

Brucey

Your understanding of the mechanics of the centre tie rod are far greater than mine! I have just removed mine as I am replacing all of the steering suspension components. Mine was not the original even though the car has only 50K and was a genuine OE part. I had only a Halfords splitter that would not remove the ball joint (gap too small). I hacksawed through the shaft and then used the splitter to remove the remaining piece. I found that the idler arm joint had no movement in any plane, I thought it was supposed to be like this!! Not so sure now. I noticed that the replacement is either 75 or 25 from german and swedish or 65 from Motormec. I guess I will go for the Motormec offering. The ball joint that had no movement was unmarked with no damage to the boot and the car has not been used in winter for ages. I had the advantage of having the car on ramps. If I was going to use the tie rod again I would have butchered the splitter to bite on the cast in lugs on the idler arm.

Regards Tim
User avatar
Brucey
6 Series Guru
6 Series Guru
Posts: 10077
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Brucey »

ooh, be careful.... once the centre rod is out the steering motion of the wheels is quite free to turn and the ramps may not stop them.....

nice work with the hacksaw BTW....


cheers
~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Drew

Post by Drew »

cheers Brucey and happy new year, another superb write-up. Come spring I'll be under the front end to sort out my vague steering issues. As my car is E12 though how much of this will be the same as your E28? Do you know if they share the same basic steering layout??

(I know the front suspension is very different.)

on stands the response of the wheels to small movements in the steering wheel is very good, no discernable play. But with weight on the wheels there is an inch or so of movement in the steering wheel before the wheels show any sign of turning. So far I think I've eliminated the UJs in the steering column and the steering box itself (the box arm seems 100% connected to the steering wheel) so that leaves all the idler arm, tie rod gubbins.
Plan is to put the front wheels onto something like breize blocks so that I can see where the slack is with the weight on the front rubber (maybe/ hopefully)
User avatar
Brucey
6 Series Guru
6 Series Guru
Posts: 10077
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Brucey »

Hi Drew,
the basic layout of the steering components is the same on E12 but all the parts are of course different. I have not investigated the RHD vs LHD preload issue for E12 parts as yet but it wouldn't surprise me; my MOT tester said he used to do plenty of E12 type centre tie rods too.

BTW there is more to come on this thread- I have been stripping out the old centre tie rod and I found inside a feeble spring that will only ever exert about 28kg preload on the Right-hand side ball joint; enough for the one on the idler arm, nowhere near enough for the one on the steering box. A mod is in development for this.....

cheers
~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
User avatar
Brucey
6 Series Guru
6 Series Guru
Posts: 10077
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Centre tie rod; adjustable ball joint for RHD application.

Post by Brucey »

Some of you will remember the post above regarding the centre tie rod that is fitted to RHD cars 82-89. So far as I can tell, they only commonly supply one part for both LHD and RHD cars, despite the fact that the two balljoints are differently preloaded, in a way that suits LHD cars but not RHD cars. If you have this part in your hand, the RH joint will be quite easy to move, and the left one may need to be hit with a hammer, even on a well-used example. There really is a big difference in the preload on these joints......

My MOT chappie is well versed in the ways of this vintage of BMW, and 18 months ago was keen to fail my car on its 'sloppy' RH ball joint; 'yeah, they need changing every year, they do....'. So I changed it for a fresh Lemforder part, identical to the one that was fitted.

On the last MOT he said 'you fitted a new centre tie rod last year, didn't you?'; 'yes' I replied. 'Well you need another one....this is loose....', he continued.... 'its only done 3000 miles....' I said.

He passed it with an advisory, and I made a note to do what I'd planned to do before, i.e. make a revised, adjustable preload RH joint. I'm not sure every MOT tester would fail this joint in this way; it takes light prybar force to move it against the preload spring, but light prybar force is probably comparable to steering loads.

The picture below says it all really. I used an angle grinder to remove the rear cap on the joint. Inside I found a feeble preload spring, OK for the idler arm loading, but no good at all for the steering box loading. I ground the back of the ball flat to make room inside the housing, and turned up a brass carrier piece for three belleville washers. The washers and the carrier are designed so that the load is about 400lbs when the washers go flat; any further tightening load is then borne by the carrier, so that the washers cannot easily be deformed. The adjuster is a threaded item robbed from an old hydraulic control valve. Conveniently it has a 1mm pitch, so I can set a known preload very easily.

Welding was tricky; the delrin ( I think) seat is easily damaged by heat, as are the belleville washers. I welded the joint in 1/4" length sections, flooding the joint with water between bursts of weld to keep it cool. I used an old pump-action liquid soap dispenser to pump water into the unit; this way I could cool the joint very quickly, one handed, immediately after every weld.

I made a mistake when welding; I assumed that the main weld could be 'hot' enough to overlap my three tiny tack welds without having to grind them out first. However, I went a bit colder than I'd originally planned, worried about the delrin and the washers. When I'd finished, I leak tested the joint with compressed air and had three leaks, one for each tack weld. D'oh! It took some time to grind out the bad parts of the weld and make them leak tight, far longer than it would have taken to do it properly the first time....

Once leak tight I finally dried the joint with compressed air and alcohol, then painted it, before greasing the joint via the adjuster hole. If the feel of the revised RH joint is anything to go by, the left side joint has a lot more than 400lbs preload in it.

In case you are worried by the potential consequences of weld failure, don't be; the joint can't come apart, the ball will be held captive and the joint will just be very loose. The weld I've put in should have a failure load of at least ten tonnes, so I don't think its very likely to fail.

I have yet to fit the revised part, or see what preload setting is correct. However if the old joint was loose enough to move in normal service (and it might have been, or it would not have worked loose in 3000 miles perhaps) then when I fit the revised part I may improve the steering feel.

[note; I finally fitted the part this year -2013- and the steering is considerably better than it was with a brand-new part (with the wrong preloads).]

If all this seems like a major faff, it is; a 'quick and dirty' solution is often to give the back of the RH balljoint a healthy smack will a ball-pein hammer. Its best to do this with the rod off the car, or at least with a heavy bolster behind it; the idea is to remove all clearance in the joint by deforming the rear cover. I have seen several used examples that bear the scars of such an approach, presumably for MOT purposes....

All you LHD chaps don't know how lucky you are.......

cheers
Attachments
this picture is three years old and finally got round to fitting the part a few months ago....ahem
this picture is three years old and finally got round to fitting the part a few months ago....ahem
adjustable tie rod v1.jpg (65.77 KiB) Viewed 12128 times
~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
User avatar
jps635
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: NZ

Post by jps635 »

Hi Brucey

So there are no off the shelf after market upgrades for the tie rods like with the numerous options for the control arms?

I've got to do my idler arm and would rather go through the lot at once and be done with it.

What are your thoughts on the spherical bearing upgrades.

Thank Chris
'85 635csi JPS (RA2-66)
User avatar
Brucey
6 Series Guru
6 Series Guru
Posts: 10077
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Brucey »

I have not really looked into it, but for all I know spherical bearings may be just an expensive way of replicating what you get as stock in the case of tie rods; stock parts are effectively polymer on metal spherical bearings, just made differently.

The problem with the preload on the RH balljoint in the centre tie rod is fairly easily solved as per above.

Changing the idler arm is ten-minute job; you only need to split one ball-joint and undo one bolt to do it.

cheers
~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
duracel79
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:19 pm
Location: Stevenage, UK

Re: 82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by duracel79 »

Bit of a thread revival but I thought this may be useful:

Walloth & Nesch have an offer on some steering components this week and I noticed they offer both LHD and RHD centre links.

https://www.wallothnesch.com/angebote/w ... i-e24.html

I wonder how different they really are?

Cheers

Ben
User avatar
ColinC.sg
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2020 4:09 pm
Location: Singapore

Re: 82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by ColinC.sg »

Hi Bruce and all,
Thanks for this post, although it is an old post its an issue I’m facing right now.
I had 2 centre tie rods replaced and each lasted no more then 1000km before rattling.

I have a 1981 RHD car, based on realoem the part number that need for the centre tie-rod is 32211108081 or 32211108070
Im not sure what part was used in the last 2 rounds, but I’m guessing it may not have been the correct part.

Anyways, does any of you have experience with RHDs pre 1982?
And would the above part number work properly and last for a reasonable time?

I just wrote to Wallothnesch and the are currently restocking the 32211108081 part.

Quick question, is there a RHD/LHD part difference for this?
Does anyone have experience with the above part for pre1981 cars?

Does anyone have any experience using other aftermarket /uprated centre tie rods for RHD cars pre 1982?


Thanks all in advance!
User avatar
jps635
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: NZ

Re: 82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by jps635 »

Hi Colin. I can't answer your q re pre '82 cars but have had to replace a couple in my '85, the most recent last year where thanks to a tip from an Aus member managed to get one from Rock Auto in the US (Delphi brand). To prevent further problems sourcing future replacements I sent my old one (Lemforder part) to a rebuild firm to get the RH ball joint replaced, with the same pre-load as the left. Perhaps you can do the same.
'85 635csi JPS (RA2-66)
User avatar
ColinC.sg
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2020 4:09 pm
Location: Singapore

Re: 82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by ColinC.sg »

HI jps635,
Thanks for the input… will definitely try to find a place that can help rebuild ball joints with the correct pre-loads… is there any specifications for the preload?
Meanwhile i will be trying to source for a replacement as well so that i can work on the existing worn one.
Thanks
TimU
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 2:16 am
Location: Sydney

Re: 82-89 centre tie rod; a RHD problem?

Post by TimU »

I've placed an order today from ClassicBM in Melbourne, Australia who stock a RHD specific part.

Centre steering tie rod / Track Rod / Drag Link (32211129017).
https://www.classicbm.com.au/product/ce ... 211129017/
Product number: 32211129017
Brand: Trucktec (high quality aftermarket)

Centre steering drag link, right hand drive specific.
Please note: BMW painted these in a dark red colour to denote them being RHD specific. LHD are black (32211129014 for reference)
This item is painted black due to being manufactured along side LHD ones in the factory, however it has been manufactured to suit RHD vehicles specifically.
04/1986 635csi Euro spec
Australian Delivered, RHD
Post Reply