I guess I have been fortunate. I had 256,000 miles on my 89 Dakota 4x4 when I
sold it and never had a front end part go. I did grease the upper and lower
ball joints and the inner and outer tie rod ends at every oil change.
My 99 4x4 has 91,000 on it so far and the front end is still tight. I still
grease the inner and out tie rod ends and the lower ball joints at every oil
change and keep a close eye on the uppers.
Dave clement
99 SLT+ CC 4x4
In article <b26be6d904121007411169ad1b@mail.gmail.com>, andy.levy@gmail.com
(Andy Levy) writes:
>
>
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:34:01 +0000 (UTC), Walt@walt-n-ingrid.com
> <Walt@walt-n-ingrid.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yea, I heard a brief mention on the radio this morning. What I find
surprising
> > is the recall recommendation only covers 2000-2003 model years. This has
been
> > a long time complaint of many Dakota/Durango owners. I know personally,
while
> > the recommended recall does not apply to my either of Dakotas, while
installing
> > the lift kit into my '88, the new OEM lower control arms I bought had new
ball
> > joints pre-pressed in from the factory. Those ball joints were junk with
> > between 1/8" and 1/4" play in them right at the parts counter and I could
move
> > them with just my forefinger and thumb. If I let go, the ball stud would
flop
> > to the side with no resistance. I was told by the parts guy "that is
normal".
> > Major difference from the Moog units I pressed in only 2 hours later. I
think
> > more people need to complain and try to force the NHTSA into expanding the
> > recall recommendation. Obviously they don't have all the facts.
>
> I think the bulk of the complaints that have been logged are for 2000+
> trucks. Older vehicles, people expect "parts to just go, it's normal
> wear."
>
> IIRC, 2000 was the year they switched from greasable to non-greasable
> balljoints. Coincidence? I think not!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 01 2005 - 11:48:08 EST