I'm the same way. Inquisitive.

I should have clarified.

This is not 'my' own design. I never referred anywhere that I personally designed and make these.

These are a direct copy of the same balljoint used in Montero/Pajero's overseas.

I gave the specs to a certified machine shop locally who made them.

There are different thicknesses, makes and designs.

I chose to use the one that has had no effect on our vehicles and the same design that people have been using over on the other side of the ocean for quite some time.

There doesn't seem to be one single manufacturer/patent making these (identical one's). There are various Mitsu 4x4 outlets/online overseas that pump out hundreds of aftermarket products. It's just too bad we don't get them here.

Taking something that's been already designed/implemented, is currently being sold and used on Montero/Pajero's is a different story.

To question it's use or safety factor would be the same thing like someone posting up new shocks or anything modification/suspension-related.

The spacers are machined out of 6061-T6 aluminum.

If I'm being unrealistic about the price, I'll knock it down.

I just have to figure out how much in the hole I'll be once they are sold.

I only have 11 sets left. I had 15 sets made up.

Flat spacers will push the wheels outward at the top, changing the camber angle much more than the tapered spacers.

A proper alignment will need to be done after installing the spacers.

For those of you who don't know what a balljoint spacer is or what's its function is, see here :

http://www.4crawler.com/4x4/ForSale/BallJointSpacer.shtml

What is the difference between just cranking up the torsion bars or running the ball joint spacers up front?
While both techniques can provide the same amount of lift, the ball joint spacers will afford a softer ride and more suspension flex compared to the cranked torsion bars for a given ride height. Why? The more the torsion bars are cranked, the tighter they get and the less likely they are to allow for full travel. With the spacers, you get the added ride height of the spacers without the need to tighten up the torsion bars as much, so the suspension can flex more. As far as the suspension and steering components go, there is no difference in stress or wear and tear on them at a given ride height whether that be from cranking up the torsion bars or running the spacers. So running the spacers gives the advantage of increased suspension travel over simply cranling up the torsion bars. Of course the advantage of the cranked torsion bars is that it can be done at no additional cost.

The taper is there to help counter-act the camber.

Here is the original spacer being used in the UK:

Well thank you! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" /> I'll take a set and i'll write a full review once they've gone through the rocks and some road miles. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" /> This is how you get things done in the offroad aftermarket industry, i guess that's why i'm so far behind. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Can you take some pics of these installed?

It still looks like the heads of the bolts would be "seating" on a surface that is not perpendicular to the threads.

X2! Everyone loves pics <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


I only have $83 USD in paypal...waiting for some money to go in to buy a set <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" /> Can I put in a down payment to guarantee a set? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

In order from top to bottom :

Flat hex head bolt mates to the top of the upper control arm which is flat. Perfect mating surface.

The bottom of the upper control arm is flat which mates to the top of the flat taper (spacer).

The bottom of the spacer (non-tapered) is flat and mates to top of the balljoint which is flat.

The bottom of the balljoint is a flexible/swivel joint connecting to the lower arm.

With these facts in mind, the heads of the bolts are seated on a flat surface which is the top of the upper arm.


Upper arm -> taper -> flat bottom -> balljoint -> swivel joint.

If the balljoint was a solid shaft connecting the upper and lower arms, then a tapered spacer would not physically work.

Because the balljoint flexes, it allows for the taper which is there to correct the 'extra height' that throws off the camber.

The taper can be viewed as the bottom angle of the upper control arm.

Side profile pic below.

If this was not tapered, you would see the balljoint pushed outwards to the left side of the picture, away from the Monty.

You had a great idea by making these local to the North American market. I see what the spacer does.

It keeps the balljoint stud centered in it's cup to allow full range of motion after a t-bar crank. If you just crank the t-bar for max lift you now have the ball joint stud cocked off to one side and when a person cuts the droopstop it could cause the balljoint to overtravel. Further complication as well as the camber issue.

I for one think cranking the t-bars for 2" of lift is kiind of like putting lipstick on a pig...in the end it's still a pig. You gain no performance improvement in the suspension geometry by cranking, limit the up travel due to higher preload, not as much down travel, it's harder on all the steering, cv's and balljoints. About the only thing I would say is good about it is the extra ground clearance and fitting larger tires. I cranked my for 1/2" to reduce sag, restore factory geometry and which has no effect on any of these above mentioned items. It gave me room for 33x10.5's because mine has the factory 30mm body lift.

Just my friendly 2 cents worth <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

How does it increase preload if it is not against the bump stops?

What vehicle are you talking about?

Why not fill in your signature so we may know what you have?

By winding the screw in at the adjustment end of the t-bar you are increasing the amount of force or push against the ground.

It's a 2.8 Pajero V46 Chassis

I could probably fit 34x10.5's fine without trimming but I suspect the fuel mileage would be impacted even further.