Anyone tried the ball joint delete option?

[U&A]

I check them once per year
I used a high quality synthetic grease(Redline I think)
I believe they are timken
As long as you set the preload correctly and use a high quality grease,they should last for years

Thank you sir

 

[Sherman Bird]

Stumbled across this option on Youtube and hadn't seen it before. I haven't checked mine yet but the steering has been a little wonky and the steering column insert bearing option only made a slight improvement. I've got 85k on it and have been running wide 35's since it had 5k on it. Not much offroad use but our roads give the suspension plenty to complain about.

I don't know much about this stuff but it seems to be a better design unless I'm missing something. Pricey for sure though.
https://americanironoffroad.com/products/dodge-cummins-2000-to-2018-delete-systems

So, someone re-engineered a critical component which has major safety implications. Has this "improved" part met strict DOT and NTSHA specs? I'm HIGHLY dubious. Fitting "better" than stock parts is dubious. One example which has led to heated and hateful arguments over the years has been my observation about oil-treated air filters such as K&N causing way more than their share of drivability issues. Contaminated sensors and phantom fuel/air/correction DTC's have been way more often as have other maladies.

 

[Scottly]

Comparing a weight-bearing part to an oiled air filter is not a road that I'm really following...but ok. I think i see your point.

 

[Sherman Bird]

Comparing a weight-bearing part to an oiled air filter is not a road that I'm really following...but ok. I think i see your point.

Your perspicuity is commendable!

 

[06 Dodge]

I ran a 2004 3500 with the 5.9 diesel and had to replace ball joints every 60000 miles. The prevailing theory was the the weight of the Cummins caused the wear on the ball joints. I was wondering if the reviews you read were for both the Cummins and 6.4 hemi, or mostly the Cummins.

I put Moog HD greaseable Ball joint in my 06 CTD at 55K sold it with 115K and they were still good..

 

[70UTE]

I have the American iron off-road delete. Haven’t had any trouble with them going on 10k miles. They’re expensive but so far so good. 2013 Gas 2500 if that helps.

 

[Dean2]

One more vote for quality HD greaseable parts. OEM ball joints that could be greased typically outlasted the vehicles, new non-serviceable, not so much.

I also agree with Sherman, K&N's claims about performance and better filtration are very far off reality. Independant testing has proven time and again that their oil bath filters let more dust through but they keep claiming the opposite. Would not put their stuff in any vehicle I own. In the same league are the Miracle Oil additive makers and mileage improving throttle body add ons. Considering all of these snake oil salesman have been getting away with this for 50 years is pretty good evidence there is no reason to believe the published claims of the ball joint delete makers either.

 

[62Blazer]

One more vote for quality HD greaseable parts. OEM ball joints that could be greased typically outlasted the vehicles, new non-serviceable, not so much.

I also agree with Sherman, K&N's claims about performance and better filtration are very far off reality. Independant testing has proven time and again that their oil bath filters let more dust through but they keep claiming the opposite. Would not put their stuff in any vehicle I own. In the same league are the Miracle Oil additive makers and mileage improving throttle body add ons. Considering all of these snake oil salesman have been getting away with this for 50 years is pretty good evidence there is no reason to believe the published claims of the ball joint delete makers either.

I know this is getting off topic of the original post, but those "independent tests" concerning K&N filters are a joke. Regardless of how good or bad those filters are, the "tests" are nowhere close to being conclusive nor would any true manufacturer make a financial decision based on them. At best they would be considered an "indicator", but not any final conclusion. As far as the comment about being multiple tests......I really don't think there are "multiple" tests. There is only one larger scale test that I know of that was performed probably 20 years ago and just keeps getting brought up time and time again on posts. Again, it simply does not follow the standard protocol for reproducability and repeatability in testing. Basically, you can't take 1 sample and run 1 test on it and say that is the final results. You will always get variations in the test results.....so maybe on this one test it shows K&N being the "worst" filter, but maybe if you ran the test 20 times on 20 different K&N filters the average results show that K&N is the best? That is the way testing in the real-world works. I did this in the automotive industry for years and now do this in another industry.

 

[Dean2]

Well, I have also seen a bunch of "Real World" tests of K&N filters. A lot of guys took the bait and put them on their off road rigs. In every case, at the next service you would see fine dust AFTER the filter. You did not see that fine dust after the filter using the OEM paper filters. The only way to flow more air through the same surface area is less constriction. That means more very fine dust is going to pass though with the air.

Since you are a testing expert, perhaps you would like to do a"proper" test that meet your criteria andlet us know what you find, but for me, my eyes and experience tell me, no K&N on off road rigs.

 

[62Blazer]

So, someone re-engineered a critical component which has major safety implications. Has this "improved" part met strict DOT and NTSHA specs? I'm HIGHLY dubious. Fitting "better" than stock parts is dubious. One example which has led to heated and hateful arguments over the years has been my observation about oil-treated air filters such as K&N causing way more than their share of drivability issues. Contaminated sensors and phantom fuel/air/correction DTC's have been way more often as have other maladies.

In regards to the Dynatrac locking hub and wheel bearing kit, just keep in mind that it's really not a "re-engineering" or some new or revolutionary setup. The setup Dynatrac uses is simply the same design that every truck manufacturer used for 60+ years. The locking hubs with serviceable inner and outer tapered wheel bearings was the standard setup on trucks up to the 1990's to early 2000's era. I've repacked or replaced this style front wheel bearings dozens of times on my own or other people's trucks. My guess is they use all of the same dimensions and design parameters that Chevy, Ford, Dodge, Dana, etc... used for years and simply adapted the knuckle assembly to bolt onto the current axle. Manufacturers just went to the now common unit bearing setup around the time mentioned because they are easier to assembly and cheaper, and when they started getting away from the "serviceable" idea and instead with the "throw away" mentality. I can tell you that you can replace the entire unit bearing hub assembly quicker than you can service wheel bearings on an older style truck, and it's easier to setup or install the unit bearing since you just bolt it on and go.
In regards to another post about a claimed 3 MPG gain.......if locking hubs were actually good for 3 MPG every manufacturer would still be using them, regardless of axle disconnects and such. I would even say that an 1/2 MPG improvement is probably pushing it.