I was going through the center link for my car and as I was taking it apart, I had a piece on each side that does not show up in the diagram in the service manual, and there doesn't seem to be any mention of it in the text.
What I'd like to know is, first off, what is it's purpose, and secondly, is it absolutely necessary that it be in there.
The reason I ask is because to me, it seems like it's just a restriction for the grease so when you are servicing the link with a grease gun, it slows the grease going to the center of the link, which is nothing but a void with no parts inside.
Here's the picture that is in the service manual, and the text referring to it. (Second picture)
There are two spacers, one 8" and one 6", that go between each inner tie rod and on one side, the idler arm, and the other side, the pitman arm. Between the inner tie rods is nothing but hollow space. These thin cups, (for lack of a better description), go between the inside end of each spacer and the half moon piece that fits against the tie rod ball stud to keep it in place.
These cups are made of very thin metal and have a small hole in the center, for the grease to pass through.
The third picture is what is left of these cups.
The only thing I can see that would happen if I didn't put new ones back in, is that the grease will flow a little more towards the center of the drag link.
The fourth picture is of all the pieces that go inside the drag link assembly. The pencils are pointing out the cups in question. As you can see, they are not in the best of shape. (Third picture) The one on the right was damaged coming out, but the one on the left came out just like you see. It appears that the pressure against it caused it to split where the side connects to the center. The hole in the center is actually the same size as the holes in each of the half moon pieces that hold the arms and rods in place, so it doesn't appear that these really do anything, at least not from what I see here.
Can someone with more experience with this tell me what purpose these things cups were for, and what if anything would happen if I didn't use them? And I'm not sure if these were in the correct locations when I took this apart either. Is this where they actually go?
My thanks for any and all information you can give.
Rick
Hi Rick. Can't answer all your questions as I have never taken one apart, but perhaps the attached diagram can help a bit. Clay/Lexi
Thanks Clay, I'll have to check my new parts manual for this. I totally forgot about looking in there for a description.
That is where the image grab came from. Same for 1956, so you are covered. Clay/Lexi
They're in my '58 too, so they're "needed". I cleaned out all the old hard grease but don't recall where or why they go, without I think it's too loose to hold the ball joints/sloppy steering. Maybe yours was molested already, certainly worn out.
I've seen rebuild kits for them with all the internals, but been a while since. Try the usual suspects.
I don't think it "restricts" the grease, but lets it flow between joints.
Well I'm having some trouble getting the book to open up on my phone. I think I messed up a setting accidentally and it doesn't recognize the drive now.
Anyway, those cups are razor thin, so they're not in there to take up any slack. The outer diameter might block the grease from going around the half-moon pieces, but it's got to get there anyway to keep the ball stud on the inner tie rod lubricated, so it doesn't appear that these really do anything. The long spacer sits against the half-moon piece anyhow even with these in place. They're so thin that they might as well not be there.
Clay, if you have a chance, can you tell me what GM called those cups? I don't know how long it's gonna take me to figure out what I did to my phone and fix it. Can't seem to find the settings for the external drive, nothing is showing up like the instructions online mention.
Cadman-iac, done. Sent. Clay/Lexi
The name: cover, steering connecting link spacer. Were used from 1941 to 1958, part number 265516. Yours are "modified".
Hi Roger,
Thank you for that information. By modified, do you mean because these are damaged, or is there something different about what I have here versus what it's supposed to be? I don't see anything different from what the service manual or the parts manual shows, unless I'm just not seeing it.
Rick
Yes, its because they are damaged!
Got it, Lol!! I thought you were serious about that, and I couldn't find anything wrong except for the "non-standard" shape of those pieces. Ya got me there!
I still don't understand what real purpose they serve though. Do you know what they're supposed to do? All I can think of is a restriction to keep grease from going around the outer part of the half-moon piece that keeps the ball stud in place. But those half-moon pieces have the same size hole in them, so grease will still flow through them to the ball stud just like the little cups do.
The only thing that I see that they actually do to cause problems getting the other parts out of the drag link. As you can see by their current condition, lol !!
Richard, when I rebuilt the draglink for the 59 I have been working on, it also had those tin cups, and like yours, one was a bit mangled and the other one came out OK. I, also, could not figure out their purpose, and I could not find any replacements anywhere. The only logical explanation for them, to me, was that they were a retainer/centering device for the triangular spacers. Even that explanation made little sense to me as they are really thin and the triangular spacers were still loose inside them, plus, there was not one on each end of the triangular spacer. I think some engineer(s) had a bad theory for using this particular part and it continued for several years. The other thought I had was that the thin cups provided a wear point to keep the triangular spacer from wearing into the cup that goes against the ball, but that didn't make any logical sense either since there was not one on the other end of the triangular spacer to keep it from wearing against the "plug" for the spring. It will remain a mystery unless the Cadillac engineer(s) come forward with an explanation, and that is unlikely after all these years!!!
Daryl Chesterman
Thank you Daryl for your input. I'm glad I'm not the only person confused about those. Clay/Lexi has contacted Rare Parts Inc about their kit since he's gotten one from them in the past, and they sent a breakdown diagram of everything in their kit, and it does not include or even show those pieces, so obviously they are not necessary.
Here's what he got from them in response.
You may be right about it being a piece that helps during assembly, although I've found that the spacer goes in easier without that in the way. It's more of a hindrance than a help.
I think it is expected that you will use your orignal parts with the new parts.
Quote from: David King (kz78hy) on October 27, 2021, 05:52:51 PM
I think it is expected that you will use your orignal parts with the new parts.
That's true. I'm sure that the kit doesn't have everything that goes inside one of these drag links.
Does anyone know exactly which pieces are included in the kit? I would like to think that they would include the pieces that contact the tie rod ball studs and the ones for the idler arm and pitman arm. Those would probably be considered a wear item, although none of mine shows any sign of wear at all. Either they've been replaced at some point, or it's a lower mileage car than I thought it was.
There were signs that someone had been into this assembly at some time, there are 3 of the half-moon pieces that have indications that they were next to the spacers, they have a shiny triangular spot on the back, and if it hadn't been touched, there would only be two pieces with indications of being in contact with the spacers.
Caddy Daddy has this kit, which includes parts that don't normally need replacing—I wouldn't consider them to be wear parts.
https://www.caddydaddy.com/shop-parts/1949-1950-1951-1952-1953-1954-1955-1956-1957-1958-1959-1960-cadillac-center-drag-link-kit-18-pieces-reproduction-free-shipping-in-the-usa.html
This from Fusick:
http://www.fusickautomotiveproducts.com/prodinfo.asp?number=TRE1906K
Daryl Chesterman
Before I'd throw them out/not replace and risk steering problems, I'd be a bit cautious.
It's a "weird" design but so are a lot of others in the day. But they've worked for a long time.
If the ball isn't held tightly enough side to side it can fall out. They just slip in under the spring cover. Hate if you found out there purpose the hard way...
This seems to be a topic that comes up from time to time with no resolution. I went through it a couple of years ago myself with my 39. Here is the thread about this very topic in which Daryl and myself were both contributors. http://forums.cadillaclasalleclub.org/index.php?topic=154197.msg422678#msg422678
Seems the best solution any of us could come up with was Daryl's suggestion to slip a fender washer in there and hope for the best. That is what I ended up doing, and I'm happy to report that two years later have had absolutely no negative results that I am aware of.
Daryl,
Thank you for the links to these parts sources. I have been looking at Rare Parts Inc for them, and have just been glad that I don't need anything. These others are more reasonable in price. I appreciate the info. Many thanks.
Hey Jim,
You make a good point, and if this part were more substantial, I'd have to agree, put it back in. But given that these have absolutely no strength, and no thickness to them, they can't have any structural impact on the linkage. The only thing I can see that they might do is guide the grease through the middle and to keep it from going around the outer edge of the cupped piece. Which, when you look at it, the grease is going to get there anyway.
And if it was absolutely necessary that it be there for that reason, why didn't they do it for the other ends of the spacers and cupped pieces?
I think it's like someone said, it was something to do with the assembling of it at the factory.
Because if you're depending on something like that to keep your steering linkage together, your putting your faith in the wrong place.
I really appreciate your input, thanks for your thoughts. It does make a lot of sense.
Jon,
I read your entire thread, and it sounds like we have all come to the same conclusion. These things are not necessary. It was like reading my own thread.
I'm going to assemble mine without either of these things, because I honestly don't believe they do anything. The space that they take is minute, and that razor thin amount can be adjusted for if necessary by the spring load.
As for why the drivers side "spacer cover" wears out more than the passenger side, could it be that because the load on the steering linkage is applied with the pitman arm, it's pushing on everything to move it to the right whenever you turn left, and it might not put as much pressure on the passenger side "spacer cover" when turning the opposite direction.
The idler arm doesn't apply any force on any of the linkage, it merely supports and guides it as it moves left and right.
The comment about the shape of those spacers and the grease traveling around them is partly right. But if you have noticed, the spacers are drilled on all three sides in the middle to allow the grease to pass through them to where it needs to go. Both of the center links I've taken apart have had grease from one end to the other from decades of being greased.
And if they're assembled with just enough grease to lube the pivot points, then the guy who does the next service on the car will have to pump grease into it for a long time before he sees it come out of any of the sockets for the linkages. It's got to fill up all of those voids before it comes squeezing out somewhere.
The shape of those spacers was also mentioned, that they were not consistent on each side. I've noticed that as well, and my assumption was that it was done to give them more strength, as a ridge or channel or lip, whatever, gives a piece of metal more rigidity. But again, I'm no engineer, just my thoughts on it.
I appreciate your input Jon, and the link to your thread. I believe I have come to the same conclusion as many of you have about this, and that is, don't worry about it!!
QuoteAnd if they're assembled with just enough grease to lube the pivot points, then the guy who does the next service on the car will have to pump grease into it for a long time before he sees it come out of any of the sockets for the linkages. It's got to fill up all of those voids before it comes squeezing out somewhere.
Richard, I hope that you will apply grease through the zerks to thoroughly lubricate the center link, once everything is assembled, and before putting the car on the road. It takes a bit of grease to fill the voids, like you said, but once done, it only takes a couple of "pumps" of grease the next time the car is serviced. I like to use a moly grease to grease all of the chassis zerks because moly bonds to iron and gives the best lubrication for tie rod ends, ball joints, king pins, or anything else where there is metal sliding on metal. The only exception to using moly grease is for u-joints—I have a separate grease gun with NLGI #2 lithium grease for the u-joints.
Daryl Chesterman
Daryl,
Most definitely, I'll grease it til it's coming out of each opening. I did that on the other one I went through, and that's how I know it takes almost a full grease gun cartridge to fill it. I've been using a waterproof grease for all the other parts of the suspension anyway, so I was going to use it for the steering linkage as well.
What do you think about this type? If you need more information about it, I'll grab the other cartridge and get it.
Thanks for the tip on what to use.
Just looked at it, it's got a NLGI of 1.5, whatever that means. I bought it after looking at everything else that was offered. This looked like the best one, it certainly was the most expensive, but that didn't figure into the decision.
Is this really a good grease, or did I fall for the advertising?
Richard, I did not see a brand on the cartridge, so I couldn't look up the specifications for it. To answer your question about NLGI #1.5, it is a measure of consistency, with #1.5 being softer than #2. The following website tells a little bit about grease specifications:
https://www.skf.com/group/products/lubrication-management/lubricants/Understanding-technical-data-of-greases
The only way to compare greases is to get the specification sheet for each one and see which one has the best numbers. The testing of grease, as well as other lubricants, is done by independent labs that use testing methods that are established by ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials). Usually, chassis grease recommendations are for NLGI #2 grease, so yours would be a little bit softer than what is recommended. Since you live in Arizona, I would recommend that the next grease you purchase should be an NLGI #2, with the same base as what you have been using—lithium, aluminum, poly urea, etc., since it is recommended that grease bases should not be mixed when doing chassis lubrication.
Daryl Chesterman
Man-iac, if they got worn/mashed like that they must have done or failed to do something besides guide grease? Maybe PO let it get too far gone in the past?
I'm considering the pressure implications. In hydraulics, when there's a diam. reduction, it multiplies the force. So the grease behind is compressing and squirting through that hole which pushes into the sockets. But your's hasn't been functioning for some time and probably why it's trashed/modified. I found another "brand" rebuild on utube and he had to rebuild/metal work his tube from too much ball play wear.
I started investigating, but haven't found much so far. This era is well past. I dont; even see any replacements. I'd look at the later '60 kits(era end). They may have bene dropped, but where in in '58. I've been through this already, so I can't go back and run a test. I can see some slight geometry changes, if you take up the slack with the end plugs. But those ends are pinned and only have so much play. Just have to insure no catastrophe ensues.
Darryl's spot on with the grease info, I've forwarded that link in the past. I don't think NLGI(National Lubricating Grease Institute) ratings were around back then so no cross ref. This is non-severe service, no temp or pressure, so regular old #2 grease is fine. If it's too "thin" it'll run out and not stay where it needs to. Lots of science in lube since '56.
Moly is generally for the heavy stuff, like wheel bearings, balls, high temp/press, large, etc. My diesel P/U truck specs it, but I don't know any cars that do. Some think it's too risky should it get on brake drums/rotors, etc. You get into owning a grease store, if you have every type they call for. Some for warranty reasons, you have no choice. I have a separate gun and branded tube for the old boat trailer, but not sure it's needed for the current one. Another potential wall hanger! NLGI simplifies.
Daryl and Jim,
Thank you both for your expertise in the matter of the grease types, I hadn't known that it was that complicated. I have noticed that there are various types available, and they were of a different consistency. I'll be looking for one with a higher rating.
I have experienced some of this particular grease begin to "drip" or run from being thin, but I had thought that because it was advertised as being waterproof that it would cling better and resist the running and separating that I've had from other grease in the past. I don't like that it drips/separates, and I've noticed that a lot of other greases do this same thing. I had bought a red grease that was supposed to be for suspension and steering linkage, and it would separate in the tube while sitting on the shelf. Not what you would expect from a grease that's advertised for high temp use. I haven't used all of it yet, but I had to start storing it in a plastic bag to keep it from making a mess of my shelving.
Now I do have a small container of grease that is years old, and it's still very usable, but I don't have enough of it to use for this, and I didn't want to mix it with another brand or type. This particular grease is very thick and extremely sticky, excellent for suspension and steering linkage in my opinion. But the original container has long since deteriorated, and I had to transfer the grease to another one to keep it, or I would have had to throw it out, and it was too good to do that. It seems like it's a long fiber grease, if that's such a thing.
Would a grease with a high NLGI# be such a grease? And how can you tell if you can't open up the container or tube to see it?
Rick
Gentlemen,
I've figured out what those tin cups are for.
I decided a moment ago to start reassembly of that center link, so I put in the flat washer that keeps the rest of the pieces from going farther into the center of it. These sit against the 3 or 4, (forgot to count them) tabs that stick down inside the tube. Then I inserted the first pair of cupped pieces that grab the ball studs, and then the triangular spacer went in. When I was looking at the opening for the inner tie rod, which is a keyhole shape, I noticed that the end of the triangular spacer was visible in the opening, about as much of it as the height of the sides of those tin cups.
The tin cups are in there to help prevent the grease from coming out of the keyhole. There are covers that go over each opening, that sit on each ball stud for just that reason, grease retention.
The tin cups are just another thing that the factory used to slow the grease leakage from the inner tie rod openings.
They have no structural functionality at all. Basically they are just a baffle. You could probably make something that would do the same thing if you could find a piece of metal thin enough.
These tin cups are made of .010 thick metal, which in terms of strength for something structural, forget about it!
A baffle, that's all they are. How baffling it has been trying to figure this out.
So there you have it. And here's a few pictures to prove the point. Hope this helps someone out later when they're looking at these two little tin cups, (or what's left of them), and trying to make sense of their function.
Rick
Interesting! You found the reason of those tiny parts. Despite restoring 3 cars with that system, I never asked myself the reason for those cups and reinstalled them the same way as they came out...
Yeah, I couldn't figure out what they were for when I did the last one of these center links, but because of the condition of the tin cups, (they were not usable either), I left them out and didn't think any more about it.
This time I had the forum to ask about it, yet still didn't get an answer. I was going to leave them out this time too, but kept thinking about it as I was putting it together. Then 4 pieces into it, it hit me, grease shields, or baffles! It's the only thing that makes sense.
Rick
That makes sense. Well done Cadman-iac! Clay/Lexi
Quote from: Roger Zimmermann on October 30, 2021, 03:50:48 AM
Interesting! You found the reason of those tiny parts. Despite restoring 3 cars with that system, I never asked myself the reason for those cups and reinstalled them the same way as they came out...
I would have done the same thing, just put them back in too. Except that the first time I did this, mine were pretty much destroyed coming out. I didn't know about this forum back then, and since I didn't see any possible use for them, (and I couldn't find any more anywhere), I just assembled it without those.
This time I had access to this great resource, yet still didn't find out what those actually were for. I resigned myself to putting another one together without them. I just lucked out as I was putting in the spacer, I had the opening for the tie rod facing me. I saw how much of the spacer was exposed through the hole when I finally realized what those flimsy things did. I almost had it right when I thought they guided the grease into the ball stud socket area and kept it from going around the cupped pieces, I didn't realize they were exposed through the opening, and I was only thinking about it, I wasn't looking at it. This time I had the pieces in front of me and it became so obvious, it was like a slap in the face. An "Ah hah" moment if you will.
So if you're trying to figure out something, besides just thinking about it, visualize it, look at it, it will come to you, (in my case, eventually, lol !!).
You are the man, Richard!!! Now, if there were only a source for new tin cups, that would make a rebuild kit more valuable, since one or more of the tin cups seem to be destroyed upon disassembly of the center link.
Daryl Chesterman
Thanks Daryl,
I was trying to think of something that would work in place of those, but not necessarily in the same spot. Something that would cover the opening and seal it enough that the grease doesn't come squeezing out around the metal cover that they put around each ball stud. Those are supposed to help keep the grease under control.
I was thinking, what if you have a thin rubber sheet just slightly larger than the metal covers that you placed between the cover and the center link. It would seal the cover, maybe not perfectly, but enough that the grease leakage is kept to a minimum. You could use them on all 4 openings too. The less grease that leaks out, the less often you need to lube it too.
Rick
Edit: it would be nice if we could find a source for these tin cups, you wouldn't think that they would be that hard for a shop to make. But the demand for this probably isn't big enough for someone to invest in the manufacturing of them.
And since we now know that leaving them out doesn't effect the safety of the steering linkage, the rubber seal idea might be the best solution to accomplish the same thing as the tin cups.
You would also need a type of rubber that isn't deformed by the grease itself. The residual oils in the grease may soften and distort the rubber to the point that it will now work against you and no grease at all with get to the pivoting ball.
One of the reasons you were to never use oil to lubricate the oil filter gasket, you used either a heavy fiber grease or Vaseline. It didn't distort the filter seal.
John,
That's a very good point, I hadn't thought about that factor. I have seen how some rubber will swell and disintegrate in oil or grease.
How would you determine the best type of rubber for such duty? Are there any ratings or codes that would tell you if it's able to withstand the effects of the grease on it?
As for the oil filter seal or gasket, I've never heard of the oil causing any problems with it. In fact, the filter or the box it comes in usually has directions on it telling you to put oil on the seal/gasket before installing it.
Has the type of rubber for the filter seal been replaced with one less sensitive to the effects of the oil on it since the time that it was recommended to use grease or Vaseline?
Rick
You could make them out 0.010 shim stock, cut a disc the proper diameter and wrap some the same height around the disc and JB weld or solder.
Quote from: Cadman-iac on October 31, 2021, 05:41:47 AM
John,
That's a very good point, I hadn't thought about that factor. I have seen how some rubber will swell and disintegrate in oil or grease.
How would you determine the best type of rubber for such duty? Are there any ratings or codes that would tell you if it's able to withstand the effects of the grease on it?
As for the oil filter seal or gasket, I've never heard of the oil causing any problems with it. In fact, the filter or the box it comes in usually has directions on it telling you to put oil on the seal/gasket before installing it.
Has the type of rubber for the filter seal been replaced with one less sensitive to the effects of the oil on it since the time that it was recommended to use grease or Vaseline?
Rick
No clue, Rick. I'm not a chemical engineer. But, like you, I've seen rubber just swell up or simply dissolve when contacting oils. Whether the old way of using grease on the oil filter is long past the wayside, it may be. I was taught that waaaaay back when I first started working on cars, say about 50 years ago. It's just something that has always stayed with me and a practice I've always stuck to.
Even if you look into a tub of grease, you'll see the oil separating from the grease itself. This applies to petroleum based greases. I'm not sure about the new synthetics.
Quote from: Big Fins on October 31, 2021, 11:15:27 AM
No clue, Rick. I'm not a chemical engineer. But, like you, I've seen rubber just swell up or simply dissolve when contacting oils. Whether the old way of using grease on the oil filter is long past the wayside, it may be. I was taught that waaaaay back when I first started working on cars, say about 50 years ago. It's just something that has always stayed with me and a practice I've always stuck to.
Even if you look into a tub of grease, you'll see the oil separating from the grease itself. This applies to petroleum based greases. I'm not sure about the new synthetics.
Thanks John,
Yes, I know what you mean about how the grease will separate in the tube or tub. I have a tube of red grease that's for wheel bearings and I think suspension and steering, that I have to keep inside a plastic bag. If I didn't, I'd have a big mess. Inside the tube is the sticky stuff, and outside the tube, (caught by the bag), is the runny stuff. I'm not sure exactly how this grease is supposed to perform once it's squeezed into a tie rod or ball joint, but apparently it's a problem with a lot of various greases. You can see evidence of this on every greasable pivot point on every older vehicle in the country. Big globs of wet dirt stuck to them.
I know what you mean about old teachings and habits. My dad had taught me that you don't sit a battery on the bare concrete or dirt, you put it on a piece of wood, or the battery would be drained of power by the next day. Of course this was proven false, but he believed it until his passing.
I can see why the Vaseline idea came about, although whomever thought of it should have been thinking about the oil that gets on the seal from the inside as the engine is running.
You are correct about the effect of grease on rubber. I wish I knew a way to tell which rubber would be affected by this, it would make finding some for this particular usage a lot easier than a trial and error method. But it may just come to that.
Thanks for your thoughts and input on this. Definitely gives me something more to think about.
Rick
Sometimes being a dinosaur works, sometimes it doesn't! ;D