100 ft/#s is WAY tighter than it needs to be for YJ ball joints.
I just snug them up and then continue to tighten the nut (~20*) to the next castle nut slot.
Think about it -- why would they be outfitted with castle nuts if they were to be tightened THAT tight?
That could definetly explain why my cotterpin is just missing the castle nut, and the stiffness in turning the knuckle. But why the frick does the manual state 100 ft/lbs, can anybody else back him up on this. I like using the torque wrench, feel more confident that things are exactly where they should be. I looked, and looked all day and night and found everything from 70-100 ft lbs, which is a big difference. There's gotta be a factory torque value listed for this somewhere, I cant be the first guy here to replace his balljoints on a jeep yj, lol.
Found the same webpage in my searches last night, and unfortunatlty thats not what I'm referring to The balljoints are not the same as the tierod ends, and the torque value would be completly different, thank you for the suggestion, but i dont think were on the same page anymore. UPPER/LOWER ballstuds/balljoints is what I'm after, not the tie rod ends. I cant even use the specs for my tierod ends anyways, as I'm running 1 ton chevy rod ends now
I believe that depends on what mount and hardware you have. If you have lock rings that came with the mount you can just hand tighten really snug and you should be ok. Same goes for nylock nuts.. Also, don't forget the anti-seize..
2013 question. The 2015 question was rocker arms.
How many old threads actually convince *you* to read all 36 pages? http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f12/length-envy-build-thread-629700/