Sway bar end connections crooked? - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > ZJ Grand Cherokee Forum > Sway bar end connections crooked?

Savvy/Currie Aluminum Control ArmsROCK BOTTOM prices on LIFT KITS at Rockridge4wd!! WANT TO December Specials at Jeephut.com

Reply
Unread 07-18-2013, 05:16 PM   #1
billyblooshoes
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New Hope, PA
Posts: 77
Sway bar end connections crooked?

Something else caught me eye that doesn't quite look right. The joints where the sway bar connects on both sides looks crooked. What should I do to rectify this and what if anything will I notice as a result of this? Seems to be driving pretty good.

image-893140020.jpg

billyblooshoes is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-18-2013, 06:02 PM   #2
newfieZJ
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: , Alberta
Posts: 6,515
looks normal . it's a ball joint connection so it has movement
newfieZJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-18-2013, 06:51 PM   #3
dnuccio
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,484
someone installed those endlinks wrong. theres supposed to be a rubber piece under the sway bar, and another one on top of the sway bar, then the nut goes on.
__________________
Reliability is relative
R.I.P. Ratmonkey
dnuccio is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-18-2013, 07:02 PM   #4
newfieZJ
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: , Alberta
Posts: 6,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnuccio View Post
someone installed those endlinks wrong. theres supposed to be a rubber piece under the sway bar, and another one on top of the sway bar, then the nut goes on.
That applies to 93-95 , not 96-98
newfieZJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-18-2013, 07:25 PM   #5
dnuccio
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfieZJ View Post
That applies to 93-95 , not 96-98
really? why would they be different?
__________________
Reliability is relative
R.I.P. Ratmonkey
dnuccio is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-18-2013, 07:46 PM   #6
newfieZJ
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: , Alberta
Posts: 6,515
93-95 used as you described , bushings , washers and a nut . 96-98 uses a ball/socket type connection . Moog sells a greasable end link . From an engineering stand point , it's probably a better design .
newfieZJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-19-2013, 12:12 AM   #7
dnuccio
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfieZJ View Post
93-95 used as you described , bushings , washers and a nut . 96-98 uses a ball/socket type connection . Moog sells a greasable end link . From an engineering stand point , it's probably a better design .
huh thats interesting. could maybe be a cheap upgrade for 93-95 ZJs? wonder what the benefits would be other than being able to grease it
__________________
Reliability is relative
R.I.P. Ratmonkey
dnuccio is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-19-2013, 12:19 AM   #8
MTBlue
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Helena, MT
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfieZJ View Post
93-95 used as you described , bushings , washers and a nut . 96-98 uses a ball/socket type connection . Moog sells a greasable end link . From an engineering stand point , it's probably a better design .
100x better! I say from experience, the Moog end links work flawlessly. Not a squeak from the front end since I've installed them, and so far they haven't budged.

To the OP: Yes, that is normal, as Newfie said.
__________________
Dirt Deprived
MTBlue is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 07-19-2013, 12:50 AM   #9
Uniblurb
Web Wheeler
 
Uniblurb's Avatar
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Central, Ohio
Posts: 3,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfieZJ View Post
93-95 used as you described , bushings , washers and a nut . 96-98 uses a ball/socket type connection . Moog sells a greasable end link . From an engineering stand point , it's probably a better design .
Maybe they started the ball/socket sway bar links in 97 since my 96 ZJ and son's 96 XJ both came from the factory with the straight shaft link with a couple curves in it. We were breaking them left and right, not even off-road, and in going to the Moog's w/ball joint sure fixed that problem! Nice, they are greasable too as you mentioned.
__________________
96 4.0 ZJ Laredo, 2004 4.7L WJ Limited, 93 4.0 XJ (spare), 96 4.0 XJ (son's)

-Stalling ZJ? 12 things to check before replacing a sensor; the Dirty Dozen
-Crankshaft position sensor multimeter test. & video of testing.
Uniblurb is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools






Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.