I have worked for Ford as a tech at a dealership for 5 years and I have yet to see a factory "lifetime" ball joint not have some free play after at least 100,000 miles. Most vehicle have to have the suspension load tested for free play. The only 100%proper way to do this is with the vehicle jacked up, front wheels off the ground, and then the suspension compressed. Check them like this and you might start to see those "lifetime" joints are so hot after all. If it does not have a grease fitting it will not last nearly as long and a balljoint with a grease fitting. I run the Moog brand on my car, the Steeda's are nice as well but much more expensive. In either case definatley replace them with the SN95 style, and do not use a space or a stack of washers, that is wayyyy to much of a critical component to be "made to fit".
Gee, as someone that often has to spec bearing play, I'll say
so what??
Just, what, are you comparing the new ball joints to? And, as for slop verses no slop, it's all relative. I guarantee you that any ball joint in a Ford car is about 100 to 10,000+ times more sloppy that even the worse joint that I'd use.
Also, how do your "great grease-able POS ball joints" compare after 100K miles? How much real world experience do you have with grease-able ball joints? On how many cars? Under what conditions (winter, summer, etc).
As for the "slop" after 100K miles in the new ball joints, then how many of the new ball joints have you replaced. If none, because the "slop" is still within spec, then who cares?
As I mentioned, "slop" is all relative. So, is that "slop" really important. Also, what fails when a ball joint fails. And, how does that compared to the new ball joints verses old ball joints? BFD if the "nylon" gets some wear in the new ball joints. If that wear and slop is within spec, then who gives a rat's *ss? I think it's more important that the
old style ball joints have metal wear that results in ball joint failure.
To me, your original statement doesn't hold much value since it's stating some "random metric". Gee, is 1 week old for a brand new tire that has never been mounted? How about 1 year? How about 10 years? How about 100 years? If I have a brand new never mounted tire goes bad after 7 years, then WTF does that means compared to other tires? Is that good? Is that bad? Is that avearge? Is that the longest lasting tire ever made? Is it the shortest lasting tire ever made? Is the tire really a space alien life form that has come to observe us?
So, stating some "radom metric" without some matching basis isn't worth anything.
