When I did it with the C style press I cut the collar of the bushings off at the rubber washer with a sawzall and used a smaller receiving cup
Remove lower control arm on-frame No. 2 Bushing: dimensions and parts to do it are attached (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ccasey
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
I did the same, cut the collar off so you can get a receiver on there but used acme rod instead of the c clamp with a receiver from the bj kit.
Perhaps. But it's a fairly shape 90 degree on bushing. One thing for sure: The spacer controls depth bushing is pressed into frame.
see that bevel
shtbrwn86
SILVER Star
Crazy to me that they didn't just design it to fit without a spacer. I work on the computer software side of things, but one thing I know is that engineers don't do something just because they feel like it. Pretty much every nut/bolt/bushing is gone over and if you talked to the right engineer they would be able to tell you why they went with a specific material/design/formula. Usually it's driven by cost but not always. I'd like to just pick the brain of one of these engineers to know their process.
Probably had a bushing they were using in other vehicles and liked for this application would be my best guess.
Yeah! I put a straight edge on it. It is very very minor, but not a perfectly flat/flush right angle. Next time I've a number #2 out of the frame. I'll take very close look at inner end. See if it is a perfect right angle, that the bevel would get hung up on.
First and only time I ran into issue, where relaxed bushing wouldn't allow LCA to fit. I did use extra spacer to get relaxed fit. I studied both FSM, TIS and TIS training school courses. Non had anything on the spacer.
Where or how is it, you came up with your answer as to what spacer is for?
#2Bushing- I think @2001LC nailed the purpose of the spacer- it’s a shim to position the bushing - so it fits into the control arm squarely.
When the back end of the inner bushing steel sleeve makes contact with the a new LCA with out spacer or with out enough spacer, it’s a very tight fit on one end, and a larger gap on the other- which makes it where you have to pry the LCA onto the mount- this twists the bushing a little- not in a good way. Adding a second spacer moves the inner sleeve forward and reduce interference.
When the back end of the inner bushing steel sleeve makes contact with the a new LCA with out spacer or with out enough spacer, it’s a very tight fit on one end, and a larger gap on the other- which makes it where you have to pry the LCA onto the mount- this twists the bushing a little- not in a good way. Adding a second spacer moves the inner sleeve forward and reduce interference.
IF the I.D. of the spacer is larger than the O.D. of the bushing then it doesn't ever contact the bevel to begin with and is almost certainly NOT there to serve as a filler. It's purpose has something to do with achieving a dimension or tolerance. With respect to suspension/steering geometry....small amounts can be meaningful and you know how Toyota is typically compulsive about getting things right.
I've been chasing a pull to the right in my 2002. Have had it aligned several times and have been told repeatedly it is in spec. New UCA and LCA, all new front end suspension really, new steering rack. Pull to the right manifested after a shop installed my UCA and LCA.
If the spacer wasn't used or installed incorrectly would it be possible that is what is throwing the suspension geometry off and causing the pull?
edit: should add I had a shop check for sticky calipers in the front and were told they were fine. No pulling when I brake.
If the spacer wasn't used or installed incorrectly would it be possible that is what is throwing the suspension geometry off and causing the pull?
edit: should add I had a shop check for sticky calipers in the front and were told they were fine. No pulling when I brake.
Last edited:
Sorry @skhochay, you are wrong, saying that frame to bushing needs a spacer due to bevel restricting bushing from seating. Unless you've some evidence to show other than a drawing you made. Picture of actual tell the store: see below!
Above I asked you @skhochay "Where or how is it, you came up with your answer as to what spacer is for?" I'm not try to box you in. As some on mud do, playing their big shot games. Nor was I trying to shame you. I'd just like to know how you came to this conclusion. Which you've not responded to. You also hit my Youtube with some "expert statements".
Which you've prompted me to look at this spacer issue again. So here you go:
I may or may not have nailed it as @abuck99 suggested. It looks to me: no, one or more spacers can be used to get proper fitment with LCA. Which I only found the need for more than one spacer, once! I have always used at least one before this, just because factory had them in. But looking closely, I can see non need be in if that allow better fitment LCA into bushings. The goal is to get a relaxed fit, that is not putting any lateral pressure on bushing. IDK if spacers can also be effecting alignment, but it very well could be. But it's clear looking at the frame receiving end and bushing. Any minor bevel in bushing will not interfere with seating.
It's also possible the spacers have more than one purpose. Like cone washer of the hub flange. A friend, an engineer for over 50 years. 30 years of which was in aerospace building rocks (rocket scientist, as they say). Agrees: Cone washer are a disposable part that do more than just centering hub flange. The gap/cut in them, allows for flex. I'll run this spacer issue by him, see if he see other possible reason for them.
When I first had fitment issue of new OEM LCA and new #2 bushing. I was faced with either putting excess and constant lateral pressure on bushings rubber core, or adding more spacers. I chose to add more spacer, to get bushing in neutral stance during install. Same as why we do not torque control arm bushings bolts/nuts, lower shock bolt/nut or links lower bolt. Until on the ground in a neutral stance. If these torque while wheels hanging off the ground. They'll lock in bushings core, at dropped lower control stance we happen to be in while wheel hanging free. We then place wheels/tires on the ground and rubber core ends up under constant pressure/load. I've marked links torque in while vehicle on jack-stands, which is wheels hanging freely. Then place vehicle on the ground, and loosened the lower link bolt. Bushing of link turned almost 30 degrees once released. So any factory bushing that metal core is stationary. We always put in neutral stance, before torquing in, so they're not under constant load while vehicle in neutral stance. So it only made sense to me, we don't want lateral pressure/load on bushing either, once in a neutral stance. So I surmised, they give us spacers to correct for variation in fitment of manufactured parts i.e bushing, frame and LCA!
I did look in FSM, FSM in TIS of all 100 series years, along with Toyota training (school course). I found nothing on spacer. Spacer only show up in parts diagrams, that I've found.
This doesn't mean I'm right. But, my adding spacers, did get result I felt needed for relaxed fitment. The vehicle I did this on: Owner has reported to me: "It's never tracked or handled better". I do kind wish I'd only added 2 spacer. As with 3 spacers, bushing stuck out kind of far. So much so, I went back and measure how much of bushing was captured. Which seem okay, but I'm not and engineer. So far all is good. Hope I see this heavy built rig again and again over the years and miles. So I can see how 3 spacer perform.
Here is a picture of the receiving end in frame for bushing. I clearly see a negative bevel, which is much greater than positive very minor bevel on bushing. So I don't see any need for any spacing, to correct for casting bevel of bushing. So using no, 1 or 2 to spacer to get relaxed fitment seems fine to me. 3 is maybe pressing it a bit IDK!
Look at very top. You can see, their is very very little bevel on bushing
Above I asked you @skhochay "Where or how is it, you came up with your answer as to what spacer is for?" I'm not try to box you in. As some on mud do, playing their big shot games. Nor was I trying to shame you. I'd just like to know how you came to this conclusion. Which you've not responded to. You also hit my Youtube with some "expert statements".
Which you've prompted me to look at this spacer issue again. So here you go:
I may or may not have nailed it as @abuck99 suggested. It looks to me: no, one or more spacers can be used to get proper fitment with LCA. Which I only found the need for more than one spacer, once! I have always used at least one before this, just because factory had them in. But looking closely, I can see non need be in if that allow better fitment LCA into bushings. The goal is to get a relaxed fit, that is not putting any lateral pressure on bushing. IDK if spacers can also be effecting alignment, but it very well could be. But it's clear looking at the frame receiving end and bushing. Any minor bevel in bushing will not interfere with seating.
It's also possible the spacers have more than one purpose. Like cone washer of the hub flange. A friend, an engineer for over 50 years. 30 years of which was in aerospace building rocks (rocket scientist, as they say). Agrees: Cone washer are a disposable part that do more than just centering hub flange. The gap/cut in them, allows for flex. I'll run this spacer issue by him, see if he see other possible reason for them.
When I first had fitment issue of new OEM LCA and new #2 bushing. I was faced with either putting excess and constant lateral pressure on bushings rubber core, or adding more spacers. I chose to add more spacer, to get bushing in neutral stance during install. Same as why we do not torque control arm bushings bolts/nuts, lower shock bolt/nut or links lower bolt. Until on the ground in a neutral stance. If these torque while wheels hanging off the ground. They'll lock in bushings core, at dropped lower control stance we happen to be in while wheel hanging free. We then place wheels/tires on the ground and rubber core ends up under constant pressure/load. I've marked links torque in while vehicle on jack-stands, which is wheels hanging freely. Then place vehicle on the ground, and loosened the lower link bolt. Bushing of link turned almost 30 degrees once released. So any factory bushing that metal core is stationary. We always put in neutral stance, before torquing in, so they're not under constant load while vehicle in neutral stance. So it only made sense to me, we don't want lateral pressure/load on bushing either, once in a neutral stance. So I surmised, they give us spacers to correct for variation in fitment of manufactured parts i.e bushing, frame and LCA!
I did look in FSM, FSM in TIS of all 100 series years, along with Toyota training (school course). I found nothing on spacer. Spacer only show up in parts diagrams, that I've found.
This doesn't mean I'm right. But, my adding spacers, did get result I felt needed for relaxed fitment. The vehicle I did this on: Owner has reported to me: "It's never tracked or handled better". I do kind wish I'd only added 2 spacer. As with 3 spacers, bushing stuck out kind of far. So much so, I went back and measure how much of bushing was captured. Which seem okay, but I'm not and engineer. So far all is good. Hope I see this heavy built rig again and again over the years and miles. So I can see how 3 spacer perform.
Here is a picture of the receiving end in frame for bushing. I clearly see a negative bevel, which is much greater than positive very minor bevel on bushing. So I don't see any need for any spacing, to correct for casting bevel of bushing. So using no, 1 or 2 to spacer to get relaxed fitment seems fine to me. 3 is maybe pressing it a bit IDK!
Look at very top. You can see, their is very very little bevel on bushing
Last edited:
Interesting question. Not sure anyone can answer without trying a few things.
.5 PSI in tire pressure difference, will pull to low side.
Have you tried swapping tires LH to RH?
Do you have confident in work performed and alignment done.
Than:
Which I suppose one way to find out:
1) Release lower controls from frame. See if LCA goes back in easily!
Or
If lateral pressure on bushings needed to get LCA in. If so, than add or remove spacer to get relaxed fit. Re-align and see if still pulls.
Pressure has been checked and is good. Have swapped wheels left to right and back to front. Aligned multiple times on hunter machine.
One thing that improved but did not completely solve pull was swap in completely new wheel/tire combo. Was a noticeable improvement from which I can only conclude my tires naturally pull to right? But even with swapped wheels/tires truck still pulled to right.
I’ll have to pull the wheels off and take a look at both LCA bushings. Kind of my last hope to potentially find problem.
I have had some issues, with tech that did the alignment service. In my sons IS300, it go through front tires in 2K miles. On our third shop which was a Lexus Dealership. I got their most experienced mechanic (most star over his bay in the state) shop, Eddie. I went into the shop and got to know Eddie as he align all 4. As we talk, we came up with the wheel off set was greater, the stock wheel by 1/2". We ended up replacing the wheel with factory stock. Had Eddie align again, and Problem solved.
You may want to search out another shop. You may also want to find a frame alignment tech, and check frame. If these than found in spec or set to spec and no difference in pull. You may be and excellent example of spacer effect. That is if you end up changing the number of spacer, and it solves your issue.
I installed one without the spacer as I did not look carefully , then I press in in to the body was not able to flush, the spacer not show in the diagram , then I took apart other side I notice the spacer, with spacer I compressed it flash without you will see the cap, That probably is fine in US engineering , but for Japanese and Land cruiser was not upto the spec.
ok perhaps real photo can clear things better , One output spacer , look how hard I was trying to drive one in and it warped
see my real experience with it as I lost one spacer see what happen when I tries to seed without the spacer, the bushing went so far and then start bending under the pressure, at first I was not able to figure out why I was not able to drive all the way, only then when I did other side I notice a spacer stuck to the old bushing rusted in, see my photos on the bottom you can clearly see what happen, I did not reckon that that spacer made a difference , but it did , Japanese calculated to the millimeters.
Last edited:
Thanks for sharing, how you came to your conclusion. I can see where you'd draw a conclusion bushings bevel created interference, resulting in bending the bushing.
A bend like you show, is from putting pressure on just one side of bushing as it's pressed in. Which uneven pressing pressure, would result in bushing not being driven in squarely. Likely resulting in binding and or you had interference on receiving end.. The bushing with 1 spacer, does not protrude out back. Perhaps it would protrude, without a spacer. Than if improper receiver cup or cup not center. You may than end up having bushing press against itself. Additionally the very minor bevel of bushing, is much much less than the amount of bend you have. Even it could get hung up on a bevel. Even if using a slight oversize press cup, and pressing in squarly. It would (if hung up on a bevel) bend equally around circumference, mushrooming bushing lip.
It would not be possible to bend like that, with the correct size press and receiver cups properly in place.
The correct pressing set-up would put equal pressure 360 degrees around inside of lip. The receiving cup would not restrict bushing travel.
Last edited:
Here a pictures of old bushing with factory spacer still on it. You can clearly see an approximate 2 MM rust line back of space on bushing. This rust line is area of no contact on bushing, of the negative bevel in frame.
