greaseable vs. non greaseable ujoints

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Oct 27, 2003
North Cadillac
I posted a while back regarding the japanese made ujoints that manafre sells. I got some pretty good feedback from folks using them noting that they were high quality and have had no issues with them, so i bought and installed some on my front dshaft.

This weekend i was noticing a little rougher than normal driveline vibs. I figured since i had wheeled the piss out of the truck in deep water and mud followed by high pressure hose to the undercarriage it just needed a little grease. So i crawled under and started to grease the ujoints on the rear shaft. I was very surprised at how many pumps it took to get old grease to ooze from the joints. After about 10 pumps i could see fresh grease comeing out of the ujoints. I then moved to the front shaft to grease those only to find and remember that these are non greaseable ujoints.

Which brings me to the question, since the ones on the rear shaft were in dire need of grease, what gives on the fronts? I can't grease them so i guess i'm just supposed to hope that they remain sealed and full of grease. Would this be a good argument for only purchasing greaseable joints?
me too I prefeer greasable u-joints .. but there are much cars that comes from factory ( Suzukis ) with non greasable u -joints ..
I think now, i also prefer greaseable. Not taking anything away from the MAF ujoints. If i were not going to wheel in heavy mud and water, they should be fine. But when you get water/mud/high pressure washers into the equation, i think those suckers need some grease.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom