posted 08-01-2024 03:24 PM                  

I was recently concerned about my lower ball joint replacement on my 99 Prowler. I see a lot of people purchasing them here online. I don’t understand this? It’s a recall! Just last week I called my local Chrysler dealer to inquire about the recall. After 25 years, They promptly ordered the parts and will be replacing them next Monday. Why are people paying for something that Chrysler will fix for free?

Just curious?

posted 08-01-2024 05:27 PM                  

My 2001 has recall ball joints & plan on replacing with Rare Parts…… IMO cheaper to replace with better quality than have one break & damage or total the car

posted 08-02-2024 05:58 AM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by WildCat:

The recall ball joints have also failed. My recall ball joints were ok but now have Rare Parts greasable lower ball joints

My 2001 has recall ball joints & plan on replacing with Rare Parts…… IMO cheaper to replace with better quality than have one break & damage or total the car

---

Hmmmmm? I respectively disagree.I don’t believe Chrysler is going to put an inferior replacemnt part on their vehicles. The liability would be horrendous! Their R&D is so much bigger than any private company. I just think someone is gaming the system to sell a balljoint. It’s not rocket science! It’s a balljoint! I will trust the company that created the vehicle over a private company anyday.

Just my two cents!

posted 08-04-2024 11:51 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by BeWare:
One problem with the OEM lower ball joints and even the recall replacements is they don’t have a grease fitting. So the is no way to replenish the grease. they are not designed so that you can add one either. So the boots dry out , rot and break. This allows moisture to get in the ball joints. The Rare Parts ball joints do have a grease fitting. From that standpoint alone the Rare Parts are a superior design. JMO.

---

They are ball joints! nothing more. Everyone is over-thinking them! And they are free from Chrysler. You can’t justify this! Just saying. It’s not a performance car. Was never intended to be. Millions of cars produced don’t have grease fitting balljoints and they are just fine. But spend your hard earned dollars however you want! It’s a balljoint people! And again, it’s free from the manufacturer who created the vehicle.

My 2024 Ford Raptor doesn’t have nipple grease fitting ball joints. I guess they’re going to break? Come to think of it, my Viper doesn’t have them either. Weird?

posted 08-05-2024 02:38 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by phipplet:
They are ball joints! nothing more. Everyone is over-thinking them! And they are free from Chrysler. You can’t justify this! Just saying. It’s not a performance car. Was never intended to be. Millions of cars produced don’t have grease fitting balljoints and they are just fine. But spend your hard earned dollars however you want! It’s a balljoint people! And again, it’s free from the manufacturer who created the vehicle.

My 2024 Ford Raptor doesn’t have nipple grease fitting ball joints. I guess they’re going to break? Come to think of it, my Viper doesn’t have them either. Weird?

---

posted 08-05-2024 04:32 PM                  

The first replacements were free, under a recall. If your car was serviced under the recall, no more free replacements will be supplied. If the recall wasn't performed on your car I seriously doubt if any parts, free or for sale, will be available from Chrysler 20 some years after the recall.

As for Chrysler's R&D budget, these ball joints are purchased from a supplier. Chrysler does not make ball joints. Any R&D would be carried out by the supplier. Sure Chrysler would most likely have tested these ball joints to a simulated life of typically 10 years of use, but it seems like errors may have been made.

As an ex Chrysler engineer (thankfully not in suspension) I would not be too quick to ignore owners experience.

posted 08-05-2024 08:12 PM                  

Members on this site have reported replacement lower ball joints installed by dealers under recall, have experienced torn rubber boots. Conclusion: Recall replacement ball joints are no better than original no matter what Chrysler/ DC/ FCA / Stellantis says.

Some Chrysler online parts sites show lower replacement ball joint is available (part #CBBTC030). But, may or may not be available when you actually place order.

eBay has a few for sale.

Note: Replacement lower ball joint from Chrysler were/are delivered as a pair. Some unscrupulous folks maybe selling them singerly. Buyer beware.

posted 08-05-2024 08:22 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by ed monahan:
I THINK the geometry of the suspension might have something to do with the failures, also. I don't KNOW that for a fact, just that Chrysler realized there was a problem waaay back when.

---

I honestly believe it was the offset on the front wheel where the geometry error was made. I have 3 sets of custom built wheels for my car. Different offset up front. I moved the offset in more to cradle the axis point of the joints rather than put negative pressure on them, especially the lower. Much less of an angle at full lock. When the factory front wheels were on my car it seemed like at full lock (turning) the angle on the lower joint is extreme. I really have no idea what the issue was but in my opinion it’s the wheels. I’m sure you all remember me saying the Mickeys were rough on my car? I run the Mickeys in the rear with my silver wheels up front and it’s mint. The front wheels need to be wider and inboard more so the geometry isn’t so extreme. Just my opinion from experience.

phipplet I understand your reasoning and it makes sense except that the Viper and the Raptor have never been called out for an issue with the lower joints to my knowledge. I hope it works out for you.

posted 08-06-2024 03:51 AM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by cdeluca99:

I honestly believe it was the offset on the front wheel where the geometry error was made. I have 3 sets of custom built wheels for my car. Different offset up front. I moved the offset in more to cradle the axis point of the joints rather than put negative pressure on them, especially the lower. Much less of an angle at full lock. When the factory front wheels were on my car it seemed like at full lock (turning) the angle on the lower joint is extreme. I really have no idea what the issue was but in my opinion it’s the wheels. I’m sure you all remember me saying the Mickeys were rough on my car? I run the Mickeys in the rear with my silver wheels up front and it’s mint. I went +1 offset on the skinnies up front, BAD idea. Those wheels are going to be hose reels soon. The front wheels need to be wider and inboard more so the geometry isn’t so extreme. Just my opinion from experience.

phipplet I understand your reasoning and it makes sense except that the Viper and the Raptor have never been called out for an issue with the lower joints to my knowledge. I hope it works out for you.

---

posted 08-06-2024 05:44 AM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by phipplet:

Thank you! It’s not a performance vehicle. It was never intended to be! It was an experiment in aluminum manufacturing. I trust the company! Oh! BTW, my new lower ball joints from Chrysler have ZERK FITTINGS! Hmmmmm? I guess they got the memo. But, spend your money however you want. I’ll stick with the developer of the vehicle everytime!

---

posted 08-07-2024 12:15 AM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tchootch:
Manufacturers issue recalls when the original parts are defective. It happens, mistakes are made. If the replacement parts are not re-designed to eradicate the failure, then it will happen again.

The first replacements were free, under a recall. If your car was serviced under the recall, no more free replacements will be supplied. If the recall wasn't performed on your car I seriously doubt if any parts, free or for sale, will be available from Chrysler 20 some years after the recall.

As for Chrysler's R&D budget, these ball joints are purchased from a supplier. Chrysler does not make ball joints. Any R&D would be carried out by the supplier. Sure Chrysler would most likely have tested these ball joints to a simulated life of typically 10 years of use, but it seems like errors may have been made.

As an ex Chrysler engineer (thankfully not in suspension) I would not be too quick to ignore owners experience.

You say the dealer has ordered parts. It will be interesting to see if they turn up.

---

posted 08-07-2024 12:07 PM                  

It is common knowledge that it was a design exercise in Aluminum construction. That doesn't mean it's a substandard vehicle.

posted 08-07-2024 12:49 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by phipplet:
This is absolutley 100% false! As an engineer, there is nothing wrong with the Chrysler replacement ball joints! They have ZERK fittings! They comply with all NSTB standards! And yes! They did arrive and they replaced them within two days! I’ll say this all day long, the Prowler was never a PERFORMANCE vehicle! It was an experiment in aluminum technology! Stop pushing a fasle narrative about a stupid ball joint people. Chrysler pays for the recall! It’s FREE!

---

As has been mentioned by cdeluca99, can you please post pictures and part number/invoice of new recall ball joints installed on your car?

If replacement part has changed, our Prowler community would gratefully like to be aware of it.