[screamingchief]

Ok,where do I start? LOL

If they're supposed to have anti-sieze on them,,,then someone needs to run right out and go tell all the OEM's that they've been doing it wrong for like the last 50 or so years...

Also,personally I've never had any problems seperating BJ's,but that's also because I'm not remotely affraid of smacking the $#!t outta the spindle with a BFH to break the taper loose.

And yeah,I'm one of those certified mechanics (ASE master) that has done literally thousands & thousands of BJ replacements.

We'd get paid like 20-30 mins. a side to do both of them on a 1/2 ton GM truck or such.

The taper on most BJ's is by it's design intended to be a slight interference fit,and anything that changes that relationship dynamic is likely not going to be all that productive to the function of said BJ.

If Moog or any of the other suspension parts co.s wanted ya'll to use anti-seize on their BJ's,trust me they'd include a small packet of it in the box right along with all the other installation hardware.

Anit seize is meant to prevent thread galling and electrolysis related corrosion in assemblies using dissimilar metals and such (steel threads in aluminum for example).

The only time I could see using anti-seize as a benefit for a BJ install would be when the spindle itself is aluminum and it uses a tapered BJ (which is pretty unusual in OEM vehicles),as then there would be that dissimilar metal/electrolysis dynamic in place that could affect said assembly.

Beyond that,I dont see a need for it.

JMO/FWIW

Bret P.