[72pontiac]

Do you agree with these nut and bolt orientations in the upper and lower rear control arms

[Rich-Tripower]

That is hard to read and not entirely sure what it is all saying, but: lower arm bolts, heads facing outside of car, upper arm bolts, heads facing inside of car.

[72pontiac]

Originally Posted by Rich-Tripower

That is hard to read and not entirely sure what it is all saying, but: lower arm bolts, heads facing outside of car, upper arm bolts, heads facing inside of car.

Thanks that's how it reads so it shall be

[72pontiac]

Since you seem to know. how about which end of the lowers go towards the front. theres an oval hole and a round hole on top at each end. or the way the sleeve of the bushing faces. I'm not worried about judging but if I'm doing it might as well do it right

[Cardo]

Photo of mine before i took it apart.

[72pontiac]

Originally Posted by Cardo

Photo of mine before i took it apart.

Looks like round hole is forward. Also appears your bolts are opposite of what is claimed to be correct

[Cardo]

Yeah, I noticed that too. To the best of my knowledge my car had not been apart.... It had about 62k miles on it. Here's a few more.

[Kenth]

From the 1967 assemly manual:

[72pontiac]

Originally Posted by Kenth

From the 1967 assemly manual:

Boy, I wish that was clearer. Interesting the shock bolts goes up from bottom. Also interesting it contradicts what the guy on Chevelle sight said about control arm bolts.

[Kenth]

Originally Posted by 72pontiac

Boy, I wish that was clearer. Interesting the shock bolts goes up from bottom. Also interesting it contradicts what the guy on Chevelle sight said about control arm bolts.

Right click on picture and open in new window and they will be enlarged.

I would not trust a Chevy-site when it comes to Pontiac.
"old ultimate warrior proverb"

[72pontiac]

Originally Posted by Kenth

Right click on picture and open in new window and they will be enlarged.

I would not trust a Chevy-site when it comes to Pontiac.
"old ultimate warrior proverb"

Trust no one. I'm about to stop caring. Who knows if they changed methods from 64-65 to 67

[Cardo]

At this point, I would suggest a PM to a couple of the guys on here with survivors. 60stuff Chris and NYGTO Gary have both helped me out in the past, and were more than happy to help. That would settle it for you for sure. It could come down to which plant it was was built in and who was putting those bolts in that day. I work in an assembly plant, and things are definitely not always done by the book!

[Kenth]

Originally Posted by 72pontiac

Trust no one. I'm about to stop caring. Who knows if they changed methods from 64-65 to 67

1965-1966-1967 shop manuals are the same as the assembly manual.

Can´t got wrong doing it the factory way, even if someone on the assembly line had a bad day.

FWIW

[Rich-Tripower]

At the end of the day it probably makes the most sense to just install the bolts with whatever orientation is easiest from an assembly/disassembly stand point since this is probably what was done in the factory. I can't see how it would make any difference performance-wise or functionality-wise what direction the bolt is in.

[Scarebird]

^^^ especially the forward lower bolts - who wants to fish those in from the outside? pop them in from the inside and gun them to spec.

['ol Pinion head]

Ease of repetitive installation is why the engineers specified installation of the r/e control arm bolts from one side. My own take, & I don't want to even think of how many rearend housings w/o axles, complete rears, & lower control arms I've pulled out of '64-72 A-body's in the last 38 years. Following is my own take, it matches original rears in several of my keepers as well as the original rolling chassis out of a 4082 mile original '72. Also confirms what is pictured in the '67 Pontiac A-body Assembly & '71 Pontiac A-GP Assembly manuals.

Lower control arm/front position. The front bolts go in from the OUTSIDE of the frame, through the frame & control arm & then the nut is held on the inboard side to be tightened. Its always been much easier to install, & for that matter, remove those two bolts from the outside of the frame. During an opposite installation, inserting a nut in the socket, then having to deal with the possibility of dropping that nut into the boxed section of a the frame, then have to fish it out .. . Uhh No. During assembly, the heads of these long bolts tend to slide up into the depth of the socket & are fairly easily guided into the hole from the outboard side of the frame. When boxed lower control arms & rear swaybar were installed, on the inside of the frame, before the nut goes on, the lower portion of the brace was installed, then a lock washer was used before the nut. AGAIN, the nut was to the inside, it was held with a wrench as the bolt head was tightened.

Lower control arm, rear position.... the far rear bolts go in from the inside, retaining nut towards the outside. Again this was done this way for a reason. If the autoworker tried to install the nut, inboard, there was not enough room outboard to run the long bolt in with the socket attachment on the air tool. As delivered to each assembly plant, the rearends were delivered as an assembly with loaded backing plates & drums on each assembled rear. If they did not have their drums & loaded backing plate bolted to the housing ends, there would be a straight shot for the extension/socket on the air tool. Have observed the results of many a home "wrench" getting the direction of this bolt wrong.

Upper control arm to each r/e hsg perch...
The control arm bolts were installed from the front of the rearend. Once through the upper control arm & bushing, a nut (no lock washer) was installed on the outboard side, held with a wrench, & the head of control arm bolt was tightened from the front.

Upper control arm bolt to the frame crossmember... this is the only position ive ran across where the bolt could be factory installed either way. On the front side of the frame crossmember there is a large indentation on each side. On manual transmission cars, a "4 spd" reinforcement bar was installed at this point. I've pulled such originally installed braces with the bolt head right next to the stamped steel brace on that front side. Have also ran across several instances that the bolt was flipped around & the nut was on the front side with brace behind it. Hmmm...

Ton of details... across the '64-67 & '68-72 A-body lines, there were numerous different original versions of upper & lower rear control arms. Including the oddball adjustable uppers that Olds used for a short time. Also, the partially boxed lower control arms that were used under '64 & 65 442's & '65 Z16 Chevelles. These tended to crack on the lip of the U channel near the area where each partial boxed insert was welded. Not the best design, & why full length boxed inserts began showing up on '66 model 442's. In a concurrent BAT '67 GTO topic there is a pic of partially boxed uppers that went under '67 Pontiac A-body's when equipped with manual transmission & 3.55 to 4.33 STT rears. Have only had a few pair of those arms, too many in boneyards had previously been cut with an acetylene torch. Have pulled near 4 dozen of the rein upper LH control arms used under '68-72 "A-bodys" w factory installed 12 bolt c-clip rears, that particular upper has been reproduced.

Hope this helps.

[72pontiac]

Originally Posted by 'ol Pinion head

Ease of repetitive installation is why the engineers specified installation of the r/e control arm bolts from one side. My own take, & I don't want to even think of how many rearend housings w/o axles, complete rears, & lower control arms I've pulled out of '64-72 A-body's in the last 38 years. Following is my own take, it matches original rears in several of my keepers as well as the original rolling chassis out of a 4082 mile original '72. Also confirms what is pictured in the '67 Pontiac A-body Assembly & '71 Pontiac A-GP Assembly manuals.

Lower control arm/front position. The front bolts go in from the OUTSIDE of the frame, through the frame & control arm & then the nut is held on the inboard side to be tightened. Its always been much easier to install, & for that matter, remove those two bolts from the outside of the frame. During an opposite installation, inserting a nut in the socket, then having to deal with the possibility of dropping that nut into the boxed section of a the frame, then have to fish it out .. . Uhh No. During assembly, the heads of these long bolts tend to slide up into the depth of the socket & are fairly easily guided into the hole from the outboard side of the frame. When boxed lower control arms & rear swaybar were installed, on the inside of the frame, before the nut goes on, the lower portion of the brace was installed, then a lock washer was used before the nut. AGAIN, the nut was to the inside, it was held with a wrench as the bolt head was tightened.

Lower control arm, rear position.... the far rear bolts go in from the inside, retaining nut towards the outside. Again this was done this way for a reason. If the autoworker tried to install the nut, inboard, there was not enough room outboard to run the long bolt in with the socket attachment on the air tool. As delivered to each assembly plant, the rearends were delivered as an assembly with loaded backing plates & drums on each assembled rear. If they did not have their drums & loaded backing plate bolted to the housing ends, there would be a straight shot for the extension/socket on the air tool. Have observed the results of many a home "wrench" getting the direction of this bolt wrong.

Upper control arm to each r/e hsg perch...
The control arm bolts were installed from the front of the rearend. Once through the upper control arm & bushing, a nut (no lock washer) was installed on the outboard side, held with a wrench, & the head of control arm bolt was tightened from the front.

Upper control arm bolt to the frame crossmember... this is the only position ive ran across where the bolt could be factory installed either way. On the front side of the frame crossmember there is a large indentation on each side. On manual transmission cars, a "4 spd" reinforcement bar was installed at this point. I've pulled such originally installed braces with the bolt head right next to the stamped steel brace on that front side. Have also ran across several instances that the bolt was flipped around & the nut was on the front side with brace behind it. Hmmm...

Ton of details... across the '64-67 & '68-72 A-body lines, there were numerous different original versions of upper & lower rear control arms. Including the oddball adjustable uppers that Olds used for a short time. Also, the partially boxed lower control arms that were used under '64 & 65 442's & '65 Z16 Chevelles. These tended to crack on the lip of the U channel near the area where each partial boxed insert was welded. Not the best design, & why full length boxed inserts began showing up on '66 model 442's. In a concurrent BAT '67 GTO topic there is a pic of partially boxed uppers that went under '67 Pontiac A-body's when equipped with manual transmission & 3.55 to 4.33 STT rears. Have only had a few pair of those arms, too many in boneyards had previously been cut with an acetylene torch. Have pulled near 4 dozen of the rein upper LH control arms used under '68-72 "A-bodys" w factory installed 12 bolt c-clip rears, that particular upper has been reproduced.

Hope this helps.

now thats an answer thanks for taking the time to do that

[Tom Vaught]

Agree! Thanks OPH

Tom V.