The Triumph Dolomite Club - Discussion Forum

The steering U/J at the bottom of the column on the toledo needs replacing due to play in it, just wanted to know if its the same joint through all the ranges as ive got some spare dolomite/sprint ones.

Yes they are all the same, in fact it is the same joint on the Herald/Spitfire range too!

Steve

Flexible coupling yes...u/j is not the same as a Spit/Herald one for sure...Spit shaft is a lot longer.

Toledo and dolomite intermediate shafts are all the same...

Jonners

Jon Tilson wrote:Flexible coupling yes...u/j is not the same as a Spit/Herald one for sure...Spit shaft is a lot longer.

Toledo and dolomite intermediate shafts are all the same...

Jonners

Well he did say the one at the BOTTOM of the column Jonners!

Steve

Thanks for the replies,
Well today we had a good look by taking them both off to find out its the upper U/J that's gone the one that fits on the bottom of the column, we have a choice of two good S/H ones to fit, one is original type and the other looks like an after market one.

steve

How come the silly bottom joint is called a UJ by so many of us, surely the pedants among us must be bursting blood vessels!!!

The "bottom" one is not a UJ, it is an inline joint that is used to connect the intermediate shaft with the rack, it also is there to absorb minor vibrations and shock.

"Flexible coupling" is a better term ,especially when the rubber bushes are failing - it then becomes very flexible. The top one is definitely a UJ

To avoid all confusion we should call the top one 'the UJ', and the bottom one 'the liability'

Steve

Lol Steve of all people should know the difference between a u/j and a flexible coupling....

And I'm not sure about it being a "liability". If your top u/ seizes in one plane I reckon that's more of a liability...

In short order it will make mincement of the column lower bush and the flexible coupling too....

Jonners

If we want to be really, really pedantic - Jonners standard - then the lower one is a Layrub Coupling.

Haha. Who makes up these names?

Its a very old name, goes back to the days of Laycock Transmissions and Clutches...

I have fitted the non original U/J and fitted the poly bushes on the steering rack and completely transformed the steering, it make you realise how vague the steering had become.

Interesting to know the name of the joint Matt. I have never been convinced about replacing it with a U/J , it's obviously not one.

I assumed that it had something to do with cushioning the steering.

However I know that many people have used a U/J and it seems the compatible replacements are not exactly top quality.

Karlos wrote:How come the silly bottom joint is called a UJ by so many of us, surely the pedants among us must be bursting blood vessels!!!

As something of a professional pedant, I have to say that my "bottom" one is a UJ, and a forged one too.

Not only better than the fake FAM1718s, like below around, but safer by far.


Don't it worry you when a vendor can't even be bothered to find a picture of one that's not rusty?

Graham

AlanH wrote:I have never been convinced about replacing it with a U/J , it's obviously not one.

Me neither - its meant to provide some cushioning, not flexibility like a UJ. Layrubs are used to stop vibration, not provide variation in angle like a UJ.