I have a 1972 Olds 442 W-30 that I am replacing the lower front RH control arm. I ordered a replacement with the ball joint and bushings installed. I received the part and it looks good except one thing. It has two round bushings instead of a round bushing and a oval bushing. Matching it up to the old arm it looks the same as far as fitment. Same widths at the insertion points on the frame and all that. Same holes, etc. What problem is going to be incurred by using the arm with two round bushings? Is it less heavy duty? Or does it matter? Any expertise would be appreciated. It's obviously a pain sending it back, but I want it to work right.

 

I "thought" the general consensus was the oval bushings providing more flex. Taken from another forum:

SOURCE: https://www.v8buick.com/index.php?th...shings.120295/

I replaced my suspension a couple years ago (1971 CS convertible) - all Moog oval bushings. I cannot state w/ any authority whether the above quote has merit, I'm only a messenger; but, it's a novel point of discussion -

 

Interesting concept. Makes sense. That being said, I could use the control arm I have, just need to decide if I want the smoother ride. If I could I would just put an oval bushing in the hole with the round one, but I don't think that's possible either.

 

If you'd like images and more discussion, you can certainly expand on this performing more research. What you determine to be correct, will depend on what you consider to be correct for your car. Best of luck! (I'd return the control arm to match what belongs on the car)

Three Types of Lower Control Arms

 

The oval bushings were used in some A-body applications to provide added compliance for a softer ride. Dimensionally they interchange with the arms that have two round bushings. The quote that Norm posted is correct. That is exactly what the oval bushing was intended to do, but obviously added compliance is exactly the opposite of what you want for tight handling.