Jeep axles

[robertf]

rover actually protects the axle components by limiting the ratio at the ring and pinion and puts more reduction in the transfercase. this allows a similarly overall geared trucks with less reduction in the axle itself.

This is classic



All u joint front axles have the c clip problem, even 60's. I have a stack of egg shaped 60 stubs in my storage unit given to me for free.

What have you torn up a number of ring and pinions with? I'd say its a setup problem if it keeps reoccuring. I wheel pretty regularly with rigs with 44s, I've had big v8 power in front of a locked 44 with 36"s and deep gearing, even have done wheelies with the thing and clutch drops. Never once have I seen a broken dana 44 ring and pinion. I think saw 3 rover diffs pop at SCARR alone.

 

[MUSKYMAN]

yeah popping wheelies with D44's and 36"tires...good thing I'm here because its sure getting deep in bullshit over there.

 

[robertf]

yeah popping wheelies with D44's and 36"tires...good thing I'm here because its sure getting deep in bullshit over there.

cj5 with a 360 in low range will hop a beer bottle. Try it. Swampers too, heavy bastards

 

[MUSKYMAN]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUSKYMAN
rover actually protects the axle components by limiting the ratio at the ring and pinion and puts more reduction in the transfercase. this allows a similarly overall geared trucks with less reduction in the axle itself.

This is classic


.

classic?...as in your calling bull shit?

please explain ?

let me hear your vast knowledge.


so what are you keeping all the worthless D60 stub shafts for?

thats funny the D60 ones egg out and fail but the D44's dont?

you ask what I ate up D44's with...look at my home page that scout spit out D44 ring and pinions on 35" tires.

I was machineing the yokes and installing 360* snap rings in dana's 20 years ago...were you wheeling 20 years ago?

 

[jhmover]

Who cares about 44's? It's a retarded idea to spend all the time and money putting 44's under a Rover. If you're going to spend all that time and money, then why not put in 60's or portal's?????

 

[Azdiscovery]

MUSKYMAN...

I now believe that he is an A$$HAT Troll...

D60's failing and 44's not.... wow...:banghead:

Just leave it be...

Actually, I now believe I know why he is trying to put 44s under his disco..

He tried to follow SY's locked AWD front idea---whoops.

 

[Mongo]

Never seen a 44 break a R&P, but had them on a jeep with a v8. OK, what ya break, because something had to let if you wheeled the thing. I really hope your not saying a 60 is weak and a 44 is stronger.

The point is that is if your going to thru the pain of a axle swap, why do it with a axle that really not any stronger than a built rover axle. A toy converted rover axle is stronger than a 44. Hands down...


What broke in the rover diff's? What size tires and what axle upgrades?

 

[Andrew Homan]

Build rover axles= a stronger polished turd!

Toy conversion= best bang for the buck!

Dynatrac custom axles= big dog money but nothing better. Just go buggy at this point.

My .02 cents

 

[p m]

Dana 44 axels are CRAP! Seriously they're heavy as shit, not especially strong, a bitch to work with, expensive, and the stock Jeep shit is not even a semi-floater.

Max, I don't think you're know what you're talking about.
Dana 44 axles are at least 80 pounds lighter than Rover axles.
In the late-70's Dana 44s -
- the axle housing is stronger than a Rover's (and heavier - things that made Rover axles so much heavier are the 3rd member and outer ends),

- the axleshafts are 1.31" Dia. and 31-spline - compare that to Rover axles

- the brakes are half-ton GM brakes - front with huge rotors that will not fade, and the brake pads would easily last 40 thousand miles, rear with 11" drums that are easily converted to the same rotors as the front

- IIRC, 44s have 8.75" ring gear diameter, and you can have nearly any ratio available from 2.72 to 5.89

- and, obviously, you can have any imaginable locker or limited slip or anything for them.

I can't think of a single mechanical advantage of Rover axles (in terms of pure strength) vs. Dana 44.

Max, I just saw the last sentence there - "stock Jeep shit is not even a semi-floater" - you really don't know jack shit about it.

 

[p m]

Who cares about 44's? It's a retarded idea to spend all the time and money putting 44's under a Rover. If you're going to spend all that time and money, then why not put in 60's or portal's?????

In immortal words of Rob, "folks are crawling out of woodwork lately..."

No, it is not retarded. It may not be the best, but by no means it is retarded.

 

[jhmover]

It's retarded Peter, I have no doubt in my mind.

I'm not debating 44's vs. Rovers, I'm debating that if you're spending all the time, money, fabricating, welding, etc., that it doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever to put 44's on. At that point you may as well spend a few bucks more and pt on 60's.

 

[robertf]

I was machineing the yokes and installing 360* snap rings in dana's 20 years ago...were you wheeling 20 years ago?

dana 20's huh? You know thats not an axle, right?

Never said 60's fail and 44's don't. I said they both suffer from the same ujoint cap spitting problem.

 

[Azdiscovery]

RobertF.

It was clearly a type-o by Musky.

I think you've just earned ASSHAT of the year award...



<trying to see how many times I can say that today>

 

[p m]

It's retarded Peter, I have no doubt in my mind.

People who don't have doubt in their minds are retarded.

FWIW, a pair of QT Wagoneer D44s can be slung under a Disco in one weekend.
Try pulling that off with a D60.

 

[p m]

Never said 60's fail and 44's don't. I said they both suffer from the same ujoint cap spitting problem.

Have you witnessed that?
The smallish U-joint in the front D44 is still a lot stouter than the Rover CV joint.
By the way, there wasn't even a typo in Musky's post.

 

[robertf]

RobertF.

It was clearly a type-o by Musky.

I think you've just earned ASSHAT of the year award...



<trying to see how many times I can say that today>

Was it? He's typed so much misinformation in this thread that its hard to separate the typos from the bs.

I guess if calling someone out on an incorrect statement makes me an asshat then so be it. (the incorrect statement being 44's are junk)

And pm I have seen it happen on spooled front 60's (how do you think I got all the messed up stub shafts). Some tack welds go along way on trail only 60's.

 

[jhmover]

Read below, he wasn't talking Wagoneer 44's he was talking JK Rubicon ones. I love the way people change stuff to suit their own agenda.

I know many will think this idea is a sacrilage but it beats using toyota parts. The new JK rubicon has D44s that are larger w/ bigger bearings and pinions than before. They're a little wider and have coil brackets that may be adapted. They also come w/ lockers and 4:10s. The axles are available as a MOPAR part from a dealer for $1400 each. There's said to be a D60 version coming soon from the mil-spec JKs sold in the middleeast. I know the axles are for a Jeep but you proud sensative types could say they're MOPAR axles. Damn , I'm gonna be hated on this board as a Jeep Lover, oh well.

 

[Mongo]

well if you could read that would help... he said that he was doing the 360 clip mod 20 years ago on a dana. Not on a dana 20. And now you have a truck with a spooled front dana 60, ok, is it yours, or a friends...

Whatever...

and yes, a 44 swap can be done in a weekend, so can a toy conversion.

 

[p m]

Was it? He's typed so much misinformation in this thread that its hard to separate the typos from the bs.

I guess if calling someone out on an incorrect statement makes me an asshat then so be it.

No, you've earned the asshat award by being unable to read what he said.

I was machineing the yokes and installing 360* snap rings in dana's 20 years ago...were you wheeling 20 years ago?

Show me where in this quote did Thom mean a Dana 20?

Thom, by the way, Wagoneer 44s didn't have C-clips. It's Chevy shit, maybe others'.

JH - he did ask about Mopar 44, but I didn't, and was very clear about it. It would seem, to me, retarded to spend all this coin on JK axles and then hack them apart, and in that I agree with you.
Just simply call Jeep hardware junk is silly, because it isn't. Some of it is worse than Rover's (like most T-cases), some of it is better.

 

[jhmover]

Now you got it Peter, next time I'll explain myself better. I don't believe I used the word Junk. Like i said I'm not debating 44's vs. Rovers, etc. It's like if you're going to be hacking, then you may as well do the hacking on 60's.