This is kind of a random questions, but I got into a discussion the other day with a guy about axle strength. I'm far from an expert on this subject. He believed that Land Rover axles (I don't know if D1 and D2 are different, or D-90 for that matter) are comparable to a Jeep Wrangler; I think that they are stronger than the Dana 35 and 30 that most Jeeps have (not counting the Rubicon). Not looking for anything real scientific, but how strong are LR axles compared to Jeeps? What is a rough equivalent for our axles, ie Ford 9 inch, Dana 44, etc.:applause:
Axle Strength - LR vs Jeep
- Thread starter RayDunn
- Start date
S
Swa j-Ten
Guest
its kinda a mute point because they are in different applications
axle strength has alot to do with wheel base, the longer the wheelbase the stronger axle components need to be to hold up because the overall weight of the truck has more leverage on the components.
example a long bed pick-up will make toast out of the same axle that will live forever under a short little willies given the same ratio and tire size.
axles strength always goes back to ring and pinion size and design, a ford 9" isnt only strong because it has a 9" diameter ring gear it also has a supported pinion gear . the support keeps the pinion gear from being flexed away from the ring preventing failure.
the outer components of a axle also come into play to a great extent. the Dana 30 and 35's have nearly identicle ring and pinions and differencials but the dana 35 has slightly larger outer components and the newer ones have a very easy system for service when a outer component does fail.
the Dana 44 has come in so many different forms that it hard to say where it falls. the dana 44's that came in international scouts had huge thick tubes and beefier housings then most preventing some failures that plauged chevy versions. the outer components on D44's also had all kinds of different outer variants. some were terrible and were constant maintenance headaches with locking hubs coming loose all the time. other designs that used internal style locking hubs or no locking hubs at all were near bullet proof. with slight modifications such as 360* c-clips on the outer u-joints you can run 35" tires on a D44 without many problems at all.
If i was puting them in order
Dana 27
Dana 30
Rover DII
Dana 35
Rover D1
Dana 44
Dana 50
Toyota
Ford 9"
Rover sals
Dana 60
Sterling 10.75
Volvo 303
Dana 70
unimog 404
Dana 70M
Dana 80
Rockwell
axle strength has alot to do with wheel base, the longer the wheelbase the stronger axle components need to be to hold up because the overall weight of the truck has more leverage on the components.
example a long bed pick-up will make toast out of the same axle that will live forever under a short little willies given the same ratio and tire size.
axles strength always goes back to ring and pinion size and design, a ford 9" isnt only strong because it has a 9" diameter ring gear it also has a supported pinion gear . the support keeps the pinion gear from being flexed away from the ring preventing failure.
the outer components of a axle also come into play to a great extent. the Dana 30 and 35's have nearly identicle ring and pinions and differencials but the dana 35 has slightly larger outer components and the newer ones have a very easy system for service when a outer component does fail.
the Dana 44 has come in so many different forms that it hard to say where it falls. the dana 44's that came in international scouts had huge thick tubes and beefier housings then most preventing some failures that plauged chevy versions. the outer components on D44's also had all kinds of different outer variants. some were terrible and were constant maintenance headaches with locking hubs coming loose all the time. other designs that used internal style locking hubs or no locking hubs at all were near bullet proof. with slight modifications such as 360* c-clips on the outer u-joints you can run 35" tires on a D44 without many problems at all.
If i was puting them in order
Dana 27
Dana 30
Rover DII
Dana 35
Rover D1
Dana 44
Dana 50
Toyota
Ford 9"
Rover sals
Dana 60
Sterling 10.75
Volvo 303
Dana 70
unimog 404
Dana 70M
Dana 80
Rockwell
Last edited:
I would put the dana 35, below the dana 30 too, I've seen more rears busted on jeeps than the fronts, almost every jeep trip i went on in Texas we had at least one axle go...of dif like mine
Great explanation above!
What make the Salsbury (sp?) axle stronger than a standard LR axle? Are the sals axles only found on 110's?
What make the Salsbury (sp?) axle stronger than a standard LR axle? Are the sals axles only found on 110's?
UK 4X4 said:
The reason you see more 35's break is because they do most of the work when out wheelin, not because the 30 is stronger. Most guys I know wheel with a locked rear and open front.
Muskyman summed it up about perfectly.
Herkvet said:
because they both use the same center section/third member but the D1 is true full floating design, full floating means that the weight of the vehicle is caried on bearings on a spindle, semi floating is when the weight is carried on the actual axel such as a DII. The DII also uses a smaller Cv that has a exposed boot, these are very problematic if the diameter of the tire is increased.
UK 4x4 said:
well as I pointed out they are very similar, the differences are that the Dana 30's all used very light weight tubes in the housings and that any air time will bend them making the whole thing worthless, I have seen dozens of them taco'd on the trail and anyone that was wheeling in the CJ5/CJ7 era will know what I am talking about. The Dana 35 was HUGE strength upgrade because the axle was to be used in jeep XJ's as well as wranglers. yes they still have failures but thats more of the fact we are all driving much tougher terain today then what people were doing in the CJ Era. The Dana 30 can be made much stronger with a truss and with 360* c clips they are pretty good.
Swa j-Ten said:
yes your right...Nothing scientific:rofl:
Z
Zoolander
Guest
Aren't jeeps much lighter than Rovers, which would mean that you'd have to do an apples to apples comparison? Would a Dana 35 on a Rover hold up as well as a Dana 35 on a jeep? Also, would a DII Axle on a jeep be stonger than a Dana 35 on a jeep?
RayDunn said:
sorry missed this one...I sals other then being a gravy covered chopped steak is a rover specific Dana 60, they are way larger then a standard rover axle and thats why they are stronger. on top of that they can be upgraded just like a Dana 60 with 35 spline shafts and huge heavy duty lockers. The ARB that goes in a sals/dana 60 is bigger then the whole third member of a standard D1/defender Rover.
Zoolander said:
I would put a Dana 35 against the DII all day long, they live with 35" tires under XJ's pretty well with only minor upgrades. the housings in the DII are stronger...but the Dana 35's dont really have that many housing failures it more the 28 spline outer stub shafts that can be very easily upgraded for damn near nothing compared to rover upgrades.
S
Swa j-Ten
Guest
Dang Muskyman, Thanks
I am gonna offer you up a drink for that write up.
PM if your ever in the Wheeling area !!!
Hey how much do you know about MOG 416 portals
and fast axles vs. standard ??
Peter
I am gonna offer you up a drink for that write up.
PM if your ever in the Wheeling area !!!
Hey how much do you know about MOG 416 portals
and fast axles vs. standard ??
Peter
Sweet !!!
Cool I'd be happy to join up with your guys some time and see a MOG in action.
I'm looking to purchase a 406 or a 416. Need to start in on my homework
first.
I was serious if your ever in the Wheeling area around lunch time
send a PM Bob Chinns is down the road.
Cool I'd be happy to join up with your guys some time and see a MOG in action.
I'm looking to purchase a 406 or a 416. Need to start in on my homework
first.
I was serious if your ever in the Wheeling area around lunch time
send a PM Bob Chinns is down the road.
MUSKYMAN said:
not sure i agree w/your order of the last few but your pretty close.
i'd prefer to beat on a 60 or 70 way before a 303 or 404.
seen to may 303's and 404's break where 60's seem to hold up...
but this is in rock crawling, and just my observations.
portals aren't the end all be all, which is why most crawlers are going back to the 60.
it's tried and true.
good post Thom, i guess w/ age there is some wisdom....:rofl:
marc olivares said:
gotta bring up the age thing
yeah the guys are moving back to straight axles, I wonder if its more a size thing or strength?...buggies are gettings smaller and those portals are frigging huge. add to that the after market 60's out there that are damn near unbreakable and I dont blame them.
I gotta say that if I was going to add a Terra pro Dana 60 with thier outer knuckles and say CTM or longfield HD 60 CV's that it would be right at the bottom of that list. If you can afford the strength man there is some tough shit out there!!
Hi Muskyman,
Great information with regards to axles. What is a sterling 10.75? Is that supposed to be a 10.5?
With regards to the series II vs. a series I.
Is the series II rear axle still a full floater with the difference being that the hub/wheel bearing assembly is sealed in the series II vs. the serviceable one in the series I? I believe you can remove the drive axle on a series II but still be able to leave the tire wheel bolted to the hub. Same style of pressed hub for the front is used in the rear. Seems like all the newer cars move to a sealed bearing design similar to a front wheel drive vehicle. I could be wrong.
lkl
Great information with regards to axles. What is a sterling 10.75? Is that supposed to be a 10.5?
With regards to the series II vs. a series I.
Is the series II rear axle still a full floater with the difference being that the hub/wheel bearing assembly is sealed in the series II vs. the serviceable one in the series I? I believe you can remove the drive axle on a series II but still be able to leave the tire wheel bolted to the hub. Same style of pressed hub for the front is used in the rear. Seems like all the newer cars move to a sealed bearing design similar to a front wheel drive vehicle. I could be wrong.
lkl
nope the rear of a DII is a semi floater...the wheel must come off before you can remove the axle.
the axle comes off with the hub/bearing assembly and then you remove the axle nut to remove the axle shaft from the hub....not a very good system
the axle comes off with the hub/bearing assembly and then you remove the axle nut to remove the axle shaft from the hub....not a very good system