| Author |
Message |
    
al hang
| | Posted on Monday, April 08, 2002 - 02:56 pm: | 
|
In the ongoing battle to replace all the weak stuff on the disco, I've been looking at getting 1 ton CV's hopefully sometime this summer. on www.paddockspares.com I found this rover part number with these 2 sub headings. this 110 part is almost double the cost of the D90 part. Is this the fabled 1 ton CV? I'm pretty sure with delivery I can get these for around 400 as opposed ECR's price of 680 not delivered. Any thoughts? Marty have you had a chance to do your swap yet? Ron (breaker of all things british) Brown how about you? And what the heck is this bronze location collar?
Thanks in advance,
-al
RTC6862R
CV joint-90 frm axl 22L27848 65.00 GBP
110 frm axl 20L48866 125.00 GBP |
marty amedeo (Marty)
| | Posted on Monday, April 08, 2002 - 07:58 pm: |
|
Al
Ordered all the parts but haven't got them yet.
Marty |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Monday, April 08, 2002 - 09:01 pm: |
|
I thought you had to give up ABS for this swap?? Or so said Great Basin Rovers.
-P |
Ron
| | Posted on Monday, April 08, 2002 - 09:55 pm: |
|
Al,
I have not done it. I may, but I need to figure out if they will fit in my housings. I have the 606665 cvs which came stock on most 87s and a very few 88 range rovers.
Basically they are the same size as the 1 ton cvs but the stub shaft is seperate (and 10 spline with integral flange) and the arrangement of the balls is slightly different on the 1 ton making the 1 ton marginally stronger.
The advantages of the 606665 are:
1. Availablity and cost
2. It has the 23 spline inner so you don't have to run the POS 32 spline 1 inch inner axles
3. Mike and Wayne Smith have run them in comps so they have to be somewhat strong.
As I understand it you need new swivels, knuckles, flanges and inner axles to run 1 ton cvs on any non suffix A axle. On a suffix A (which came with the 606665) 1 tons might with with just new flanges. No one can tell me for sure. One guru says probably and certainly with a slight bit of machaning.
Of course this does Al Hang little good as your axle will need all new parts to run one tons. To run 606665 I dunno. Bill @ GBR would know however.
Confused.
Ron |
al hang
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 12:25 am: |
|
to add more confusion to the mix, KAM makes a conversion kit for 32 to 24 splines with a whole slew of parts, check it out at:
http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~kamdiffs/kamscrn1.html
it sells for 532 GBP/per kit or roughly 1500 for the full axle. But I think it can be done with a combo of aftermarket parts and off the shelf pieces from older/different rovers. So my frankenstein axle would consist of
CV #606665 85.00 GBP(2 required)
(which according to Ron includes cv,stub axle, and flange)
Heavy duty 24 spline inners roughly 200 GBP per pair
Bronze location collar or bearing adapter for $?.
So that's like 370 GBP plus delivery and misc. seals, gaskets, bearings adding an additional 100 US.About 630 U.S. when all said and done? Does this combo make sense? BTW Ron does the inner star on the CV look stronger than stock, that part worries me the most. I will probably buy one of those 606665 so my local dutch redneck friend can either give a thumbs up or thumbs down. |
Ron
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 02:45 am: |
|
(which according to Ron includes cv,stub axle, and flange)
NO,
the 1 tons include the the stub axle and cv as one unit and have a seperate flange
the 606665 is just a cv. The flange with intergral stub axle is another piece.
Ron |
Ron
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 02:59 am: |
|
Ok,
I just looked at the KAM site. I am not sure of the part number on that cv. It looks like the early 24 spline range rover cv but since I have never seen one I am just speculating. The difference between it and the 606665 is that the 606665 has a 10spline to the hub not 24.
The only thing I can say is that IMO you are wasting money. How much are you really gaining over stock with 606665? And how much would you gain over 606665s with 1 tons (I will dig up the 1 ton cv part number if you want). Since I break everything anyway I go with the run what you brought. Carry some spares which can be found relatively inexpensively from those who have upgraded and go with it.
The only LR axle I have seen worth anything was the one timm cooper built for slades truck. As I understand it he used warn 30 spline blanks (4340 chromo) and dana 44 u-joints (which could be upgraded to CTMs.
With the machine work the bill was close to 2000 I think.
All new parts with GKN new cvs should last a good while with either 606665s or 1 tons or whatever the early RR ones are numbered, but if you think you can make a rover axle into a strong axle I think it is a pipe dream.
I guess the easist and possibly cheapest way would be to find a suffix A axle (should be cheap as no one knows any difference) buy new inners and cvs and keep the old ones for spares. That way it is all bolt in and you can just build it up and then swap complete axles.
Ron |
alhang
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 09:27 am: |
|
yeah, i'd like the 1 ton part numbers if you got em. I think the rover axle can made 20-30 percent stronger for a halfway decent price. I'm not talking about bulletproof, but reliable enough that I don't worry about breaking anything with 32's
Thanks Ron,
-al |
Bill Davis (Gbrbill)
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:14 pm: |
|
al/Ron/Marty/Perrone
Someone called me and said to check out this discussion. Heres the info you are looking for. First I need to clear up some mis-information. First, there is no such thing as a 1 ton CV joint. The infomation is posted on ECR's website but it is not correct. The CV joint in question is actually the early 110 CV joint, that may have been used in a 1 ton application but it isn't specificly 1 ton. In 1989 when Rover went to the 32 spline CV in all of their applications, their 1 ton applications also switched to the 32 spline CV.
Second major misconception is that the reason you are switching to either the early 110 CV joint or the suffix A CV joint, both of which use the 23 spline input, is that they are stronger than the stock 32 spline CV. They are slightly stronger but the real reason is the this setup allows you to use a bigger inner axle. The 23 spline inner axle is approximately 1.185 inches in diameter. The 32 spline is .885 inches. This is the minor spline diameter. Both the early 110 CV and the suddix A RR front axles used 10 spline diffs so neither of these overall, were particularly strong because of the limitation of the 10 spline axle at the diff. The trick is to use a 24 spline inner axles at the diff and a 23 spline CV joints although there are several technical problems with doing this. Also you need to use an upgraded CV joint because all off the shelf CV joints suffer from various manufacturing problems, especially aftermarket ones.
If you put an early 110 CV joint in a Disco, you run into several problems as follows;
1) The integral stub axle on this CV joint is longer than the stock one. You can call me and I can supply a special drive flange to accomadate this or if you do what ECR/Ashcroft does, replace the drive hub/spindle/drive flange with early 110 components. A very expensive way to accomplish the same thing.
2) You willl lose the ABS pickups on the CV joint, as the early 110 CV joint and for that matter the suffix A CV joint do not have this provision. If you don't provide thses your brake warning light will stay on and you will also not have functioning ABS. There is a solution, I can provide an ABS ring to install on these CV joints but this creates another problem. The OD on this CV joint with the ABS ring is larger than the original one so you need to clearance the inside of the swivel housing with a grinder to allow the CV the full range of motion without interference. The second problem with the larger OD and will not fit in an assembled swivel ball/housing. The solution is to assemble the swivel housing around the CV joint althought the problem with that is if you break the CV/inner combo on the trail, the trail fix will entail dis-assembling the entire swivel housing instead of just the drive hub to remove the broken components. This is a lot more work and remember field repairs usually entail rain. mud and irratated wives! The other solution to the brake light warning light is to cut the wire to it but if you have a brake system problem you will also not have any warning of it. Its called a brake warning light for a reason.
3) You need to replace the needle bearing with a bronze collar unless you replace the drive hub/spindle/drive flange with the early 110 stuff. I can also supply the bronze collar. You also lose the spindle seal because the seal land on this CV joint is a smaller diameter. Not a big deal unless you want to keep the lubrication separate between the wheel bearings and the swivel housing.
Even after you have done all of this you only have a marginally stronger CV joint because as noted earlier, the early 110 CV joint suffers from the same problems as the factory 32 spline i.e. mass produced machining and heat treating. This is what I discovered when I started to do R&D on CV joints. To recap the route I took in CV joints, first I replaced the CV cage the most common failure point. Problem was that it turns out that the inner race, also known as the star, started to fail when the cages were upgraded. We next decided to rework the entire CV joint with some very sophisticated metalurgical process to deal with the mass production issues along with continuing to replace the cage. We are currently selling these CV joints and estimate that thay have double the durability of a stock one. They are a bolt in with no modifications to ABS, seals, drive flanges etc.
Sounds great other than you still have the small 32 spline inner axle. I supply an much stronger upgraded 32 spline inner axle but its still smaller than the 23 spline stuff. What I am working on is a custom Disco/D90 CV joint hat has all of the same external dimensions but has a 23 spline inner race that allows you to use a bigger inner axle. This will eliminate all of the installation problems associated with trying to fit non stock CV joints in the Disco.
A couple of comments on the sufix A CV joint. To fit them in a Disco also requires numerous modifications. THey also suffer from the same mass production problems. They also use a 10 spline stub axle integral with the drive flange instead of the CV joint. The reason that folks such as Wayne Smith use them is that if you break something in the front axle with this setup, its probably going to be the stub axle. In a competition situation, it is much quicker to replace a stub axle/drive flange than either an inner axle of CV joint. We are also developing a custom CV joint that uses a separate stub axle for copetion use. I have spoken to Wayne and he will probably use this new set up.
I would be leary of the KAM stuff. I used to carry it but it has numerous issues, which I won't go into here.
Hope this provides some useful info and clears up some questions. If you have more questions email me to check this bulletin board as I usually don't have the time to so without prompting. Also I don't have any of this info on my pathetic website so feel free to call if you want.
Bill
GBR |
John Lee
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:21 pm: |
|
Damn. The Drivetrain Authority is as authoritative as ever. |
Kyle
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:28 pm: |
|
Damn he dont post much , but when he does its a novel....... 
Kyle |
alhang
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:35 pm: |
|
whoa... well that blows my money saving theory out the door. |
RVR OVR (Tom)
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:38 pm: |
|
In opposed to John, who has more novels out there than Steven King.
Tom |
Ho Chung (Ho)
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 09, 2002 - 01:57 pm: |
|
Stephen King is quite entertaining you know. LOL |
Rich Lee
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 01:28 am: |
|
I'm yet into needing such a mongo front drivetrain. However, Tom Walsh (creator of "The Light Brigade" Disco) now uses GKN Torque Limiters on his built up D90. These are designed to "slip" before you build up enough torque/shockload to bust a CV or front axle. He used to break a lot of CVs on his Disco, and I believe it saved him a lot of grief at Bill Burke's Moab Camp a couple of years ago. I heard a lot of D90s broke front driveline bits on the "extreme" runs and Tom did not. He is a fairly "aggressive" driver (but not stupid) and I'll bet these have saved him a field repair more than once.
Check them out at:
http://www.fluentnet.com/lr/tech/torque.html
For more discussion on them, go to:
http://www.d-90.com/faq/Drive/DriveHubs.html
Tom Paid 886 British pounds in 1998 for 2 limiter hubs, including all shipping charges. That comes to about $1303. U.S. for the set, delivered to California, at current exchange rates.
This may be expensive, but in light of Bill/GBRs info, it may be the easiest and eventually cheapest (if you never break anything again) solution. You must use steel wheels though. |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 03:47 am: |
|
Last I heard GKNs were not making the torque hubs
THANKS BILL!
And if I understand Bill correctly I can bolt in 1 tons (I know Bill, I know they were never called 1 tons but if I call them County 110 cvs it confuses everyone) with the following parts:
New drive flange (or in my happiness FWHs)
Bronze bush
New inner axles 23spline at the cv 24 at the diff (ie GBR or Ashcroft).
Assuming I don't mind losing the ABS and alloy wheels.
Is this correct? I need nothing else? No clearancing?
Personally I think new GKN "1 ton" cvs would be a good gain over highly used stock disco stuff.
Ron
PS I will dig up the 1 ton part number |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 03:52 am: |
|
PS my real reason for the 1 tons over the 606665 is that I need 1 tons to run Free Wheeling Hubs.
YMMV FWIW
Ron |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 03:59 am: |
|
I THINK it is
AEU2522
But I am going to double check with someone who I know has them
The internet has them for ~50UKP but for that price I doubt they are GKN (the brand for good rover cvs)
Ron |
Mike Smith, ECR
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 09:13 am: |
|
OK, we need to clear up some information as posted. The 1 ton CV joint comes from a 1 ton Defender 110 application. The name sounded good so that is what we called it, it sounds better than parts # such and such CV joint. It is also the same CV used on early 110s. The UK and the rest of the Rover world look at this CV as about the toughest thing you can install (UK trialers, German off roaders, etc), until someone develops better, and don't get me wrong, as soon as someone comes up with a better mouse trap, we'll be the first ones to run them, we sell these to our customers where it fits their needs. So we aren't slagging anyones products. We have however broken every type of CV joint we have tried, except the early 110 CVs. I personally have popped all teh CVs other than these in my Defenders. These are in all the ECR vehciles, and are out there in a number of D110s and D90s of our customers. The smallest tire being used on our CVs by us and our customers are 35", the biggest are 37" and in the 3 years we have been doing them we have had no CV related failures in our rigs, or our customers, and we are in touch with all the customers we have sold the set up to on a regular basis. Luck? perhaps. Driving style? perhaps. I won't baffle you with technical BS, my words come from trail use in the east, Moab, Colorado, etc. I run these in my Tdi D90 with SSR 35s. they now have 40,000 miles and I removed them for inspection a few weeks ago and they still look great and will continue to be in the truck until they break. If they break we'll let people know. People like Marty Amedeo know how hard I wheel the ECR 4 D90 and he can atest to the fact that nothing has broken on the vehicle. Scientifically, are the ECR/ Ashcroft units better than anyone else's? Who knows. We have not done any independant testing of the CVs on the market today, so we won't make any claims except for what our experience with the units has been. We would however be very happy to GIVE a CV and axle combination to anyone who wants to do a stress test and post the results. So we fully put our money where our mouth is.
We sell this type of CV because all of our reserach in the UK and elsewhere with teams of competition trucks showed us this was the most commonly used set up. Do these guys break these CVs, sure they do, anything can be broken. If you want unbreakable I don't think it exists.
We don't feel the 1ton CV isn't really a viable solution for the Discos anyway due to the parts needed to make them work, the ABS factor an the fact that you can't run alloy rims, but if you wanted to go through it it can be done, and a lot easier than Bill makes it sound. We mainly set up Defenders with these parts, but if you scrapped your ABS you can do it too, but with some good bolt in CVs available with ABS sensors, and most Discos not running huge tires it may or may not be worth it to you.
To install the CVs in a Disco you will need new (different):
Spindles (stub shafts)
Hubs
Wheel bearings
Drive flanges
gaskets
bolts
caps
circlips
CVs
24/23 spline Ashcroft axles
These parts will directly bolt onto your Disco 1 axle with NO modifications, and you can leave the swivel housing in place, for easy field fix. Nothing has to be built around anything. The swivel stays on the axle tube during install, or field fix.
To install you would remove the wheel, remove the cap, circlip and drive flange, remove the lock nuts and then remove the hub, then remove the brake caliper and then the spindle (stub shaft). Then remove the CV and axle assembly. Then you would install the Ashcroft axle and the new CV. Then use a new gasket and install the new spindle, then you'd swap your existing brake rotor over to the new hub, install new bearings and hub seal and then install that on the stub shaft with the locking nuts, then put the caliper back in place, then the drive flange and then check the end float on the CVs, set with shims as needed and then install the circlip and cap. Then install new CV grease.
Obviosuly this is simplified, but it just shows that no machine work or weird assembly is needed to install the units.
We won't slag off anyone elses product or say you shouldn't buy product X, Y or Z, and we won't try to baffle you with tech talk, as we aren't in the mail order business. We have no desire to make the world buy our CV set up, our business does not depend on it. The only real reason we even have the stuff for sale is because we run it in our own rigs and some of our customers demanded the same stuff as they see our rigs doing some really nasty stuff and always driving out, unbroken.
We'd be happy to supply anyone the parts list needed to make this conversion happen, and yes, you can get some of the parts cheaper in the UK. We are in business to make money, so our prices do reflect our need to make a profit, but as we don't see CV sales as any real part of our business we'll be more than happy to help out the DIY community with a parts list if they desire it.
Whos CV joint is best? That is up to the customer to decide. What set up should you run? Well if you ahve a Disco with ABS, probably not our set up, but we just wanted to clear up that these are good units, they aren't for everyone, but they do work very well and we have put them through hell on ECR 4.
For anyone intestered we will fully document the install of these units into the Discotech project on our web site in a few weeks.
Thanks, and sorry for the long post. :-) |
RVR OVR (Tom)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 11:14 am: |
|
This thread goes into the personal archives. Thanks to ECR and Great Basin for all the good info.
Tom |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 12:17 pm: |
|
While these are a couple of excellent posts from some of the most knowledgable rover people around, this is the point of diminishing returns for Rover axles. Save yourself a bunch of headache and heartache and swap to domestic units. In the rear you have lots of readily available options Dana 60/70, Gm/Eaton 14 bolt, Ford 9/9.75/10.5. Here in the Minnesota where corrosion is king the salvage yards are full of the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks and vans that used these axles. In the front your options are simpler Dana 44 or Dana 60. The conversion of any of these axles to rover use is something any street rod or race car chassis builder should be able to handle. I have a complete set of specifications and drawings for converting Dana axles. If you want them email me with the name and phone number of the fabricator you are going to use. Once I am satisifed that he/she is competent and both of you sign a purchase agreement/waiver I will sell you the package for $1. Sorry no exceptions my professional liability insurer insists. |
Bill Davis (Gbrbill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Hi Mike
One thing I didn't make clear on my post yesterday was that I wasn't criticizng you, your company or any of the vendors you represent. When I reread it before sending it, some of my comments sounded a little harsh and I thought about rewording them or toning them down so they didn't come off sounding like a criticism and almost put in a comment to the effect that I respect you and your company and recommend them whenever anyone asks me about them. I was in a hurry and should have done so, hopefully this post clears that up.
I'll add a few comments to yours and this should give folks most of the information out there.
You confirmed my observation about the 1 ton CV joint. My point was that there isn't a specific CV joint sold by Land Rover for a 1 ton application. As I noted yesterday, the joint everyone is refering to is the 1983 to 1988 Defender 110, which was also used in some 1 ton applications. Land Rover didn't list it as a specific 1 ton CV joint but if you want to call it that for marketing reasons I have no problem with that. Thats marketing! I do have to admit I get tired of people calling me about the mythical 1 ton CV joint and I always respond by saying "Oh you mean the early 110 CV" and patiently explain to them that these are the same part.
You are correct in that this is the best off the shelf CV joint that Land Rover ever used, although it is extremely important to only use genuine ones. You can buy them aftermarket and they are junk. In spite of the fact it is the best factory CV joint, they do have some issues listed below, which is why I am doing to R&D to come up with something better.
1) They do fail in some circumstances. In competitive events such as the Warn Challenge in Australia and the Rainforest Challenge in Malaysia, they regularly shear the stub axles off, when they are pointed straight and will break the outer race (the bell) when turning. Admittedly these aren't normal circustances but are indicative that they can be improved.
2) As I noted yesterday, when they do break, it is relatively labor intensive to repair the problem. this is why Wayne Smith (is he a relative?) and other competitors in the events listed above do not use them. Instead they use the suffix A CV's, which have the same internals but have a separate stub axle that can be changed in less than 5 minutes if it breaks.
3) Adapting them to certain applications can be expensive. There are a couple of different ways to install them on other models. You supplied your parts list, which make my point perfectly. Heres my list:
Drive Flanges (can run stock wheels)
Maxi-Drive 2520/21-24 axle kit (with spacer and spring ring)
CV joints
bronze bush
You don't need to chnge the following:
spindle
hubs
wheel bearings and other miscellanous parts listed.
Both ways work but if you add the cost of the extra parts, especially the spindle and hub, I can't see how it could be less expensive.
My kit is also a bolt in application, unless you want to retain the ABS. I might not have made that clear in my previous post. Adding the ABS is where the install becomes complicated. We retain the ABS function by having a special ABS ring manufactured that installs over the CV joint. This increases the OD and requires you to machine the inside of the swivel housing and assemble the swivel assembly around the CV joint. This triples the assembly time and also creates the problem of trail repairs.
These is the major reasons I actually try to talk most Disco folks out of purchasing this kit. I also get really nervous for liability reasons if the same folks want to buy it without the ABS option. I really don't want to show up in court, trying to explain why I sold someone a product that disabled their brake warning system. Any product liability lawyers reading this that want to comment on this! As a result I have primarily sold this kit to Defender owners. I feel that my upgraded Disco CV joints with upgraded smaller 32 spline inner axles are almost as good as this setup but it can be improved by using a larger inner axle. This is why I am releasing my own CV joints. I can build a far superior CV joint than the early 110 and use bigger inner axles, plus it will be a complete bolt in and retain the ABS etc.
I would also like to note that the CV joints I sell are not off the shelf Land Rover units. they started out that way but we do some special metalurgical processes to them that I estimate double the durability of them.
Hope this adds some usefull info to the discussion.
Bill
GBR
P.S. Hows the Owls Head event coming along? |
Mike Smith ECR
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 02:03 pm: |
|
Bill and all,
No worries. I got an email this am from a customer telling me to look at the Discoweb. He was little upset at your post, but I can see how the 1 ton CV question would get to you after a time. Imagine how many times a day I get to answer 300 Tdi questions. ;-)
I agree with most of your points, but to date I have not been able to break one. This includes idoit moves like doing 6 foot sky wheelies on Rock Pile in Pritchett Canyon at full throttle numerous times. If that didn't do them in (I'm still running the same units) I love these things.
I will step up and donate one of our set ups if someone wants to get a stress test done. You should do the same and that would end any debate. I'd do it, but I just don't have the time and as CV are such a tiny part of our business I can't invest the time.
Different strokes for different folks. Like I said we aren't in the CV joint selling business and also like I said, I don't think this set up is viable for Discos, although it will be the only thing I run in our Discotech (but we have ABS delete and steel wheels).
As for the US axle debate, that is another story that I won't get into. We are a Rover shop and New England doesn't have that type of Upper Helldorado Extreme trails (unfortunaley), so these CVs basically become totally bomb proof out east, at least in our experience. Can a guy in Austria that does nothing but foot to the floor racing break them? Sure can. Can those guys in Iceland racing up volcano side with NOS break a Dana 60? Sure can. But will the average Disco owner with 34s and trips out west 3 times a year break our CVs, not likely. I can't break them, and I regularly try, and I have a 143:1 crawl ratio and a 275 ft lb. of torque Tdi.
As soon as the better mouse trap CV is built and tested (by you Bill or anyone else), I'll run them too.
That being said, to each his own and have fun!
The event is shaping up nicely. The Twist Off thing seems to have little reponse, but east coat guys aren't into that sort of thing I guess. I am! (hell, I drove 6000 miles last year just to do it!) but the rest will be fun. Lots of people letting us know they are heading up for the weekend. :-)
Take care! |
Kyle
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 03:42 pm: |
|
Mike , it drives me insane when people compare something that works in a little 90 to the Discovery. You are talking about a whole different ball game with the Disco as far as weight and potential strain on these components. Hell , we can carry almost as much as a little Defender weighs . A Disco just left my shop here en route for Moab with barely enough room inside to fit a nail file if he had to (Floor to ceiling and 160 pounds on the roof). Saying that you havnt broken them in a 90 doesnt say much to me... Are you gonna run that "Discotech" with more then a gas can in the back and some drinks when you do your "testing" ?
Kyle |
Milan
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 03:45 pm: |
|
Thank you Bill and Mike (and Ron and all the others) for probably the most informative post on front shafts/CVs ever. Maybe this is something that could be added to both the GBR and ECR sites in the axle sections? Or maybe our own Discoweb gentlemen would care to add it to the tech section if nobody would mind.
I kept saving this post daily since beginning and it seems to get better every day.
Once again, thank you all! |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 04:32 pm: |
|
Kyle is on the money again. Empirically in any situation if you double the weight of the vehicle you will double the torsional stress on the axles. In the real world the situation is even worse since the dynamic loads vary at the square of the power input you can see two squared or four times the stress. |
niall forbes (Forbesn)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 05:08 pm: |
|
Kyle is not on the money. First, Mike stated that he didn't think the Disco was a good application for this CV, although, admittedly, it was not for that reason. However, how many people are running 35" tires on their Disco? A few, but not many. With the larger tires Mike has on ECR4 combined with his low low crawl ratio, I'm sure he can submit those CVs to as much strain as you're going to get in Disco from having some gear in the back. Maybe I'm wrong, I really have no experience in this field but this is what makes sense to me.
So Kyle, what CV did your friend use since the above mentioned one is not strong enough for his application? |
Kyle
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 05:13 pm: |
|
Wrong Niall. If you are light it really doesnt matter how much "HP" or Torque your engine has. The vehicle itself is only capable of applying so much of that to the ground (Ground pressure). The Disco can potentially apply more to the tires and therefore get more power to the ground. That leads to more resistance on the driveline and so on and so on...... This is the same talk just in reverse as we had about the lawn chair..... Comparing Defenders and Discoveries when you are talking about HD parts is not good practice... Now , Disco's and 110's ? Thats a whole other story...
Kyle |
Mike Smith, ECR
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 06:00 pm: |
|
Kyle,
I really have never taken a Disco to the scale, but I do know my diesel 90, loaded with spares and gear when I head out west weighs in at about 4500 lbs on our local truck scales, are you saying a loaded Disco tops out at 10,000 lbs.?? or even anything close to that? Heck, my F350 crew cab diesel only weighs 7700. I can't imagine that the Disco weighs that much more mthat a loaded diesel 90 Wagon with 35s, but to be fair I'll get the Discotech weight tested when we get the spares in it and the new tires put on.
I have to say that with the my diesel's low range torque and gearing it has serious axle snapping power vs. the typical V8 auto Disco. Don't get me wrong Discos are great, but my "little 90" as you call it carries some heavy weight, and if the argument is weight, what about the 110s we have set up with diesels, crap loads of gear and our heavy CVs (see Bill... I didn't say 1 ton). These things pack some serious weight when running around, more than a Disco. and these have no failure yet either.
Weight is for sure a consideration that Bill and I did not talk about, but in this case testing in a diesel D90 is pretty close to that of a V8 Disco.
Thanks all! |
Kyle
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 06:09 pm: |
|
We have tossed around the weight thing here on and off and the average seems to be just under 6K empty. Thats considerably more then your 90 35s and all. As for your "axle snapping power" um , cmon man. Do people really buy that ? You have a little torque there but witout the weight you arent getting it to the ground. You have a seriously nice truck and I love the clatter of the little diesel but I have never thought of the diesels as "Axle snappers". Some where here we have that suspension rocket scientist guy Rich. He can probably tell us exactly how much force each vehicle is capable of applying to an axle when fully loaded.
Now once we get to the 110s. Then we are talking a serious comparison. If you have a CV that can hold up in a 110 that actually does some work then you are getting in the ball park.....
Kyle |
Mike Smith, ECR
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:07 pm: |
|
OK Kyle,
How about this... a diesel Discovery?? You know, that test project we are building. That should qualify as a seriously heavy beast. If your 6000 pounds for a V8 Disco is right, then the diesel will add a boat load of weight, plus the 35s we will be running, all the gear we plan to put in and we'll be running locked, then that should basically qualify as one f the top 10 heaviest Discos in the USA? Yes? If the heavy CVs (see Bill... still not saying 1 ton) stand up to that, that should then help people make their choices?? Yes? (eventhough we still don't consider the 1 ton CVs to be the asnwer for the Discos)
As for axle snapping... it'll snap a lot of axles. I'm not talking about weight really, I'm talking about putting a tire in a basically wedged position, or on a vertical rock face and then letting out the clutch with diesel low end grunt, locked, with ultra low range. Weight isn't the real issue, it is stress brought on by force. I'm not rocket scientist, but wedging one 35" tire into a crack up to its rim, while you ask the other one to climb a 30" vertical rock face causes some serious axle snapping force, no matter if it is Disco or D90. My point about testing things with my D90 is not that one is much heavier than the other, it is that I put that D90 into situations that most people will never see, and I outwardly will try really starnge obstacles to try and force the breakage issue. The point being that if I can't break it with the BS that I put my truck through, that likely the average Disco driver will have no trouble, eventhough his rig may be heavier.
But to end any debate on weight or test vehicles... TA-DA... We built up a diesel Disco so stay tuned and we'll let you know if the stuff holds up. :-)
I'm driving the Discotech now with 36s and beadlocks, so that should be a good test.
Unfortunately I don't have time to use this list to its best advantage and I'll be heading back into the shop now, but if anyone has questions feel free to email me directly and I'll be sure and give you my opinion. Keep in mind all these emails from all of us are opinions, and everyone has a different one. No one is right or wrong. Its your Rover. Set it up the way YOU want to.
Take care all! |
p m
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:12 pm: |
|
In the real world the situation is even worse since the dynamic loads vary at the square of the power input you can see two squared
or four times the stress.
regardless of initial thread, what's this all about? Jay, care to point to a source? Hate to say that, but it sounds like a backwater mechanic's explanations of inner workings of NP242.
peter |
p m
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:13 pm: |
|
Given all the trouble to upgrade the rover front axle, how much would be Currie's high-pinion 9"?
peter |
Mike Smith, ECR
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:22 pm: |
|
One last note:
If you do order the 110 CVs from the UK yourself from an aftermarket supplier like Craddock or something, make sure you buy the CV parts # followed by a "G" (such as AEU2522G) otherwise you'll get a really crap CV joint that won't last. It'll cost less, but won't hold up.
This "backwater mechanic" as Peter called me is now heading back to work. |
niall forbes (Forbesn)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Kyle, I hadn't thought of the whole getting traction to the ground thing. But, Mike has since pointed out, there are situations where this won't apply. Anyway, it's all acedemic to me. I don't even have a Disco yet, and when I do, I won't be able to afford drivetrain upgrades for quite a while.
Well, back to the books. I hate finals. |
p m
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:34 pm: |
|
Mike,
i haven't called anyone backwater mechanic.
If you look at the quote, it didn't come from your post.
peter |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 07:57 pm: |
|
Axle snapping torque from a 2.5 liter diesel?? That says it all about the strength of Rover axle components. I am going to have to say it again. The only reason rover axles last at all is that rover motors are slightly more powerful than two squirrels in a cage. The faithful think 300 lb-ft is an huge amount of torque, but I think they are about half right on that. |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 08:16 pm: |
|
P M - I was just simplifying the load equations for a shaft subjected to combined loading to highlight the change in stress with increased weight. I can give you the complete equations in MathCAD or Maple form, but I can't post them in that form here if you want them email me. For a good handbook on mechanical design try Robert Norton's "Machine Design - an Integrated Approach". |
Kyle
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 10:34 pm: |
|
Mike I hear ya and I am not giving you shit , well , in a way I am I just always try to be the voice of "What if ?" and I get very tired of Disco mods being modeled after what may or may not have worked on a Defender. They are two different beasts and do different things very well. Wedging a tire certainly can get the axle snapping going on but that little diesel really dont start making anypower till you spool it up nice. Pack that Disco full of gear and do the same things. If it lives then we have a real life comparison . By the way , ignore Peter , he is a russian bastard and a jeep owner to boot...
By all means keep posting , and I am glad to see that you reckognize its all just kicking shit around here and nothing should be taken so damn seriously as some of these folks take it...
Kyle |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 10:43 pm: |
|
I think the biggest thing with them is that they die from mileage and fatigue rather than stress loading.
Like I said before I am of the run what you got school but since the free wheeling hubs I want to run are designed to work with a 24 spline stub shaft I am probably going to do the swap.
This gives me the added bonus of eliminating ALL the on road stress and mileage and also eliminating the heat cycles that on road use would cause. Is there any benefit to this? I dunno, can't hurt though.
As far as front swaps to dana or 9in a couple rover people have successfully done them.
As I see it there are a couple of minor problems:
1. It is a PITA no matter what. Lots of stuff to swap over and make work (brakes, drive shaft, and suspension)
2. The good front US axles are expensive even in junkyards. A front 60 is about a grand used.
3. ALMOST all of them are u joints so full time 4wd might have some vibe issues.
4. Most are very wide which means at least shortening one side or running full width.
5. Most rears are centered rear differential. This is not good as your t-case output is offset.
Now there are some solutions. The LT230 (t-case) is a beast and will stand up to almost anything you can throw at is. So if you want to keep it you can:
1. convert it to part time and then the U-joint front axles will not have any issues
or
2. Run a dana 70 with tracta joints which are full time compatible
As far as the rear this is fairly easy.
1. You can use a Dana 60 or even dana 70 out of a 3/4 ton or 1 ton dodge or for van. These axles have a passenger offset diff. while it is 5in and rover is 6in it is no biggy and will work. The hard part is making the upper mount for the A frame as you have to weld on the cast differential houing.
2. Some 3/4 ton chevy's have an eaton rear axle. while most are passenger offset the pinion is offset on the differential and therefore the pinion is centered. However, there are some that can be flipped and made passenger offset.
Personally I have a set of scout 44s I bought. i found a way to make them fit but I have decided that they are not enough. So I have located a D70 rear out of an E350 and I am looking for a full width front to match.
Ron |
al hang
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 - 11:50 pm: |
|
I have to admit this is my favorite posting so far, learned some new stuff and there's no useless name calling. |
al h.
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 12:39 am: |
|
The faithful think 300 lb-ft is an huge amount of torque.
yes, but what about the effect of gearing? since rovers with the lt230's have 3.3 gearing compared to most other stock vehicles (1.97-2.xx) they do make a lot more torque at the axle compared to most vehicles right? personally i do think it is an adequate amount of torque, especially for street driven vehicles. |
p m
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 01:04 pm: |
|
Ron,
a couple of comments
- yes, most U.S. front axles have U-joints. There's nothing wrong with a U-joint, except for the obvious (it's not a constant velocity joint); jeep used them on full-time 4x4s since '73, and there are no vibration issues whatsoever.
- I didn't mean junkyard axles at all; the price of upgrading the rover front axle with 3/4 ton-sized components (used on 1-ton rovers) seems to be getting close to a one-off deal from Dynatrac or Currie. I like 3-rd member layout, hence mention of a 9".
by the way, on a Disco or Rangie, it will take some lead foot combined with other hazards to break a Scout 44.
Jay -
the dynamic loads vary at the square of the power input - this doesn't sound like a PE speaking. WTF is "dynamic loads?" Local stress where a ball in a CV hits the cage?
peter |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 04:22 pm: |
|
In this Defender versus Discovery discussion we were talking about the ramifications of an increase in vehicle weight. I was hoping my use of a half-ass general term like "dynamic loads" in place of a bunch of terms like "the differentials of asynchronous torsional stress with respect to time and displacement" would help an audience some of whom may lack an engineering background to grasp the concept that the shaft and cv stresses are changing non-linearly as the applied torque changes. Trying to convey an engineering concept in a text environment that doesn't support mathematical equation notation is like trying to teach swimming without using water! |
Kim S (Roverine)
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 04:57 pm: |
|
god damn engineers/scientists!
Kim
(married to one, but it doesn't help) |
Scotty
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 05:31 pm: |
|
half-ass general term like "dynamic loads" "the differentials of asynchronous torsional stress with respect to time and displacement" the shaft and cv stresses are changing non-linearly as the applied torque changes.
Dont worry Captian Kirk, I will have the Enterprise ready to warp speed in a flash |
Ron
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 06:41 pm: |
|
"and there are no vibration issues whatsoever"
On a jeep this could be true. However those who have done a u joint swap have reported vibes. Does this mean anything. maybe, maybe not. sort of a YMMV situation.
As far as a dynarape or currie front axle you are looking at 3-4k minimum. Also I have to say the couple people I have known who have gone this route it has not been easy. The builder never get it right on the first time and it costs major $$$$ in the end. You are not dealing with a TJ where they have done a few and know what they are doing.
Parts on a rover "1 ton" cv set up seem to be in the 1000-1500 range based on my math
Anywho, enough obsessing with axles for me today
Ron |
p m
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 08:00 pm: |
|
hehe Ron,
you need to find a right builder
but, seriously, I can't figure how U-joints may induce vibrations while front wheels are pointed straight. yes, there's significant jerking of the steering wheel when the front wheels (on the jeep) are at full lock and under some stress, but - that's what a Saginaw steering box is for. If you're at a point where 1-ton hardware is mandatory, a stock LR steering box may not cut it.
peter |
p m
| | Posted on Thursday, April 11, 2002 - 08:04 pm: |
|
one more question -
GM uses CV joints on all of its 4x4s now, up to 1 ton. I don't know if there's a full-time 4wd Sub, but Hummers are. So I guess there are some stout CV joints around; next thing is the swivel housing that you could easily do without... essentially adapting 3/4 to 1-ton axle ends to the LR center section.
peter |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page