I suck at long term plans

[Root Moose]

Yep, there is the exact reason I would not go with RE or most other lift companies. They seem to end up much higher then advertised. If I get a 5.5" lift, I want a 5.5" lift, not a 7" that "might" settle in years. I like the OME stuff because you typically get what is advertised. The higher you go (even if you thought you bought a lower lift), the more problems and issues you will run into.

This is a function of how the machine is built.

If my Jeep has rock rails, front and rear bumpers, stiffeners and a roof rack and I bought a 5" lift and only got say 4" out of it I wouldn't be happy.

My understanding is that RE rates their lifts based upon what a built Jeep will weigh, not show room stock weight.

That said, it would be good if RE made their assumptions well known.

All new springs sag with time and usage. Some worse than others. OME springs are not exempt from this (Bt/dt).

If you have a 242, then you are basically stuck with either the Tom Woods SYE or HnT setup. Though the Tom Woods setup is really the way to go, they do cost much more than what you can get for a 231 case.

I'll disagree with this. The TW SYE is a factory NV242 shaft that has had the hole drilled for you. There is really no value add to buying the TW setup other than having the hole drilled. In fact I would debate it is more PITA than it is worth since you have to disassemble your transfer case and ship the shaft to TW to get back the core charge.

$0.02

 

[ExpoMike]

I'll disagree with this. The TW SYE is a factory NV242 shaft that has had the hole drilled for you. There is really no value add to buying the TW setup other than having the hole drilled. In fact I would debate it is more PITA than it is worth since you have to disassemble your transfer case and ship the shaft to TW to get back the core charge.

$0.02

My bad. I swore I had read somewhere that TW had finally released a new shaft (versus modified stock) SYE for the 242. Guess I was smoking crack that day. :ylsmoke:

 

[Root Moose]

Looks like we are both off in our data:

http://www.4xshaft.com/SYE/242LateDesignLatetransfercase27spline.html
http://www.4xshaft.com/SYE/242JeepappsEarlyDesign27spline.html

It is a modified stock shaft (resplined) but gets you no strength increase.

FWIW, I have the RE SYE on my NV242. When I build the MJ (swapping in NV242) I will use the yoke style SYE like IRO uses.

 

[adambro]

As for the SYE, if you have a 231 case, it makes NO sense to go hack 'n tap. They are a bandaid fix and doesn't increase the strength of the output shaft. PORC and others have gotten the prices down below $200. If you have a 242, then you are basically stuck with either the Tom Woods SYE or HnT setup. Though the Tom Woods setup is really the way to go, they do cost much more than what you can get for a 231 case.

Interesting view of the hack 'n' tap style SYE. I've not seen any evidence of failures with this solution. Is there evidence out there of shaft strength being a cause for concern? I can tell you that my yoke is within an inch or so of the sealed output on my NV242, and with the slip now in the middle of the driveshaft, there won't be significant loads acting on the yoke trying to pull it off of the t-case. The torque load will be driven by the splines just like it always has been. Also, since the output shaft has been shortened, any stress on that shaft is better supported by the entire case. The original slip yoke shaft is quite long by comparison.

As for lift, personally, unless you are planning rock crawling, 3" on 31" tires really is a good setup. It keep the CG low, climb in height reasonable (Lisa can just get into it without too much problems. Higher and it would be a problem). With some rocker and transfer case protection, it will get you 90% of the places you most likely will want to go. Proper line selection is really more important as I have seen stock rigs get to places I would never imagine but it was all the driver.

Agree! My truck is admittedly overbuilt for anything I will do with it (5.5" advertised; ~7" reality on 33's). It's a combination of opportunity and availability of good quality parts for reasonable coins

 

[ExpoMike]

Interesting view of the hack 'n' tap style SYE. I've not seen any evidence of failures with this solution. Is there evidence out there of shaft strength being a cause for concern? I can tell you that my yoke is within an inch or so of the sealed output on my NV242, and with the slip now in the middle of the driveshaft, there won't be significant loads acting on the yoke trying to pull it off of the t-case. The torque load will be driven by the splines just like it always has been. Also, since the output shaft has been shortened, any stress on that shaft is better supported by the entire case. The original slip yoke shaft is quite long by comparison.

Part of the output shaft's strength comes from the slip yoke surounding it. There is also a bushing that the slip yoke transfers load to the housing. Without the slip yoke there, the shaft is kind of hanging out in air (inside the housing). This, over time, will takes its toll on internal items like bearings and such. With twisting loads, the unsupported shaft will try to walk away from the centerline. Enough times, a failure with the transfer case will happen.

The 231 SYE conversions that replace the output shaft is WAY beefier than stock and is way shorter, eliminating the "hanging in air" issue of a hack 'n tap. The 241OR came this way from the factory. They did this because it is a stronger system and with the 4:1 low gears, the torque output is way higher and could result in a higher failure rate, if the slip yoke design was used.