yes that is correct the centering yoke that is a component of the H member is what is greasable...my bad.
Canadian Disco 2 Build
- Thread starter R_Lefebvre
- Start date
yes that is correct the centering yoke that is a component of the H member is what is greasable...my bad.
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Well, the local place didn't pan out. He tried to talk me into a non-DC driveshaft, but I just won't go for that. Said it would cost too much to build it with all new components himself for a DC shaft.
I considered a shaft from GBR. I don't really care about the personal insults thrown his way, I know how that goes... He seems decent on the phone. I thoroughly read the 13 page thread on Dweb, and I think his argument on the technical merits alone were pretty solid. I do like that his shafts use all (or almost all) Spicer components. All else being equal I probably would have gone with him.
But, Tom Woods has a pretty solid reputation. And Will Tillery has them in stock down in VA. My sister is on a business trip to NYC so I'm having it shipped there and she'll bring it back for me. Got lucky there. :wings: It's just cheaper and easier to get it shipped from Will.
I'm nervous about the reports of imbalanced shafts. If that happens to me, you'll hear about it. I don't see any reason why my driveline would be misaligned.
I could have still rebuilt mine, but... this front shaft thing has been my #1 fear with this truck and I'll be glad to put it behind me. It's a 100% failure rate (seemingly), often with no warning, and potential catastrophic damage.
I considered a shaft from GBR. I don't really care about the personal insults thrown his way, I know how that goes... He seems decent on the phone. I thoroughly read the 13 page thread on Dweb, and I think his argument on the technical merits alone were pretty solid. I do like that his shafts use all (or almost all) Spicer components. All else being equal I probably would have gone with him.
But, Tom Woods has a pretty solid reputation. And Will Tillery has them in stock down in VA. My sister is on a business trip to NYC so I'm having it shipped there and she'll bring it back for me. Got lucky there. :wings: It's just cheaper and easier to get it shipped from Will.
I'm nervous about the reports of imbalanced shafts. If that happens to me, you'll hear about it. I don't see any reason why my driveline would be misaligned.
I could have still rebuilt mine, but... this front shaft thing has been my #1 fear with this truck and I'll be glad to put it behind me. It's a 100% failure rate (seemingly), often with no warning, and potential catastrophic damage.
Antichrist
Expedition Leader
That's only for the OEM shaft with "lifetime lubed" u-joints. Once you rebuild it with greaseable u-joints, and lube it properly every oil change they are fine for most.
Not that there is anything wrong with a TW or GBR propshaft.
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Thom has his failed H-member story which... <shrug> I dunno.
A big part of it as well was being able to get a 1310 ujoint anywhere. Even here in town, I was going to have to order the 1-0005 overnight. Not a huge problem, but not great in BFN, could have become 2 days, etc.
Any other comments on what to do with the rear? Ideally at this point, I'd like to replace that joint with a 1310. Seems that should be easy to do locally. Just get a 1310 joint, drive yoke and weld yoke and have it welded on.
Ideally I'd like to only have 1 type of joint on the truck now. I don't mind the rotoflex at the back.
A big part of it as well was being able to get a 1310 ujoint anywhere. Even here in town, I was going to have to order the 1-0005 overnight. Not a huge problem, but not great in BFN, could have become 2 days, etc.
Any other comments on what to do with the rear? Ideally at this point, I'd like to replace that joint with a 1310. Seems that should be easy to do locally. Just get a 1310 joint, drive yoke and weld yoke and have it welded on.
Ideally I'd like to only have 1 type of joint on the truck now. I don't mind the rotoflex at the back.
Last edited:
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Oh, and can anybody say... it might be too big to fit in her suitcase. Can you just pull them apart at the spline and put them back together?
You will be happy with the TW, as far as pulling the shaft a part the shaft should be 25" fully compressed . If she needs to pull it apart have her mark it with a sharpy pen first so that you can make sure to get it back in the same position. The balence is based on it being in phase but it can be put back together in phase 180 out and then it would be outa balence.
As far as the rear goes, you may be able to get a new 1300 joint yoke welded to your old shaft to dump the roto on your old shaft. Then all you will need is the 4 hole flange for the pinion .
As far as the rear goes, you may be able to get a new 1300 joint yoke welded to your old shaft to dump the roto on your old shaft. Then all you will need is the 4 hole flange for the pinion .
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
I prefer to keep the Rotoflex for NVH reasons. I haven't yet seen any overwhelming reason to replace it out of hand. Put a new one on just as a preventative measure, and keep my old one as an emergency spare as there's nothing wrong with it.
I'm more concerned with the 1300 at the front of that shaft.
Good point on marking it before separating. So it just pulls apart, no tools or force needed?
I'm more concerned with the 1300 at the front of that shaft.
Good point on marking it before separating. So it just pulls apart, no tools or force needed?
Antichrist
Expedition Leader
Yes, I saw his report of that and I'm sure if one has, others have as well. My point is that I've seen zero evidence that it's a "100% failure rate" on a properly rebuilt/lubed stock propshaft.
Just for clarification (more for others who may read this), not trying to talk you out of a TW propshaft.
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Ok. I meant 100% failure on the factory shaft.
I think we should analyze this topic further. Rob don't do anything, front drive shaft failures in DII are non existent. Don't worry engineers made it the way it was supposed to be...
For the rest of the free world! Replace the original front DII shaft.. Its a bomb!
Anyone for paint chips??
For the rest of the free world! Replace the original front DII shaft.. Its a bomb!
Anyone for paint chips??
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
The other thing about this I thought about yesterday... The greasable versions of any given U-Joint are supposed to be weaker than the sealed versions. Due to having been drilled out for the galleys, and the sealed versions seem like they tend to be made with a better process. At least according to Spicer anyway.
So by putting in 1300 series greasables, you're actually reducing the actual breaking strength of the shaft, though you are helping it's longevity with the grease.
Directionally, it seems like upgrading the size while going greasable is a good idea.
Antichrist
Expedition Leader
Technically true, but if it were a big problem we'd see a lot of broken OEM u-joints on the diff end since they have a zerk.
But I do prefer the Neapco because the zerk in the end cap rather than the cross results a stronger u-joint.
You can mitigate the weakness caused by the zerk in the cross by making sure it's under compression when driving forward, rather than tension. That would apply to 1310's as well. TW uses u-joints with the zerk in the end cap, so you're good there.
But I do prefer the Neapco because the zerk in the end cap rather than the cross results a stronger u-joint.
You can mitigate the weakness caused by the zerk in the cross by making sure it's under compression when driving forward, rather than tension. That would apply to 1310's as well. TW uses u-joints with the zerk in the end cap, so you're good there.
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Got the driveshaft. My sister didn't have too much trouble getting it in her checked baggage on the plane. I'll regrease it before installing though, just to be sure because the grease might have been pushed out due to the pressure change.
The shaft is interesting. It's significanly heavier, but doesn't look that much bulkier. Most of the weight must be in the thicker wall tubing, and slightly thicker castings, etc. I'm curious about the DC section. TW states it is made of "steel", instead of cast iron. But, what process? Is it forged, or some steel casting method (but not sand-cast iron like stock). The surface finish definitely indicates some type of bulk forming. It's not carved from billet, or anything like that. If it's forged, why not just say it's forged like many of the other parts?
Just curious.
Also I noticed the balancing weight on the TC end is on the DC section, not at the back end of the tube like on the stock shaft. Interesting change and I wonder what the thoughts are on that.
The paint job is pretty pathetic.
Couple questions:
I need to replace the nuts, if not the bolts as well when I install it. The nuts are not useable because they're so soft most of them were destroyed on removal. But the bolts, I'm wondering if they are long enough with the new thicker flange on the TW shaft?
I'd prefer to replace the bolts, but can't even figure out what grade they are. Just marked "Atlas" and a "T".
I can get a 3/8-24-1-1/4" Ferry 12-point Cap Screw with a chrome finish for corrosion protection.
Or just go with a simple hex head in Grade 8... or stainless would be nice for corrosion again. But stainless is roughly equivalent to a Grade 5 and not sure that's enough.
Lastly, is there a trick to removing the bolts from the TC flange, or is pulling the flange off the only way?
The shaft is interesting. It's significanly heavier, but doesn't look that much bulkier. Most of the weight must be in the thicker wall tubing, and slightly thicker castings, etc. I'm curious about the DC section. TW states it is made of "steel", instead of cast iron. But, what process? Is it forged, or some steel casting method (but not sand-cast iron like stock). The surface finish definitely indicates some type of bulk forming. It's not carved from billet, or anything like that. If it's forged, why not just say it's forged like many of the other parts?
Just curious.
Also I noticed the balancing weight on the TC end is on the DC section, not at the back end of the tube like on the stock shaft. Interesting change and I wonder what the thoughts are on that.
The paint job is pretty pathetic.
Couple questions:
I need to replace the nuts, if not the bolts as well when I install it. The nuts are not useable because they're so soft most of them were destroyed on removal. But the bolts, I'm wondering if they are long enough with the new thicker flange on the TW shaft?
I'd prefer to replace the bolts, but can't even figure out what grade they are. Just marked "Atlas" and a "T".
I can get a 3/8-24-1-1/4" Ferry 12-point Cap Screw with a chrome finish for corrosion protection.
Or just go with a simple hex head in Grade 8... or stainless would be nice for corrosion again. But stainless is roughly equivalent to a Grade 5 and not sure that's enough.
Lastly, is there a trick to removing the bolts from the TC flange, or is pulling the flange off the only way?
the flange has to come off, you need to leave the 6 points in there as they are held from rotating by the flange to simplify the removal replacement of the nuts.
get some non-nyloc self locking nuts. They are a bit thinner then the nylocks so you will get full threads in the nut no problem and the locking mechanism wont be effected by the heat from the cats.
the balence weights are on the CV because its a bigger diameter and often needs less weight to balence from what I have been told.
The part is a cast steel part not a forged part, the cast steel is much stronger then the standard cast iron that is used by spicer and that is part of why the overall strength of the shaft is better then others. That is why Tom had the part made that way. That was in the thread you read over on dweb.
Yes ...regrease it for sure and I like to use marine trailer grease as its the best for blocking water from getting in. where you wheel that will help protect the components.
get some non-nyloc self locking nuts. They are a bit thinner then the nylocks so you will get full threads in the nut no problem and the locking mechanism wont be effected by the heat from the cats.
the balence weights are on the CV because its a bigger diameter and often needs less weight to balence from what I have been told.
The part is a cast steel part not a forged part, the cast steel is much stronger then the standard cast iron that is used by spicer and that is part of why the overall strength of the shaft is better then others. That is why Tom had the part made that way. That was in the thread you read over on dweb.
Yes ...regrease it for sure and I like to use marine trailer grease as its the best for blocking water from getting in. where you wheel that will help protect the components.
R_Lefebvre
Expedition Leader
Yeah, I guess the 6 point locks into the flange somewhat... but not actually good enough to torque the nut. I thought about using a prevaling torque nut instead of a a Nylock... but figured the nylock ones seem to work OK stock. The only problem is they're so damn soft. I've encountered a few fasteners on the truck that are like that. I tried to remove one of the chassis crossmembers once, I think the one under the tranny, and the bolts heads all just rounded off. I'm used to breaking the bolt heads off if the bolt is really seized.
The other thing is the prevailing torque type, with the squished threads, they mess up the threads on the bolt if you use them too many times. But, I'll give them a shot if that's what people are doing.
Marine grease is the only thing I use regularly.
Oh, and do I need to worry about re-indexing the axle flange to the TC flange in any way? I don't think so.
Once I get this thing back on, I'll be moving on to construction of a new rear bumper, which I'd like some input on. I'll pretty much be copying a lot of existing designs out there. But I was wondering about which is the best recovery point design to use. The DB points are sexy, but too expensive for me right now. I could simply weld in a big tab to which I'll fix a shackle. That's the easy/cheap way. I'm also curious about the... pin and pocket style. You know what I mean? Those are nice because they're cleaner in design, and won't ever get hung up on anything.
Another aspect I need to figure out is the trailer hitch. The easy way is weld in a reciever tube. But I need a big drop... like 12" to keep the trailer level. There's really no way to avoid that being a big ground plow, but of course it would be removable. I'm mostly concerned with it bringing in a lot of play on the trailer connection. I could simply have some back-stay rods that would go back and pin onto the frame... similar to the way the stock reciever is braced back.
Or, I was also looking at what they tend to do in the UK. Put a bolt pattern in the bumper on the same pattern as the 4-bolt DB. Then use a piece of 6" steel U-channel that drops down, and the tow ball bolts to that. That would also be stiff enough. And allow me to get a nice DB later on.
Was also thinking about putting recovery points on the wings behind the rear tires. I'll have that section tied in to the frame anyway. Would seem having points there might be useful for side pulls, but maybe excessive junkiness.
I think I'll do the turn-out on the exhaust system, and incorporate the outlet into the side wing on the bumper. I've hit the damn tail pipe on enough things already.
And then later this winter, rock rails. I've got crazy idea... I like the frame mounted ones, for sure. But it seems like a hell of a torque load when you really come down on them. I was thinking of removing the chassis cross-member, and making new ones that would extend all the way to the sides and hold the rock rails. That way you don't torque the frame mounts, but support it from underneath instead. I'd also incorporate mouns points on the new cross-member for some powertrain skidplates. I'm already banging up the crossmembers a fair amount.
Seems like a good plan in my head, but I've never seen it done so... am I missing something?
The other thing is the prevailing torque type, with the squished threads, they mess up the threads on the bolt if you use them too many times. But, I'll give them a shot if that's what people are doing.
Marine grease is the only thing I use regularly.
Oh, and do I need to worry about re-indexing the axle flange to the TC flange in any way? I don't think so.
Once I get this thing back on, I'll be moving on to construction of a new rear bumper, which I'd like some input on. I'll pretty much be copying a lot of existing designs out there. But I was wondering about which is the best recovery point design to use. The DB points are sexy, but too expensive for me right now. I could simply weld in a big tab to which I'll fix a shackle. That's the easy/cheap way. I'm also curious about the... pin and pocket style. You know what I mean? Those are nice because they're cleaner in design, and won't ever get hung up on anything.
Another aspect I need to figure out is the trailer hitch. The easy way is weld in a reciever tube. But I need a big drop... like 12" to keep the trailer level. There's really no way to avoid that being a big ground plow, but of course it would be removable. I'm mostly concerned with it bringing in a lot of play on the trailer connection. I could simply have some back-stay rods that would go back and pin onto the frame... similar to the way the stock reciever is braced back.
Or, I was also looking at what they tend to do in the UK. Put a bolt pattern in the bumper on the same pattern as the 4-bolt DB. Then use a piece of 6" steel U-channel that drops down, and the tow ball bolts to that. That would also be stiff enough. And allow me to get a nice DB later on.
Was also thinking about putting recovery points on the wings behind the rear tires. I'll have that section tied in to the frame anyway. Would seem having points there might be useful for side pulls, but maybe excessive junkiness.
I think I'll do the turn-out on the exhaust system, and incorporate the outlet into the side wing on the bumper. I've hit the damn tail pipe on enough things already.
And then later this winter, rock rails. I've got crazy idea... I like the frame mounted ones, for sure. But it seems like a hell of a torque load when you really come down on them. I was thinking of removing the chassis cross-member, and making new ones that would extend all the way to the sides and hold the rock rails. That way you don't torque the frame mounts, but support it from underneath instead. I'd also incorporate mouns points on the new cross-member for some powertrain skidplates. I'm already banging up the crossmembers a fair amount.
Seems like a good plan in my head, but I've never seen it done so... am I missing something?