e350 dually purchase, question about rear axle use in 4x4 conversion.

[non_applicable]

I'm looking at purchasing a 2009 chassis cab, e350, 6.0. My first question, is if the dually rear axle (I believe it is a full floating Dana 10.5") is more narrow or more wide than the typical Dana 60 that's used with the UJOR system? I'm wondering if it will be a problem just running a single rear wheel on this axle, under a SRW service body.

The van does not come with a service body, I intend to purchase one and install it. My second question, is how does the service body (or any attached body) actually attach to the front cab? I'm planning on doing a walkthrough from the cab to the service body, and the chassis cab is completely open in the back like the one pictured. Is it reasonably simple to mate the service body to the chassis cab? It looks like it is, I just want to get some feedback.

My last question is if the 55 Gallon fuel tank, or the mounting location for the rear springs, or if the additional 4inch distance between the rear spring mounts compared to a SRW e350, will cause any problems or concerns with the 4x4 swap and lift itself?

Thanks for any help here! I'm ready to pull the trigger on this and get my conversion started, I just need to make sure it's not a mistake for some reason.

 

[non_applicable]

If the rear axle is wider than standard I think that would be okay. I'd really like to go with a Dana Super 60 up front with the F550 14" rotors, and that's quite a bit wider axle than standard. I'd like to get the footprint of the van fairly wide to help with stability. I'm not entirely sure how I'd do the lift up front in that situation, but possibly I could contact RMS offroad about the cool 4 link setup they made for their shop van.

 

[tgreening]

I'm not 100% on this so don't be afraid to seek more than my opinion, but I believe the rear axle in your chassis cab is going to be a dana 80. More than one of us, myself included, are using a dually rear as a single. The problem is not so much matching whats going on up front, but being able to keep the single rear axle from getting lost back in the wheel well of whatever type of body is mounted back there. In my case a widebody ambulance shell.

Your front axle will be 6" wider than the standard D60, 3" per side, and offer an amazing turning radius vs the standard front.

I think the dually rears are in the vicinity of 73"-74" wms to wms, and the single rear axles around 66"-68". I believe those numbers are ballpark correct enough for your purposes.


In my ambo the flanges of the cab and body openings are just bolted together around their perimeters.

Chris' kit works with a regular van with a single rear axle, and it also works fine with chassis cab duallys, at least dually ambos. I believe that would have you covered.

Not sure about your tank. It wasn't an issue for mine, but my ambo is a '92, and I'm not sure what the tank size is to be honest.

Best thing to do is call Chris, tell him what you got, where you want to end up, and let him roll. Otherwise you can think and second guess yourself into a coma. I dang near did.

 

[non_applicable]

Thanks for the input, that's very helpful information!
I was able to find a spec sheet for the 2011 chassis cab vehicles, and at least on the 2011 v10 the rear axle is a full floating Dana 10.5" I'm guessing on the older vehicles they're a Dana 80, like you're saying. I'll link it here just in case anyone searches this post in the future and is looking for the same information I am.

The body that's going on the rear would be designed for a single rear wheel, so that's my primary concern with running it on the wider than standard axle. This is a Quigley with the same body I'd be using. I'd be running wider tires too and trying to push things outward and gain some more stability, something like the e550's wide stance. I'm guessing there will be enough room in the rear, and at worst I'd need to do some trimming. At least the axle is wider though, and not more narrow. That's great!

Thanks again.

 

[tgreening]

Thanks for the input, that's very helpful information!
I was able to find a spec sheet for the 2011 chassis cab vehicles, and at least on the 2011 v10 the rear axle is a full floating Dana 10.5" I'm guessing on the older vehicles they're a Dana 80, like you're saying. I'll link it here just in case anyone searches this post in the future and is looking for the same information I am.

The body that's going on the rear would be designed for a single rear wheel, so that's my primary concern with running it on the wider than standard axle. This is a Quigley with the same body I'd be using. I'd be running wider tires too and trying to push things outward and gain some more stability, something like the e550's wide stance. I'm guessing there will be enough room in the rear, and at worst I'd need to do some trimming. At least the axle is wider though, and not more narrow. That's great!

Thanks again.

View attachment 251117

I thought you were looking at a 2009? In any case I mistyped. It wouldn't be a dana 80. Dana 80 was the F-series. According to Dana the rear axle in a 2009 E-series DRW is a Dana 70, which has a 10.5" ring gear. Maybe that's where the confusion is coming from. If your service body is designed for an SRW axle I think your dually axle might end up looking funny back there. It depends on how far back into the wheel well they designed the tire to sit. If they designed it to be fairly deep, you might get away with mounting a single on the dually rear without the tire sticking outside the body much.

If I were you I'd just talk to Chris. His kit offers a better turning radius than stock anyway, and a wide-track D60 up front will set you back a pretty penny compared to a regular D60 (at least around here). Front D-60s are fairly reasonable, DRW versions not so much, and widetrack front D60s are gold plated. Once you put that axle on your van (6" wider) and then put on the usual wide off road style tire, you might end up a bit wider up front than is practical anyway. I'm not sure you can get a flare wide enough to cover all that, at least not without going custom. I've got the widetrack on my F-series and it uses about a 3" flare to keep the tire covered, and that's with the fairly skinny dually type tire on a dually rim. If I had something like a 12.5" tire up there on a run-of-the-mill 10" rim w/ say 4.5" of back space, I'd have to have a ridiculously wide flare to keep it all covered.

Of course the only person you have to please is yourself, so feel free to place the same value on what I say as you paid for it. I would.

 

[non_applicable]

Yes, I am looking at a 2009. I just post that link because it's very likely the same specs for most vans 2008 to present, if not 2004 to present. Sorry if it got confusing though or if I posted any bad information. I am new to vehicles and to all of this in general.

I'm okay with the extra 6 inches, I'm trying to make something like the e550 stance. I feel the wide stance would make the vehicle more stable on the highway, which is where I spend a good deal of time, at speeds of 75 to 85mph. The downside to the super 60 was pointed out to me by another member, in that after market support is limited, and off course, the price.

Something like this, with a service body, and SRW.

 

[non_applicable]

Also, sorry, writing on a phone. I very much appreciate you help and descriptions on the looks and functionality of this setup. It does help me to visualize things better.

 

[tgreening]

Also, sorry, writing on a phone. I very much appreciate you help and descriptions on the looks and functionality of this setup. It does help me to visualize things better.

No problem. I understand wanting what you want. I can be unreasonably stubborn about that.

Using your picture as a reference point you'll notice that the only way to run a dually rear axle as a single AND keep rim compatibility with the front is to use a dually rim in the rear. If you do that, two things. Your tire will really stick out on your designed-for-single-axle service body and you'll likely destroy the bearings in the rear axle very quickly due to the leverage being applied, because you have no inside tire to balance the load with the outside.

If you run a single rear tire on a normally offset rim, your rear axle will be happy, your service body will likely be happy, and things will most likely look proper as well, but. If you wish to maintain rim compatibility with the front you have to use that same offset. Imagine that front tire moving outboard about another 6" +/-, per side. Great for stability maybe, but going to be difficult to cover, and pretty hard on your steering gear.

If you dont care about rim compatibility just go ahead and run the setup pictured in the front. Then run a single wheel in the rear and call it a day. But you'll need to either carry two spares, get really familiar with how to plug and fill a flat on the side of the road, or have a really awesome AAA membership and be willing to wait for however long it takes them to show up.

I know your fealing, believe me. We want two different things, but in the end (for me) it boiled down to this. I could get what I want, but it was neither cost effective, or practical, or really all that sensible. Of course that didn't stop me from spending about 2 months of badgering people that knew better, trying to find an end run around the issues involved. In the end I saw the light, took the advice, and started moving forward getting stuff done instead of in circles doing nothing.

 

[tgreening]

Here's a thought. I dont know what that service body looks like underneath, at the wheel well, but you might want to see if you could actually fit an inside tire using your dually axle the way it was designed. If the tire will fit, or the body can be easily modified to make it fit, then You can run a dually setup all the way around and your drivetrain will be golden. Your outside rear tire is going to stick out, but it looks like you could mount a flare on the body for coverage, and I don't think that would look bad at all. It would more or less match whats going on up front looks wise.

 

[Bikersmurf]

How much taller? I've got a 97 E350 ambulance with duallys, it handles well at 75-80 mph. A wider front axle seems like more of a pain than it'd be worth.

 

[non_applicable]

I will be using some regular old 35x12.50, on a standard 10" rim, front and rear. The picture of the e550 isn't the greatest, I just meant to illustrate the ride height of the 550, and how wide it is up front; two things I entirely failed to mention. If the DRW axle is 73" then it should be about the same width as the Dana Super 60. I'd just need some fender flares like those on the 550 to keep everything covered well.

However, as someone else advised me, I'm having a difficult time finding the Super 60. Perhaps it would be better to just swap in a matching set of axles from a Ford F350, that way I don't have to deal with changing the gearing in the rear. I found a 2008 F350 that's being parted out, I'm presently trying to find out how viable it would be to grab the rear and front axle, the suspension, everything attached to them, and possibly the t-case. I'm just trying to research how I get the caster to 5 degrees to avoid steering issues. I'd probably also pickup some highsteer/crossover knuckles from North West Fab, though I'm uncertain how the new highsteer knuckles would affect everything.

Thanks again for all of the input, I really appreciate the help. I agree that I'd either need to run the vehicle as a dually setup with a slightly wider utility body (which I don't really like the look of), or see how the rim / tire combo fits on the stock rear axle, and possibly swap it out with one from an F350, particularly if the rear isn't geared to 4.10

 

[tgreening]

Besides cost and availability of the widetrack 60 you're missing what I'm telling you about the width.

If you put a 12.5 tire on a 10" rim, and mount that up front, you will have about as much tire sticking completely outside the flare as that picture shows sticking inside.

You shouldnt have to but a matching set of axles just to get compatible gears. Search via car-parts.com and you can narrow by gear ratio.

It sounds like you are trying to stick with a coil bucket system. The current ford 4x4 suspension is very similar to a system they used in the 70's. Back tnen they used modified bushings for the radius arms that adjusted the camber. This could only adjust for so much lift so after a certain point drop brackets for the radius arm frame side connection were needed, which destroys ground clearance.

Personally I would avoid the coil bucket system and go with a leaf conversion. Neat, clean, and functional.

The vehilce in the photos you posted in tha othe thread seems to be suffering from some camber related issues. My guess is it is a big lift, with no adjustment of the radius arm situation. With that kind of lift as you install taller springs you force the axle from the frame, which cause it to swing to the rear, which changes the camber and also tilts the axle spring pad toward the front. This changes the alignment relationship between the top and bottom mounts. That's most likely why the springs have that slightly bowed look to them.

 

[non_applicable]

You're right, I didn't realise it would stick the wheels THAT far outside the fender flare. I don't want that.

And wow, awesome reply. Thank you!

I didn't know about car-parts.com, that's very helpful.

With regard to the radius arm though, I was planning on adapting a 4 link component from an F350 lift kit. Would that adequately solve the problem?

Thanks again for so much input! Your knowledge is invaluable to a newbie like myself.

 

[mgmetalworks]

.....Personally I would avoid the coil bucket system and go with a leaf conversion. Neat, clean, and functional.

Going by the adjectives you used there.... The Coil/Radius arm 4x4 suspension (like the '05+ Super Duty trucks) is also neat, clean and functional...and better turning radius.

I know some folks don't like radius arms or 4 link suspensions but I believe it is more about misconceptions than anything else.

and... one of the most important parts of setting up the Super Duty truck axles is getting the caster correct...

 

[non_applicable]

Or maybe, I could just step it up to something like this:
Assuming the custom sway bar setup would work out. I do have access to a laser, so I could fabricate a new arm if need be, though I'd much prefer not to.
I am confused about why they didn't change the knuckles out for some high steer knuckles? Why leave it hanging down low like that when you've gone to so much effort to address everything else?

Can you think of any reason why this would be a bad idea? It seems to me that it should make everything easier, considering that it's all adjustable, but maybe that statement just shows how new I am ...