Opinion on which direction to take on my build.

[Rovertrader]

Do you have the stock D44's? I have read a few reports of bent stock Rubi axles with 37's. Most upgrade the rear to a D60, sleeve and sometimes gusset, and new shafts on the front axle.

First, let me say to OP, Ryanc, the weight issue from your first post is what caught my interest here. And I am in no way trying to muddy your thread, but felt my thoughts paralleled yours to quite an extent.
I have been building trucks and wheeling/playing in the dirt for over 40 years. And have turned that into a bit of a business the last few years- primarily for Rovers built for overlanding. I also suffer from vehicle ADD for my personal vehicles, and enjoy building, using, selling, acquiring -repeat. All that said, and due to many incidents from the past now playing havoc with a high mileage human body, I am too trying to build a keeper- real world exploring rig that is capable at 99% of everything while being supremely reliable and economical in the long run. The Rovers are just too maintenance intensive and parts are getting more difficult to come by. I cut my teeth on Jeeps early on, and have played with them intermittently over the years- see my website under Sold Vehicles for a pretty decent TJ...
So, how does this relate? I have elected to forgo the expensive-cost and weight- of anything not adding its value to the project. Hence, no HD front and rear bumpers for me. I do want decent approach angles, hence the trimmed stock bumper. I want decent ground clearance and departure angles, hence the 37s. The AEV rear tire carrier was a toughy to justify both in cost of weight and dollars, but is the best alternative to carrying a spare 37 I found. I elected to go AEV 3.5" lift as it seems best for all around performance with a nod towards real world everyday driving.
It response to the quote above, as well as Ryanc and JPK replies, I have also sleeved the front axle, gusseted the C's, and stuffed both F&R with 5.13s, HD axles, Detroit rear and TT front lockers. This all in the sake of an ounce of prevention vs. a pound of cure and a long and costly recovery should something break- yes, an old Boyscout to say the least... Which also explains the 8274.
The roofrack is aluminum to keep weight and the cg low whilst providing additional storage should the need arise- again, multi use, like say canoes/kayaks, wet clothes, etc...
In the end, a comfortable long distance exploring machine. Keep the weight down, improves fuel economy and negates the need to carry additional fuel, and minimizes wear and tear on the vehicle. The JKU seems the most appropriate choice, and built smart should provide an answer for many years and miles to come...

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

Repo:
He has the Mojave Edition which comes with the hoodblack out with Geko.
D

 

[Ryanc]

I run 37's on the oem D44's and have had no issues. I've kinda been expecting to bend the front tube, especially since my JKU weighs a lot, but haven't managed it yet. I rock crawl ten or twelve days a year, spend a fair amount of time on crappy gravel and two tracks. On rocks I am light on the throttle.

If I ever do bend the tube I'll go Dynatrac.

Dave Harriton of AEV pointed out in a discussion on AEV's forum that he had searched and never found a first hand account of a bent C. He's looking for first hand accounts, so if you have one or can refer me to a link, I'll pass it on.

I know sleeving will bring strength, and it's not that expensive, but a sleeved tube weighs more than a stronger, slightly higher clearence Dynatrac housing, and Dynatrac offers the option of additional caster angle/reduced pinion angle.

JPK

There are numerous alignment specs on various forums showing camber way out of spec. This is still evident after replacement of the ridiculous inferior balljoints they put in. Now I realize, these axles are coming out of spec from the factory, but not out of spec by 2 degrees.

 

[Ryanc]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

One thing that had me concerned is this picture. It appears the ARB front bumper is keeping my COG more forward, prevnting rollover. With the front bumper, my rear wheels were practically stuffed, and the front was really lifting. I dont know, good info in this thread, and I am just thinking aloud.

 

[Zubicon]

I say first it depends on your states inspection laws. In Utah, although you see stubby bumpers, it's illegal because your bumper must run the entire track width. Don't know what Georgia law is.

Second it depends on what you wheel. If you truely only do overlanding and stay away from moderate to serious rock crawling than you probably would be OK. I know if I didn't have a full length wrap around bumper on my LJ my rear corners would be all bashed in, the departure angle is highly inadequate even though I run 33s".

Last if weight is really the issue here why don't you just go full width and build them out of aluminum. I have two buds that run Aluminum bumpers wheel the extreme trails of Colorado and survived the rigors of the Ultimate Adventures unscathed. While your at it, getrid of your oem seats and go with some Mastercrafts and you'll save weight there, not to mention you'll be far more comfortable.

 

[JPK]

There are numerous alignment specs on various forums showing camber way out of spec. This is still evident after replacement of the ridiculous inferior balljoints they put in. Now I realize, these axles are coming out of spec from the factory, but not out of spec by 2 degrees.

Camber issues are the result of bent tubes and not bent C's, according to DH. AEV did some jumping with JKU's, some of which you can see on YouTube. No bent C's, often bent tubes. But he was looking for first hand examples of bent C's. Got one? Or a link to one?

I've been waiting for the oem ball joints to go too, but 39k miles and no play yet. I spend a lot of time on the sand and I would have thought the sand would accelerate wear, but nothing so far.

I like the Dynatrac replacements too, but Poly Performance offers a solution too.

JPK

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

I agree with much of what said, but what I see is folks trying to find that perfect intersection of "wheeling" vs. "over-landing."

As a Tread-Lightly Trainer, I can say first hand, that as places to "wheel" get closed due to irresponsible "hey, ... watch this" off-roading, ... we see more and more moving towards the over-landing aspect of capable vehicle ownership.

As this trend continues, we all find ourselves trying to strike the balance between what works and what doesn't. I can personally say that the most fun I ever had "wheeling" was in a stock 1993 Range Rover Classic. (but yes some body damage on my perfect daily driver ensued! with the replacement of a rear quarter panel). That said, I have seen even stock JK's do amazing things- and in some cases fair much better than a very well built JK. (i.e.: in this case it was a wrangler on 44's and no winch on the front, and the front was so light that the front kept lifting and threatening a front-to-rear roll over).
I think with Dale's (rovertraders) build, he has compensated with the stubby front, but with that 8274 on the front, he has plenty of weight to off-set the front bumper (a very nice compromise).
With my truck (and an AEV front bumper), I have a Warn 9000xi on the front, but because of the great AEV design, it is low and very well protected which helps keep the COG low and safe.

In the end, you have so find something that works for you, but makes sense. I have found over the years, that it is better to save and get better (and in some cases more expensive) accessories than to skimp or save and go thrift, as in the end, you get what you pay for.

Here is my truck so far. Thinking (still) on a half rack like Dale has on his (cept I am thinking Front Runners low profile).

D

 

[K2ZJ]

Have you taken them off an wheeled without them? Can you actually notice 200lbs? I am not saying you can't or shouldn't try, but I don't know that between the front and rear losing that weight would have that significant change in seat of the pants feel. When I am wheeling with my dad and he jumps out to spot, I don't say "whoa, what a difference 230lbs makes." I realize on a long trip, dropping a few lbs here and there can add up, but when your pictures show you with a soft top and no doors how far do you want to take the no weight thing? Get a Rhino?

I read what I wrote and want to convey these comments are for provoking thought and not to come down on anyone. In fact I am trying to build an aluminum winch bumper for my ZJ. So Zubicon, do you know what thickness Al they using, or what brand they are?

 

[Zubicon]

Diy 1/2" built far beforeyou could get them commercially. To simplify things you basically need twice the thickness of alum to exceed the steel counterpart. I'm certain Kurt could break that down further, even enough to make your head hurt. And we all know that 1/4" plate bumpers are weigh over built so you do the math. I'm going to build mine out of 3/8" as soon as I figure out where I can get them processed after the fact to bring them to 6061......sorry for the hijack

 

[Bigjerm]

Ryan is that pic from Mountainside?

Anyways as far as the weight I can understand. I have seen rigs start to get tipsy and just me hanging on to 1 side or bumper at 245 lbs takes away the "bobble" affect. I realize that is when the is only slightly off balance though. The further it goes over the more weight it would require to get the same stabilization. I do question if my 245 lbs has kept a rig from rolling, or just making the operator feel slightly more secure while negotiating an obstacle. My guess is 2nd option. Once a piece of metal at that weight starts to go, no man or big bumper is going to be enough weight to offset it, it just might make the roll point a little higher than it would have before.

 

[Ryanc]

Ryan is that pic from Mountainside?

Anyways as far as the weight I can understand. I have seen rigs start to get tipsy and just me hanging on to 1 side or bumper at 245 lbs takes away the "bobble" affect. I realize that is when the is only slightly off balance though. The further it goes over the more weight it would require to get the same stabilization. I do question if my 245 lbs has kept a rig from rolling, or just making the operator feel slightly more secure while negotiating an obstacle. My guess is 2nd option. Once a piece of metal at that weight starts to go, no man or big bumper is going to be enough weight to offset it, it just might make the roll point a little higher than it would have before.

Yeah it was mountainside the week before Christmas. That trail name I cant remember. What a cool place, it was my first, and unfortunately my last time there. Thanks for all the information this thread has brought, keep it coming.

 

[Ryanc]

Have you taken them off an wheeled without them? Can you actually notice 200lbs? I am not saying you can't or shouldn't try, but I don't know that between the front and rear losing that weight would have that significant change in seat of the pants feel. When I am wheeling with my dad and he jumps out to spot, I don't say "whoa, what a difference 230lbs makes." I realize on a long trip, dropping a few lbs here and there can add up, but when your pictures show you with a soft top and no doors how far do you want to take the no weight thing? Get a Rhino?

I read what I wrote and want to convey these comments are for provoking thought and not to come down on anyone. In fact I am trying to build an aluminum winch bumper for my ZJ. So Zubicon, do you know what thickness Al they using, or what brand they are?

Ive noticed the weight. For instance when I wheel doorless, it makes all the difference in the world.

 

[Rovertrader]

There are several analogies, from running to bicycles to racing, and so on- weight is not your friend. Less weight, less fatigue, less energy required, etc. There are certainly instances where a load shift- similar to a person 'hanging ' on a vehicle can help- but imagine how much less weight it would take, or how much more affect the 'shift' would have if the whole rig was lighter. Simple physics really- fulcrums, load points, weight transfer, etc.
Not trying to beat the dead horse, but most sport's cost increase as the weight involved decreases. Think of titanium bicycle parts, race cars, etc- all the same principal...
Also, other than heavy roof racks, heavy bumpers cantilevered off the front and rear of vehicles have the most effect as the weight is high and the distance long. A built axle has much less physical impact as the inertia is so much less, and the mass is much more centralized.
But enough engineer jargon- enjoy, and thanks for the thread as debate is a positive thing me thinks...

 

[Ryanc]

Camber issues are the result of bent tubes and not bent C's, according to DH. AEV did some jumping with JKU's, some of which you can see on YouTube. No bent C's, often bent tubes. But he was looking for first hand examples of bent C's. Got one? Or a link to one?

I've been waiting for the oem ball joints to go too, but 39k miles and no play yet. I spend a lot of time on the sand and I would have thought the sand would accelerate wear, but nothing so far.

I like the Dynatrac replacements too, but Poly Performance offers a solution too.

JPK

Call Mel Wade at (714) 870-5515(Offroad Evolution), he has the measurements, or so he says. He admits that both the tubes and Cs are bending. If you notice the C on the JK and the dana 44 of the TJ the gap is much larger, which may lead to more bending due to leverage, etc.

 

[JPK]

Call Mel Wade at (714) 870-5515(Offroad Evolution), he has the measurements, or so he says. He admits that both the tubes and Cs are bending. If you notice the C on the JK and the dana 44 of the TJ the gap is much larger, which may lead to more bending due to leverage, etc.

Here is Dave's querry: "Anyone ever seen a bent "C"? Anyone have a picture? Just curious, I've bent plenty of housings, but I've never seen a bent C myself and couldn't find any examples on Google, so if someone has something, please send it to me. thanks, dh"

I'll pass on the information to DH.

The C on the JK is larger so that the Rubicon D44 can accomodate a stronger 1310 u joint, or so I have been told.

JPK