The Gubblemobile- Series III from hell.

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
So, I got the rear springs rebuilt (finally), burnt/cut out the old bushings, installed the new greaseable poly bushings, and attached them to the frame. Quite a bit of energy was expended removing the old bushings, and then even more when it came to actually aligning the springs with the frame. Oh my aching back. I laid the axlehousing across the springs, but the wife called "time" and I had to stop for a while. Just as well- ubolts probably would have done me in. After the axle is fully mounted, I'll probably look at starting on the front axle. I really need to start bolting these parts on, just to make room on the garage floor.

Once the front axle is cleaned up and mounted, I can start looking at the bulkhead. The new footwells are still sitting in the box, and I have a whole lot of parts to strip off and clean up. I just haven't had the room to do it.

When I got home from work, there was a nice box from Novak waiting for me. All of the engine to transmission adapter kit. Guess the pile just got bigger.

At any rate, it's nice to see something actually bolted to the new frame. Makes me feel like I might actually get somewhere one day.
 

Yorker

Adventurer
Alaska Mike said:
I've been looking at his site, but the info is kinda lean. I've heard rumors of people using Spicer 18s in Series rigs, but I haven't seen much evidence of it on the internet (photographic proof). I never like being the first guy to try out these things, so I try to look before I leap.


He definitely used a Dana 18, I am sure of it. Though he may have made it in a dana 20 case so it would be stronger- Seems I remember readig about that upgrade somewhere- the "super" Dana 18 or something like that. Maybe it was the 5th generation Dana 18...

I've seen a couple others using Dana 18s over the years but they don't seem to be a popular swap- Everyone figures they might as well keep the Rover T case since it is one of the parts that is hard to fault. Dana 18s seem to have a reputation for case failure like the TLC t cases do- You never hear of a Rover case doing that for some reason.
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
The main place Dana 18 cases crack is right at the intermediate shaft, but that most often is from abuse and high horsepower. I don't think I'll have either problem.

If I had known more about the available adapters, I might have considered trying to rebuild the old case and source the missing parts (a shifter and some small brackets). However, a Spicer 18 is a lot easier to find parts for, and within the Jeep community it's a known quantity. So, chalk it up to ignorance on my part. Even now, knowing what I know, I'd probably still be torn. Novak makes a hell of an adapter.
 

Yorker

Adventurer
Alaska Mike said:
The main place Dana 18 cases crack is right at the intermediate shaft, but that most often is from abuse and high horsepower. I don't think I'll have either problem.

If I had known more about the available adapters, I might have considered trying to rebuild the old case and source the missing parts (a shifter and some small brackets). However, a Spicer 18 is a lot easier to find parts for, and within the Jeep community it's a known quantity. So, chalk it up to ignorance on my part. Even now, knowing what I know, I'd probably still be torn. Novak makes a hell of an adapter.



Yeah and that is IF you can get a series T case adapter without having to make it yourself. Timm Cooper makes them IF you can get ahold of him, I think he was asking $800 for them maybe more. Ike Goss did a run of the NP435 ones and they weren't cheap either when compared to more common swap stuff.

Maybe there haven't been as many blown up series T cases simply because there aren't that many out there being abused with high horsepower rigs? I don't know... If I was going to change that much though I'd have been tempted to use a NP205 or 300 or other straight through t-case and use a centered rear axle from a Toyota minitruck or something like that.
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
I seriously considered using a centered output transfercase (quieter, stronger...), but it would require chassis mods on my 88, as well as the replacement of at least the rear axle (and matching gearing). Running Toyota truck components was also a consideration, but the idea was discarded for length reasons. The SM465/Spicer 18 combo was a tight, clean package that was near-stock in length, while providing a much stronger and maintainable (locally available parts) drivetrain.

I've seen Spicer 18s doing well behind big-blocks. The larger intermediate shaft models seem to last the longest, and I used a really good (Novak) rebuild kit to bring it back to life. I've seen the kits with the rebar disguised as an intermediate shaft, and the results are not pretty. I would have rather reused the stock one- at least it wouldn't disintegrate.

Right now I have to sort out some issues with Novak. It looks like they machined my bellhousing's input bearing retainer hole a bit too small (bored to 4 11/16” instead of 5 1/8”). They also left out the special pilot bushing and throw-out bearing. I'm not in too much of a hurry, so it doesn't matter that much. Novak is a good company, so we'll see how far they're willing to make this right.
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
Right behind the transfercase on my Series III is a crossmember that would have to be removed or seriously modified to allow a center output.

The rear driveshaft on that Series II is too short in my opinion, and overall the concept looked like too much effort for the finished product. Going the way I did allows me several GM engine choices in the future should the current plan not pan out. It's always nice to have options.

I think for my current build philosophy, the Rover axles will do just fine with the Seriestrek 24 spline shafts in the rear. Gearing is still up for debate (4.7 or 3.54?), but I really like the full-floating, 3rd member design. With the small tires I have planned, either is completely doable.
 

Yorker

Adventurer
you mean this crossmember?
lrchassis%20align.jpg
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
Yeah, for some reason the measurements didn't work out and I would have been square in the middle of that crossmember with the output shaft. Is that the Toyota truck driveline, or is it from another model?
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
Wait- looked more closely and tracked down the website and it's a Jeep driveline. Glad to see I'm not the first one to swap in a Jeep 2.5L. You don't know how happy that makes me.
 

ntsqd

Heretic Car Camper
A trick that I've seen done with the D18's is to convert the center gear to use tapered roller bearings and a custom shaft that has the ability to adjust the pre-load on those bearings (and take the thrust loads rather than putting them into the case). As I recall it was Jack O'Brien (sp?) that was doing the conversion. It is possible to do this mod on your own (or hire a machine shop to do that part), but an good understanding of design and mfg process' is required.

Recommend comparing a D20 case to the D18 case. The 20 looks to be an exact fit and a more robust part. Also suggest looking into a stout "oil pan" for either case. Ideally such would seal with an O-Ring and not a gasket so that the 'pan' becomes structure across the bottom of the case.
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
The Dana 20 is a center-output case, while the Spicer 18 is an offset case. While some internal parts can be swapped over (to achieve a lower low range in the Dana 20), they are actually different animals.

Here's a little information from our friends at Novak, who know more about these than I ever will (cut n' pasted from:http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/model_18.htm)

Versions
There are four major styles of the Model 18.
Early Military, 1941-1945
Military versions of the 18 built for the MB & GPW wartime Jeeps have a 1.97:1 ratio low range and a 1:1 high range. These early versions featured a 3/4" diameter intermediate idler shaft and dual shifters. These transfer cases were only married to the Borg Warner T84 three speed transmission and had a 3-5/32" input locating bore.

Early Civilian, 1945-1946
A handful of the earliest civilian Dana 18's that were married to the side-shift version of the T90 feature 2.43:1 low range and have a 3/4" intermediate shaft. Relatively few examples of these exist but the reader should be aware of it. They were developed for the prototype 6x6 Tugs (only 16 of these were made). This transfer case came in the preproduction 1944 CJ-1 and 1944-1945 CJ-2 and were installed in the CJ2A up through serial number CJ2A-24196.

Mid Civilian, 1946-1955
With military restrictions freed up and Willys eyeing the civilian, utility and agricultural markets, the Dana 18 was improved with a lower 2.46:1 low range gear ratio. The intermediate idler shaft was increased to 1-1/8", using caged needle roller bearings. The rear PTO port began to see serious use as a driver of accessories ranging from pumps, winches, generators, farm implements, etc. The locator bore continued to be the 3-5/32" diameter. Casting numbers of C18-15-10 have been seen on these versions.

Later Civilian, 1955-1971
In 1955 (this varies by a year or so on some models; no doubt while Willys-Overland was using up its remaining inventory) Jeeps received the Dana 18 with an 1-1/4" intermediate shaft. This improvement was not indended to increase the shear strength of the pin, but to increase the bearing area and the number of bearings. Free needle rollers, then, replaced the earlier and significantly fewer caged needle rollers. The locator bore continued to be the 3-5/32" diameter.

Final Civilian, 1966-1971
The "large case" version of the Dana 18 was the most improved version of all. It was only found behind the Buick V6 engine with its T86 and T14 transmissions. The case casting used was that from the Dana 18's progenitor, the Dana Spicer Model 20. This case featured a 4" locating bore and a single stick shifter and new front output cap. The front output assembly did not provision for a shifter mounting point, as the shifter was anchored to a transmission bracket. The internals were essentially identical with the standard Dana 18. This version is best thought of as Dana 18 guts in a Dana 20 shell. Individuals can build a "Super 18" by copying this version.

Strength
It is nearly remarkable how much power this compact transfer case can transmit and sustain. It is not so rare to see them handling Big Block grade power and deep, compound gearing.

The 18 is not without a fuse when under extreme service; its offset design causes the reactive driven torque of the driveshafts to apply a large upward moment force against the case and the case can split between the intermediate shaft bore and the PTO port or the case bottom opening. Gears (as with any gearbox) may break under some outstanding circumstances. Also, the forces of the front helical gearset are not captured and balanced by the rear spur gearset, causing these forces to be applied against the case, which may stretch it to a failure point. However, these situations are quite rare and essentially non-issues for the appropriate driver, Jeep and terrain.

The "large case" 18 is the stronger of the lot, though not dramatically so. Its case casting was improved in both engineering terms and in is method of casting.
_________________________________________________________________
The version I have is the "Later Civilian" out of a 1963 Scout 80. While not the "ultimate Spicer 18", it certainly is a good design. It originally sat behind a IH 152 and T-90, which didn't seem to stress it all that much. I replaced all of the bearings and bushings, as well as the intermediate shaft and all sorts of small parts. I figured it was due, after 45 years of service without a rebuild. It turns and shifts smoother than a lot of rebuilt Dana 20s and 300s I've seen, so hopefully that trend will continue when the torque is applied. Nice to dream anyway...
 

ntsqd

Heretic Car Camper
When I had a Willys Pick-up I did some research on the 18, and then again when a friend started his MB build. The Achilles Heel of the 18 seemed to first be the needle bearings for the intermediate gear due to the power flowing over them. The next issue was the case breaking. The later models with their bigger intermediate shaft sizes & stronger castings were progressively better, but the "O'Brien" mod was the best way to go (at the time of the research anyway) for further improved longevity. The shaft's mod was required to put the tapered bearing thrust loads into the shaft itself as none of the cases could handle it on their own. Some D20 owners had done the mod as a way of increasing the power capacity & reliability to the front output.

I had intended to do the tapered bearings mod with a D20 case for the truck's D18, but had to sell off the whole deal when I went back to school.

BC Broncos offers or used to offer a 300M output for the Early Bronco D20 variant. Not sure how interchangeable those are with D18 rear outputs.
 

Alaska Mike

ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
Since the plan at this time is to use a relatively small engine, the stock Dana 18 should prove sufficient. Even with the torque multiplication from the SM465, I doubt I'll be able to do much damage to the case. I generally don't romp on my vehicles, which seems to be another cause of the failure.

Time will tell if I made the right choice. I seriously doubt I made a bad choice in drivetrain, but there very well may be better choices. We'll see.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
186,712
Messages
2,889,208
Members
226,872
Latest member
Supreet.dhaliwal
Top