Figured that's get one of the three viewer's attention.

Considering there's no other discussions occurring here, and I'm certain there will be no shortage of opinionated responses, I'll toss this in the ring for debate.

Preface with I'm mechanically challenged, when it comes to the discussion, or implementation of suspension design, theory, calculations, fabrication and installation, but I'm not a dumb ass. If the education and information is above the requesting of the members here, then I'll quietly revert back to lurking, as one of the three viewers on the FJ portion.

Attempting to determine the rear end, gearing, and locker combination, as part of an in process LT upgrade. All of the usual have been suggested, and have had many conversations with the other blue room participants that frequent this forum, but the more I delve into discussions with various vendors, the more I realize how ignorant I am.

Intend on maintaining the OEM linkage geometry, mounting locations, shock mounts, again for the previously stated lack of ability.

Let the flaming education begin. What is critical for determining what is necessary?

Figured that's get one of the three viewer's attention.

Considering there's no other discussions occurring here, and I'm certain there will be no shortage of opinionated responses, I'll toss this in the ring for debate.

Preface with I'm mechanically challenged, when it comes to the discussion, or implementation of suspension design, theory, calculations, fabrication and installation, but I'm not a dumb ass. If the education and information is above the requesting of the members here, then I'll quietly revert back to lurking, as one of the three viewers on the FJ portion.

Attempting to determine the rear end, gearing, and locker combination, as part of an in process LT upgrade. All of the usual have been suggested, and have had many conversations with the other blue room participants that frequent this forum, but the more I delve into discussions with various vendors, the more I realize how ignorant I am.

Intend on maintaining the OEM linkage geometry, mounting locations, shock mounts, again for the previously stated lack of ability.

Let the flaming education begin. What is critical for determining what is necessary?

:laughing:

No flaming here:flipoff2: The answer to your question has more to do with what you intend on doing with your rig and or how capable are you needing to build it. It sounds like you already have plans for the front end, so that being said desired tire size will drive most of what you will have to modify to the rear end (ie gear ratio, Ring & Pinion size, lift etc) what size and type tire are you wanting to run? Are you planning on using low range or mostly high range? Are you needing a real locker? What type of terrain/obstacles are you wanting wheel? The answer should be pretty easy after answering these questions. Feel free to respond and I'm sure we can provide you a pretty clear laundry list of mods that will have to be done to meet your needs. As far as the "3 Viewers" that is pretty sad:shaking: I spend most my time in the Comp sections and I would imagine that a lot of fellow FJ cruiserheads split time in other forums and casually drop in to here. Thanks
Figured that's get one of the three viewer's attention.

Considering there's no other discussions occurring here, and I'm certain there will be no shortage of opinionated responses, I'll toss this in the ring for debate.

Preface with I'm mechanically challenged, when it comes to the discussion, or implementation of suspension design, theory, calculations, fabrication and installation, but I'm not a dumb ass. If the education and information is above the requesting of the members here, then I'll quietly revert back to lurking, as one of the three viewers on the FJ portion.

Attempting to determine the rear end, gearing, and locker combination, as part of an in process LT upgrade. All of the usual have been suggested, and have had many conversations with the other blue room participants that frequent this forum, but the more I delve into discussions with various vendors, the more I realize how ignorant I am.

Intend on maintaining the OEM linkage geometry, mounting locations, shock mounts, again for the previously stated lack of ability.

Let the flaming education begin. What is critical for determining what is necessary?

No flaming here:flipoff2: The answer to your question has more to do with what you intend on doing with your rig and or how capable are you needing to build it. It sounds like you already have plans for the front end, so that being said desired tire size will drive most of what you will have to modify to the rear end (ie gear ratio, Ring & Pinion size, lift etc) what size and type tire are you wanting to run? Are you planning on using low range or mostly high range? Are you needing a real locker? What type of terrain/obstacles are you wanting wheel? The answer should be pretty easy after answering these questions. Feel free to respond and I'm sure we can provide you a pretty clear laundry list of mods that will have to be done to meet your needs. As far as the "3 Viewers" that is pretty sad:shaking: I spend most my time in the Comp sections and I would imagine that a lot of fellow FJ cruiserheads split time in other forums and casually drop in to here. Thanks

Thanks for your reply.*

Intended usage is mixed, but will be driven the many miles necessary just to get to the varying terrains, that consist primarily of rocks, trails and minimal high speed desert terrain.*

The OEM third is notoriously a failure point, and attempting to prevent occurrence 400 miles from home, at the same time increasing the rear track width 4" to correspond with the front. Reliability being biggest reason for replacing.*

Currently running 33"s and based on the responses from varying sources, re-gearing to 4.88s has been advised with air lockers front and rear. Front being an addition, altogether.*

I've discussed the RJ60 and it's been stated it's probably heavier than necessary, and there are lighter options offered that are "bolt on", and better suited for the purposes described. Having stated the lack of resources and capability for fabrication, "bolt on" factor has been the primary concern, and the limiter to determining, without requesting input from forums and vehicle specific vendors.*

To address the "3 viewers" comment. There's obviously a wealth of technical experience on this entire forum, and I've perused every section here in, with intention of self educating. I realize that there's little tolerance for dumbass questions, and I've spent a considerable amount of time attempting to answer the dumbass question I posed, already, to no avail. Each answer poses another question.*

I'd like to see more discussions here, in regards to the technical aspect of the specific vehicle, *but there must be an underlying fear from participation.*

I bounce between several forums, but have found the limitation of discernible information, when it comes to questions of this nature, on the others. Except for a few guys with actual experience, the respondents are quoting the pertinent information from the vendors webpage for whatever it is they were sold, and had installed.*

As stated in another thread, I'll likely win the prize for the "least meaningful contributor" which appears to be an accurate statement, but considering the lack of current threads in this section, a dumbass question may beat none at all, and pave the way for more dumbass questions from the other lurkers with the same intention I have, for the sake of audience participation.*

Make it challenging to post in every FJ thread in a day, all while enlightening those not concerned about the "do you like my new stickers?" threads waded through elsewhere.*

Without getting into too much tech:D Keep in mind I have never built an FJ, I bought it:smokin: That being said, I have built many rigs over the years and have sold them right here on Pirate. Any time you start swapping axles there is a good chance you are going to have to fab bracketry (w/exception of a Jeep) Also keep in mind you are on a slippery slope. Once you start building it will never be good enough and you will continue to throw $$$ at it:D So my .02 cents is build it right the first time, trust me it will save you $$$ later.
first off 4:88's are correct and will take you to 37's if you want later. Due to your axle width requirement, you can cross out all mini truck rear ends due to 55"-58" width depending on year. 4 Runners (96 and newer) around 60" so that would require wheel spacers (not recomended) unless you have to. The RJ is over kill for what you want to achieve. That being said, if cost really isn't a big factor, my top two choices would be a Spyder 9" (no question) or Currie 9" due to availability, weight, options. That being said, I have seen several FJ 80 Axles on here (in classifieds), with the cost factor, electric lockers, full floater, and aftermarket chromally shafts from Longfield this would be a great choice. You probably would have little fabbing to do due to simiar suspension design, it is 63.5" width vs your 64.25 FJ so you are right in there. This would be a great option and you could do the SAS later very affordable plenty of axles. Trust me, if you stay on the rocks, it is a slippery slope and you will eventually do a SAS. Do not do Coil overs in the rear, it's not worth punching 2 holes in your truck. (Been there with my 1990 Range Rover on portals and 42"s). Use the OME 418's (3" coil lift) that will clear up to 37's easily. Call Tony as Rock Equipment and get one of his buggy sway bars (it's not bolt on and will require very little welding)
FAB= None of us were born Fabricators, in the long run, you will save yourself a lot of $$$ and headache by learning to weld. Keep in mind your not building a tube buggy:flipoff2:You just need to be able to buy brackets/links and be able to weld them on. Tires=KM2 BFG (yeh, I'm sponsored by BFG) however, best choice for your application, Good Year MTR 2nd choice

I hope some of this info helps

Chris as insinuated earlier on other forums the 9" LP Currie is probably your best bet for a "bolt on" axle that matches OEM geometry. It will be lighter and stronger than the HP RockJock that everyone seems to believe (on the blueroom) is invincible.

Currie is the only company that will offer a bolt on option. Any other axle provider will be requiring you to setup the mounts yourself.

However, I'd really consider doing a new rear suspension if you are spending the money on a new axle. The vast majority of folks have had their OEM rears hold up fine...the ones that I've seen break them first hand were loving on the skinney pedal and hopping.



btw - coilovers in the rear don't have to go through the body :flipoff2:

What size CO's in the rear R U running and at what angle? I am assuming that you mounted them vertical to the axle with no inward slant! If so, how is the body roll and sidehill stability?

Without getting into too much tech:D Keep in mind I have never built an FJ, I bought it:smokin: That being said, I have built many rigs over the years and have sold them right here on Pirate. Any time you start swapping axles there is a good chance you are going to have to fab bracketry (w/exception of a Jeep) Also keep in mind you are on a slippery slope. Once you start building it will never be good enough and you will continue to throw $$$ at it:D So my .02 cents is build it right the first time, trust me it will save you $$$ later.
first off 4:88's are correct and will take you to 37's if you want later. Due to your axle width requirement, you can cross out all mini truck rear ends due to 55"-58" width depending on year. 4 Runners (96 and newer) around 60" so that would require wheel spacers (not recomended) unless you have to. The RJ is over kill for what you want to achieve. That being said, if cost really isn't a big factor, my top two choices would be a Spyder 9" (no question) or Currie 9" due to availability, weight, options. That being said, I have seen several FJ 80 Axles on here (in classifieds), with the cost factor, electric lockers, full floater, and aftermarket chromally shafts from Longfield this would be a great choice. You probably would have little fabbing to do due to simiar suspension design, it is 63.5" width vs your 64.25 FJ so you are right in there. This would be a great option and you could do the SAS later very affordable plenty of axles. Trust me, if you stay on the rocks, it is a slippery slope and you will eventually do a SAS. Do not do Coil overs in the rear, it's not worth punching 2 holes in your truck. (Been there with my 1990 Range Rover on portals and 42"s). Use the OME 418's (3" coil lift) that will clear up to 37's easily. Call Tony as Rock Equipment and get one of his buggy sway bars (it's not bolt on and will require very little welding)
FAB= None of us were born Fabricators, in the long run, you will save yourself a lot of $$$ and headache by learning to weld. Keep in mind your not building a tube buggy:flipoff2:You just need to be able to buy brackets/links and be able to weld them on. Tires=KM2 BFG (yeh, I'm sponsored by BFG) however, best choice for your application, Good Year MTR 2nd choice

I hope some of this info helps

Very much. Thanks.

Currie 9" appears to be the contender. As for the specifics, still reading. At some point, they were rumored to offer an FJ specific bolt on, but there's no indication anywhere I can find.

Every answer poses another question.

I can weld, but I'm not a welder. Have honestly never built anything but quads, but my intention since I bought was to do it myself, regardless of fuck ups. Plan to adhere to.

Thanks for the direction.

I'm not refering to mine (photos of mine provided below for reference tho). You could potentially fit a 12" travel 2" dia coilover without going through the interior (forward, vertical, or aft of axle...see photo below). A 14" might be possible if you push it and are willing to have a very low mount on the axle, oem ish. A wider axle makes things a bit more friendly.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_W2w_GOseuf8/TYqoESBK4LI/AAAAAAAAA_w/YuLo4pkPdME/s512/P1010665.JPG




Images of the coilovers on mine are below. 14" travel 2" diameter notched into the frame. Coming into the interior wasn't an issue for me since the back seats were replaced with a storeage setup anyways. It's all framed out anyways too look like oem sheetmetal below the stock interior.


http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f339/DaveatJaviersAutos/Brian%20FJ/BrianFJ033.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f339/DaveatJaviersAutos/Brian%20FJ/BrianFJ076.jpg

Chris as insinuated earlier on other forums the 9" LP Currie is probably your best bet for a "bolt on" axle that matches OEM geometry. It will be lighter and stronger than the HP RockJock that everyone seems to believe (on the blueroom) is invincible.

Currie is the only company that will offer a bolt on option. Any other axle provider will be requiring you to setup the mounts yourself.

However, I'd really consider doing a new rear suspension if you are spending the money on a new axle. The vast majority of folks have had their OEM rears hold up fine...the ones that I've seen break them first hand were loving on the skinney pedal and hopping.



btw - coilovers in the rear don't have to go through the body :flipoff2:


I listened, but still unclear on the specifics.

Why the LP vs. HP?

Will the drive shaft have to shorten with either?

ARBs for front and rear? Only regear front?

Is it stupid to replace the known weakest component of the drive line, in advance of even a planned redone rear?

I listened, but still unclear on the specifics.

Why the LP vs. HP?

HP in the rear you are running on the coast side of the gears which isn't as strong.


Will the drive shaft have to shorten with either?

Yes, you'll need a custom driveshaft or yours modified to the correct length.



ARBs for front and rear? Only regear front?

ARB isn't your only option as far as lockers go if you are doing a custom rear. The front and rear axle have to run the same gear ratio, so unless you get an aftermarket axle and run 3.73's, you'll have to regear the front to match your rear. If regearing the front, there isn't much added cost to add a locker there as well (really the cost of the locker itself) since you are already pulling the dif apart



Is it stupid to replace the known weakest component of the drive line, in advance of even a planned redone rear?

Build the vehicle as you see fit. If thats preventative so things don't break than go for it. If its upgrading when things break then go that route. I will say that your rear third isn't the weak link in the entire driveline (imo)...many more folks have blown their CVs than those tearing apart their rear third members.

OK, being one of the three I will jump in here. Dont feel like a dumb ass for
asking stupid questions. I have the baddest FJ in the world and am a technical idiot. I'll be the first one to admit that when I started building Mad Dog the first time, I thought a locker was where you stored your gear I just didnt understand why you needed two of them.
I happened to have the resources and very little time so I had almost everything done by someone else and if I didnt like the way it worked out I just had them do something else. I didnt want to know how or why I just wanted to drive it hard and fast on the toughest trails in the country.That being said I didnt really become part of the offroading community I just became known as a rich dumb ass.
Mad Dog has now been built 3 different times and is in its 4th and final as I write this but I have changed along the way and have really started learning how and why. As the 3rd build progressed I started doing some of the work myself and researching suspension geometry and calculations. I also started paying attention to my rig and how it responded in the desrt and in the rocks so that I could make sense out of roll center and antisquat and the way that the rear wheels track in reference to the front.I think it was Belly Doc who made a coment on one of these threads about how you dont really have or know the true spirit of offroading until you have done your own work. So that is what I have started doing as much as possible. I recently aquired an FJ40 that I will be building on my own and have alrady started. I am also learning to weld so I know if I can do it any one can.
Hopefully some time I can go back and post a comprehensive build thread for Mad Dog from the begaining so all can see how it morphed into what it is now. The next build thread will be from what it was at last KOH to the race build that is being done now.

I HATE LONG POSTS !!

i recently aquired an fj40

i knew it !!!!

It will be lighter and stronger than the HP RockJock that everyone seems to believe (on the blueroom) is invincible.

I have never seen anyone argue that a 9" is stronger than a Dana 60. Lighter, but not stronger.

http://www.savagesun4x4.com/enter/viewpoints-technical_discus/dana60_vs_ford_9_jeep_tj.html

I have never seen anyone argue that a 9" is stronger than a Dana 60. Lighter, but not stronger.

http://www.savagesun4x4.com/enter/viewpoints-technical_discus/dana60_vs_ford_9_jeep_tj.html

Depends which 9" you are comparing to which 60, and what your important concerns are.

Depends which 9" you are comparing to which 60, and what your important concerns are.

Yeah, I guess I should have said a stock 9". The upgraded ones can indeed be stronger.

I have never seen anyone argue that a 9" is stronger than a Dana 60. Lighter, but not stronger.

http://www.savagesun4x4.com/enter/viewpoints-technical_discus/dana60_vs_ford_9_jeep_tj.html

What you are asking is fairly broad and tradeoffs are there for each axle, what you quoted from me was specific (if you had quoted/read the whole post). The comparison I gave was between a HP rockjock and a LP 9" and holds water.

btw - Don't buy too much into the comparison you linked. It provides no technical evaluation in the design differences whatsoever...other than to say " 9's are on 1/2 tons where you'll find 60's on 3/4 and full tons".

Compare the gear design, supports, size, and then you start to see the pluses and minuses of each.


Depends which 9" you are comparing to which 60, and what your important concerns are.

Exactly...the OP had mentioned elsewhere potentially doing some high speed runs in the future...pushing my recommendation for the 9".


Yeah, I guess I should have said a stock 9". The upgraded ones can indeed be stronger.

I'm fairly certain Chris is looking for custom or bolt on axles....not a junk yard pickup (comparing stock to stock).

I had good conversation with a local builder, whose a vendor here, about the rear end short term goals, and long term aspirations.*
To reiterate the short term, eliminate a potential issue, while extending width.*

After meeting, seeing, and hearing his responses to my questions, and explanations of several I hadn't known to ask, I feel comfortable with his capabilities to see this through to the end......once I determine where the end is.*

I wish I'd had the opportunity to meet with a few weeks ago before a few acquisitions were paid for, and I possibly would've gone all out on this round. *The *rear will be baby stepped into, without limiting future changes. Not too far gone. I can still do what I thought I was going to do solo, makes the necessary major revisions to the rear suspension next year (or month, who really knows), while replacing the OEM, now.*

He claimed the linkage brackets can be installed, removed, and re located without damage. They've done it before, and expressed no concern. ( that statement would kind of have me concerned under normal circumstances ). The components of themselves would remain unchanged, regardless of 3 or 4 link, or lefty addition later.*

So that puts me back to where I was, with a rear end to order in the near future.*

Why do the damn asterisks show after ever paragraph?

I'm fairly certain Chris is looking for custom or bolt on axles....not a junk yard pickup (comparing stock to stock).

From what I have read, very few of the aftermarket 9" are stronger than a 60 either.

I know the OP spoke of high speed, I was just pointing out that most feel that a 60 is the stronger of the two stock vs. stock. Unsure of LP 9" vs. HP D60 in terms of strength, I missed that part of your post.

From what I have read, very few of the aftermarket 9" are stronger than a 60 either.

I know the OP spoke of high speed, I was just pointing out that most feel that a 60 is the stronger of the two stock vs. stock. Unsure of LP 9" vs. HP D60 in terms of strength, I missed that part of your post.


Wondering how critical the 4" difference in pinions between the two is.

From what I have read, very few of the aftermarket 9" are stronger than a 60 either.


If you've read about why one is > than the other toss out why, the previous link provided no technical insight.

What are making these select 9's > d60's and all the rest of the 60's > than 9's? What are the major design differences making one superior to the other?


Do some research and I think you'll find each has their tradeoffs. Just because you can run a 9.75" ring gear in a 60 doesn't mean it is superior to a 9" gear....we live in a 3d world, so size matters (:eek: :flipoff2:) in more than one direction.


Unsure of LP 9" vs. HP D60 in terms of strength, I missed that part of your post.

Explained above already in this thread as to why the HP is weaker.


Wondering how critical the 4" difference in pinions between the two is.

:confused: Are you refering to the length of the pinons? I thought it was only a couple inches...not four.




I'm always eager to learn, so educate me.

are you refering to the length of the pinons? I thought it was only a couple inches...not four.




I'm always eager to learn, so educate me.

I'm smart enough to recognize that as the trap that it is.

From reading, the Dana pinion is 2" above the axle, and the 9" is 2" below.

I'm a proponent for the 9", due to the intended usage, for clarification.

Googled "Currie 9" FJC" and spent two hours perusing Air's build. Basis for the question, and I did the 2+2=4 math for the uneducated 4" difference.

:laughing: The last bit wasn't neccessarily directed at you....more or less pbb in general. I want to learn dammit! (looks around and waits for someone to post up "Search :flipoff2:")


From reading, the Dana pinion is 2" above the axle, and the 9" is 2" below.

I'm a proponent for the 9", due to the intended usage, for clarification.

Googled "Currie 9" FJC" and spent two hours perusing Air's build. Basis for the question, and I did the 2+2=4 math for the uneducated 4" difference.

Ahh...I think you are comparing a high pinon 60 axle to a low pinion 9 axle? Comparing apples to apples (LP to LP or visa versa), the pinion height to axle center difference, between the 9 and 60, should only be around an inch.

The tradeoff with the HP is better driveline angles (reduce your risk of rocks meeting driveshaft), but at the cost of reduced strength vs its low pinion counter part.



I'm not saying that a 60 isn't stronger than a 9 or can't be built stronger....or the other way around, in some situtations. However, I think it'd be better to elaborate on "why is it stronger" aspect with info on the respective axle. I only have a basic understanding compared experts on here, but from what I've seen, when you start looking at the strength to weight...things can get a bit muddy but folks seem to gravitate in a certain directions.


Chris - are you open to all axle options or only one you can get with bolt on mounts (limits the discussion to curries products)? It helps frame the context of the discussion and options.

If you've read about why one is > than the other toss out why, the previous link provided no technical insight.

Unfortunately, most of what I have read is forum material. I know that such info can not always be trusted; however, it is one of those things that if I see it enough times, I get somewhat comfortable with the information. Most all are unanimous on the 60 being the stronger of the two (but obviously not the best for all situations). That said, alot of the info I see could be speaking of stock v. stock. I would need to look again.

Do some research and I think you'll find each has their tradeoffs.

Agreed

Just because you can run a 9.75" ring gear in a 60 doesn't mean it is superior to a 9" gear

From what I read, it is not just that the ring is less beefy, but the length of the pinion also puts more torque on the smaller ring (not sure if I understood that correctly).

I'm always eager to learn, so educate me.

Definately not educated or experienced enough to do that on my own.

:laughing: The last bit wasn't neccessarily directed at you....more or less pbb in general. I want to learn dammit! (looks around and waits for someone to post up "Search :flipoff2:")




Ahh...I think you are comparing a high pinon 60 axle to a low pinion 9 axle? Comparing apples to apples (LP to LP or visa versa), the pinion height to axle center difference, between the 9 and 60, should only be around an inch.

The tradeoff with the HP is better driveline angles (reduce your risk of rocks meeting driveshaft), but at the cost of reduced strength vs its low pinion counter part.



I'm not saying that a 60 isn't stronger than a 9 or can't be built stronger....or the other way around, in some situtations. However, I think it'd be better to elaborate on "why is it stronger" aspect with info on the respective axle. I only have a basic understanding compared experts on here, but from what I've seen, when you start looking at the strength to weight...things can get a bit muddy but folks seem to gravitate in a certain directions.


Chris - are you open to all axle options or only one you can get with bolt on mounts (limits the discussion to curries products)? It helps frame the context of the discussion and options.


I quote from "Currie FJ Ford 9 Axle" circa 2008. ( Google Title, if interested )

"there are two primary aftermarket gear sets for factory off road vehicles. The Dana Series for crawlers, and the Ford 9 for racers. Dana pinions are 2" above the rear axle, and the Ford 9 is 2" below. So who wants a Ford 9? It's stronger (than OEM was author's intent ) and takes sudden shock loads of high-speed runs better, but the clearance creates as issue over the rocks."

End quote

According to this same thread, the author's FJ was used for, and this was the prototype for the Ford 9/FJ "bolt on". For context, was installed on probably the most intense build I've seen for a desert FJ, to date.

I'm not one to be spoon fed, as the participants on the "other" forum know, and still yet I have multiple, impending WTS threads coming soon. So don't think I read and considered this to be the final word, it's the only information I've found anywhere about, vehicle specific.

No. I'm no longer limiting to "bolt-on" due to the previously posted meeting, yesterday. I would like to maintain the ABS/Speed Sensor functions, though.

The basic criteria is wider and reliable, on 35"s with intention of OEM linkage mounts (not OEM links), now. I don't want to limit a future rear 3-4 link, or have to replace, considering they're not giving them away.

OK, being one of the three I will jump in here. Dont feel like a dumb ass for
asking stupid questions. I have the baddest FJ in the world and am a technical idiot. I'll be the first one to admit that when I started building Mad Dog the first time, I thought a locker was where you stored your gear I just didnt understand why you needed two of them.
I happened to have the resources and very little time so I had almost everything done by someone else and if I didnt like the way it worked out I just had them do something else. I didnt want to know how or why I just wanted to drive it hard and fast on the toughest trails in the country.That being said I didnt really become part of the offroading community I just became known as a rich dumb ass.
Mad Dog has now been built 3 different times and is in its 4th and final as I write this but I have changed along the way and have really started learning how and why. As the 3rd build progressed I started doing some of the work myself and researching suspension geometry and calculations. I also started paying attention to my rig and how it responded in the desrt and in the rocks so that I could make sense out of roll center and antisquat and the way that the rear wheels track in reference to the front.I think it was Belly Doc who made a coment on one of these threads about how you dont really have or know the true spirit of offroading until you have done your own work. So that is what I have started doing as much as possible. I recently aquired an FJ40 that I will be building on my own and have alrady started. I am also learning to weld so I know if I can do it any one can.
Hopefully some time I can go back and post a comprehensive build thread for Mad Dog from the begaining so all can see how it morphed into what it is now. The next build thread will be from what it was at last KOH to the race build that is being done now.

I HATE LONG POSTS !!

^^ Zen and the Art of Off road Vehicle Modification, defined.

I took this on, with the intent of doing it myself. In realizing that, at some point, we all reach our limitations technically, mechanically, or financially, is the reason for the conversations, here, and elsewhere, in an attempt to utilize other's knowledge and experiences, to not continue the "dumb ass" mistakes.

I'm not proficient in any of this, and regardless of the shit I'll get for doing it three to four times, I busted my ass to make the money, I put a lot of effort into researching all of the high dollar components I'm now replacing with even more high dollar components, and enjoying every second of the process, even when I'm bleeding. Quality lies there in.

From what I read, it is not just that the ring is less beefy, but the length of the pinion also puts more torque on the smaller ring (not sure if I understood that correctly).


That was my point. Ring gear size is only a one dimensional measurement and we live in a 3D world. You aren't looking at the width or thickness of the gear which inherently also determine strength. While a 60 houses a larger diameter gear, it is also thiner and narrower than its 9" counterpart (again tradeoffs here when it comes to what you fit inside that). So while the 60 has a larger OD the 9 is wider and thicker.

I'm not sure what you are saying on the last part there on pinion length. Are you refering to the need for the 3rd bearing support? As noted above the gear design on a 9" allows for a greater contact area between the teeth...meaning a better distribution of load, I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "more torque on a smaller ring".


I quote from "Currie FJ Ford 9 Axle" circa 2008. ( Google Title, if interested )

"there are two primary aftermarket gear sets for factory off road vehicles. The Dana Series for crawlers, and the Ford 9 for racers. Dana pinions are 2" above the rear axle, and the Ford 9 is 2" below. So who wants a Ford 9? It's stronger (than OEM was author's intent ) and takes sudden shock loads of high-speed runs better, but the clearance creates as issue over the rocks."

End quote


That quote is comparing a Hi Pinion to Lo Pinion axle. You can get either axle in HP or LP....if you are comparing apples to apples the pinion height difference is only around an 1" between a 60 and 9.

Again, I don't know enough to argue on my own. I just read stuff like this (aware that these are not the best sources - just a bunch of anicdotal):

From Pirate:
The Dana 60 is unquestionably the most desirable steer axle currently used by rock crawlers. No matter what upgrades are performed on lighter duty units, their strength just cannot be compared to the Dana 60.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/articles/productreviews/dedenbear

http://www.fullsizebronco.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-116363.html

http://www.moparchat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72878&page=2

http://www.stevesnovasite.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-173033.html

(I doubt last two were Hi-P though)

That is no different from folks on the blue room saying a HP rockjock is indestructable. Aside for one or two posts there is little technical comparison between them...the few that are there are far from comprehensive. I can post up links to other forums saying "go with the 9"...its better". What value does that add to this thread though without justification behind it?

I'm not arguing for one axle or the other. Simply trying to illustrate the tradeoffs I know of and better understand the ones I don't. Shafts, R&P, Locker, Housings, Design, Strength, Weight, etc.


btw - it probably would be best to keep the thread and vehicle in context, so we are all on the same page. Unless Chris is planning on doing rear stear or swapping his IFS out for a SA front the pirate link doesn't provide much insight. Rear axle & aftermarket options (not stock).

That is no different from folks on the blue room saying a HP rockjock is indestructable. Aside for one or two posts there is little technical comparison between them...the few that are there are far from comprehensive. I can post up links to other forums saying "go with the 9"...its better". What value does that add to this thread though without justification behind it?

I'm not arguing for one axle or the other. Simply trying to illustrate the tradeoffs I know of and better understand the ones I don't. Shafts, R&P, Locker, Housings, Design, Strength, Weight, etc.


btw - it probably would be best to keep the thread and vehicle in context, so we are all on the same page. Unless Chris is planning on doing rear stear or swapping his IFS out for a SA front the pirate link doesn't provide much insight. Rear axle & aftermarket options (not stock).

I can't argue your point. I was just saying that anecdotally I always heard that the D60 was stronger.

Chris, I think you should put a TTB in the rear (being facetious). That would be a first for an FJC though. Has anyone ever put one on the rear before? I was just thinking about it because Torchmates Ultra4 build w/ TTB in the front recently won a race.

In continuation.*

Let's assume that a bolt on product is no longer a criteria.*

Based, again, on little information a Google search produces about vehicle specific 9" offerings, and even less general knowledge, it appears that Currie (2008) attempted to offer a bolt on option for the FJ, yet I can find the product (for research, not purchase) anywhere.*

Some issues the prototype for FJ encountered were, quote*

"1. Toyota set the engine and transmission "flat", meaning it does not tilt down as in most other engine installations. *This affects the driveline geometry negatively, but has benefits in ground clearance and center of gravity.

2. The Toyota transmission output shaft sits relatively high for protection. *This increases the driveshaft angle even more.

3. The Ford 9 pinion is 2 inches lower than stock, increasing the driveshaft angle again.

4. The Dana 60 pinion is 4 inches higher than the Ford, so it does not have the angle geometry problem. *However, it still needs a new driveshaft because the pinion is a couple inches farther forward.

The first adjustment Currie tried was to lengthen my upper links by an inch. *This has the effect of rotating the axle back, pointing the pinion up and decreasing the angle. *But it wasn't enough.

All-Pro does carry adjustable uppers, but the adjustment range is intended for the stock axle. *This is true for all the adjustable lowers out there as well. *So, putting in adjustable upper and lower links would not have rotated the axle far enough in this case." end quote.*

They corrected with a new drive shaft a Double Cardon joint, and modifications to the linkages at this install. The 9 had a u-bolt yoke and the drive shaft was accommodated to mate, but it was stated the the 9 had the option of flanged, just wasnt utilized.*

Here's my questions:

Could this have some bearing on why Currie doesn't market a 9 bolt on?

Let's assume that the OEM linkage points are maintained, and the pinion angle is correctable, will the LP pose an issue, requiring the CV2 joint, regardless?*

Mad Dog, I know you hate long post, but in light of the current banter, wanted to provide the information as I read it, in it's full form, so we're all on the same page, to avoid the bullshit.*

As previously expressed, I'm technically challenged, but the issues as stated, are making sense.*

Chris - what Todd outlined there are all minor items that come with changing out axles...none of them are as "big" as his posts made them out to be. I don't see any of them stopping Currie from offering a 9" for the FJ specifically.

You'll need a new driveshaft anyways, so getting one with a CV isn't a big deal. You'll see less vibration with CV/double cardan, but it will be a pia to deal with if it fails (not as easy as reparing a singal cardan on the trail). Going with something like a Tom Wood's or High Angle driveshaft and you'll be fine for the type of trails you are planning on doing.

What do you plan to do with your FJ? Also are you planning on reusing the stock brakes? The FJ I used to drive had a dynatrac hp 60, stock brakes and coilovers.

Chris - what Todd outlined there are all minor items that come with changing out axles...none of them are as "big" as his posts made them out to be. I don't see any of them stopping Currie from offering a 9" for the FJ specifically.

You'll need a new driveshaft anyways, so getting one with a CV isn't a big deal. You'll see less vibration with CV/double cardan, but it will be a pia to deal with if it fails (not as easy as reparing a singal cardan on the trail). Going with something like a Tom Wood's or High Angle driveshaft and you'll be fine for the type of trails you are planning on doing.

Noted, and I take your word for it.

So now on to driveshafts, before getting even a remote handle on the rear.

What do you plan to do with your FJ? Also are you planning on reusing the stock brakes? The FJ I used to drive had a dynatrac hp 60, stock brakes and coilovers.

I've heard the term "expedition vehicle" to describe. More specifically, drive hundreds of highway miles to get to varying terrain. Primarily, see more rocks and trails, locally, but intend on traveling the desert south west.

Want to maintain the ABS functions, so maintaining stock brakes, and in the future, may (I'm frigging sure) do a 4 link and coilovers. For now, maintain the OEM linkage geometry.

Part of this process has been ensuring that the rear is permanent, for whatever suspension in finalized.

For an expedition vehicle either will work. A good expedition vehicle is about reliability. The one I was driving was supercharged with a manual on 40's. The hp rear held together fine.

If you are going to use the stock bracketry, I would go 9" as I think it would be easier to weld everything to. I'll bet Currie can put factory outers on either axle.

For what you want to do, I'd run the factory axle. Easier to get spares for if it breaks, which is still unlikely.

For an expedition vehicle either will work. A good expedition vehicle is about reliability. The one I was driving was supercharged with a manual on 40's. The hp rear held together fine.

If you are going to use the stock bracketry, I would go 9" as I think it would be easier to weld everything to. I'll bet Currie can put factory outers on either axle.

For what you want to do, I'd run the factory axle. Easier to get spares for if it breaks, which is still unlikely.

I have seen a lot of factory axles breaking lately. Currie can send the axle and housing fully assembled with bracketry.

I have seen a lot of factory axles breaking lately. Currie can send the axle and housing fully assembled with bracketry.

Who's factory axles have you seen broken? Thirds...yes I've seen and heard of....actual shafts..that'd be a first.

I think his point was spares are a heck of a lot easier OEM. Waiting for a custom axle or axle shaft from currie can take weeks.

I know of a few that bent axle tubes on the stock rear housing.

I know of a few that bent axle tubes on the stock rear housing.

How are the trucks being used?

How are the trucks being used?

jumpin. That's what bent up the tubes.

How many bent axles are you guys seeing? I know of one locally from the guy jumping dunes...However, I've seen/heard many more rear R&P grenading than anything else.

MetalTech bent theirs at AllCal a few months ago.

I have bent front and rear RJ housings but never busted an R&P and I have hammered them as hard as that engine would hammer them. I think Currie D60 RJ's rule and no one backs up thier products like they do.

jumpin. That's what bent up the tubes.

Hardly something that you would do on an expedition.

Communications with Currie, in regards to.


Quoting Darrell at Currie.*

"The 9 is definitely a viable option to look at, depending on what you plan
on doing with the truck. The 60 is the bigger differential in gear size,
carrier size, and just basically sheer size in everything. It is the
'stronger' of the two in almost all aspects. The one aspect that the 9 inch
beats the 60 in would be housing strength, especially a fabricated housing.
The 60 has a slightly weaker housing because of the inherent strengths you
lose when you have a steel tube pressed into a nodular center. The 9 inch
has an all steel housing with steel tubes welded in. The fabricated centers
have a 'D' shape notched into the end of them so that they index the
faceplate and basically have one continuous structure from housing end to
housing end. Both units use essentially the same axles and bearings, so
there's no real difference there. The 9 inch also has a bit better ground
clearance because it's smaller. So really, there are situations where either
would be the better choice. You just have to determine what situations you
are going to be in and choose the unit that suits that better."

Second reply, my questions are obvious.*

"The 9 is available as complete as the 60 is. I don't build them with the
axles already in there because they reuse your factory brakes. The 9 inch is
going to be smaller and lighter than the 60, typically about 40 lbs lighter.
LP is definitely stronger in the rear. The 9 inch is the only one that will
really make a difference in a truck as light as an FJC. The high pinion 60
will still be more than strong enough. What size tires are you running?"

I replied "35s". His response.*

"You could technically run the high pinion on either one of the 9 or 60, but
the high pinion 9 inch is at its limit with that kind of vehicle weight and
35 inch tall tires. The 60 would be much stronger, or the low pinion 9 inch."

"If *you're high speed running, like a desert run, the low pinion 9 inch would
be better. For slower rock crawling type stuff the high pinion 60 would be
better. "

I have seen a lot of factory axles breaking lately. Currie can send the axle and housing fully assembled with bracketry.

Wrong post to quote. Regardless, intend on 4" wider axle, ruling out an OEM replacement.

I ordering three front assemblies, to be prudent, but I hadn't given thought to ordering spare rear, mostly because I hadn't considered failure a common occurrence.

It would, to some degree, defeat the purpose would it not?

How are the trucks being used?

One was a driven by a guy that thought he was Robbie Gordon and the other was on a sas'd fj with the stock rear end still in it.

Considering the latest information from Currie, and the nominal 40lb difference between the two completed assemblies, and takers on recommending a direction from here?
How critical is the 40lb difference?

I originally thought the axle/driveshaft could be a consideration, and installed, later adding the TC/Crawlbox, whatever, but it's potentially more of an issue later, correct?

I'm still interested to hear more on the 40lbs difference. Most quotes I'd seen previously had showed it at 100 or more and the Pirate weight chart shows 75lb difference between a 9" (225lbs) and a 60 (300lbs).

As Dave mentioned elsewhere the beauty of the 9 is being able to weld directly to the housing. The 60 nodular section means most folks truss it which potentially increases your overall height. Definitely the case on the FJC which makes it a bit difficult to manage with the upper crossmember near the gas tank.

Either one is an option (so is sticking with OEM). If I had known more when I bought mine and not simply gone on the vendor saying the HP 60 is "indestructible", I would have selected a different axle.

You'll likely need a new driveshaft if you go with a aftermarket axle...yours could be modified to work tho. If you plan ahead of time you can probably also make the driveshaft you get work with your current and final transfer case. Again not something to get too hung up on.

40lbs is nothing. A stock 9 is lighter than a built 9. Smaller axles , less material in the third etc.

Why are you so set on a currie housing? IMO there are better housings out there (cheaper too). Sure, they are the only ones that say the sensors all work, but I am sure you could find a way to use the stock ends on whatever housing you choose.

Why are you so set on a currie housing? IMO there are better housings out there (cheaper too). Sure, they are the only ones that say the sensors all work, but I am sure you could find a way to use the stock ends on whatever housing you choose.

More than likely because they will deliver a finished housing. Anything else will require some diy.

More than likely because they will deliver a finished housing. Anything else will require some diy.

That's correct, and the reason for the Currie inquisition, so far.
I'm not set on Currie for namesake, or any other reason, but the fact that it's a bolt on product, because I don't have the capabilities, yet, to do much of anything else.

If you have suggestions, please make. The only criteria that makes some previous suggestions questionable is the 4" wider width.

EDIT: Chris responded at the same time...no need for the redundant post.

EDIT: Chris responded at the same time...no need for the redundant post.


I was going to reply to your post. I'll wing it.

There's a Pirate Forum Vendor in the area that I've spoken with about this, and future 4 link fabrication. He insinuated that, though he's unfamiliar with the FJ ABS/ESP accomodations made by Currie, he thought he could replicate with their assistance, on any rear end. The linkages would have to be added and it's an extra step, if maintaining the OEM linkage points.

My question in regards to, is there another rear that could be purchased economically enough, to justify the expense of setting up the OEM linkages on, by a fabricator?

Based on the replies here, there must be, and I'm open to. Will reference the thread to local shop for review.

Really need to better define the purpose of your FJ. It almost sounds like you are looking to make this more of an robust trail FJ thats still capable of driving on the road based on the questions.

Getting clarity on what you truely want to build and use it for will define your needs and whether OEM, standard currie housing, or brand x would be best suited. Based on your definition below you don't need an aftermarket axle or even to change the suspension geometry for any of that. Folks have been using their FJs for 5 years now for the exact purposes you've outlined and the vast majority of rear ends have held up fine...let alone the need for a 60 or 9.

I've heard the term "expedition vehicle" to describe. More specifically, drive hundreds of highway miles to get to varying terrain. Primarily, see more rocks and trails, locally, but intend on traveling the desert south west.

Want to maintain the ABS functions, so maintaining stock brakes, and in the future, may (I'm frigging sure) do a 4 link and coilovers. For now, maintain the OEM linkage geometry.

Part of this process has been ensuring that the rear is permanent, for whatever suspension in finalized.

Really need to better define the purpose of your FJ. It almost sounds like you are looking to make this more of an robust trail FJ thats still capable of driving on the road based on the questions.

Getting clarity on what you truely want to build and use it for will define your needs and whether OEM, standard currie housing, or brand x would be best suited. Based on your definition below you don't need an aftermarket axle or even to change the suspension geometry for any of that. Folks have been using their FJs for 5 years now for the exact purposes you've outlined and the vast majority of rear ends have held up fine...let alone the need for a 60 or 9.

You make a valid point, and I think we can both agree that neither of us knew the total degree to which the builds would extend, or for what purpose, originally. I'm taking that into consideration with this aspect, based on that reason, and it's an attempt at easing into the inevitable, even though I can't say, with certainty, what that is.

To address specifically the thought progression, redoing the front and rear width should correspond. Going to run 35s, so need to re gear. Have to
regear, so add the front locker. Continue? TC? Crawlbox? 3-4 link?

The resounding purpose in all of this is to replace a known weak point, without limiting future suspension upgrade, to coincide with the progressiveness stated above.

Have encountered several instances where there was no way I was making it in current form. I don't care much for that scenario.

redoing the front and rear width should correspond.

Why?

If you don't like the way it looks, run a quality wheel spacer on the rear.

Why?

If you don't like the way it looks, run a quality wheel spacer on the rear.


Wider is better.

Assumed necessity/travel advantage for future rear linkage set up.

Wrong?

The 40lb difference between the 9 and D60 is only in the housing, according to liCal builder. Estimated over 100lb difference.

For what it's worth.

Wider is better.

Assumed necessity/travel advantage for future rear linkage set up.

Wrong?

I am with you, I don't like spacers if you don't have to do them. That said, I don't think I would buy a whole new rear axle just to solve that problem. Per our discussions though, I know that is not the only reason you are considering a swap.

Wider is better.

Assumed necessity/travel advantage for future rear linkage set up.

Wrong?

Not neccessarily. Again you don't gain any travel from a wider axle (on SA applications). Travel is your axle moving straight up and down. The only place you'd gain anything is articulation and it'd be minor.

Save yourself the money and just put some quality spacers on the rear axle to match whatever front suspension you run.

Once you decide if you actually want to modify your rear suspension geometry then start thinking about a new rear axle. Do the regearing and front locker if you decide to run an aftermarket rear axle. Hands down I'd still do a lefty or atlas transfer case before swapping rear axles for a "bolt in" replacement...imo that's your biggest bang for your buck since it buys you quite a bit more control..and is something you use every time you go offroad (ask FJC folks with front lockers how often they use them...there's a thread on the blue room where 1911 and mtbcoach discuss that point).

At least thats my 2 cents.

Not neccessarily. Again you don't gain any travel from a wider axle (on SA applications). Travel is your axle moving straight up and down. The only place you'd gain anything is articulation and it'd be minor.

Save yourself the money and just put some quality spacers on the rear axle to match whatever front suspension you run.

Once you decide if you actually want to modify your rear suspension geometry then start thinking about a new rear axle. Do the regearing and front locker if you decide to run an aftermarket rear axle. Hands down I'd still do a lefty or atlas transfer case before swapping rear axles for a "bolt in" replacement...imo that's your biggest bang for your buck since it buys you quite a bit more control..and is something you use every time you go offroad (ask FJC folks with front lockers how often they use them...there's a thread on the blue room where 1911 and mtbcoach discuss that point).

At least thats my 2 cents.

Whose paying you off?

He is correct.

He is correct.

I won't argue, because I know it's futile.

Attempting to avoid doing shit twice, such as re gearing OEM, since re gear is inevitable. Axle wouldn't change regardless of rear linkage modification, later.

You are swapping the rear end, why do you want to swap the suspension?

You are swapping the rear end, why do you want to swap the suspension?

Can't rule out a 3-4 link with COs. For now, swapping the components that I know won't be replaced later, once it all develops.

Attempting to eliminate an extended stay on the rack, to do it all, but in stages, to minimize mistakes.

Don't over think issues like weight, wheel spacers, Etc. Paralysis/analysis. Who cares that an axle weighs 60lbs more/less on a 6k lb vehicle! It is unsprung weight and low. As far as strength HP vs LP etc. For crying out loud it's not a comp buggy and very few people will ever be able to put a 35 spl shaft to the test and by the way jeapardoning their full size FJ in places where it may have to be airlifted out to recover! So, don't waste time argueing weights etc. Buy quality parts, use strong links/brackets, good geometry and strong welds, and lastly "wheel the he'll out of it" that's it go buy parts and get fabbing!!! Oh, buy quality wheel spacers and you will probably be braking wheels before ever having problems with them. I have ran them on 42" rubber in both highway use and competions for several years with zero issues. Go build it.

It is unsprung weight and low.

:confused: Unsprung weight is going to make a bigger difference than sprung weight. For the most part I concur with everything else. However, at the same time I'd recommend to plan it out and do it right the first time (seeing as I am already planning to revamp my rear geometry and suspension down the line...even tho we haven't finished the 3 link on it yet).

FJled, being I am on my I phone, oh and on a beach on Hawaii! I will explain reasoning later. So fjled explain how you come up with that unsprung vs sprung weight!!!

The advantage to lots of low unsprung weight is lowering your CG keeping you more stable. Great for crawling...not so great for any type of high speed driving compared to less unsprung weight. More unsprung weight the more work for your suspension to control all that weight. Less unsprung weight the more effectively your shocks and springs can do their job - better on road or offroad at speed (ride quality).

All I said was that unsprung weight's going to make a bigger difference than sprung (pound for pound) in your suspensions peformance. Something we can both agree on?

Can fully appreciate the lower CG aspect with a heavy axle and it obviously has its application.

Why are you so set on a currie housing? IMO there are better housings out there (cheaper too). Sure, they are the only ones that say the sensors all work, but I am sure you could find a way to use the stock ends on whatever housing you choose.

Care to expound? I'm all ears, and not limiting to a bolt on option.

I have a high-pinion axle that was in an FJ-cruiser if you are interested. I was going to use it in my next project, but I may be willing to part if you want to make a deal.

The housing has 5.38 gears, a Detroit locker, factory fj-cruiser brakes and is a full floater with some spare shafts. I don't remember if it has the wheel speed sensors or not. I'd have to check.

pm me if you are interested.
it is in paso robles area of CA.

I have a high-pinion axle that was in an FJ-cruiser if you are interested. I was going to use it in my next project, but I may be willing to part if you want to make a deal.

The housing has 5.38 gears, a Detroit locker, factory fj-cruiser brakes and is a full floater with some spare shafts. I don't remember if it has the wheel speed sensors or not. I'd have to check.

pm me if you are interested.
it is in paso robles area of CA.


What exactly do you have? Not a stock axle I presume. Hi pinion 60? 9? 70? please explain. If Chris doesn't take this, I might consider.

Care to expound? I'm all ears, and not limiting to a bolt on option.

I would start by looking into different housing and differential options. Read through the build threads. Then get a hold of currie and see if you could just purchase the pieces you need to make the sensors and all that stuff work. I am a big fan of the Ruffstuff Housings. They are much cheaper than a currie housing as well, Almost half the price if I interpret both websites correctly.

Prorock 60

I would start by looking into different housing and differential options. Read through the build threads. Then get a hold of currie and see if you could just purchase the pieces you need to make the sensors and all that stuff work. I am a big fan of the Ruffstuff Housings. They are much cheaper than a currie housing as well, Almost half the price if I interpret both websites correctly.


Ford 9 with ARB, regardless of gearing, HP or LP, or anything else as a bolt on (the axles aren't assembled to swap OEM brakes)

$4,426.10 which is an easy $800 than the All Pro website claims for RJ60.

The offer above that you expressed interest in I'm not familiar enough with any of this to determine what's even offered.

Class in session? Can someone explain?

Dynatrac Pro-rock High pinion Dana 60. Used, full floater with spare axle shafts. dDisc brakes, 6-lug, about 70-inches wide. No speed sensors. It was under an FJ-cruiser. PM me if you are interested.

I would start by looking into different housing and differential options. Read through the build threads. Then get a hold of currie and see if you could just purchase the pieces you need to make the sensors and all that stuff work. I am a big fan of the Ruffstuff Housings. They are much cheaper than a currie housing as well, Almost half the price if I interpret both websites correctly.

Are you keeping the recipe secret? Ha.

I've spoke with anyone that'll listen, and the resounding input here is "that ain't a bad price....if you want to keep the OEM functions". Looked into a built axle with local builder, and it comes within the same range at the Currie, but a much prettier housing.

Newest member of the blue room, with engineering background, re-iterated the same, and an All-Pro email stated they were testing the Currie 9 (no other specifications given) under a Tacoma, front and rear.

Is this the gold standard?

Also, in regards to the front axles. At what point will the RCV offerings be advantageous? I know FJNewb's stated they've been added to increase travel that was limited by the CV, and the numbers on his make the acquisition sensible. Is the RCV's biggest advantage merely the increased CV angle? If dealing with overall travel numbers much less, that the CV isn't going to limit, is it prudent to upgrade? Eliminate issues? Simply, is a product capable of the travel discussed on FJNewb's essentially bulletproof on a front end only capable of 4" less travel? How about a front locker and SC addition to the equation?

In regards to front CVs, my drive for going to RCV axles was that the OEM inboard joint was maxed out before full bump or droop on the rest of the Camburg kit. The biggest value for me was the increased travel. The side benefit was a stronger axle setup overall (930 inner and 60 outer with heat treated internals and shafts from my understanding).

However, this is not the typical axle they marketed for the FJC. The one they offered previously I think did use a 930 inner, but the outer was still a rzeppa joint. Both had various internals upgraded with chrom-moly parts. I still haven't got a clear answer on why RCV stopped offering these.


The concern the upgraded axles bring is whether or not they now let go first or now if your r&p does instead.

In general the OEM CVs hold up well enough for most folks. Failures tend to be when folks have got their wheels locked and are applying substantial loads from what I've seen and the retainer cage gives.

Oops duplicate post

http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp358/patrickmintun/IMG_0058.jpg
http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp358/patrickmintun/IMG_0059.jpg
http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp358/patrickmintun/IMG_0053.jpg
Speaking of RCV axles.
After breaking 3 axles and weighing the cost difference between cromoly shafts with $300 u joints and the RCV axles went with the RCV.
Got a great price thru a friend's shop.
Now I have a $3500+ Dana 44.
Should have started with a 60 or diamond or the like.

Going to see how it goes.

In regards to front CVs, my drive for going to RCV axles was that the OEM inboard joint was maxed out before full bump or droop on the rest of the Camburg kit. The biggest value for me was the increased travel. The side benefit was a stronger axle setup overall (930 inner and 60 outer with heat treated internals and shafts from my understanding).

However, this is not the typical axle they marketed for the FJC. The one they offered previously I think did use a 930 inner, but the outer was still a rzeppa joint. Both had various internals upgraded with chrom-moly parts. I still haven't got a clear answer on why RCV stopped offering these.


The concern the upgraded axles bring is whether or not they now let go first or now if your r&p does instead.

In general the OEM CVs hold up well enough for most folks. Failures tend to be when folks have got their wheels locked and are applying substantial loads from what I've seen and the retainer cage gives.

Had plans for a complete third axle assembly. Proceed with, since the travel/bind issue won't be a problem.

In regards to the front and locker. Depending on what gears you go with and the material, I'd probably have them heat treated as an extra measure of saftey if funds allow for it. Something I wish I had done before having Dave toss my gear set it.

That way if you ever do end up upgrading axles you at least have a bit more reassurance on the front r&p.

I may still end up buying a spare fron R&P and heat treat them or a tundra front clamshell and gear set (still waiting to get measurements from folks on this tho to see how much fabrication it require and if it fits within the space available).

In regards to the front and locker. Depending on what gears you go with and the material, I'd probably have them heat treated as an extra measure of saftey if funds allow for it. Something I wish I had done before having Dave toss my gear set it.

That way if you ever do end up upgrading axles you at least have a bit more reassurance on the front r&p.

I may still end up buying a spare fron R&P and heat treat them or a tundra front clamshell and gear set (still waiting to get measurements from folks on this tho to see how much fabrication it require and if it fits within the space available).

Yes, I have decided to hold off on RCVs until the CVs inevitably break. Further, I am definately going to get the front R&P cryo'd if those ever go. In the mean time, why has no one found a good solution for the tie rods. I know All Pro made the HD kit; however, I heard it splayed your tires outwards and created some bump steer. I may do some playing after the new year to try something else.

All of the options have induced bump steer from my understanding. Think moog makes an alternative end that can be utilized on the OEM tierods. Personally would rather replace the tie rods or the CVs than my steering rack or r&p.