Guys - saw this on another board. A Guibo is a flexible coupling used instead of ujoints on some european cars. Including M series BMWs, which indicates that they can handle some horsepower.

The thing that caught my attention is that they might be able to handle thrust problems as well as misalignment. For the guys that want to run trans to tcase with one (or no) ujoints, this might be a way to do it.

Haven't found anything yet that indicates what operating angles they can tolerate - I'll be looking.

Here's a pic:

http://www.koalamotorsport.com/mall/repair%20manual/images/260001.jpg

side view:

http://www.koalamotorsport.com/mall/repair%20manual/images/260002.jpg

Kinda look's like an oversized Rag joint:smokin: :D

interesting....

I remember some time ago when doing some work on my moms late 80s ford ranger 2wd pickup, seeing somthing like that on the output of the transmission.

It was an extend cab, w/ a 4cyl, manual trans. It wa a 2 piece DS with a carrier bearing in the middle....

(We were constanly fixing the radius rod busingings.... but hey 180k can't be all bad)

Wait....
Now that I think about it I'm almost positive it had a similer setup. I remember why I know it had a carrier bearing :-) The bolts that threaded in that rubber coupler piece were in there with locktight from hell !


-mike
:barf:

Mike, that would fit with what I have found so far. It looks like these are used on cars with IRS, and several have a carrier bearing in the driveline. I think they are used when the driveline angle is pretty flat overall but manufacturing tolerances and the distance from trans to rear diff or transaxle make it difficult to get perfect alignment. The main purpose seems to be to absorb vibration, handle minor misalignment and provide some cushioning for the driveline.

I've seen lots of large electric motors (sawmills ect I'm an industrial electrician) coupled to the machine their turning with similar type couplings so I'm sure this could work for a sami. :beer:

i'll keep my ujoints but thanks for playing. :flipoff2:

Ask Oilburner what his replacement was for the short shaft...

one of these rag joints perhaps? :emb:

I studied this for Months, emailing a couple guys in Europe who installed Volvo trannies in between their Samurai 5 speed & t-case. Those guibo's came in a lot of vehicles - Beamers, Mercedes, XR4Ti's, even the Viper. I just wasn't convinced it could handle the stress over a long time. I specualted on the time it would take to design/fabricate/debugg the system and concluded that Life is too short for that - I've fabricated practically everything else on my rig - this time I'm going with what works so I can spend more time on the trails.

The fact that I made some deals & lucked into the Klune didn't hurt, either. :D

back when i used to work for land rover we had a set of them on the shelf, i asked around, they had been there for as long as any one could remember.. they just dont seem to wear out.. they also seem to be able to handle prob some where around 15-20 degrees of deflection. a nice side benifit is that they do absorb some shock loading, therefore it reduces some stress on parts.

We looked into these a while back for ultra short intermediate shaft use. Some of the things we found:

They are used in a lot of European vehicles. You name it, and if they made a rear wheel drive, then they probably used one or two of these joints.

They are a high wear part, and most models need to be replaced every 60,000 miles. (Compared to a u-joint on a factory vehicle, that is high wear.)

The best I can figure is that the main reason to put these in the driveline is to reduce the shock loads, and reduce the NVH levels for the vehicle.

They are sometimes used instead of u-joints, and sometimes they are used with u-joints. Sometimes they are the only joint, and all by themselves, but only in very straight applications. (You should do your own research on this one.) I think a Mercedes had just one, but it also had a ridid 3rd member. (IRS)

The flanges that work with these joints will not really save you much space compared to 2 u-joints that are back to back. So the space savings wasn't all that great.

In the long run, they do seem interesting, and are worth looking into.

One concern I have is that I would not want this joint flexing much if any. (operate at, or near, zero degrees.)

Do a search on the web and see what you find.. Alfa, BMW, Mercedes, etc..

-Wayne