maybe i should drop a 109 rear body tub onto my truck?

it would look a hell of a lot better on the humungo tires and long wheelbase than the 93" WB and 88" tub i have now.

eventually planning on about a 110-120" WB w/ 4 wheel steering rockwells and 44-53 :eek: inch tall tires.

coil suspension front and rear, of course.

what do y'all think? just as a refresher, heres what the war machine looks like now-

Chop the rear half of the bed off and make it look like a chassis cab.

Cut down the hard top and make it like a series I pick up cab.

put forest rover style rear fenders with a simple tray with lid in the center.

chop the front fenders and do forest rover style front fenders with santana lightweight style headlamp mounts.

120in WB would kill you up in MA/ME keep in in the 100-110in range, run little lift with the custom body and whatever tires you axles can handle.

Most importantly do SOMETHING I want to here alum scream :mad2:

Ron

Originally posted by evilfij
120in WB would kill you up in MA/ME keep in in the 100-110in range, run little lift with the custom body and whatever tires you axles can handle.

Most importantly do SOMETHING I want to here alum scream :mad2:

120WB too long even with 4 wheel steer? and no way will this rig reside in the northeast forever, in a few years its off to the southwest to rock it with the big boys!

oh and dont worry about me doing something, i will also be sure to post a video clip of me making the first cut so you can hear AND see that aluminum SCREEEEEEEEEEEAM!

whatever tires my axles can handle? ok 48s it is :D

rockwells can handle ANYTHING, especially with a measly little small block ford powering it for the time being heheheh :D

i like your plan and i think it would be easier. ill have to do some more "drawing it out on paper" before i can make a real decision, though.

Out of curiosity why would you want to run rockwell axles??? Low ground clearance, etc. I know they state 2.5 tons, but the sniper seemed to go through them everytime I saw him in Choke Cherry Canyon (Farmington). He was running 42" tires also. I have seen a lot less breakage on D60 and 70s with the same tire size. I am not convinced of the strength, and I have to wonder if it is necessary to go that big. It seems like even if it is slightly stonger, you give up a lot of clearance. Are you partial to the differential disc brake that hangs out there to hit on rocks or what??? Help me understand. Is it the gears?? You can go really low with Dana 60s. Also I have to wonder how big of a tire you can really fit without making your rover a buggy. Do you plan to have this thing articulate?

Way

hey adam. you can very very easily shave a rockwell to have 1/4" more GC than a Dana 44, and way less than a 60. stock they have 1/4" less than a 60.

my other big reason for going with the rockwells is that they are CHEAP. $800 for two steering axles. and that already comes with deep gears, and a few minutes with the welder and now they are locked.

the disk brake is an option, normally on the M35s that they come out of, they have drum brakes at each wheel. i dunno what brake setup i would run, it also depends on what Strange Rover finds out about his little plan :D

yes the thing will articulate very much. the rear body is basically going to be a shell on the outside with some sort of framework on the inside. the front wings are going to be essentially nonexistant. and im going to be moving the front axle forward about 8", and the rear back about 15" from its current place for a total of 116".

No kidding on the GC! Didn''t know that. Thanks for the info. What is the WMS to WMS on a rockwell? I am also wondering of the tire is going to be completely outside of the body, or do you plan to really hack the fenders.

Way

the WMS measurement of a rockwell with the hubs flipped in is 70". however, with this setup you can only run a pinion mounted disk. with the hubs flipped out, it is 80".

just as a point of reference, the WMS measurement of a ford HP D60 front is 70".

i am thinking of running with the hubs in, and a pinion mounted disk. 20x8 rims with 5" backspacing. 1200x20 Michelin XMLs which are 48" tall and about 16" wide.

coil suspension front and rear with "SA-Links" which is basically an altered double-triangulated 4 link where the two upper links are combined into one as are the two lower links. flexes like hell.

oh and the tire hopefully wont be completely outside the body. a lot of it will, but in any case i am really going to hack the fenders. i have been drawing out custom rear frame designs all day today and thing i finally have one nailed down that will offer me everything that i want.

For reference 1/2 of my 12.50 wide tire hangs out of the front of my vehicle. My WMS to WMS is 63" in the front. the rims are 10" wide and have a 3.5" backspacing. At 70" + an additional 5" back spacing will definately put the entire tire and then some out of the body. I would go with a rim that has a positive off-set, or in other words looks like a hummer rim where there is no dish to the rim.

Way

P.S. Excited to see this thing going. Sounds like a several year project.

Originally posted by Way
Sounds like a several year project.

hopefully, since i will be doing it el cheapo, i will have it done by the fall :eek:

wishful thinking, i know.

but the motor is there and runs (well, only has 12,000mi on it), the trans is, the case is, just need to work out the axles, suspension, and bodywork and shes good to go.

why not build it basically as is with a full width 70 and full width 60.

Since you already have the 70 and the going rate fro a front 60 WHERE they are POPULAR is about 1000 you should be able to score one for less in the NE.

Slap some used 38-42in tires and get it sooner. that would be enough to scare the crap out of the loacl rover people then you will be able to wheel during the summer.

:)

If it weren't for the fact I have a stable of POS rovers to wheel I would build stuff alot quicker

Ron

9-Volt, any pics of this SA-Link suspension? Sounds interesting. Is it similar to the a-frame on the rear of a DI orD90, but one on top and bottom? I assume you have to have a panhard to keep it from moving side-to-side.

Adam,

In the April 2002 issue of Four wheeler they have a right up on 2 1/2 ton rockwells. It is on page 106-109. It talks about cutting them down and the different inner axles that they have. I guess there have been three different types of axle joints. One is very similar to the CV (called Bendix), the other is called a "rezepa" and the most sought after is the U-joint. Before you buy you may want to check this article out.

Also most all come with 6.72 gears (no aftermarket gears currently available). Are you planning on using these? What I found suprising is although they are huge, the u-joint is still realtively small (looks like a D60 joint). The axles are tapered as well.

Expect on running different rims front and rear if you want the same width. The rears were intended for dual tires, thus they carry a more standard full width, were as the front is super wide. You may end up needing two spares like me, if you go this route. Talk about taking up your cargo room with two 48" tires!!!

I wonder how your acceleration will be affected by the 640 lb axle vs. the weight of a D44 at 240 lbs. Got to also wonder about the suspension set up trying to handle this amount of weight. I know you have done way more research than most of us, so share some of your thoughts. I am still not sold on going this route.

Way

P.S you can now do disc brakes and lockable hubs on these monsters as well.
Chuck's Trucks (407)-650-3802 (Orlando FL) can give you more info on this. They perfrom this mod on the 2.5 ton in the article.

ok adam, i did some calculations today and heres what i came up with for you-

63" WMS
10" wheel with 3.5" BS
12.5" wide tire

6.5 (amount of wheel that sticks out past the MS)+1.25 (amount of tire that overhangs the wheel)= 7.75

7.75x2=15.5

15.5+63=78.5" from the outside of the tire to the outside of the tire.

now, for me-
70" WMS
10" wheel with 8" BS
15" wide tire

2+2.5=4.5

4.5x2=9

70+9=79" from the outside of the tire to the outside of the tire.

so i will only be 1/2" wide than you and have more tire on the inside so that it looks better.

as to your suspension concerns, the vehicle will not be used at high speed very often. i essentially plan on registering it as an agricultural vehicle, which limits me to 45mph.

i will keep the 6.72 gearing, cause with the little 302 and the 48s, well gearing that low will be needed :D