Anyone have opinions on which is better between D44's and stock fj40 axles, besides the obvious birfield issue.

New aftermarket products such as alloy axle shafts and CTM joints give the D44 the capability of being a significantly stronger axle assembly, in my opinion. Without the upgrades, I view them as comparible.

I agree with Medusa but you also have to consider that not all Dana 44's were created equal. There are differences in the Toyota Axles as well, such as stronger birfields through the years and with the Fj62 and Late model mini trucks the axle housing was reinforced.

In Dana 44's the size and wall thickness of the axle tubes vary as does the placement of the spring pads on the pumkins. Some Dana 44's have thick tubes like on a 3/4 ton truck front end, while others like on Jeeps are pretty thin and weak.

Overall, the design of the Dana cast center section with pressed in tubs is not a strong as the Toyota/Ford 9" inch style of a welded housing, but then again with a dana 60 or 14 bolt the setup is really strong.

For a toyota mini or Land Cruiser a late 70's Wagoneer front dana 44 is a good choice. About the same width as a FJ60/62 front axle and it has the thicker tube and the larger U joints. I am looking for one to match the BB/HD housing 9" inch that I found in a 77 Early Bronco...A Scout II front end is also good, but they don't any caster built in unless you can find one from a 1980 model and that only has 2 degrees built in.

I like the 44, it's simple to work on, the calipers are like $15.00 and even though the brakes are cheap, they work really well on K10...

-Stumbaugh