ok we need some real word stuff here does the hi pinion on a rockwell have more leverage because of the hi pinion i think so but i wont to here from peaple that have some besides me maybe with leaf springs. this topic was some heated argument at my shop today so if i'm wrong o well shit happens.and also does a bigger ring gear have more leverage than a smaller ring gear if of the same ratio i,m saying like a steering wheel if you have a smaller wheel its harder to turn than a bigger wheel. :confused:

Yes, 5.13's in a 10.5" 14 bolygive better torque multiplication to the wheels under the same circumstances and conditions than a set of 5.13's in a 7.5" 10 bolt. There's greater mechanical leverage...

yes thats the question daniel

frankie, belive me it has soooo much more leverage it's rediculous. I first put the rockwells in with no traction bars, and they would wrap like nothing i have ever seen. To answer your question, YES they have more leverage because the pinion flange is further away from axle centerline...

oh BS:rolleyes:

On a bigger R & P, the center of the pinion is moved away from the ring gear, reducing the mech. advantage there, so it cancels out.

increase the leverage, but decrease the force, and total output stays the same.

5.13 = 5.13 = 5.13

A is A

Originally posted by reddwarf
oh BS:rolleyes:

On a bigger R & P, the center of the pinion is moved away from the ring gear, reducing the mech. advantage there, so it cancels out.

increase the leverage, but decrease the force, and total output stays the same.

5.13 = 5.13 = 5.13

A is A the ratio is the same yes we know this ,but does the larger ring make more mech. advantage because it's futher away from the center line of the axle.remember the pinion is turning the ring gear .i'm saying from a stand still to a motion state obvioulsy the larger gears and bearings will have more drag at speed.

You're forgetting the pinion gets bigger too!

yes the pinion gets biger to but so does the ring gear .and if this theory you are saying is true then why does the rockwell axle wrap so bad is it becaus the pinion is so far away from the center of the axle(mech advantage) :confused:

all this is only true if the pinion were to stay the same size. But then, it wouldn't be the same ratio, would it?

Ratio means how many times the torque is multiplied. You guys are trying to make it more complicated than it is

Originally posted by reddwarf
all this is only true if the pinion were to stay the same size. But then, it wouldn't be the same ratio, would it?

Ratio means how many times the torque is multiplied. You guys are trying to make it more complicated than it is ok so then why does the ring and pinion get larger for bigger axle? if there is no more mech. advantage then make them all small and over build them with bigger bearings and longer contact paths on the gears .i'm only after the facts and your input is apreciated ;)

Originally posted by elf_cruiser
To answer your question, YES they have more leverage because the pinion flange is further away from axle centerline...

Does this really matter? The distance the pinion is from the axle centerline? Does it give more leverage? I don't think so. But what do I know, I'm a newbie. :D

Originally posted by anthony_harris


Does this really matter? The distance the pinion is from the axle centerline? Does it give more leverage? I don't think so. But what do I know, I'm a newbie. :D yes it matters because you are now putting more force into your links or springs under power ,and think about the weigth of the machine under braking you have now turned say a 5,000 lbs machine into your motor for comparasin and with lots more mechanical advantage you may have some serious issues with links holding up under load so as a manufacter of off road machines yes all forces applied matters to me!but thanks for your very helpfull reply you fawkin newbie ha ha i was a newbie and still may be:flipoff2:

Originally posted by elf_cruiser
frankie, belive me it has soooo much more leverage it's rediculous. I first put the rockwells in with no traction bars, and they would wrap like nothing i have ever seen. To answer your question, YES they have more leverage because the pinion flange is further away from axle centerline... thanks elf i already know this but for the less fortunate i was making a stament and was shot down and i'm here to ask if i'm correct but i alredy know i'm correct because of expearence and hands on noledge but there is power in numbers so thanks and thanks to daniel as well i value his wisdome.;)

Originally posted by frankie finland
yes it matters because you are now putting more force into your links or springs under power ,and think about the weigth of the machine under braking you have now turned say a 5,000 lbs machine into your motor for comparasin and with lots more mechanical advantage you may have some serious issues with links holding up under load so as a manufacter of off road machines yes all forces applied matters to me!but thanks for your very helpfull reply you fawkin newbie ha ha i was a newbie and still may be:flipoff2:

I was not asking if more leverage would matter on your own rigs leaf springs or links or whatever. I was asking if the fact that the axle has a pinion that is that high makes more leverage than an axle with a lower pinion. I don't see how it would. Maybe if you were pushing on the pinion somehow but its not, its a twisting force so the distance from the pinion to axle centerline shouldn't matter, its all rotating around the axle centerline or ring gear. Just trying to understand here.

How do rockwells work, I know they dont have a normal ring and pinion like say a Dana 60 right? The ring gear contacts from the top, not the side. Maybe this is the reason the rockwells have more leverage and bad axle wrap??

Originally posted by anthony_harris


I was not asking if more leverage would matter on your own rigs leaf springs or links or whatever. I was asking if the fact that the axle has a pinion that is that high makes more leverage than an axle with a lower pinion. I don't see how it would. Maybe if you were pushing on the pinion somehow but its not, its a twisting force so the distance from the pinion to axle centerline shouldn't matter, its all rotating around the axle centerline or ring gear. Just trying to understand here.

How do rockwells work, I know they dont have a normal ring and pinion like say a Dana 60 right? The ring gear contacts from the top, not the side. Maybe this is the reason the rockwells have more leverage and bad axle wrap?? you said it
it's rotating around the axle centerline so think about it you have lots of traction and the machine is pend down by say a rock ledge then you have a unmoovable object against a unstopable force then what happens if the tire doesn't wont to moove and drive train doesent stop aplying power then the force is greatly mutiplyde by the more offset pinion and trys to rotate off of the cener line of the axle and when this happens there are greater forces on links and springs that need to be addresst i was using the above for a simple basiss of what hapens under hard throtle and breaking. i hope this helps you understand. ;)

I just wanted to throw in a couple of comments. There seems to be a questions as to whether a larger ring gear matters if the gear ratio is the same. In theory if the gear ratio is the same the torque at the wheels should be the same since torque is generated in the engine and transfered to the wheels through the drive train. If the drive trains are equivalent then the torque should be equivalent. But the larger ringer has less force applied to each tooth where the pinion contacts the ring gear if it is larger. This would lead me to believe that a larger ring gear would lead to a more efficient drive train. This is all just a theoretical argument since I don't have a Rockwell sitting here that I can test, so I may be wrong.

5.13 =5.13

no matter what the size of the ring gear the pinion will brow to be 5.13 times the size therefore 5.13:1 mechanical advantage. ( this is of course excluding and factors of rotating mass drag cooeficients of the bearings, and friction between the teeth.

apparently some of you are having trouble thinking 3 dimentionally. imagine if you will the box fan in my shop. the motor has a 2" pully driving a 10" pully. there is a 5: mechanical advantage for the motor to drive the fan. now if the fan pulley was enlarged to 100" then it would be easier to turn with the same motor pulley, but to maintain the same ratio the motor pulley must now be 20". this will maintain the 5:1 advantage. the3 same is true of your ring and pinion, as the ring gets larger for larger rear ends, the pinion grows too...therefore the mechanical advantage of a 5.13 gear is 5.13:1 reguardless of what size rear end it is in.

Why not jump in on this and add my $0.01 (recession made me loose my other $0.01)


For same input torque from the driveshaft, the torque to the axle shaft is unchanged. However, the larger pinion and larger ring gear will have less force applied to the teeth. This is becuase the increased distance from the d-shaft centerline to the center of the contact pattern on the pinion (~50% larger pinion of Rockwell over a D60 for same ratio). Same idea as adding a cheater bar. Easier to get to same torque when wrenching from farther away.

This smaller force is applied to the ~50% larger ring gear. Also, the larger gears have a larger contact pattern, so even less pressure per tooth. The larger ring gear applies the smaller force a greater distance and thus the torque at the centerline of the axle shaft is the same as with the smaller R&P of the same ratio. Also, since the force applied to the ring gear is smaller, the bearings see less load between the races, and thus even lower pressure over the larger bearing surface.

So yes, the larger R&P is more efficient, if weight and size were not an issue. This is also why you can send more power through a Rockwell than a D60. The internal loads are less for a given torque input, and that fact that the shafts are bigger.

However, to answer your question about axle warp and such, the mounting points of a Rockwell are farther away from the axleshaft centerline than say a D60.

So the same torque applied farther away from the bottom of your leaf pack is going to exert more twisting force on the leafs. So if you had a D60 mounted so that the axle shaft centerline is the same distance from the bottom of the leaf packs, you will see a similar amount of axle wrap.

Or maybe I am just full of shit.... I could never afford a set of Rockwells so it would never matter to me anyway...

Originally posted by Pavemen
Why not jump in on this and add my $0.01 (recession made me loose my other $0.01)

For same input torque from the driveshaft, the torque to the axle shaft is unchanged. However, the larger pinion and larger ring gear will have less force applied to the teeth. This is becuase the increased distance from the d-shaft centerline to the center of the contact pattern on the pinion (~50% larger pinion of Rockwell over a D60 for same ratio). Same idea as adding a cheater bar. Easier to get to same torque when wrenching from farther away.

This smaller force is applied to the ~50% larger ring gear. Also, the larger gears have a larger contact pattern, so even less pressure per tooth. The larger ring gear

applies the smaller force a greater distance and thus the torque at the centerline of the axle shaft is the same as with the smaller R&P of the same ratio. Also, since the force applied to the ring gear is smaller, the bearings see less load between the races, and thus even lower pressure over the larger bearing surface.

So yes, the larger R&P is more efficient, if weight and size were not an issue. This is also why you can send more power through a Rockwell than a D60. The internal loads are less for a given torque input, and that fact that the shafts are bigger.

However, to answer your question about axle warp and such, the mounting points of a Rockwell are farther away from the axleshaft centerline than say a D60.

So the same torque applied farther away from the bottom of your leaf pack is going to exert more twisting force on the leafs. So if you had a D60 mounted so that the axle shaft centerline is the same distance from the bottom of the leaf packs, you will see a similar amount of axle wrap.

Or maybe I am just full of shit.... I could never afford a set of Rockwells so it would never matter to me anyway...

Very well put. I couldn't have said it better so I just quoted it. :flipoff2:

here is a simple fact. i ripped the rockwell completly out of the back of my cruiser this past weekend. broke both shocks and ripped the spring pads off. and bent the rear springs worse than anything i have ever seen. and this is with a doggy 6cyl with a auto. mike

Pavemen hit it on the head......

5.13 = 5.13....without quetion. A samuri w/ 5.13 in stock diff's puts the same torque to the ground as if it had 5 ton rockwell's w/ 5.13's (assuming no :nuke: )

may very well get more axle wrap w/ rockwells because the housings are bigger, so the leaf spring is mounted farther from the axis at which the torque is applied......think rockwells have built in lift blocks.....

5.13 = 5.13

great post paveman.

am i understanding you correctly? it seems that what you are saying is that because the gears are contacting further from their centerlines, there is less contact pressure between the gears (less breakage) however the mechanical advantage of a 5.13 gear is 5.13 no matter what nominal size, is this correct?

Originally posted by heep86
great post paveman.

am i understanding you correctly? it seems that what you are saying is that because the gears are contacting further from their centerlines, there is less contact pressure between the gears (less breakage) however the mechanical advantage of a 5.13 gear is 5.13 no matter what nominal size, is this correct?

Yes that is what I am saying. Torque is torque is torque....

Torque = Force * Distance Applied

so to get the same torque at a larger distance, you need less force.

Where people are ripping the alxes out from under their rigs comes from the mounting distances, not the R&P size.

I think it just boils down to the fact that a rockwell center section weighs over 220 lbs and it is so much higher above the center line of the axle. It is just a leverage thing, not what is inside the center section.

The bigger and heavier an axle gets and the springs stay the same, they are just less able to control the weight being rocked back and forth.

That is why, when I built my suspension, I mounted the link(s) that control axle wrap a lot higher than on a smaller axle, so as to try and overcome some of this leverage effect.

My .02

Originally posted by 350 Samurai
I think it just boils down to the fact that a rockwell center section weighs over 220 lbs and it is so much higher above the center line of the axle. It is just a leverage thing, not what is inside the center section.

The bigger and heavier an axle gets and the springs stay the same, they are just less able to control the weight being rocked back and forth.

That is why, when I built my suspension, I mounted the link(s) that control axle wrap a lot higher than on a smaller axle, so as to try and overcome some of this leverage effect.

My .02

The weight may be an issue, but I do not think it is a big factor. The relative differences in the speed of the center section as it twists vs the suspension, the additional inetria/momentum created by that weight at that speed is negligable.

Originally posted by heep86
5.13 =5.13

no matter what the size of the ring gear the pinion will brow to be 5.13 times the size therefore 5.13:1 mechanical advantage. ( this is of course excluding and factors of rotating mass drag cooeficients of the bearings, and friction between the teeth.

apparently some of you are having trouble thinking 3 dimentionally. imagine if you will the box fan in my shop. the motor has a 2" pully driving a 10" pully. there is a 5: mechanical advantage for the motor to drive the fan. now if the fan pulley was enlarged to 100" then it would be easier to turn with the same motor pulley, but to maintain the same ratio the motor pulley must now be 20". this will maintain the 5:1 advantage. the3 same is true of your ring and pinion, as the ring gets larger for larger rear ends, the pinion grows too...therefore the mechanical advantage of a 5.13 gear is 5.13:1 reguardless of what size rear end it is in. ok mike tomorrow when your late ass shows up for work you need to regear the fan its dam hot in the shop and also sence your already at it reager your mouth to a slower ratio please like maybe 0=0 ratio ha ha:flipoff2:

Originally posted by Pavemen
Why not jump in on this and add my $0.01 (recession made me loose my other $0.01)


For same input torque from the driveshaft, the torque to the axle shaft is unchanged. However, the larger pinion and larger ring gear will have less force applied to the teeth. This is becuase the increased distance from the d-shaft centerline to the center of the contact pattern on the pinion (~50% larger pinion of Rockwell over a D60 for same ratio). Same idea as adding a cheater bar. Easier to get to same torque when wrenching from farther away.

This smaller force is applied to the ~50% larger ring gear. Also, the larger gears have a larger contact pattern, so even less pressure per tooth. The larger ring gear applies the smaller force a greater distance and thus the torque at the centerline of the axle shaft is the same as with the smaller R&P of the same ratio. Also, since the force applied to the ring gear is smaller, the bearings see less load between the races, and thus even lower pressure over the larger bearing surface.

So yes, the larger R&P is more efficient, if weight and size were not an issue. This is also why you can send more power through a Rockwell than a D60. The internal loads are less for a given torque input, and that fact that the shafts are bigger.

However, to answer your question about axle warp and such, the mounting points of a Rockwell are farther away from the axleshaft centerline than say a D60.

So the same torque applied farther away from the bottom of your leaf pack is going to exert more twisting force on the leafs. So if you had a D60 mounted so that the axle shaft centerline is the same distance from the bottom of the leaf packs, you will see a similar amount of axle wrap.

Or maybe I am just full of shit.... I could never afford a set of Rockwells so it would never matter to me anyway... ok so then i like your reply see a i dont always disagree ;)

I just added Pavemen to my list of people who know what the fawk they're talking about !

Frankie was already there - but in the column labelled "spelling" it says "n/a - Finnish!" :flipoff2:

Thank You Paveman for putting a little sense to a bunch of ridiculous posts. I was reading so much bad info I was getting dizzy. First of all we are talking about two different torques:

1. The torque placed on twisting the axle shaft
2. The torque placed on the axle as a whole

Scenario 1 is a function of gear ratio, motor, tire diameter, etc. As someone said, 5.13 is 5.13 whether your ring gear is 10" in dia. or 10 ft. in diameter.

However, in Scenario 2 it does not matter what the gear ratio is. A Rockwell is going to be different then a D60 because of one main difference: The rotational moment placed on the axle assembly is different between a Rockwell and a D60. This is due to the pivot point of a Rockwell and D60 being much different. It is different; because the width of the axle and the locations of the spring mount points (or other traction bars, links, shocks or other crap that’s attached to the axle). This in conjunction with the source of torque (the drive shaft) being in a much different location, causes much greater rotational stresses. A Rockwell having a rotational moment in a much different spot in relation to the pivot point versus a D60 is why the axle twist is so much different. It’s simple math (if you were to draw the scenario in stick figures).

For example: The force required to move a vehicle from 0 to 10mph in 10 seconds is the same weather you have 500hp or 50 hp, 5.13 gears or 3.73 gears. Therefore, given enough traction the torque placed on the entire axle assembly will be the same, which in turn will produce the same amount of axle wrap.

I know in my experience in building 4 link's with 2.5 & 5 Ton Rockwells even with the Model 106's that if you dont have the "beef" in the links and attaching points of the suspension you will have a chance to do it right the 2'nd time cause it will BREAK-TWIST-BEND everything with any GREAT forces applied. I usually make my "link bars" outta 2 in. x .750 wall DOM and they seems to take plenty of abuse. As for the springs turning into ~ useless pieces of metal.....you are asking them to control WAY more force than what they were designed for.....for what is worth that my experience and opinion.....Later guys.... :D :D

Originally posted by Shaker
I know in my experience in building 4 link's with 2.5 & 5 Ton Rockwells even with the Model 106's that if you dont have the "beef" in the links and attaching points of the suspension you will have a chance to do it right the 2'nd time cause it will BREAK-TWIST-BEND everything with any GREAT forces applied. I usually make my "link bars" outta 2 in. x .750 wall DOM and they seems to take plenty of abuse. As for the springs turning into ~ useless pieces of metal.....you are asking them to control WAY more force than what they were designed for.....for what is worth that my experience and opinion.....Later guys.... :D :D amen brother your on time:D p.s. billvesta i only have one finger so spelling is hard i lost the other 9 in the great finland blizerd in 86 you know frosty bittey ha ha :flipoff2:

here is a simple fact. i ripped the rockwell completly out of the back of my cruiser this past weekend. broke both shocks and ripped the spring pads off. and bent the rear springs worse than anything i have ever seen. and this is with a doggy 6cyl with a auto. mike

I can't believe you wheeled it with no traction bar??? The first time i drove mine, i was like, "wow, i need a fawkin' traction arm, NOW!!!"

For same input torque from the driveshaft, the torque to the axle shaft is unchanged. However, the larger pinion and larger ring gear will have less force applied to the teeth. This is becuase the increased distance from the d-shaft centerline to the center of the contact pattern on the pinion (~50% larger pinion of Rockwell over a D60 for same ratio). Same idea as adding a cheater bar. Easier to get to same torque when wrenching from farther away.

OK, hold the fawk on here, and pull that bus over!!!

And all you other people that just bent down to suck this guys wang. Just stop right there!!

All that is true, ASSUMING THAT THE DESIGN OF A ROCKWELL IS THE SAME AS A 60!!!

WHICH IT ISN'T!!!

The pinion and 1st ring gear in a rockwell are only slightly larger than a 60, not "~50%" The ratio there is only 2.5, then there is a helical gearset that drops down to the housing. The carrier fits inside the larger gear in that gearset. Now, I know you are gonna argue about how the smaller gear in the 2nd gearset applies less torque to the larger gear and blah blah blah...

Maybe that's true, and I don't know why - BUT -

ROCKWELLS WRAP WORSE THAN OTHER AXLES GIVEN THE SAME RATIO!!!!

that's a fact, i can't explain it, but it's true...

I dont know if any one has said this yet BUT, yes a rockwell will have more leverage than a standard axle (9" 60 etc..) no mater what the gear ratio. this is because a rockwell use's spur gears and bevel gears to get the reduction. If the tires are held still the drive gear will try to walk around the driven gear but being that they use spur gears you dont loose the mechanical advantage like you do with sprial gears

Originally posted by TR
I dont know if any one has said this yet BUT, yes a rockwell will have more leverage than a standard axle (9" 60 etc..) no mater what the gear ratio. this is because a rockwell use's spur gears and bevel gears to get the reduction. If the tires are held still the drive gear will try to walk around the driven gear but being that they use spur gears you dont loose the mechanical advantage like you do with sprial gears

That is what I was trying to get at, rockwells do not have a normal R&P. :flipoff2:

Originally posted by anthony_harris


That is what I was trying to get at, rockwells do not have a normal R&P. :flipoff2: you fawkin newbie:flipoff2:

And all you other people that just bent down to suck this guys wang. Just stop right there!!

Hold on there Mr Potty mouth :flipoff2:

The point I was agreeing with was the argument dispelling the ridiculous assertation that, for 2 equivalent R&P ratios, the "larger" one would provide more "mechanical advantage".

Now, you could very well critisize that that wasn't what Frankie was asking, nor does it mean jack in regards to Rockwells being different from 60's. But you missed that boat...so :flipoff2:

Originally posted by elf_cruiser


OK, hold the fawk on here, and pull that bus over!!!

And all you other people that just bent down to suck this guys wang. Just stop right there!!

But it sure did feel good while they were doin' it :flipoff2:

All that is true, ASSUMING THAT THE DESIGN OF A ROCKWELL IS THE SAME AS A 60!!!

My basic assumption was more of a general larger R&P vs small R&P scenario simply using the 2 axles previously mentioned as reference. So I was not clear on that, sorry.

WHICH IT ISN'T!!!
The pinion and 1st ring gear in a rockwell are only slightly larger than a 60, not "~50%" The ratio there is only 2.5, then there is a helical gearset that drops down to the housing. The carrier fits inside the larger gear in that gearset. Now, I know you are gonna argue about how the smaller gear in the 2nd gearset applies less torque to the larger gear and blah blah blah...

Thanks for clarifying... I do not actually know how the Rockwell works, but you can apply the same principles amongst all the gears in the set and come to the same overall conclusion.

Maybe that's true, and I don't know why - BUT -

ROCKWELLS WRAP WORSE THAN OTHER AXLES GIVEN THE SAME RATIO!!!!

that's a fact, i can't explain it, but it's true...
If someone can point me to an exploded diagram of the Rockwell showing the relation of the gears, then I may be able to explain more.

i can describe it,

from the yoke on the pinion turns a bevel gear which meshes with another bevel gear that rides on a metal shaft. also on that metal shaft is a spur gear which turns the diff which also has a spur gear on it. understand?

Originally posted by TR
understand?

Not one bit... got a pic?

this any better?

man when you guys or gals get threw chewing on this post i have another post with some more sic stuff (evil laf) ha ha ha ha he :D

Originally posted by elf_cruiser


OK, hold the fawk on here, and pull that bus over!!!

And all you other people that just bent down to suck this guys wang. Just stop right there!!


Ain't no wang-sucking. Just an honest stress analysis.

Originally posted by elf_cruiser

All that is true,

Period. Full stop. LONG PAUSE.

Originally posted by elf_cruiser

ASSUMING THAT THE DESIGN OF A ROCKWELL IS THE SAME AS A 60!!!

WHICH IT ISN'T!!!


Certainly there are differences. But let's look carefully at what they are and the forces involved before we start accusing people of "wang-sucking" OK?

Originally posted by elf_cruiser


The pinion and 1st ring gear in a rockwell are only slightly larger than a 60, not "~50%" The ratio there is only 2.5, then there is a helical gearset that drops down to the housing. The carrier fits inside the larger gear in that gearset. Now, I know you are gonna argue about how the smaller gear in the 2nd gearset applies less torque to the larger gear and blah blah blah...

Maybe that's true, and I don't know why - BUT -

ROCKWELLS WRAP WORSE THAN OTHER AXLES GIVEN THE SAME RATIO!!!!

that's a fact, i can't explain it, but it's true...

I don't think that anyone is trying to argue that Rockwells don't wrap worse than other axles. Now some have argued that the size of the gears has nothing to do with the issue of wrap - and I agree completely. By exactly the same logic, NEITHER DOES THE GEAR DESIGN. Let's look carefully at wrap for a moment to help clarify.

Imagine an axle - any axle. Stationary, for simplicity. You apply a torque to the driveshaft, which is multiplied by the gearset and applied to the axleshafts. The torque applied to the axleshafts is balanced by an equal and opposite torque applied to the housing. This must be true or we've violated some basic prinicples of physics that have been known for centuries. Now the torque on the housing is transferred to the chassis - let's use leaf springs because that seems to be the direction of this thread. How does the axle housing transfer the force to the springs? With a twisting moment. Thus we multiply the force on the axle housing by the length of the lever arm - this is the distance between the axleshaft centerline and the top plane of the spring pack. Because Rockwells are bigger than, say the D60 cited earlier, this distance is much longer. By a factor of 3 or 4 perhaps? Someone get me a real number here. Now don't forget that most people swapping in Rockwells aren't replacing an axle that already has 6.72 gears, so add another factor just for the change in R&P ratio (say 1.5 just to pick a number). Now by looking EXCLUSIVELY at the distance between the axleshaft centerline and the top of the spring pack (with a small factor for the usual ratio change when these axles are swapped in) we can predict a Rockwell to wrap worse than another smaller axle BY A FACTOR OF FIVE. Notice that we have not addressed the size or design of the gears because it simply does not matter. Do you expect your leaf springs (or links or whatever) to take FIVE TIMES the torque without winding up, when I bet they did it some before?

The distance between the top of the spring pack and the axleshaft centerline is the controlling factor in leaf-spring axle wrap.

What a fawking thread... Paveman has answered the entire axle wrap question and still it goes on.

Center of axle up to pinion GO MEASURE YOUR AXLES the Rockwell is TALLER... this means is has a longer lever and if anybody here remembers leverage????? longer it is the more ya got... Hence more leverage on the damn spring. More wrap etc etc etc etc.. the torque or gear ratio, weight,etc have no input. All in all if the 60 and the Rockwell were built the same internally, but the external dimension were still the same the Rockwell would still have greater axle wrap.

Originally posted by ItsaCJ6
Center of axle up to pinion...

Oh bullshit. You obviously can't read OR think. And yes, Pavemen did answer the question corretly, except that it isn't the bottom of the spring pack it's the top - the bottom leaves act like blocks. The pinion has absolutely no role in balancing the torque on the axle housing; this is what the springs do. Go put 8" blocks on a 60 and you'll see as much wrap as a Rockwell.

Originally posted by TR
this any better?

Oh, so that is how they work.... Cool. But since it appears that the spur gear/shaft is parallel to the axle shaft, nothing has changed in my previous explanation.

I will assume that the setup is slightly different since in your drawing the ring is turning the wrong direction given the standard pinion rotation direction.

The axle wrap may not be as bad as you guys think though. It is most likely more of an issue with wrap AND twist (wanting to lift the right rear/front left, just like any axle) but since the pinion is offset from the ring the twisting forces induced by the tire traction (same forces that lift the front left of any car when you romp on it) is amplified and adds additional force that many may not consider.

Originally posted by Lloyd


Oh bullshit. You obviously can't read OR think. And yes, Pavemen did answer the question corretly, except that it isn't the bottom of the spring pack it's the top - the bottom leaves act like blocks. The pinion has absolutely no role in balancing the torque on the axle housing; this is what the springs do. Go put 8" blocks on a 60 and you'll see as much wrap as a Rockwell.

Yes, technically it is the top of the pack, but since we were assuming the same vehicle with jsut different axles, the bottom of the pack will work since it remains constant.

Thanks for all the support guys and am glad I was finally able to contribute something other than a :flipoff2:

haha

Absolutely right. It's just easier to use the top explicitly to get a rectal estimate of the torque multiplication factor since you don't have to add/subtract spring pack thickness to get the ratio... and it's easier to use the bottom of the pack to compare the difference in the axles.

A few people here need to take a physics class. But that wont happen. So throw a bunch of steel at the problem and dont worry about good design practice, like most peole here do.

Oh yea, well My Dad is older then your Dad

Originally posted by frankie finland
you fawkin newbie:flipoff2:

The ratio change is a big hitter. Like Lloyd mentioned above, we've been talking about 5.13's, but all the rockwells I've heard of have been 6.72's. That lower gear makes for more torque applied to the suspension.

And often, the axles that went away had smaller tires on them than the rockwells that got installed, too. That's another source of increased wrap.

Gear design and size has nothing to do with wrap. It only affects how long the system will endure the torque load.

Originally posted by BillaVista
I just added Pavemen to my list of people who know what the fawk they're talking about !


He said the same thing I did, he apparently just has a degree in elementary education :flipoff2:

Originally posted by Pavemen
....and am glad I was finally able to contribute something other than a :flipoff2:


Where would we be without those? :flipoff2:

He said the same thing I did, he apparently just has a degree in elementary education

I was waitin' for you to say that :)

You're right , he did.

But I like it because it is appeals to me in 2 ways - It is written in a manner that is thorough, and yet simple enough that I can understand it, and yet still with enough style/ complexity that it makes me feel clever for being able to understand it as I read it.

Your explanaation was so clear and simple and to the point it didn;t make me feel good at all about myself as I read it !:rolleyes:

:flipoff2: to me

Originally posted by Lloyd


Oh bullshit. You obviously can't read OR think. And yes, Pavemen did answer the question corretly, except that it isn't the bottom of the spring pack it's the top - the bottom leaves act like blocks. The pinion has absolutely no role in balancing the torque on the axle housing; this is what the springs do. Go put 8" blocks on a 60 and you'll see as much wrap as a Rockwell.

Ok Roid forget the springs... top, bottom, inside, where ever......If you measure the distance from the center of the rotation to the end of the lever (this being the highest point dipshit) the longer the lever the more leverage......This is the increase in applied leverage and is what is causing more torque to be applied to the springs through greater leverage.

Now the springs react differently in their reliative locations. the reaction of the applied torque will be different depending on where the springs are mounted (DUHHH) so you can now fawk off.

I am offly mouth after 4 beers...

i love it ha ha:D just wate till my next brain cramping post it will be even better boys and girls :flipoff2:i will give you a hent stacking ##### but dont go by number of # cause i cant fawkin spell:flipoff2: i gota go its time for my prozack

Ok Roid forget the springs... top, bottom, inside, where ever......If you measure the distance from the center of the rotation to the end of the lever (this being the highest point dipshit) the longer the lever the more leverage......


but where is the axis of rotation for a rockwell, because of the double gear redution there are 2 axis, does a rockwell rotate about the axle shaft or the smaller ring gear on the top?

the axis of the axle flange (tire contact) there is no oposing force without the tire in contact with the ground