I'm looking to save my quarters now but would like to get some information about the NP205 and Atlas II.

One or the other will be in use behind a NP203 and a BUNCH of torque(~400ft/lbs from the engine and a TH400)

My questions are in respect to the physical characteristics of each tcase(I know the Atlas II costs an arm and a leg, and I know I'm :rainbow: for considering the NP205 :rolleyes: )

Specifically, I was looking for the following:

weight
face to rear flange length
face to front flange length
front output centerline to rear output centerline distance


Should I be concerned with the Atlas II behind a bunch of power? Fortunately, I'm not a heavy throttle user:p

Thanks in advance for any information that is provided,
John

The weak spot should be the NP203 output shaft...Not the 205 or Atlas.

The 205 and Atlas will survive much longer and should handle the torque you've listed. Dump the NP203 and go with a Klune and 205. This will handle tons of torgue. Don't have length/spec answers...sorry.

:rasta:

Originally posted by NOTPRETTY
The weak spot should be the NP203 output shaft...Not the 205 or Atlas.

The 205 and Atlas will survive much longer and should handle the torque you've listed. Dump the NP203 and go with a Klune and 205. This will handle tons of torgue. Don't have length/spec answers...sorry.

:rasta:

Scratches head... I don't see how the output shaft on the gear reduction portion of an NP203 would be considered the weak spot. Especially if it is going to be a 32 spline type:p

If anything would be considered weak, it would be the 10 spline front out on the NP205 if I got one of that variety.

I've heard mixed reviews on the Klune box so I'm a bit leary of getting one.

Not exactly sure why you'd want to run a 203 in front of an Atlas. An atlas with a TH400 would be plenty low enough....

Originally posted by Lance
Not exactly sure why you'd want to run a 203 in front of an Atlas. An atlas with a TH400 would be plenty low enough....

Oohhhh... I think the red star I purchased got the head guy to answer:D If I would have known that, I would have saved my quarters sooner :D

On why I would consider an atlas after an 203 behind a TH400... by the time I get around to putting an atlas or 205, I'll already have the 203 installed with crossmembers and such.... basically I'm being a lazy bastard:p Plus, when all is said and done on the rig, it should be "semi" show quality.... meaning: it will be unique and a clean install... not the 50k items of chrome :flipoff2: But, that being said, I'm still considering the NP205 with 3.x gearset... it should be a wash as far as price goes once everything is done.

And the reason I don't do the 205(or atlas) imediately is because I don't have the 205(32 spline input style) or the cash to spring on the ORD adapter.... but I have the $250ish to adapt the 203 to an fJ40 tcase for some light usage(lets just say I have all but the spud shaft right now) :p I also have a future use for the NP203 to FJ40 adapter so I don't consider the $250 a complete waste of money :D

And for the record, NO, the FJ40 tcase is not a permanent or serious solution... just enough for me to limp around a bit:D I wouldn't be suprised that if I was seriously getting it, the tcase would go:nuke:

Anyone have some input of measurements? Please?

notpretty - you say you would go for the 205 + the Klune-V crawl box, because they are strong.

i know that the 205 is plenty strong, but i have my doubts about the Klune-v's ability to stand the same stress.

i keep in my garage a brand new Klune-v 2.72:1(Goliath).
it is heavy duty with 32 splines in and out, and still i'm affraid to put it in the "frog".

any of you have any experience with the Goliath between a
TH-400 and an NP-205 with 44"s????

i would be really interested in getting a first hand experienced opinion about it.

Not quite the same but I have a Klune "David" model between a 727 and 205 with 38's. My rig weighs 5000 lbs with a 392 V8. It's held up fine for about 3 yrs now.:)

I'm sure you've seen the KluneV website. The goliath is fully warranteed and is built for high HP applications...even big blocks.

I don't have the spec's on it, but I have a couple Early Bronco buddies (Not much EB left though) using the goliath and the 205 behind 351W's juiced up. (I think POR member Glenn Bonner is running the same set up but 302...not sure though.) Rigs weigh 4-5 grand. No they aren't running 44's, but 39.5...yes. Seen no issue to date. One is even using an NP435 with this set up. Crazy low and he has a heavy foot. He does break, but the Klune/205 doesn't bust.

Why do you feel the golaith is a concern? What have you heard I haven't. Fact is I am considering one myself. Atlas is very nice too. In either case, you'll probably break something else first.

Klune-V stands behind its product with a full two-year warranty: If it breaks, we'll fix it or replace it! [

Take a look...

www.klunev.com/pricing_3.htm (http://www.klunev.com/pricing_3.htm)

Here is my reason to go with the 205: the 203 low, Gen II doubbler, and 205 will be the exact same length as a stock 203 for the rear driveshaft, so only your front driveshaft will have to be modified when you put in the 205. Other than gearing, from what i know, the 32 spline 205 and 32 spline atlas are both about equal in stength. Just depends on which way you want to go.

Garrett

PS. in case you decide to keep the 203 for awhile longer, you can also put the 3.0:1 gear set in that, then keep the stock in the 205..

Garrett

I am currently in the process of building a Klune type planetary box to hook to a full 32 spline 205. This will be behind a 454 and sm-420 in my 5000lb+ Cruiser. This setup seems logcal to me, because I actually end up with three low ranges (1.96, 2.72, 5.XX), the planetaries are compact and can handle a serious amount of torque, and the 205 should be bomb-proof. As for the Klune itself, they are quite strong and should handle whatever you throw at them.

As for the 205 vs. Atlas dimensions:
weight-Atlas is about 110lbs, 205 140 IIRC
offsets-Atlas is 8.5", 205 is 10.5"

the lengths are pretty similar between the two.

here is a few reasons to not go with a 203/205 doubler...

NP-205 - 124 lbs
NP-203 Range Box - 81 lbs
WMS Dual T-case adapter - 25 lbs
TH-350 to NP-203 Adapter - 12 lbs
Total for Dual Transfer Cases w/o shifters - 242 lbs
All weights dry

from this page (http://www.alaskaoffroad.com/tech_2.htm)

Originally posted by NOTPRETTY
Take a look...

www.klunev.com/pricing_3.htm (http://www.klunev.com/pricing_3.htm)

well, thanks for the link and thus for the reason why the Klune-V
WILL NOT hold in the "frog":-

it says in that link that the Goliath can hold 1,350 ft/lb of input torque. my big block produces at least 500ft/lb;
the TH-400 multiplies it by 2.48 and the t/c by another 2(at least).

therefore:-
500x2.48x2=2480 ft/lb, not to mention 44"s, 2.5 ton rockwells and a 6,400 lb of the frog's weight!!!

anyone interested in buying the Goliath?!?!?!?!?
i'll give it for a good price:bounce2:

Originally posted by the frog


well, thanks for the link and thus for the reason why the Klune-V
WILL NOT hold in the "frog":-

it says in that link that the Goliath can hold 1,350 ft/lb of input torque. my big block produces at least 500ft/lb;
the TH-400 multiplies it by 2.48 and the t/c by another 2(at least).

therefore:-
500x2.48x2=2480 ft/lb, not to mention 44"s, 2.5 ton rockwells and a 6,400 lb of the frog's weight!!!

anyone interested in buying the Goliath?!?!?!?!?
i'll give it for a good price:bounce2:

The klune setup goes the tranny/klune/tcase not tranny/tcase/klune. :flipoff2: So if you have 500 ft lbs x 2 from the tranny you should be fine. And thats for low range they are staying it can handle 4,000 lbs in high :eek: Here is a quote

" Rated at 1300 ft/lbs. torque input, 3510 ft/lbs. out in low range

Rated in excess of 4000 ft/lbs. torque in high range "


Does anybody know anyone that has broken a Klune? They seem pretty confident.

"At the time of this writing, we have been building Extreme Underdrive units for three years. That's lots of rock-miles. And to date, we have never had a reported failure. And who do you think they would call first? If you know anybody with a broken Klune-V Extreme Underdrive, we have a replacement waiting for him."

Originally posted by bgreen
here is a few reasons to not go with a 203/205 doubler...

NP-205 - 124 lbs
NP-203 Range Box - 81 lbs
WMS Dual T-case adapter - 25 lbs
TH-350 to NP-203 Adapter - 12 lbs
Total for Dual Transfer Cases w/o shifters - 242 lbs
All weights dry

from this page (http://www.alaskaoffroad.com/tech_2.htm)

If I used a Klune, it is only 40lbs so I'd save 40lbs... not much of a savings... and I'd be adding in over 4 inches of adapter :(

The atlas is only 10lbs lighter than the NP205. So the gearing is the only gain there. I haven't looked into the strengt of one yet.

As stated somewhere in this thread, I would definately be keeping the NP203 mainly because I'll have some significant material and effort put into a crossmember and skidplate from the NP203 forward(gotta protect the auto:D )

On the Klune strength issue, David would be dead in my application. At the transmission, I'd be at about 1984 ft-lbs = 400ft-lbs[engine] * 2.48[TH400] * 2[torque converter] And my engine torque estimate is based on a stock rebuild of my engine. The 1984 ft-lbs is also WAY over the Goliath rating of 1300 ft-lbs. Even if I was within the 1300ft-lbs by 10%, I'd be a little leary of it.

Originally posted by Erik D_lux


The klune setup goes the tranny/klune/tcase not tranny/tcase/klune. :flipoff2: So if you have 500 ft lbs x 2 from the tranny you should be fine.

oh no, you got it wrong, Erik D_lux.
i know how the setup goes and this is why i said what i said:-
500(engine torque output)x 2.48(tranny's 1st gear)x 2(multiplication factor of the torque converter)=2,480 ft/lb.
so, the input torque to the Goliath would be almost
twice it's rating.

regarding the David, you do'nt have to go too far to find someone who got a David broken:D (that's me!):D - i broke one when i had the frog running 39.5" boggers, and yes, Klune-V were just fantastic = they replaced the David with a heavy duty Goliath FREE OF CHARGE AND EVEN PAID FOR THE DELIVERY OVERSEAS!!
HATS OFF FOR THEM:)
this is why, by the way, i got the heavy duty Goliath in my garage......

anyone care to buy it??;) :)

I am running the 203 in front of the Atlas II with an ORD adapter and I have to tell you that it is a sweet setup. I would not worry about the atlas II. Just make sure that you get the fully 32 spline option. I havn't driven it yet but the install was a breeze. I would have gone with a Klune but theses just something I dont like about having planetaries in my truck. I do think that the goliath is planty strong however. I didnt go with the 203 and the atlas for the compounded gearing. Instead I went with it for a mud and sand ratio and a rock ratio. The4 compounded gearing is just a fun side effect and I had the room in the drive train due to an extended wheelbase and rockwells. Check out my site in my sig and look under project PITA if you want to see some pics of the doubler and the 203 installed more or less. I still dont have a new crossmember made yet but you will get the idea.

205 is about 12.5 from front face to yoke center. This depends on the yoke type but is a good approx. number. Weight is usually about 135# on a 205.
Torque capacity is higher on the 205 but I only have fuzzy numbers from Advance and it seems like it was in the neighborhood of 15-20% higher than the atlas.
Shaft centerline on both is similar I think. 205 is about 9.5"
A 203 gearbox with our kit installed weighs just under 100#. 95# or so seems to ring a bell but I don't remember exactly.

The dual case setup does add weight and some complexity but the gear selection is nice to have.

If the Klune and Atlas are approximately equal in strength and you have concluded that they are not strong enough...

What are your other options? Anyone?

:rasta:

Originally posted by NOTPRETTY
If the Klune and Atlas are approximately equal in strength and you have concluded that they are not strong enough...

What are your other options? Anyone?



203/205 doubler, or - if it was on the market -
a dual 205 combo;)