|
|
|
rear drive shaft question |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
Mark W. 
Member 
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: rear drive shaft questionPosted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 7:06am |
|
I just received a rear drive shaft I bought from a guy dumping his extra jeep parts on a Face book page. Pretty hard to beat the price $24.00 including shipping. The shaft is in about the same condition as my original is and is the same length etc.
WHERE it differs is in the diameter of the main tube. It is MUCH larger then the CJ-2A one I have. Would this most likely be from a CJ5 or even CJ5 with a V6? The Tube has some pretty deep rust pitting (nothing like that around here so I guess salt damage). Is this a stronger shaft? and would it be worth while to have the local drive shaft shop put a new tube in it and give it a good balance job? Or should I stick with my original and just set this one up as is as a spare? I haven't done anything to either of my shafts yet so I can work on either of the two rears without losing anything. I don't mind putting some money into it if its a better prop shaft. |
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
 |
|
|
Bruce W
Member 
Joined: 29 July 2005 Location: Northeast Colorado Status: Offline Points: 9651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 8:52am |
|
Mark, The CJ5 shafts I have are all the same diameter as the CJ2-A ones, but I don't have any V-6 versions. Early slat-grill MB's (VEMB's?
 ) had what is referred to as a "fat" rear shaft. I think one of those would have an operating length of about an inch longer than the CJ2-A because the T84 trans is shorter than the T90. BW
Edit: Incidentally, I need one of those if it turns out that's what it is.  BWEdited by Bruce W - 18 Apr. 2018 at 8:54am |
|
|
It is NOT a Jeep Willys! It is a Willys jeep.
Happy Trails! Good-bye, Good Luck, and May the Good Lord Take a Likin' to You! We Have Miles to Jeep, Before We Sleep. |
|
|
|
|
SE Kansas 46 CJ-2A
Member
Sponsor Member x 3 Joined: 22 Jan. 2016 Location: S.E. Kansas Status: Offline Points: 3190 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 10:35am |
|
What is the diameter of the driveshaft tubing in question?
|
|
|
46 CJ-2A #64462 "Ol' Red" (bought April 1969)(second owner)(12 V, 11" brakes, M-38 frame, MD Juan tub)
U.S. Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer(ret.) U.S. Army Vietnam veteran and damned proud of it. |
|
|
|
|
Mark W.
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 3:37pm |
|
My original is 1.25" the newly acquired one is 1.75"
|
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
|
|
|
oldtime
Member
Joined: 12 Sep. 2009 Location: Missouri Status: Offline Points: 4184 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 3:40pm |
|
Yes the larger diameter shaft tubes are able to handle more torque.
I suggest you stay with standard diameter propeller shafts, unless you upgrade the engine, increase clutch capacity or transmission is changed lowering drivetrain ratios which increases forces upon the propeller shafts. FYI Dauntless propeller shafts will be a tad longer than the standard 2A propeller shaft assemblies. Besides D-225 V-6 assemblies will have threaded wipers(not crimped) like the military propeller shafts
|
|
|
Currently building my final F-134 powered 3B .
T98-A Rock Crawler using exclusive factory parts and Approved Special Equipment from the Willys Motors era (1953-1963) Zero aftermarket parts |
|
|
|
|
Mark W.
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 3:54pm |
|
Well I am increasing the HP of the engine (how much is yet to be determined but it is still a 134L) and I have installed the 9.25" Clutch as well as installed a Selectable locker in the rear end Still running the 5.38-1 gears and stock T-90/D-18 w/30% OD.
SO the larger tube might be a good idea? |
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
|
|
|
oldtime
Member
Joined: 12 Sep. 2009 Location: Missouri Status: Offline Points: 4184 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 4:07pm |
|
The increased clutch torque will likely have greater impact than any meager HP increase.
And increase of traction via traction device or large tires may have the greatest impact Can't hurt to go with increased tube diameter.
The only possible drawbacks being the miniscule weight increase and the virtually irrelevant tube clearance concerns. |
|
|
Currently building my final F-134 powered 3B .
T98-A Rock Crawler using exclusive factory parts and Approved Special Equipment from the Willys Motors era (1953-1963) Zero aftermarket parts |
|
|
|
|
RICKG
Member
Joined: 08 Jan. 2015 Location: so idaho Status: Offline Points: 1941 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 4:44pm |
|
The M38 rear shaft is 1.75" (after 1-51)
|
|
|
I never met a mule I didn't like!
MC51986 "OD MULE" DOD 01-52 '50 CJ3A "Bucksnort". Keep 'em Rollin' |
|
|
|
|
Mark W.
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 4:47pm |
|
Thanks RICKG looks like that could be what I have.
|
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
|
|
|
RICKG
Member
Joined: 08 Jan. 2015 Location: so idaho Status: Offline Points: 1941 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 4:51pm |
|
It should have the threaded collar, not crimped.
|
|
|
I never met a mule I didn't like!
MC51986 "OD MULE" DOD 01-52 '50 CJ3A "Bucksnort". Keep 'em Rollin' |
|
|
|
|
JeepSaffer
Member
Joined: 26 Sep. 2014 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 1181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 4:56pm |
|
Mark, the weakest link in the drive chain seems to be the axle shafts. 9/10, that's what breaks when folks wheel their rigs really hard, or when they take the interlock pill out of the transfer case and run their rigs in 2 wheel drive low range.
So it's your money and your rig, you can do with it as you please. But in my opinion spending money to strengthen a component that is NOT the weakest link in the drive chain is not a good use of money. The weakest link will still be the part that goes first. 0.02
|
|
|
1948 CJ2A #204853 in South Africa
|
|
|
|
|
SE Kansas 46 CJ-2A
Member
Sponsor Member x 3 Joined: 22 Jan. 2016 Location: S.E. Kansas Status: Offline Points: 3190 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 5:16pm |
|
The 1 1/4" diameter driveshaft is constructed of .095" seamless tubing. The 1 3/4" diameter driveshaft is constructed of .065" tubing.
Both driveshafts will handle everything a L134 engine will produce in torque. The .065" tube will be easier to dent. You won't dent the .095" tube but it will bend easier. Having constructed driveshafts professionally for 18 years, I always preferred the larger diameter driveshaft over the smaller diameter driveshaft because the balance weights are always smaller and easier to spot weld to the tube. A bigger consideration in your case would be the actual condition of the splines, both female and male. If there is a lot of slop in the splines it will be picked up by the driver as a speed dependent vibration. Pick the shaft with the least amount of slop and run that. Use the other shaft as a spare when you are getting the other one repaired. |
|
|
46 CJ-2A #64462 "Ol' Red" (bought April 1969)(second owner)(12 V, 11" brakes, M-38 frame, MD Juan tub)
U.S. Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer(ret.) U.S. Army Vietnam veteran and damned proud of it. |
|
|
|
|
Stev
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 27 July 2016 Location: Cincinnati Status: Offline Points: 2384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 6:27pm |
|
Mark,
If the spline shafts are in good shape (no play) it might be worth re-tubing and balancing. It is amazing how play in the splines of the rear drive shaft can cause vibration and noise when driving. I replaced the one on our 1948 Lefty with a NOS one and it is shocking how nice it drive now.
|
|
|
Stev
1946 CJ2A Trail Jeep (The Saint), 1948 CJ2A Lefty Restored |
|
|
|
|
Mark W.
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 8:22pm |
|
JeepSaffer in my build the weakest link is the Drive shaft in the rear My Rear Axle is a 1971 Dana 44 30 spline flanged with an Eaton E Locker and pristine axle shafts. Professionally built for me I have almost $2200.00 in my rear axle before brakes to make sure I can never damage it. My rear end should easily handle a 400 HP engine and almost 3 times the torque of a 134L even my souped up one. I will be removing the "pill" as Dad removed the one in his transfer case back in the mid 60's. This way could run parades with the Sheriffs Dept Search and Rescue he and Chug were part of in 2wd low so he could easier pace the marching bands etc.. And even with the wild and crazy stuff I did as a kid we never damaged anything in the drive train (dana 41). And dad told us to go anywhere we wanted in 2wd low and when we got stuck to put the hubs in and get the hell home cause he wasn't coming to get us. Which is good since sometimes we were 300 miles+ away!
SE Kansas 46 CJ-2A is there any reason I could not have the Larger tube replaced with a tube that is .090-.095" thick? I called and for what replacing that tube and a balance job would cost upgrading it would be nothing. And yes I am well aware of the condition of the splines being a big deal on a drive shaft. I'll make my decisions once I have everything all cleaned up and see exactly what I have. Before the "new to me" shaft arrived yesterday and I saw it to be of a larger diameter tube none of this even crossed my mind. Edited by Mark W. - 18 Apr. 2018 at 8:26pm |
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
|
|
|
SE Kansas 46 CJ-2A
Member
Sponsor Member x 3 Joined: 22 Jan. 2016 Location: S.E. Kansas Status: Offline Points: 3190 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 18 Apr. 2018 at 10:23pm |
|
|
|
46 CJ-2A #64462 "Ol' Red" (bought April 1969)(second owner)(12 V, 11" brakes, M-38 frame, MD Juan tub)
U.S. Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer(ret.) U.S. Army Vietnam veteran and damned proud of it. |
|
|
|
|
oldtime
Member
Joined: 12 Sep. 2009 Location: Missouri Status: Offline Points: 4184 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Apr. 2018 at 12:21am |
|
Since you have an offset flanged D44 along with some other options I vote "GO ALL OUT' and put thick wall tubes on your 1-3/4" propeller shaft.
|
|
|
Currently building my final F-134 powered 3B .
T98-A Rock Crawler using exclusive factory parts and Approved Special Equipment from the Willys Motors era (1953-1963) Zero aftermarket parts |
|
|
|
|
nofender
Member
Sponsor Member x 3 Joined: 10 May 2016 Location: Maryland Status: Offline Points: 2035 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Apr. 2018 at 10:28am |
Honestly that's what I would do. .120 wall. It very common shaft/tube size. That's what i run on the front of my crawler with 300HP and 39 inch tires. It takes some serious abuse. It would be a nice compliment for the rear you've built. But my perspective is a little skewed on these items. I lean heavily on the modified side of things
|
|
|
46 CJ2a rockcrawler
46 CJ2a - 26819 46 Bantam T3c "4366" 47 Bantam T3C - 11800 68-ish CJ5 |
|
|
|
|
Mark W.
Member
Sponsor Member Joined: 09 Nov. 2014 Location: Silverton, OR Status: Offline Points: 7980 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Apr. 2018 at 4:29pm |
|
Well nofender just about everything on CHUG is modified in some way or the other. Being its a collection of parts from 1946 to 1972 I'm not worried about it being stock. Since there is no "stock" to be.
|
|
|
Chug A Lug
1948 2A Body Customized 1949 3A W/S 1957 CJ5 Frame Modified Late 50's 134L 9.25"clutch T90A D18 (1.25") D44/30 flanged E-Locker D25 5.38 Since 1962 |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Mark W. wrote: