 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Jeep / January 2006'76 CJ-7 Axle Conversion??!!
Okay, first things first: Don't kill me for asking:) Now... I want to do an axle conversion and need some advice on what to swap (Dana 30 frt/AMC 20 Rr, 11" drums). I've done a lot of searching and scrounging but can't find the right axles. A friend in a tranny shop recommends 10/12 bolt Chevy's. Another guy want $800 for Dana 44's from a 79 Cherokee. Another guy who customs Jeeps wants to unload a 14 bolt rear and 44 front for $600 (and $1500 in labor). I've read everything from a 8.8 Ford rear to how Scout axles have unacceptable drawbacks (for me at least). I either can't find the silver bullet website or am overwhelmed with a million "Hey! I did this and don't like this about it" hits. Can you guys give me some solid advice on axle swaps? I don't mind if it's wide since that'll help handling. Don't care if it's spring over or under either since I live in the flatlands. I'd really like better braking, though. I just don't want to go straight to a machinist off the bat. P.S. tire size and gearing are a thought as well since I have a NV4500; granny 1st is unuseably low right now and wiiiide gear ratio makes it drive like a dump truck:) Regards, Jim Well, a lot depends on what you want to do. 1. How deep are your pockets, and how long are your arms? 2. What type of terrain do you intend to conquer? 3. Do you want lockers? 4. What size tires do you want to run? 5. What engine do you have? 6. What is your overall goal for this Jeep? I ran my 89 Wrangler 2.5L on 33's with stock axles (Dana 30, Dana 35) without any axle problems. Generally stock axles are OK up to 33" tires w/o lockers. I've heard of people daring for 34's and 35's, but I probably wouldn't go that far. Lock it up and wave goodbye. Unless you want to lift your Jeep, keep it Spring-under. If you go spring-over, you will get quite a bit of lift, on average about 6". If you do want to lift it, during the axle swap is the time. Anyhow, assuming you want lockers and/or tires above 33", any of the axles you mentioned will be just fine, I would pick the one You can get the best deal on. Remember that a full-size truck's axle will need to be narrowed to fit under your Jeep properly, it'll look silly and probably be illegal someway, somehow if you don't have it narrowed. I suppose if you really wanted to pick one rear that would be the best bang for the buck, it would be an 8.8" rear from a 96 and up Ford Explorer and keep the Dana 30 front. The 8.8 is pretty close to the same width as your front axle, has larger, stronger tubes and axle shafts, than your AMC 20 and has factory rear disc brakes. I'm not sure if your CJ has the wide-track or narrow-track axles, but someone who knows will likely chime in. HTH. Carl > Okay, first things first: Don't kill me for asking:) > Now... I want to do an axle conversion and need some advice on what to [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Regards, > Jim 1 Pockets not very deep at the moment but time heals all wounds. Arms are kinda lanky but not sure what that has to do with axles:) 2 Lookin' for as capable as I can get but don't do anything radical; mostly inch-worm, creepy-crawly kinda stuff and camping. 3 Lockers are better but could live with open diffs til can upgrade later. 4 Got 33's for the past many years. Could go bigger to keep dimensions right. Not interested in size, though, just ability. 5 Just swapped in a Chevrolet 350 w/TPI, headers, etc. It's backed up with a NV4500 & Dana 300. Plenty of torque and power. Gonna upgrade it again and the numbers will go up (only 'cause I haven't rebuilt yet). 6 Outstanding question. I've owned it for somewhere around 13 years now and would never part with it. It's a sentimental hobby car since my son used to love beating it with a hammer as a toddler (lost him shortly thereafter:( All I can tell people is, "It's a Jeep thing. You wouldn't understand." Anyway, it's not meant to be a bogger, rock-crawler or pit-beater. It's a quest for the best all around 4WD I can build based on design; 44" tires and 10' tall isn't cool unless it's optimum (33" tires were it due to handling and brakes). Basically looking for the best starting alternative to look for and have all the time in the world to upgrade/modify from there. I have two little girls to beat on it with a wrench now:) Best Regards, Jim > Well, a lot depends on what you want to do. > 1. How deep are your pockets, and how long are your arms? [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] >> Regards, >> Jim I would say get an 8.8" rear w/disc brakes and lock it up. It should come with 3.55, 3.73, or 4.10 gears.The stock D30 will be fine unlocked, and with a locker in the back, you'll do really well. I think that setup with 4.10 or 4.56 gears would be optimal. Usually 33's couple with 4.56's, but withthe 350 and your transmission I don't know. What gears do you have now? Carl >1 Pockets not very deep at the moment but time heals all wounds. Arms are >kinda lanky but not sure what that has to do with axles:) [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] >>> Regards, >>> Jim Whoof! I've got 4.10's in the rear (LockRite Locker and one-pc forged axles). When you combine the 4.10 with the 5.61 granny 1st, the tranny's basically a 4 speed where I use second as first and so on and the 5th overdrive gear's a fairly low fourth. Jim >I would say get an 8.8" rear w/disc brakes and lock it up. It should come >with 3.55, 3.73, or 4.10 gears.The stock D30 will be fine unlocked, and [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> Best Regards, >> Jim It's not often that a Jeeper wants to re-gear to a numerically lower (higher) ratio, but I think you can gear the D30 to 3.73, which is what (I think) a lot of 8.8's have. You can also look for an XJ dana 44, which should have the 3.73's and if the axle shaft's break, the wheels will stay on. Out of curiousity, why do you need to upgrade the AMC 20? I assume is an issue of reliability / breakage? Carl > Whoof! I've got 4.10's in the rear (LockRite Locker and one-pc forged > axles). When you combine the 4.10 with the 5.61 granny 1st, the tranny's [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >>> Best Regards, >>> Jim Braking and handling are pretty much the desired effect (wider w/better brakes). The AMC20's built stout and I should be happy with as much as I've put into it. Still, I'm not and the 4.10's are just too much. The front Dana30's are shot enough to be swapped and that's where it all started. If I went to larger tires, I'd have to lift more than the current 4" and the body roll's a bit much for a daily driver as it is. Jim > It's not often that a Jeeper wants to re-gear to a numerically lower > (higher) ratio, but I think you can gear the D30 to 3.73, which is what (I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Carl I guess it's back to the 8.8 rear then, with factory disc brakes. That will make a big difference in braking. For a wider stance, get less backspacing. Check out http://photobucket.com/albums/d96/carlsaiyed/ . Some pics of my old wrangler are on there. The backspacing I had was 3.25", and it was VERY stable on and off road. Also, the since the tires stick out, they protect the body, throw lots of mud, and look pretty cool. Is something wrong with your D30? Carl > Braking and handling are pretty much the desired effect (wider w/better > brakes). The AMC20's built stout and I should be happy with as much as [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >> Carl Thanks to all for some good thoughts. I've considered the 9" but would still like to find discs (think they came on a Lincoln for a short while?) Two things wrong with the D30 up front: 1) needs complete overhaul and gears from center all the way to locking hubs. 2) 11" drum brakes suck. If my drums get wet, they're Absolutely, Utterly Worthless for several miles til they dry out and that's why I want discs so bad. Can't remember exactly what the thing was with Scout axles; whether it was finding parts or a PITA mod recount. Don't know what it is about the panhandle here in FL but I can't hardly find squat. There's two tiny junkyards in my area and they're about a 1/4 acre each (haul cars and sell scrap metal). As for wheel bolt patterns, I'd just get whatever rim I could find for the axle. Not sure but it looks as if a couple of front axles have interchangeable hubs (Dana44?) that I could ~simply~ swap to a matching bolt pattern for the rear. Not sure about the width but I might be able to get a D44 front with discs from a '79 Cherokee. The guy says he has the matching D44 rear from the same Jeep and wants $800 for the set (ridiculous expensive?). Those axles have a 6 x 4.5" bolt pattern, though. I'm just totally confused. 1 says "we always use GM 14 bolt's in our Jeeps", 2 says "GM 10 bolt/12 bolt is the only way to go" and 3rd says "buy my '79 Cherokee axles for $$$". >I guess it's back to the 8.8 rear then, with factory disc brakes. That will >make a big difference in braking. For a wider stance, get less backspacing. I would say they are all good. I would buy the set that most closely matched the width of my Jeep, thereby requiring the least amount of mods. Make sure you can get discs all the way around, and, of course, matching gearsets. Carl > Thanks to all for some good thoughts. I've considered the 9" but would > still like to find discs (think they came on a Lincoln for a short while?) [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>will make a big difference in braking. For a wider stance, get less >>backspacing. 8.8" comes with 5 on 4.5" bolt pattern if I am not mistaken, he currently has 5 on 5.5. So it will have to be swapped / redrilled if you want to have matching rims and carry only one spare tire. What is the problem with doing the D44 scout axles? The rear is pretty much a direct bolt in, you can do that now and be done with a phase 1. I see rear scout axles all the time local for $100 - $150. The front swap is pretty easy too, you just need to adjust the caster on them. Fronts go for $200ish, add some labor for the adjustment, and you are out of this pretty cheap. >I would say get an 8.8" rear w/disc brakes and lock it up. It should come >with 3.55, 3.73, or 4.10 gears.The stock D30 will be fine unlocked, and [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] >>>> Regards, >>>> Jim I didn't see you mention Ford 9", once installed it has the lowest priced, easiest to install, widest range of parts, daughter got one for her YJ from a 69 ford thunderbird, think it was 69, only 3" wider so didn't do any cutting, best thing about it is that if going to a machanic for gear swaps, lockers etc. you just pull 3rd member and take it to him. I'd hate to tell you that my daughter got her 9" from Pick Your Part in Calgary Alberta two years ago, boxing day sale, all front or rear ends $29.00, all trannys $39.00, all engines $49.00, only thing was you had to pull it yourself, no gas or electric tools alowed, and it was minus 22 C, that's about minus 3 F. >1 Pockets not very deep at the moment but time heals all wounds. Arms are >kinda lanky but not sure what that has to do with axles:) [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] >>> Regards, >>> Jim The Javelin ran over four hundred horsepower in front of your axle: http://www.lhmopars.com/MOPAR_Ads/1969_AMC_Javelin_ad.html God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > Okay, first things first: Don't kill me for asking:) > Now... I want to do an axle conversion and need some advice on what to [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Regards, > Jim I see a lot of 'Optionals'... > The Javelin ran over four hundred horsepower in front of your axle: > http://www.lhmopars.com/MOPAR_Ads/1969_AMC_Javelin_ad.html [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> Regards, >> Jim Who would have thought after that, that the 360 would be putting out 0.41 hp per ci by 1991, about the same as manufacturers were managing in the early 1930's. Dave > The Javelin ran over four hundred horsepower in front of your axle: > http://www.lhmopars.com/MOPAR_Ads/1969_AMC_Javelin_ad.html [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Regards, > > Jim These push rod engines are starting to sneak back in here. God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > Who would have thought after that, that the 360 would be putting out 0.41 hp > per ci by 1991, about the same as manufacturers were managing in the early > 1930's. > > Dave |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.