J-L, with all due respect, I think there's a great deal to be said for
carrying spares at a fraction of the cost of spending a lot of money trying to
outsmart engineers in a quest for something that's "unbreakable". Breakage
might suck, but as axles go, that's why we have full floaters from the factory,
and that's why it only takes about 1/2 hour (if that) in unskilled hands to
switch out the rears, and maybe an hour on the front depending on what let go.
The guys you see over on POR in ANY make/model have yet to attain the
"unbreakable axle". There are guys on 44's breaking Rockwell 2.5ton units. I
guess my question is, where does it end?
And "weak and inadequate" is some misnomer for abused and mis-applied. I had
thought that the 1-ton CV's were designed for up to 9x16 tires - I don't
believe that the engineers would have really short-changed the tolerances for
heavy duty usage on a factory spec'd tire size. Further more, the suffix A
CV's aren't that much different than the one-tons, and I'm eagerly waiting to
see how the long-field treatment is going to work for keeping those puppies
together and from breaking other parts in the front-end if they let go.
Considering that your rig is a a DD used also for trailing, and maybe some
moderate stuff in the rocks - I think a 24 spline ARB with jack-mac axles on
1-ton CV's would be just fine, and the parts are readily available.
This crap about D60's being so cheap and abundant is a myth. I've tried to dig
a couple up when I had my Scout, and spoke to dozens of scout, toyota, and jeep
wheelers in the area that had these setups. It's a broken record; you end
up doing the same damn thing to those rusty pieces of crap as you do to your
stock rover parts: replace with new, custom made parts, after you break the
original 50-75K 20 year old axles in your smoking $250 axle swap. By the time
your done you're in for just as much cash. An ARB costs the same, and custom
axles are still custom $$.
Don't get me started on transmissions and transfer cases <grin>
Engineering and breaking stuff: engineering is a process, and that process is
iterative. Breaking things and gathering data from controlled tests is a
_required_ feedback loop to the design process, I don't care what it is that's
being engineered. To ignore the importance of this process is just admitting
ignorance of what engineering is, and to not visualize how this rule applies to
our enthusiast oriented, shade-tree, lego mentality of putting our Rovers
together is dangerous on top of ignorant. Do you not do "shake-down" runs
after making a mod?
just my .03 man - good luck with whatever you decide to do.
cheers,
isaac (off soap box now)
--- Jean-Leon Morin <offroaddesign@softhome.net> wrote:
>
> > > Don't sweat what isn't broken, redesign from failure.
> >
> > Words I live by.
>
> That's actually quite scary - Do you adopt the same strategy for brakes? ;-)
>
> Redesigning from failure isn't something I would be proud of in any respect,
> especially on an expedition style vehicle that may take you very far off the
> beaten path. Granted, we all resort to this type of "R&D" sometimes, but
> there's something completely boneheaded about keeping parts that are known
> to be weak and inadequate. Of course, I could keep driving my 10 spline
> axles until I accumulate a box full of small sheared off pieces of halfshaft
> and have dozens of ring gears, just to make DAMN SURE that I do really need
> to upgrade the axles so they can deal with my 36" tires. I really don't see
> the point, in my mind if I can save myself the experience of having to
> change out a halfshaft, CV, or diff on the trail (especially in winter) I
> will do so. Breakage sucks.
>
> J-L
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> LRO@land-rover.team.net
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
LRO@land-rover.team.net
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 17:56:58 EST