U-Joint Angles | Page 2 | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

U-Joint Angles

That's the one you want for big jobs. I have the 891 model like this, and maybe that 899 version, it looks the same as that other link. They both work great, I love the smaller one for lugnuts on tire changes.
Amazon product ASIN B09YXXFPBJ
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





1200 ft lbs removal 700 ft lb install...
Hmm 700 ft-lb install, must be same model the tire shop used on my wheel lugs a few years back. Took me (at 200 lbs) jumping on the end of a ~4' cheater to break each one loose. Old school, no impact needed...until the recently acquired E350. Now looking for one like yours.

Back on topic, have to go with posts 2 and 3 on this.
 






@imp is the old expert here, I was planning to bend his ear to help with some of that. I'd love to use just a set thickness washer, I need more detailed guidance on how to do that. I have the two better Dewalt impact guns, I wonder if those are usable to do the pinon nut and washer etc?
You have my attention! Disadvantage of crush washers is that very heavy loading/usage of the gears can result in some removal of load from the washer, especially if it was used previously, thus allowing minute play between bearings, loss of preload, plus loss of nut tightness. When Ford got serious about high performance, introducing options like powerful 390s and 427s, they shipped such packages with SOLID pinion bearing spacers instead of crush washers (along with 4-pinion differentials instead of 2). Much more bullet-proof, but time consuming to set up.

FRONT refers to towards driveshaft. Front pinion bearing outer race is pressed into the pinion bearing retainer, 5-bolted part which fastens to the front of the 9-inch housing. Rear pinion bearing outer race is pressed into differential carrier casting. When bolted together with pinion bearing inner races in place against outer races, (the cone/roller assemblies), a SPACE remains between the bearings which is occupied by the crush washer, or a solid spacer; this space varies due to casting machining tolerances and bearing dimension tolerances (only a few thousandths of an inch, but still critical). The space width must be accu rately measured. With pinion bearing retainer snugged in place by several bolts, inner races are held against their outer race counterparts, and an inside caliper may be used to measure the spacer dimension between the bearings. This is normally ABOUT 3/8-inch. Ford Shop Manuals c/a 1960s list spacer thicknesses available, and how much INTERFERENCE is required. The spacer is usually sized ABOUT 0.004 to 0.006 inch THICKER than the space, follow manual instructions. When the pinion nut is tightened, this assembly will squeeze the bearings causing PRELOAD, which should be within specs, perhaps 10 to 16 IN-LBS (NOT FT_LBS!) with NO OIL SEAL DRAG. Adjust spacer thickness if too much preload, or too little.

A good solid spacer fit will allow tightening of the pinion nut to any level you like, enough so it can never loosen in service, I like 120 to 150 LB-FT, some go to 200. A good impact wrench is acceptable, making sure you are TIGHT ENOUGH. I will go further into the elastic theory of deflection of the parts, stretching of pinion shaft, compression of castings, bending, etc., if you like, but such theory is beyond the needs of capable mechanics. imp
 






...When the pinion nut is tightened, this assembly will squeeze the bearings causing PRELOAD, which should be within specs, perhaps 10 to 16 IN-LBS (NOT FT_LBS!) with NO OIL SEAL DRAG. Adjust spacer thickness if too much preload, or too little.
... imp

Thanks for that general description of the process. When you posted "with NO OIL SEAL DRAG", do you mean the check is done without the pinion seal installed yet?

I'm not sure whether I want to first set up an 8.8 diff, in the truck, and then the D35 front diff. I'm sure the front one will be trickier, but it can be done out on a bench etc, easier to get at.
 






Keep in mind the use of standard U-Joints on Corvette rear drive axles: in 1967 I heard horror stories, corroborated, of great numbers of failed rear axle U-joints with big engines. Dana Spicer recommended maximum torque applied for that style joint at 1200 ft-lbs. Use of rear gear ratios like 4:11 could put 4000 ft-lbs and more on them, they were failing all over the place. The tri-lobed CV joints in use today use needle-bearinged rollers with are super strong, last a long time, and are cheap to manufacture.
Pure nonsense
Corvette driveline and suspension better that 2020 mustang in 1963 when it came out

Horror stories all street trash talk

You put 1000 hp to a driveline designed for 400hp what do you think is going to happen???
Now for your Info…
In 1966 with the intro of the 427
Corvette had upsized unoints, it’s half shafts etc

I’ve designed these systems for 800hp
What do you really think is going to happen if you put 1200hp to it???
No really Einstein, you dont need to go to grad school to know something is Going to break

On the 2 degrees, not for wear, wrong
It’s to keep it slightly off neutral zero so you don’t get goofy driveline harmonic, coupling, and other stuff happening

Going beyond 4 degrees is where stress and wear premature failure comes in, think lifting
But you are doing different stuff and it costs to play, this is one of those costs

From there with this a good book on driveline you can find and study, regardless the X isn’t a race car nor an ultimate off-roaddesigned 4x4 so that’s why as designed it lasts

Unlike the body which disintegrat
 






Keep in mind the use of standard U-Joints on Corvette rear drive axles: in 1967 I heard horror stories, corroborated, of great numbers of failed rear axle U-joints with big engines. Dana Spicer recommended maximum torque applied for that style joint at 1200 ft-lbs. Use of rear gear ratios like 4:11 could put 4000 ft-lbs and more on them, they were failing all over the place. The tri-lobed CV joints in use today use needle-bearinged rollers with are super strong, last a long time, and are cheap to manufacture.
Pure street trash nonsense
The Corvette has a better rear suspension in 1963 when it came out than a 2020 mustang
Otherwise you wouldn’t see so many people at Car Meets saying watch out it’s a mustang and you never saw that issue with a Corvette
Now Einstein
For your info in 1966 one Corvette to 427 with over 400 hp the rear driveline was upsized with you joint caps etc.
But really you do sound like a physics major really physics fail
What do you really think is gonna happen when you put 800 hp to any kind of a driveline that was designed for 400 hp ??

I’ve designed these for 800
What do you think if one were to put 1200hp engine???
Something is going to break

On the u joint angles, wrong
2 degrees is to keep off zero so you do t get harmonic coupling and other undesirable things happening
4 degrees is to before you start hitting and exceeding optimal which reduce strength and increase wear
However the explorer isn’t the ultimate 4 x 4 off-road nor is it any kind of track car either
 






The Corvette has a better rear suspension in 1963 when it came out than a 2020 mustang
Otherwise you wouldn’t see so many people at Car Meets saying watch out it’s a mustang and you never saw that issue with a Corvette
ah, as a young lad myself who has seen many newer mustsngs. they aint hard to control, its more the drivers than the car. its just the nature of the way its built. they make good power #s so when stomped by an incompetent driver they break trac, and cause theyre the cheapest entry to power they are often driven by unexperienced. imo a camaro is no more/less likely to do this, its just due to the nature of fast rwd in general, your tires and susoension too, but imo its no more unsafe than others. theres more stangs and theres more stangs in the hands of unexperienced, so just like the exporer rollovers theres bound to be more of em, having milliosn sold and millions in incompetent hands.

who says the vette has a better suspension? iirc its got a solid axle (leaf sprung?) and leaves arent good for lateral motion, wheel hop ring a bell? whateevr happens to one wheel happens to the other as opposed to independent which allows the two to flex independent of each other. just search "camaro drift crash" or something of the like and youll find results


just my opinion however :)

(havent watched this but saw this CAMARO TRIES TO DRIFT...THEN CRASHES INTO CAR - YouTubeyoutube.com)
main-qimg-863ed75c52a750cab0b238f5bda1fc7f-lq.jpeg
 






ah, as a young lad myself who has seen many newer mustsngs. they aint hard to control, its more the drivers than the car. its just the nature of the way its built. they make good power #s so when stomped by an incompetent driver they break trac, and cause theyre the cheapest entry to power they are often driven by unexperienced. imo a camaro is no more/less likely to do this, its just due to the nature of fast rwd in general, your tires and susoension too, but imo its no more unsafe than others. theres more stangs and theres more stangs in the hands of unexperienced, so just like the exporer rollovers theres bound to be more of em, having milliosn sold and millions in incompetent hands.

who says the vette has a better suspension? iirc its got a solid axle (leaf sprung?) and leaves arent good for lateral motion, wheel hop ring a bell? whateevr happens to one wheel happens to the other as opposed to independent which allows the two to flex independent of each other. just search "camaro drift crash" or something of the like and youll find results


just my opinion however :)

(havent watched this but saw this CAMARO TRIES TO DRIFT...THEN CRASHES INTO CAR - YouTubeyoutube.com)
View attachment 430665
You haven’t a clue
Corvette was irs in 1963 and clearly led the way since

The same driver tires and hp
Demonstrate-able different
The corvette squats and goes the s550 squirts to one side
Physics
Geometry
 






You haven’t a clue
Corvette was irs in 1963 and clearly led the way since

The same driver tires and hp
Demonstrate-able different
The corvette squats and goes the s550 squirts to one side
Physics
Geometry
it was irs? huh interesting. does the vette break the rear tires? i assume it would, so i have nothing to defend my argument
 






it was irs? huh interesting. does the vette break the rear tires? i assume it would, so i have nothing to defend my argument
Basically unchanged 1963-1982
My first was a 70 370/350cid
Riad rocket and so much fun to pour into curves it was 50/50 weirght balanced

Breaking the tires means you are not accelerating at optimum, they did and can still get rubber after 1st gear
All depends on how much hp you put to the rear wheels
 






Basically unchanged 1963-1982
My first was a 70 370/350cid
Riad rocket and so much fun to pour into curves it was 50/50 weirght balanced

Breaking the tires means you are not accelerating at optimum, they did and can still get rubber after 1st gear
All depends on how much hp you put to the rear wheels
10-4!
 






Thanks for that general description of the process. When you posted "with NO OIL SEAL DRAG", do you mean the check is done without the pinion seal installed yet?

I'm not sure whether I want to first set up an 8.8 diff, in the truck, and then the D35 front diff. I'm sure the front one will be trickier, but it can be done out on a bench etc, easier to get at.
Oil seal friction is variable, based on type, condition, lubrication, so for most accurate bearing preload torque, it is best to establish that w/o the seal. However, using the crush type washer makes it necessary to put the whole thing together at once. For normal driving conditions, the crush type system suffices, though. It takes some thousands of pounds of force to crush the washer, which means the nut will be pretty tight to achieve that. Two thoughts are important: the crush is inelastic, meaning once crushed, it returns very little if unloaded, and, initial crush takes much force, less being present the more you crush it, like a beer can holding up a weight, then abruptly collapsing.
 






I'll give it a try to set one up by measuring for the spacer needed etc.
 






Keep in mind the use of standard U-Joints on Corvette rear drive axles: in 1967 I heard horror stories, corroborated, of great numbers of failed rear axle U-joints with big engines. Dana Spicer recommended maximum torque applied for that style joint at 1200 ft-lbs. Use of rear gear ratios like 4:11 could put 4000 ft-lbs and more on them, they were failing all over the place. The tri-lobed CV joints in use today use needle-bearinged rollers with are super strong, last a long time, and are cheap to manufacture.
No traction, no broken parts...
 






Keep in mind the use of standard U-Joints on Corvette rear drive axles: in 1967 I heard horror stories, corroborated, of great numbers of failed rear axle U-joints with big engines. Dana Spicer recommended maximum torque applied for that style joint at 1200 ft-lbs. Use of rear gear ratios like 4:11 could put 4000 ft-lbs and more on them, they were failing all over the place. The tri-lobed CV joints in use today use needle-bearinged rollers with are super strong, last a long time, and are cheap to manufacture.
No traction, no broken parts...
 












Thank god they don't make them like that anymore. The new motors put out a lot more than that 454 did.
 






Thank god they don't make them like that anymore. The new motors put out a lot more than that 454 did.
wasnt it 500 ish tq and 300-400 hp? been a while sonce ive hesrd of these, so foggy memory (no not covid...) pretty sure a stang can easily put out >500 lb ft
 






wasnt it 500 ish tq and 300-400 hp? been a while sonce ive hesrd of these, so foggy memory (no not covid...) pretty sure a stang can easily put out >500 lb ft
Those numbers are gross, it drops from 390 hp to about 275 hp net. The Corvette pictured has a modified engine that made 750 hp. A new Corvette is still faster than this one
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





Pure street trash nonsense
The Corvette has a better rear suspension in 1963 when it came out than a 2020 mustang
Otherwise you wouldn’t see so many people at Car Meets saying watch out it’s a mustang and you never saw that issue with a Corvette
Now Einstein
For your info in 1966 one Corvette to 427 with over 400 hp the rear driveline was upsized with you joint caps etc.
But really you do sound like a physics major really physics fail
What do you really think is gonna happen when you put 800 hp to any kind of a driveline that was designed for 400 hp ??

I’ve designed these for 800
What do you think if one were to put 1200hp engine???
Something is going to break

On the u joint angles, wrong
2 degrees is to keep off zero so you do t get harmonic coupling and other undesirable things happening
4 degrees is to before you start hitting and exceeding optimal which reduce strength and increase wear
However the explorer isn’t the ultimate 4 x 4 off-road nor is it any kind of track car either
Really coming off like a real a-hole, and coming from ME, that’s saying something….
 






Back
Top