Nice cheap solution, i have 4 pods floating around and was planning on doing the same thing.
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
1984 K30 "C4" Truggy on Rockwells
- Thread starter Kay86K5
- Start date
Over the last few weeks just been knocking off small little things on this thing. First off was I picked up a hitch d-ring receiver to put in the back of this thing. At the same time I knew I needed some additional bracing on the back "bumper" if I really wanted to be able to tow something with it, so adding some bracing underneath. Made it so the bracing tubes did connect up with and weld onto the backside of the hitch a little bit, just to give the hitch itself a little more strength
Next was I found some weld on d rings on amazon for pretty cheap that looked like I could get to work for my application, with a little modifications. So got those on the front bumper with some d-rings there too
Then I made a small little plate to fill the hole in the floor where the original tcase shifter went (will be going cable shifters, so no need for the big hole in the floor)
And I also picked up a set of Rockwell Boot Guards from DIY4x, so I threw those on too
And I also picked up a set of Rockwell Boot Guards from DIY4x, so I threw those on too
Well, shiz is getting real now! My TH400 back with full rebuild, full manual valve body (forward pattern), beefed up tail housing, new rear shaft shortened the correct length for the tcase setup with a TH400 to black box adapter off the back, and a 2000-2200 stall converter in it
Also, my 205 rebuilt (was a syncro case so all the syncro’s were swapped out for standard 30 spline front output) with shift rail mod done, mated to a NWF Eco-205 reduction box (this is like the “eco” version of the titan box where it goes together the same but you have to supply the planetary and sun gear just like the normal eco box)
This is by far the most money spent on this thing, but will be well worth it in the end. Over the next few weeks I’ll be working on getting these installed and building some crossmembers.
Also, my 205 rebuilt (was a syncro case so all the syncro’s were swapped out for standard 30 spline front output) with shift rail mod done, mated to a NWF Eco-205 reduction box (this is like the “eco” version of the titan box where it goes together the same but you have to supply the planetary and sun gear just like the normal eco box)
This is by far the most money spent on this thing, but will be well worth it in the end. Over the next few weeks I’ll be working on getting these installed and building some crossmembers.
Last edited:
That's some beef dude!
Yeah, I figured with a big block and rockwells it probably wasn't smart to skimp on the tranny and tcase setup
Good grief was that a lot of work, but the trans and doubler are in with a custom crossmember/skid plate I built. I’m pretty happy with how it turned out
More beef! Nice!
Crossmembers with beefy skid plates can rank right up there with bumpers on the amount of work they take. At least pickups have a nice straight frame to deal with unlike K5's.
Are you going to run a 1 piece or 2 piece driveshaft?
Are you going to run a 1 piece or 2 piece driveshaft?
I think I prefer bumpers than crossmember/skid plates cause with crossmembers, you have to get under the truck about a bagillion times to get things figured out correctly.
I am honestly thinking of keeping the carrier bearing in the rear with a 2 piece shaft. With how high the location of the yoke is on a Rockwell, if I went two piece, it would mean the whole rear driveshaft would be above the frame rail. So it may be worth it. We’ll see
Down side with 2 piece is expense. But I think you could use it to customize you driveshaft angle. I'm still playing with my carrier bearing location.
I was thinking if I was going to still use the carrier bearing, I would just keep that in the stock location. But you're right, the downside is cost. I guess I'll just need to call my local guy who I've had do my last couple driveshafts and talk to him about it and see what the best route is. I'm almost wondering if a single shaft on this thing wouldn't be that much less than a 2-piece, mainly because if I did a 1-piece shaft it would be on the longer side which means it probably would need to be a little bit thicker of a tube adding to cost. But who knows, just need to talk to the driveline shop and see what the best option will be
Ive been trying to convince Ryan to two piece his k30 but hes stubborn. In your case it would t hurt you at all, just put one that doesnt deflect as much as the oem. Youll tear up the stock one.
Secondly, I'd lose that poly mount off to the side there. Looks like it will be too restrictive and and break something in between.
Secondly, I'd lose that poly mount off to the side there. Looks like it will be too restrictive and and break something in between.
Keeping the carrier where it's at should work pretty good considering you've moved the axle up. I've been wanting to try and set mine up so that the carrier bearing location is about 6" to 12" further from the axle as compared to the rear axle to transfer case distance on a K5. I always thought the K5 rear shafts were almost too short so something that would a little longer would work better for angles but also keep the driveshaft up out of harms way better. At the very least the K5 could give you some starting point reference.
Are you talking about the carrier bearing?
You talking about my rear mount off the 205? I don't think it'll hurt anything. On my K5 with the Titan/205 I have a mount off the PTO side of the 205 in that situation and I've never had an issue with that setup at all after 4 years of beating on it. And I feel like this setup is better than that as the tranny mount and the 205 mount are more in line and can move more in sequence with each, more than my K5 setup even allows. Plus, I have new ploy mounts on the motor, tranny and 205. So I'm not too worried about it at all
Yeah the one on the back of the 205 front output cover. Ive seen it too many times. May be good now while everything is still tight. When the motor mounts fatigue some and settle and start deflecting more and more that 205 is gonna be held tight with leverage off to the side. The big block is gonna torque over and the 205 is not going to move. Youre going to break the trans case right at your welded plates on the back mounting flange.
my 205 is supported the same way but I'm also boxed and caged so the noodle frame element has been removed from the equation.
Yep, and mine will be exo caged front to back (plus starting with a K30 frame is nice), so again, the frame isn't going to flex much at all after the cage work, and I've seen plenty of people run these mounts with no problems, so again, I'm not worried about it
Not even a little bit now that you've jinxed yourself?
