What's new
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.

84 Shortbox-2wd to 4wd- Parts Trucks!

Overview Gallery Discussion
Pulled the GM Dana44 apart tonight. Still need to get the stub shafts separated from the axle shafts, everything else (knuckles, spindles, hubs, backing plates) is in respective milk crates. One of my Spicer dials is cracked....I think I have a better one up in the attic.

Each side had one broken spindle stud. I believe I have a couple out on the scrap trailer I can pop some out of. New balljoints, wheel bearings, u-joints will be going in when I put a HP44 together.




I found a Hp44/9" for $350. Guy seems to be dicking me around about meeting up. If that falls through, I'm only about an hour from Bronco Graveyard. They sell them for $400, not the best deal, but I feel like it's an okay deal for what it is. Weather I go with links or leaves, I want to use a Hp44. So getting one and getting it ready is going to be #1 on the list.


Edit: There is a set of lat top knuckles in the classifieds. Thinking about going that route. After buying steering arm, machine costs and ball joints it'll be close to the same price.
 
Roll axis angle should be a small negative number (slight under steer)
Your vertical link separation on the axle side looks very small.... That's going to be really tough on your mounts and heims
Your roll center axis is only 13" off the ground? That's definitely not good... You want that as close to your vehicle CG as reasonably possible.... More like 30" to 36" if you can do it.

It's going to be a long, wild ride.... You also need to fit steering, coils and shocks into that space. This build / design process will make you humble. :)


-G
 
I would run a ferd HP44 and a gmt400 nv3500/np241 setup. A hp d44 and ford 9in combo has a lot to offer if you arent going to go bat**** with tire size and power.

I think this build will be cool. Its certainly different and that attracts me to builds on this site. Dont get me wrong theres lots of good work and cool builds on here but seeing 6500 52in front spring swaps and shackle flips gets kinda old.

Stick with your 3 link ambitions. Dont give up. And save yourself a huge headache and do the coilovers rather than trying to package shocks and coils on top of everything else. I had originally wanted to do a 3link in the front of my frame I built but realized the upper link wouldnt happen in a million years without every last piece of the puzzle in place first so I switched to radius arms. Start simple, get your drivetrain in and get everything tucked up that might need to move.
 
Heres an example of what Greg is talking about with panhard packaging.

IMG_20120820_193636.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]

I went pretty much as high as possible because it benefits your handling characteristics, especially on the street. Its going to affect your flop factor that you feel when turning.

The other important thing to consider is packaging your steering vs the panhard. If you dont set your angles and length consistent to each other you'll wind up with bump steer. I must have looked at 5 different steering boxes before choosing one. Im not saying the steering has to be moved but let me tell you the nightmare of packaging crossover steering up on the knuckle with a panhard thats not way out front on a truss. This is another place I felt coilovers would have benefitted immensely in packaging.

 
Greg72 said:
Roll axis angle should be a small negative number (slight under steer)
Your vertical link separation on the axle side looks very small.... That's going to be really tough on your mounts and heims
Your roll center axis is only 13" off the ground? That's definitely not good... You want that as close to your vehicle CG as reasonably possible.... More like 30" to 36" if you can do it.

It's going to be a long, wild ride.... You also need to fit steering, coils and shocks into that space. This build / design process will make you humble. :)


-G
Click to expand...


Thanks for popping in! I've been playing with the calculator some more and have gotten some better numbers now that I have a few actual measurements from the truck. Some of what is in the pics were just numbers I put in playing around/hadn't touched. I'm sure I'll have more questions once I get further along.



Stomis said:
I would run a ferd HP44 and a gmt400 nv3500/np241 setup. A hp d44 and ford 9in combo has a lot to offer if you arent going to go bat**** with tire size and power.

I think this build will be cool. Its certainly different and that attracts me to builds on this site. Dont get me wrong theres lots of good work and cool builds on here but seeing 6500 52in front spring swaps and shackle flips gets kinda old.

Stick with your 3 link ambitions. Dont give up. And save yourself a huge headache and do the coilovers rather than trying to package shocks and coils on top of everything else. I had originally wanted to do a 3link in the front of my frame I built but realized the upper link wouldnt happen in a million years without every last piece of the puzzle in place first so I switched to radius arms. Start simple, get your drivetrain in and get everything tucked up that might need to move.
Click to expand...


The plan is Hp44 and Sf14, but I think a 9" would work just as well. Finding different rims doesn't bother me much. A matched pair would save me the hassle of possibly needing to change gear ratios right away.

I agree that it gets old seeing the same parts being throw at trucks. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with that. I've done it enough to know what I wanted to change. Some of the parts I picked are based on availability, not uniqueness

It was up in the air 3link vs. radius arms. From what I've read...for the little more work involved a 3link would be much better. Pretty much talked myself into coilovers. Been seeing some used ones pop up on Pirate, might jump on a set of them and revalve/sping to suit my needs.
 
3link is way more work than radius arms IMO. Packaging is a lot harder on that one upper link that 60 lower links Lol but the benefit is there for sure.
 
Babaganoosh said:
What about a ori strut? Less stuff to package and they are cheaper
Click to expand...

Stomis said:
I never read too far into those. Im assuming they have way more to offer than an airshock but whats the downfall between them and a coilover?
Click to expand...


Curious about these. Only thing I have really heard about them is they have a long lead time to get them. Not that it matters, since it's going to be awhile (and I have to figure out sizes).
 
Did some quick google'n.

They are something to consider. I wouldn't call them cheaper though. Can find Fox remote 2.0's for $324 shipped. Add some springs and right around $500 each. 2.5's for $500 each. Either way...it's a ways off, put a pin in it and research later.
 
Reason why I think they are cheaper is the internal bump stop and bypass built into it. It has been in the back of my mind to sell my kings and bumps to purchase a set....
 
84 Shortbox-2wd to 4wd-3 link numbers

A couple of things to consider, from what I have read and learned 7 inches is a good number for vertical separation of links, typically the upper control arm is 70% of the lowers length.
Also the longer you can make the track bar and obviously matching the steering angle has its benefits. The vehicle pivots around the roll center so a low roll center will result in a vehicle that has a lot of body roll and a higher roll center results in a vehicle that has too much roll stiffness causing jacking, radius arms suffer from this and basically means on tire will lift under certain conditions. The benefit for a 3 link with pan hard is that there is that lack of inherent roll stiffness in the links because they are not bound together. The pan hard is what determines the roll center, as previously stated matching the cg to your roll center creates a predicable chassis.

Also! Something to think about it your antisquat, this will determine if the truck dives like a crazy drunk guy under braking or puts that braking force to the ground.
There is no silver bullet for is but as comparison is inevitable radius arms are 300% or something around that and radius arm trucks have good roll stiffness but suck under braking and power.

Ok one more thought a lot of these numbers will be dynamic because the chassis moves, so your a/s your roll center etc will change as suspension moves and typically the goal is to get is as good as you can in normal travel ranges. Ala what are you going to be doing the most of? Be realistic with your expectations and you will be surprised, and read some the. Read some more then read again some more until you kinda understand.. This stuff isn't rocket science but it's also not erector set simple either. Good luck!
 
sreidmx said:
A couple of things to consider, from what I have read and learned 7 inches is a good number for vertical separation of links, typically the upper control arm is 70% of the lowers length.
Also the longer you can make the track bar and obviously matching the steering angle has its benefits. The vehicle pivots around the roll center so a low roll center will result in a vehicle that has a lot of body roll and a higher roll center results in a vehicle that has too much roll stiffness causing jacking, radius arms suffer from this and basically means on tire will lift under certain conditions. The benefit for a 3 link with pan hard is that there is that lack of inherent roll stiffness in the links because they are not bound together. The pan hard is what determines the roll center, as previously stated matching the cg to your roll center creates a predicable chassis.

Also! Something to think about it your antisquat, this will determine if the truck dives like a crazy drunk guy under braking or puts that braking force to the ground.
There is no silver bullet for is but as comparison is inevitable radius arms are 300% or something around that and radius arm trucks have good roll stiffness but suck under braking and power.

Ok one more thought a lot of these numbers will be dynamic because the chassis moves, so your a/s your roll center etc will change as suspension moves and typically the goal is to get is as good as you can in normal travel ranges. Ala what are you going to be doing the most of? Be realistic with your expectations and you will be surprised, and read some the. Read some more then read again some more until you kinda understand.. This stuff isn't rocket science but it's also not erector set simple either. Good luck!
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advice. I've been playing with the calculator some and have gotten some better numbers. Next time I have a nice day I'll get the truck back up in the air and get a few more measurements that I missed the first time, then I'll have a better idea of what will actually fit under there.
 
Post up your new numbers man. Depending on what you do with it radius arms can be a good solution.

If you use a high pinion 44 can't you just use chevy outer to get 6 lug. I am not a fan of the 9" the pinion comes in low. Too low. Sf 14 is a good solution but if you aren't gonna crawl technical boulders the 9" is a solid axle
 
blazinzuk said:
If you use a high pinion 44 can't you just use chevy outer to get 6 lug. I am not a fan of the 9" the pinion comes in low. Too low. Sf 14 is a good solution but if you aren't gonna crawl technical boulders the 9" is a solid axle
Click to expand...


Yes he can use chevy outers. And if its the same as the dana 60 stuff the chevy knuckles should be beefier.

Despite the pinion I would still run the 9in just on the grounds that theres no c-clips out of the gate.
 
Stomis said:
Despite the pinion I would still run the 9in just on the grounds that theres no c-clips out of the gate.
Click to expand...

I hate changing bearings on a 9". On 35s to 37s a 14 b sf is a pretty beefy axle. Plus since I have seen 3 9" shafts break where you do loose a wheel non c clip is less of an advantage for me. I have also seen a 9" shaft break then you limp it out only to find massive damage from the loose bits.

Hot rod it would be a 9" without question. 4x4 one of my least favorite rear axles. It certainly has its 4x4 applications though
 
blazinzuk said:
Post up your new numbers man. Depending on what you do with it radius arms can be a good solution.

If you use a high pinion 44 can't you just use chevy outer to get 6 lug. I am not a fan of the 9" the pinion comes in low. Too low. Sf 14 is a good solution but if you aren't gonna crawl technical boulders the 9" is a solid axle
Click to expand...

When I ger back to the computer I'll post them.

That's the plan with the Hp44, already gutted a Chevy axle from the knuckles out. Probably send my flat top kuckle out to get machined for crossover in a week or so.

An Sf14 was the original plan, but if I come across a matched pair (Hp44, 9") I'll use tbe 9", need to move spring perches either way. Downside to this route is I'll need new wheels.
 
blazinzuk said:
I hate changing bearings on a 9". On 35s to 37s a 14 b sf is a pretty beefy axle. Plus since I have seen 3 9" shafts break where you do loose a wheel non c clip is less of an advantage for me. I have also seen a 9" shaft break then you limp it out only to find massive damage from the loose bits.

Hot rod it would be a 9" without question. 4x4 one of my least favorite rear axles. It certainly has its 4x4 applications though
Click to expand...

Bearings are a pain. I think he should full floater the 9in :D. That would put a smile on my face.
 
Ok...so I had a "t" in the wheelbase of the first couple of screenshots of the calculator. Once I took that out things made more sense.

This is after playing around with it some more.






This is with the links the same length.



 
Putting this here for future use.

Cycle, cycle, cycle, cycle and when you think you are done cycle some more.

Looks like fun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom