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.

Clocked np241 with sye (updated)

hmm, I didnt need to go with a 2 piece front driveline on my 241 and i didnt clock the case as high as you and im running a straight trans mount, well maybe its because I ran it under the frame instead of in line with the frame but still i would have though you could notch the tube and build everything else properly and not have to worry about the super short front driveline.
 
I did put a notch in the tube and the angle is still murder. I have posted on how to do this before I did it, and all I got was a couple people using there old cross member, which to me is pointless if your lookin for clearance, and nobody clocked it REALLY FLAT, they kept it below the frame probly to avoid cutting the floor and modifying the seat mount becuase my T-case is stickin through the floor about 3 inches, and a 2 piece drive line, I mean if your gonna clock it then clock it flat.
 
Chaddy said:
This is what Im talkin about.....
attachment.php

and now its all flat under there and going to the exaust shop. :D
attachment.php
Click to expand...


The problem I see with this front shaft set-up is.. By the pics it looks to create more severe shafts/joint angle. The added intermediate shaft and carrier bearing shorten the driveshaft and move the mount forward. This would shorten the main shaft length and increase the joint angles.

Seems to me if you would have built the crossmemeber so it wasn't hanging below the d-shaft mount... You could have done away with the intermediate shaft and carrier bearing. Thus allowing you to run a longer d-shaft and reducing the operating angles.


Other than that, I do like the looks and clearance of the t-case clocked completely flat! Best way to go if you are clocking it for the best clearance! :thumb:
 
Until somebody else clocks there 241 flat in a blazer with a low pinon 60 and finds a better way to do it .......I think this is the only way.
 
Sorry but I just dont see how a carrier bearing setup is going to help you. I realize that you are gradually lower the angle on the joints but the shaft that goes to the axle is SUPER short so when you have any droop at all its going to magnify the amount of movement that the joint is going to get. Please tell em those are 1410 joints, as I cant see any other joint being able to take that kind of angle.

I know of many people that have clocked there t-case PERFECTLY flat with the frame and they needed a 42* CV.

I am interested to know what kind of flex you got as I just dont see your setup being able to take that kind of angle.


Dont get me wrong. I think you did a sweet job on doing this I just question that front shaft.
 
Chaddy said:
Until somebody else clocks there 241 flat in a blazer with a low pinon 60 and finds a better way to do it .......I think this is the only way.
Click to expand...

What about instead of running a straight piece of tube for the crossmember.. Bend it up and over the d-shaft and then down to the frame? That would eliminate the need for the carrier bearing and decrease your d-shaft angle.

The way the shaft looks in that side pic on flat bround(or trailer), you are close to maxing out that u-joint angle.(the way it looks from the pic)
 
Emmettology 101 said:
What about instead of running a straight piece of tube for the crossmember.. Bend it up and over the d-shaft and then down to the frame? That would eliminate the need for the carrier bearing and decrease your d-shaft angle.

The way the shaft looks in that side pic on flat bround(or trailer), you are close to maxing out that u-joint angle.(the way it looks from the pic)
Click to expand...

Thats what I would have done if you couldnt get enough clearance out of the tube. My buddy did that on his truck and with a properly setup crossmember I dont think there will be any issues with strength.

You could just bend a piece of tube in a U to clear the shaft and gusset it properly and it would work great.
 
Wow! I just installed my SYE on my 241 and was going to reinstall the case this weekend with the clocking ring, but not if it requires that much modification!(my truck is still a DD/trail rig). All of this would not be required if you do not do the completely flat position right?

Oh and I have a dumb question on installing the clocking ring. If I am looking at it right, you first bolt the ring to the tcase via the countersunk holes, then install the studs in the holes that you prefer for different clocking postion, and then just bolt it all up to the tranny, correct?
 
attachment.php
look...the cross member is way under and out of the way.....I put my old cv shaft under there without the cross member in and the angle was maxxed out about 2 inches so this is what I came up with. oh I had to grind the yoke too.
 
Last edited:
Chaddy said:
Until somebody else clocks there 241 flat in a blazer with a low pinon 60 and finds a better way to do it .......I think this is the only way.
Click to expand...

I love this pic. :D

aah.sized.jpg


That's a 208 clocked all the way up with a hole in the floor and a COMPLETELY flat belly.

And this is the driveshaft that doesn't seem to have as bad of an angle as yours. It's actually a stock shaft ground down for more clearance.

aat.sized.jpg



And here are the rest of the pics from that project.
 
And I am glad that yours works too. I was just showing you that others HAVE made a totally FLAT belly and it didn't include a carrier bearing or a steep driveshaft angle. That's all. :D
 
I Dont think the D-line is going to work properly . the slip should be in the last segment of the shaft . If you flex out to far i think it will bind up and bend that stub shaft . :eek1: If you did this way it would be longer and have less angle .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom