Welcome To CK5!
Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.
Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.
Discussion in 'The Garage' started by NEK5, Apr 15, 2007.
anyone running one? How do they compare to a 14bsf?
30 spline is stronger than a 14 bolt SF. 35 Spline is even stronger. They compare closer to a 14 bolt FF than a SF I'd say. I would be running one if I hadn't already found and bought my stuff for the 14 Bolt FF when I figured it out. Looking for one to replace the 14 bolt SF in my 97.
8 lug, right? any way to make it a 6 lugger?
custom wheel hubs, adapters
x2, same as a 14 bolt ff.
if you are talking Dana 60 SF (don't think they ever came 6 lug in anything), then its probably a lot closer to the 14 bolt SF in strength.
in the 60s gmc trucks there was a 6 lug dana 60 option
i had one and sold it for 300 when i decided to go with a dana 60 14 bolt combo
can't remember for sure but i think it was sf still would be better than a 12 bolt
i have never ran a rear 60 but if it as strong as a 14 bolt
the 60 has a smaller center section for better axle clearance
I would beg to differ. FF 60's (the 30 spline ones) have ~1.25" shafts. That's smaller than a 10 or 12 bolt I've had the two shafts next to each other and the dana 60 shaft is definitely smaller. Not to mention the dana 60 r&p are MUCH weaker than a FF 14 bolt.
If you upgrade the shafts to 35 spline (requiring boring out the spindles, if you have the right spindles in the first place) then you can talk about comparing them to FF 14 bolt strength. But you will still have the weaker ring and pinion.
Dana 60 ring and pinion's hold up ok in the front, but I have seen a number of them fail in rear applications.
i would beg to differ with you as well. a good friend of mine who races a 69 camaro with 1200 hp uses a dana 60 and it has never broken as well as many other people that i knwo who use them. they have been used on extreme 4x4 as well on some of their project trucks. so weak, i dont think so. i dont know where you go those shafts from but they are not dana 60 shafts. dont take me wrong. i do agree that the 14bff is stronger. but the 60 is not wek like you make it seem. the proof is in the pudding as stated above in the camaro. dana 60 is a good axle. IMO i would rather have a 14bff but bigblaze433 if you are looking for one i have one. just give me a holler
I have never felt that comparing a car rear end, I don't care how much power they have, vs. a truck application is fair. I believe that a FF D60 rear is about the same strength as a SF14 bolt with the benefit of being a FF design. When comparing the FF D60 to a FF14 bolt the FF14 is the winner in strength. The FF14 compares closer to a D70 axle. That being said a FF D60 would make a fine upgrade to anything riding on a 10 or 12 bolt rear end. Once again the draw to FF14 bolts is they are dirt cheap and are a direct bolt in on 1/2 ton chevy's and not so much because they all the hands down winner over any other axle.
I'm running a rear 30-spline D60FF since summer '03; it has worked well for me. Back then, I chose it because of ARB availability. Now that they make an ARB for a 14FF, I'd use a 14FF.
lets see....slicks, trans break and dump 1200 hp into it at 6000 rpm all at once. how does that not equate. putting force on a rear end is that same no matter if its in a car or truck and in that particular case its a lot more force unless your just out there rev'n your truck in nuetral and slamming it into drive which i dont see anybody here doing.
at no point did i ever say the 60 was stronger than the 14bff. its not. but strong it is and definitly stronger than a 10 and 12 bolt.
So you're telling me that you've never seen a FF dana 60 shafts but you're SURE that they're bigger than I'm saying they are?
Also, its likely the 60 under the camaro is a SF 60 which has larger 35 spline shafts.
Oh yeah, one more thing. There are tons of 10 and 12 bolts in the rears of many very fast cars as well. That doesn't mean they hold up well to wheeling.
This is true, they are small. My friends dad has a '59 F250 with a 428, and a Dana 60 rear 4.10 posi. He beats the tar out of that rearend, doing clutch dumps in second gear, rolling backwards down a hill at 15-20mph. He's done it hundreds of times, never broken a shaft. Other than lowriders reasoning, I don't see why a D60 would be a choice for a chevy rear when you could literally bolt in a 14 bolt. Kevin
Comparing wheeling to racing is not fair. I used to work at a machine shop and I saw a lot of cars with approximately 500-600hp using 10 bolts without failure. I saw a ton a regualar old 31 spline 9 inch axles taking a ton of abuse as well with even higher horsepower. The one dana 60 I remember seeing was in a 1967 camaro with a dyno'd 496 producing 975hp and it broke several custom 5 lug 35 spline axle shafts. Another 67 camaro with about the same hp ran a 35 spline ford 9 inch all day without a problem.
as stated before....1200hp dumped at 6000 rpm is a hell of a lot and he has been doing it for 15 years at least and has never broken one. i think that says a lot. wheeling to racing is fair cause its all force exzerted on an axle. bottom line of what i am saying is that there is nothing wrong with a dana 60 axle. it is strong and will last longer than a 10 or 12 bolt. sometimes **** just breaks as well for other reasons. i agree...i would so a 14 bolt as well. but i didnt ask about putting the 60 in. i know what direction i want to go with mine.
As others have stated....its not a fair comparison. There is only so much traction on a race track. You have 2 tires to equally distibute the load. Look at a real 4x4 application (not a mall crawler or a soley mud runner). Think of a 6000+ pound K5, running with 44" boggers, only one rear tire on the ground, a locked differential, and that one tire that is on the ground is wedged firmly in a deep crack between some rocks...then add in the gear reduction of 4lo (and possibly a doubler)....and tell me that force on that 1 side axle shaft is not more than what a light car sees on a race track. Not even close.
i can see both sides of the camaro argument. the simple torque/hp numbers make it sound like the camaro is abusing the axle more. but, offroad vehicles put wierd strains on axles/diffs/etc.:
-heavier vehicles means more downward force on axle.
-cylcing of torque - on and off the skinny pedal over and over
-bouncing and potential contact with terrain
-possibility of contamination by water, etc.
-pressure on the back of gear teeth during reverse and hill descents.
either way you look at it, both situations are pure hell on any drivetrain component, but to compare them is apples to oranges, pretty much.
I also agree that caomparing racing applications, to offroad is not fair at all.
The flexability of the dirt alone adds more resistence to a given rolling wheel.
Simple experiment: Go get a mountain bike, and take it on a sidewalk. Then go on the grass, or the dirt. Even better wet grass, or tall grass. The force needed to propel that bike easily goes up a few points. Sometimes the force needed easily doubles, or even triples.
my buddy bought my old truck off of me and said that since drag racers use 12 bolts, he can easily run 39.5" boggers and not be worried. I tried to talk him out of it, but I didn't get through to him...
I agree with what Vortec said. Not only do offroad vehicles multiply torque to the wheels with low gears and 4lo, but many times in rocky situations the vehicle tends to start bouncing. Bouncing a heavy fullsize a foot or more off the ground...and allowing the tires to quickly speed up in the air....then all the tire momentum is severly slowed when they contact the ground...puts a ton of stress on the axle.
i also forgot to mention that pressure is applied more often and for much longer duration, in wheeling. a good hillclimb can apply pressure for several minutes at at time, without release. plus, you probably drove that rig there. then wheeled all day, then drove it home home. my last real offroad excursion was over 400 miles, round trip.
Separate names with a comma.