Is this taboo? Dragging Pirate4x4 D60 thread over here.

[DavidB]

yes i did.

but it doesn't matter. i'm not going to argue the plausibility point with you. it's all there in the thread you didn't read. I want to know your excuse for acting like a jerk. you always go around trying to belittle people and making a fool of yourself? weak, man. the board is here for people to help each and share ideas, not rag on people...especially when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[DavidB]

furthermore, why don't you go research what and who you're talking about, and then come back and be a gentleman and apologize for spouting off and tarnishing CK5's rep.

 

[speedyvision917]

From pirate:

EYE want to build my OWN housing...entirely fabbed, no bought parts except maybe Cs, knuckels, and of course internals. I wanna to see what others have done...don't see a site for welderbilt?????

From pirate again:

I do want to keep it simple with as much off the shelf parts as possible.

So you want to fab everything....but buy as many off the shelf parts you can? And from what ive read (yes i read both posts fully) this is in no way simple AT ALL. Just curious...

Also, let me clear this up, you have gone from wanting to build your own to keep it cheap because you have little funds for it, to now wanting to put it into maybe an "offroad only" rig? wich in turn would cost you much more. I hope those are just far future plans.

 

[DavidB]

isn't there someone on here that has a witty siq with something about arguing with stupid people and it being a excercise in futility?

 

[DavidB]

From pirate:




From pirate again:



So you want to fab everything....but buy as many off the shelf parts you can? And from what ive read (yes i read both posts fully) this is in no way simple AT ALL. Just curious...

Also, let me clear this up, you have gone from wanting to build your own to keep it cheap because you have little funds for it, to now wanting to put it into maybe an "offroad only" rig? wich in turn would cost you much more. I hope those are just far future plans.

Come ON guys...my faith in CK5 is rapidly waning. This isn't that complicated if you pay attention.

I want to fab the HOUSING...the internals i want to keep off-the shelf, like you can go to the parts store when you break in Moab and get whatever you need...nothing custom internally.

The front-or-offroad-only idea results from me realiing it would be extremely difficult to make a housing that can cruise 80 mph down the freeway for the life of the vehicle like the OEMs...like I said in the thread, maybe if it was just in the front, it would work. Just like your front driveshaft doesn't have to be perfectly balanced since it doesn't spin on the fwy (like my dodge )

Let me try to sum it all up or something :

It started out as a goofy idea...the first post wasn't really serious. It doesn't take an axle guru to figure out that you can buy a housing (if you can find it) for cheaper than you can build it. But it kinda grew into something more...trying to make some thing plain basic and simple to try to eventually increase availability to the masses. I said somewhere that maybe me messing around with it will result in something good. It happens. Maybe not a fabbed housing, who knows....I'm just asking for ideas over here, I got a lot at P4x4...which is what inspired me to get more serious and actually think about it. Almost all i get over here is guff.

 

[speedyvision917]

Dont see what was so stupid about my thread, i was just trying to clear things up for myself. As far as you building it, go for it anythings possible.

 

[DavidB]

Sorry man...didn't mean to imply yer dum

Did i make it clearer? I know it is a little long...I reread the pirate thread and noticed some stuff i didn't at first. I think we all tend to read somethign once, make an assumtion about what's being said, and knee-jerk respond. I've encountered i numerous times, and been guily (obviously) of it too.

I'm just a little frustrated and irked with this darkshadow feller. I looked up a bunc of his posts...he has a ton, but very rarely are they 4x4 or tech related....? Which i guess is fine in the lounge...but why does he have to jump my butt about stuff he doesn't understand...eh. <let it go, self>

 

[DavidB]

Update:

dkshadow PMed me and we got our crap straight...i wanna make it known that i'm asking what everyone thinks, if you think it's stupid fine...but mostly i'm looking for more ideas or alternate ideas...not just "that's dumb". Also, if you have questions about the idea or my sanity, ask away.

 

[speedyvision917]

Well if ya ever do end up doin it make sure to put up some pics at least!

 

[bigjbear]

Now do you see why cross posting between boards is a bad idea? You would have been better off just making seperate posts or posting in one or the other. Most people are not going to keep linking over there just to check out the latest replies to your post. I had some cool (at least I thought so) thoughts, but they have already been mentioned by others over there, so no point in retyping.

 

[Eric M.]

Not trying to stir up any more trouble on this post and this is a little off topic. I seem to be missing or mixing something up. You worked on Apollo 13 which did its thing in 1970 and the birthdate on your Pirate profile says 1981. Was there another Apollo 13 later or did the original take off again at a later date after the accident?

I just saw the movie last weekend, so, I'm a little confused.

Good luck with the axle. I gotta say, it's gonna be a lot of work! If you're up for it, cool. From someone who has done some R & D (not much) it does get expensive. If your thinking of this as a business investment / venture, I think that's great. If your thinking of this as a one off axle for yourself, I think you're gonna end up spending more $$ than if you bought one of the fancy - pants hi pinions off the shelf!

Eric M.

 

[sandawgk5]

I dont think that when he was said "we worked on the Apollo 13 project", he ment himself. Rather he was saying his family's machine shop worked on the project.

But on topic it sounds interesting but I am a lazy F**K and I would rather pay someone for their design abilities to a point at least.

 

[DavidB]

Now do you see why cross posting between boards is a bad idea? You would have been better off just making seperate posts or posting in one or the other. Most people are not going to keep linking over there just to check out the latest replies to your post. I had some cool (at least I thought so) thoughts, but they have already been mentioned by others over there, so no point in retyping.

That's why I asked it if was taboo..question answered

 

[ntsqd]

Read the whole thread, and make sure you understand the point and all of what has been said before you throw down judgement.

What statement of Camo's are you referring to?

First off, I'm offering an opinion, not judging anything.

Second, I find that most of the frequent posters on POoR are "Great I am's". I've better things to do than wade thru 3 pages of their blatherings. Camo's first comment is unsupportable. It is a blanket statement that is true perhaps for him, but not for everyone. But b/c you're not doing his way or the way he is familiar with "it won't work." Good thing Cam didn't ask him what he thot b4 building the Chainlink, or it never would have been built. Self proclaimed "guru's" piss me off. Which is why I don't spend any time on POoR and why I didn't read more than the first page.

Now then, Scott E called it. It would be a spendy thing to make as a one-off, likely cost far more than any semi off-the-shelf solution. A casting would greatly simplify things, but you're not going to do THAT for a one-off part. Sure, you could model it and do a Lost Wax rough casting from an STL part, but where's the low cost in that?

OK, so do it as a fabrication. I'll guess you'll want to rough in billet parts for both bearing sets, then do the fab, then come back and put the finish bores where they need to be. Do you have drawings with the tolerences for the housing you want to re-create? Or are you planning on reverse engineering it? If the latter you'd damned well better have access to a CMM or you're lost b4 you started. Even if you have access to one you're still lost on the relative bearing bore location tolerence(s). Only real way to get close w/o drawings would be to sample as many production housings as possible. Then find the extremes and the mean for those tolerences.

All that being said, I'm not against such a project. I just see lots of work ahead of you. For an eventual product, sure. For a one-off, hard to justify unless you've got a large bankroll.

 

[gambit420s]

As a person with a lot of crack-pot ideas, i feel your pain. too many people write you off as a crackpot, with out contemplating the merits of your idea.

with that said, i somewhat agree with dark shadow when he said "at that point why would you want to make a D60? why not make a d80 or something with the set up of a regular (non-rockwell) axle with better strength"

i can see everyones point of tolerences not being consistant with a booty-fabed housing(which SOME obviously think are the limits of your skill, which having never met you or seen your product i will refrain from judging), but i can see that a quality job with lots of R&D might just work.

i think that casting the housing and then machining would be a better method simply because clearance and spacing could be addressed after the main section has been cast and heat-treated. there is a reason dana, aam,eaton, etc. do it this way, it might only be for large scale production, but there may be other reasons, such as the critical spacing and the like.

given that manufacturing the housing was sorted out so far as construction methods and materials, why not use your venture to rethink the idea of power transfer, and ground clearance?

not to say that one hundred years of auto axles have been wrong, but i have been thinking about this and have been tossing around the idea of a two pinion type housing that would allow you to mount the ring gear flat, similar to the illustration below.

i am not an engineer or machinist so i dont know if it would work, but getting a low ratio seems to be the limiting factor given that you basically converting pinion speed to ring speed and then back to pinion speed, sort of...and there would not be differential action, seeing as my idea uses one axle that spans hub to hub, but that might be benificial for off road only...

time to get out the lego's...

just my crack pot idea, what ya think?

 

[ntsqd]

I like it. Negates the need for portals. I see problems in building it, but if it were easy someone would have already done it.

The biggest problem (if I'm thinking correctly) is that the second pinion will have to be huge or you will end up with a very low numeric (tall) total gear ratio.
What if there were 2 seperate ring gears? First one large, second one small driving a big Pinion.

 

[DavidB]

It's a snazzy idea...like you said, prolly valuable mostly off road. What if you used that WITH portals? Uber-clearance! If i was a genius, I might try it But I just want to make plain ole D60 beef easier to come by. I'm thinking about just trying to talk some company into doing a big run or something.

 

[CyberSniper]

Wow, talk about a lot of whining. Are they out of midol and tampax at Walgreen's?

Reading these two threads... I can't help but think of Marshall Mather's catch phrase... "snap back to reality".


You could pretty easily build a metal center section using a ton of pieces and welding them together. Then you'd do the final machining once it was welded. The easy part is getting everything machined relative to one another. The hard part is pinion lubrication and bearing caps.

I wouldn't use a HP60 center anyway if I was going custom. I'd go HP 9" like truehi9. And their center sections are already moderately affordable. The ring gear is only marginally smaller than a D60 and since the offset is much greater and has two pinion supports it is much stronger than a D60 center. And you'll have more clearance for the yoke and less overall thickness. If they were slick, they'd make it so the center section case that was both press in tubes and bolt on at the same time. It'd make it completely modular and affordable so you could use it in the rear, in the front, and any offset you want... and can ship it for an affordable amount of coin.

I mean, you can get 40 spline stuff for Ford 9" axles. It's only a matter of time before people use true high pinion Ford 9" gearsets with 40 spline centers and 1580 universal joints with custom C-knuckles using standard 3.5" tubes.

 

[DavidB]

Wow, talk about a lot of whining. Are they out of midol and tampax at Walgreen's?

Reading these two threads... I can't help but think of Marshall Mather's catch phrase... "snap back to reality".


You could pretty easily build a metal center section using a ton of pieces and welding them together. Then you'd do the final machining once it was welded. The easy part is getting everything machined relative to one another. The hard part is pinion lubrication and bearing caps.

I wouldn't use a HP60 center anyway if I was going custom. I'd go HP 9" like truehi9. And their center sections are already moderately affordable. The ring gear is only marginally smaller than a D60 and since the offset is much greater and has two pinion supports it is much stronger than a D60 center. And you'll have more clearance for the yoke and less overall thickness. If they were slick, they'd make it so the center section case that was both press in tubes and bolt on at the same time. It'd make it completely modular and affordable so you could use it in the rear, in the front, and any offset you want... and can ship it for an affordable amount of coin.

I mean, you can get 40 spline stuff for Ford 9" axles. It's only a matter of time before people use true high pinion Ford 9" gearsets with 40 spline centers and 1580 universal joints with custom C-knuckles using standard 3.5" tubes.

Not sure who's whining you're referring to, but I did get a little bent out of shape...not necessarily becuz I think everyone should agree with me, it's just that I felt like people were calling it crazy, based on the very first post, which was more of a joke...my bad I'm just kinda doing backyard jawjacking R&D here, playing with ideas, looking for more, like "i know this guy who did this"...or " i saw this website where they show you how to...". You have to admit, it has generated a lot of discussion and ideas being thrown out. I'm still trying to stick to the point though...making basic beef affordable...the Hi-9 looks really good to me, I like the press-in tube idea a lot - maybe if there was a big company producing them that could bust out a ton and sell them cheaper to get the market started, they'd be less expensive. He probably can't afford do do that. The reason I'm looking at the 60 is that all the internals can be had from most places - no custom (expensive, hard-to-find) parts.

You pretty much nailed my fabbed 60 idea, and the problem. A basic box, pretty heavy, but simple to throw together. Maybe the lube issuse wouldn't be a problem if it was front (lower speeds) only. Beefy rearends are a lot easier to come by. I think the only way to get a lot of housings out cheap is the big-company-mass-produced idea. Maybe I can come up with something tinkering around. Right now, I'm a young guy with a family. Maybe by the time I can afford to 'wheel again, there will be cheaper alternatives...or maybe they'll all be used up.

 

[ntsqd]

major snippage.....

If they were slick, they'd make it so the center section case that was both press in tubes and bolt on at the same time. It'd make it completely modular and affordable so you could use it in the rear, in the front, and any offset you want... and can ship it for an affordable amount of coin.

Anyone else remember the Spencer Low Engineering housing from the 70's? That is close to what they did. Their aim was at the mini truck front axle market as there were no stock mini 4x4s. They used D30 parts. Center section and cover were cast aluminum. Tube flanges bolted to the side of the center section. Could have any diff location you could fab the tubes for. Seem to recall a counterbore in the casting that piloted the tube and put an O-Ring there for sealing.
BTW, that would be the dad of SLR over on rdc.