try and find a 3/4 ton dana 44 housing to build and maybe it will be a thicker tube .
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.
Things were going so smooth, right up untill !!!!!!!
- Thread starter sponsoredbydad
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
Is that where it broke ?
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
Ya pretty much
I suppose I shuda connected it to the inner c
I suppose I shuda connected it to the inner c
Ah, I see, I was looking at your old pics with the bolt on truss thinking you welded it to the tubes and the thread snapped off or something. I agree, the next housing definitely weld it to the inner C.
I agree on the 44, I have a heavy @$$ Dana 60 and its not really needed on the sand toys with all that unsprung weight and lack of traction to break axles and u-joints, etc.
Exactly Heath. I've been keeping my eye out for a D44 or better yet a TTB44
Are you serious on the TTB44? I thought those were low travel pieces of junk that were always out of alignment?
they can be made to do BIG travel = look at the off road desert racers . they use the same basic design of front end long arms for lots of range of motion .
reason out of alignment on street vehicles is 2 fold . 1 = weak coil springs or sagged out leafs on 250 trucks . 2nd is lots of alignment techs dont like to do full alignments and skip the upper camber/caster bushing replacment or adjustment . with todays machines its stupid easy to get the caster / camber in spec . you input the current bushings * and +/- value and the open notch location in clock value . then hit calculate button and it gives you the new bushing * size and new clock value to set it at and bam set the toe and done . . . . but lots of techs these days are just to lazy or dont know the machine will do this for them .
Yeah but they don't have to worry about that center u-joint angle. If you are going that route skip the solid axle all together and build a 4WD independent system, even less unsprung weight and better handling and camber movement than the TTB.
With the truss ending a few inches shy of the inner C and being on the bottom of the axle, then the shock mount starting almost straight above the end plate of the truss major shear was created in that area and in effect you sheared the end of the axle off. Enginerd types will have more terms and explanation but in short that's it.
Take the next truss all the way to the C, don't end a gusset for the truss at the same place the other side of the axle has a point load and it should all work out as good as possible.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
Well it was my 1st try and it lasted pretty long. D44 3.0 will be better
v2.something sounds better . .. . 
Yup be cool to still have 4x4 if I ever needed it. For sand you really don’t. D44 and d50 tt. Setups for for pennies on the dollar here in mud truck land.
Alan2smiley
I'm in the shop
The bright side is it's easier to replace the axle than the frame. 
I like your style, if you break it make it better.
I would think the leaf spring center bolt has to be sheared now,and there may be damage to the spring and maybe the frame too,after that hard of an impact ..
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
4x4 in the sand for a full size truck that is frame and metal is necessary out west.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
I will be checking but I really don't think so. It did not seem like that hard of a hit. I think the dunes just got a lucky shot inI would think the leaf spring center bolt has to be sheared now,and there may be damage to the spring and maybe the frame too,after that hard of an impact ..
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Posts
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 1,043
Is there another way?
