Axles
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 08:06:35 +0000
From: "Mike Graham"
Subject: Full Floaters
To: TLCAL@tlca.org
> If the weight of the vehicle is not taken on the axle then
> where does the weight sit? The wheels of the vehicle essentially
> end up with the weight of the vehicle right? then the wheels essentially
> are connected to the axle. I'm confused.
In a full-floating axle, the weight of the vehicle is held by the
bearings in the wheel assembly. Keep in mind that there are two
parts to an axle on a 'normal' offroad vehicle; the axle housing and
the axle shaft. On a wagon, you have one iron rod which is the axle,
and all the weight is on it. It has to be pretty big to take the
weight. Now wrap a 1/2" thick cylinder around it. This is the axle
housing. Put some bearings on the end of the axle housing so that
the axle stays centered, and the weight is now on the axle housing,
not the axle shaft in the middle. No big gain on a wagon, but
imagine that this is a driven axle on a 4x4 that has to handle
tremendous torque from the engine; the added weight-handling of a
semi-floater in addition to the rotational torque load is nasty, and
means you have to have a *really* thick axle shaft.
Anyway, that 'load bearing' part isn't the reason that they've been
outlawed in Australia, and it not really the reason that nobody
really likes them. Semi-floaters are held in by c-clips (usually).
If the axle shaft breaks, the wheel can fall off. This is bad.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Mike Graham
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// 1981 BJ42 24V Diesel LandCruiser, "New brakes, new problems."
//
// "Smell? What smell?"
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:31:52 -0200
From: Rod LaHaise
Subject: Full Floaters
To: TLCAL@tlca.org
At 10:34 PM 9/30/96 +0000, Kerry Uchida wrote:
>Could someone explain full-floaters in a little more detail for
>us who are a little less mechanically inclined.
A full floating axle has the outer shaft running through a hub with the load
being carried by two tapered roller bearings between the hub and spindle,
the wheel bolts to the hub as does the axle shaft much like the front axle
of a Cruiser which is in fact a full floater. A broken axle shaft here means
no power to the wheel but nothing is going to fall off.
A semi-floater has no spindle, instead a single roller bearing sits in the
axle tube and the axle shaft runs through it so the load is placed directly
on the axle, in this case the wheel bolts directly to a flange on the end of
the axle shaft. If you were to break an axle you could pull the wheel off
with part of the shaft still attached complete with the brake drum.
I am no artist and my ASCII talents are bad even by my standards but here is
my best attempt:
SEMI-FLOATER
________________
|| < -bearing
_________________
_________________ <-axle shaft
||
________________
axle tube
FULL-FLOATER
axle tube___________
| || < - bearing
|________
____________________________
____________________________ < - axle shaft
_________ spindle
|
_________| ||
>What years/models of Toyota's had full floaters that could be
>swapped into a Cruiser?
I don't think many N-American 40's were equipped with full floaters, but
here in Eastern Canada there are quite a few FJ-45 1 ton pickups with FF
rear ends that were imported for use in mines. The sad part is that most of
them have been abandoned underground. They had the front ends removed,
transfer shifted into 4-low then the shifter was cut off and they were
simply driven until they died when they were pushed into an unused shaft and
left to rot. I have been trying to get my hands on some of these beauties
but without success although complete front end sheetmetal turns up
occasionally the rest of the vehicles seem doomed to spend there days buried
in the depths of the Canadian shield.
>I'm considering getting ARB's F&R sometime in the future should
>the full floater come 1st or can the locker be swapped into the
>full floater later on?
I doubt that the locker could be swapped.
>How about rear discs. Rob M. was able to adapt Toyota disc setup
>onto his full floater am I correct?
Yes, I am considering this for my 40, it looks to be a fairly simple
conversion.
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 1996 09:34:40 -0800
From: Rob Mullen
Subject: Strengths
To: TLCAL@tlca.org
vamike1@mnsinc.com (Mike P) wrote:
>Subject: JEEP VS TOYOTA AXLE SIZE AND STRENGTH
>I own a 86 toyota 4x4 pickup(22r)and was curious to know the diffirence in
>diameter between my rear axles and front half and between other axles such
>as ,,uugh Jeep. Also between other mini trucks and axles such as the Dana
>44. Are toyotas really that much stronger than others and why?? Also are my
>front half shafts the same diameter as my rear axle? Thanks for your help.
in another message he added:
Subject: PICKUPS VS FJ40'S strenghth
>how do Toyotas 4x4 pickups compare in strenght and durability to the fj40.
Here's how the Toy axles stack up.
VEHICLE LOCATION AXLE AXLE RING GEAR
DIAM SPLINE DIAMETER
PRE-68 LC FR/RR 1.31" 10 9.5"
68-89 LC FR/RR 1.31" 30 9.5"
90- LC RR 1.31" 30 9.5"
90- LC FR 1.31" 30 8"
79-85 Pickup FR/RR 1.31" 30 8"
86- Pickup RR 1.31" 30 8"
86- Pickup FR 1.31" 27 7.5"
NOTE: the outer stubs in an IFS front end are smaller diam and have fewer
splines than that, but I don't have the number handy.
The Danas etc. are harder to do because they're not as standardized.
AXLE LOCATION AXLE AXLE RING GEAR
DIAM SPLINE DIAMETER
Model 20 1.25" 29 8.875"
Dana 30 FR 1.16" 27 7.5"?
Dana 35 RR 1.16" 27 7.5"?
Dana 44 1.31" 30 8.5"? Not sure
Dana 60 1.31" 30 10.25"?
Dana 60 1.5" 35 10.25"?
Ford 9" 1.32" 31 Could it be 9"? ;)
Ford 9" 1.20" 28 9"
GM 10-bolt 1.31" 30 8.5"
GM 10-bolt 1.20" 28 8.5"
GM 12-bolt 1.31" 30 8.5"
GM 14-bolt 1.37" 33 9.5"
So there's the numbers--as useful as they are.
Many believe that the open-knuckled Dana 44 is stronger than a
Birfield-equipped Toy solid-axle front end. In terms of maximum
instantaneous torque loading capacity, it probably is. However, an open
knuckled front end comes nowhere close to the Toy design in terms of
longevity. Look at it this way--how often do you have to replace the
u-joints in a front driveshaft compared to how often the birfields wear out.
It's much better to have a CV joint encased in an ~1/4" thick steel knuckle,
surrounded by grease, than to have a u-joint that's exposed to all the grit
and garbage of the outside world. For that matter an open-knuckled design
requires twice as many seals that are exposed to the outside world--one on
each side of the U-joint. The seals on a closed-knuckle front end are
nested such that the axle housing seal should only ever see gear oil on the
inboard side and grease from the knuckle on the outboard side. I think
Birfields are under-rated.
Now, IFS is even worse than open-knuckles. It has 4 CV joints that are only
protected by little rubber booties. The CV joints in an IFS front end also
see more movement because they pivot every time the suspension moves,
instead of when the wheels are turned.
Now, comparing LC strength/durability to pickups. That's really tough. You
have to take into consideration the weight and capacity of the vehicle. Say
a LC is 1.25x heavier than a pickup and has 1.25x the payload. Supremely
oversimplifying, you COULD say that in that case, everything on a LC should
be 1.25x sturdier than on a mini-truck. Is it? Well, the axle shafts etc
aren't. The shafts on the mini-truck are probably massive overkill for that
application. I believe that in many other case though, the components scale
up using some kind of ratio. The frame, axle housings, ring gear etc. The
problem comes when you start modifying the vehicle. Say, for instance that
you want to put 35s on a LC. And say that the drivetrain/frame/springs can
handle that kind of unsprung weight. Problem is if you use our assumed
1.25x multiplier, 35/1.25=28 so to keep everything proportional, you'd have
to keep 28s on the pickup. That'd be pretty useless offroad though.
Anyways, enough philosophical rambling. There are some things on a pickup
that are stronger on a LC, but in every case, it is stuff on a newer (say
'81) pickup that is better than on a older (say '75) LC. Front spindles,
birfields, and LC coarse spline pinions fall into this category. If you
compare straight across model years ('81 pickup vs. '81 LC) There are some
things that are the same (spindles, birfields, axle shafts) but pretty much
everything else LC is stronger. In '86, Toyota made a quantum leap
BACKWARDS with IFS in an attempt to cater to the flabby North-American
behind. Anywhere that required SERIOUS off-road capability (3rd world etc)
still got their Hiluxes with solid axles. Unfortunately, that changed for
the worse recently.
____________________________________________________________________
Rob Mullen RAMullen@wimsey.com Vancouver, B.C. Canada |
Editor of the TLC FAQ TLCA #3036, Coastal Cruisers |
'80 Toyota BJ40 Diesel Land Cruiser Why walk?...When you can CRAWL!|
'83 Toyota BJ60 Land Cruiser Wagon TLC Offroad (604)299-5600 |
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1997 16:50:57 U
From: "Jay Kopycinski"
Subject: lots'o'stuff!
To: "Toyota 4x4 List"
Subject: Time: 10:19 AM
OFFICE MEMO lots'o'stuff! Date: 4/10/97
"Alan Anderson" wrote:
snip
>I was also going to try to find out
>what kind of job it would be to put a pair of dana 60's under the
>little monster? How many banana's?.......( I allready have a small block
>chevy, nv4500, and double marlin's,......) is it worth the effort for the
>strength that I will get/improve ?
Depends on why you feel you need to change and what you are trying
to improve?
Dana 60s are strong, but big and heavy too. You gain strength, but
sacrifice some ground clearance. If you use an uncut Dana 60, track
will be much wider than stock. If you want a narrow Dana 60 (rear)
with off-the-shelf parts, you can use an axle off a late 70s Ford van
which had an offset pumpkin. Using two pairs of short axles and
tubes will allow you to assemble a narrow Dana 60 with factory
parts.
The harder axle to mate up will be the front. Here are some
concerns I see when considering the swap.
You will have to devise spring perches to mate the axle to the
your springs. Custom u-bolts and other parts may be needed for
spring mounting. The stock perches will probably be too wide
for the Toy springs. Probably best to remove them and weld on
some new ones to set the caster you want.
A custom steering setup will be required meaning you will probably
need to mount up a different steering box and possibly a higher
volume/pressure pump to drive it.
Dana 60s generally come in 8 lug bolt pattern. You will have to
consider this with respect to the wheels you plan to use.
Depending on the type and size brakes you use you may be able to
retain your current master cylinder, or may have to swap out
to a larger one to move more fluid to the brakes.
You will need to change the driveshaft mating at the axle. You
could keep the Toy driveshafts or upgrade somewhat. The
u-joints will be the weak link between the transfer case
and the axles. You may find the Toy u-joints breaking too
often with the added inertia of the heavier axle assemblies
and may want to upsize.
There may be other considerations I've forgotten. Keep us
posted if you decide to do the swap. It'd be great to see what
is involved.
_____________________________________________
Jay Kopycinski '85 Toylet (ROKTOY)
Gilbert, AZ
ryna10@email.sps.mot.com
http://www.netzone.com/~jayk
Arizona Lo-Rangers 4WD Club TLCA #3243
_____________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 11:02:28 -0600
From: Tony Bartlett
Subject: IFS rear axle on solid axle truck.
To: toy4x4@tlca.org
Anybody interested in installing a IFS rear axle in there solid front
axle truck here are the reasons I did and the problems I ran into.
reason-larger drum brakes.(at this time I also knew they were wider)
starting to install found out my lower u-bolt/shock mount brackets would
not work. They also use a bigger axle tube with bigger bearings.
reinstalled old axle to get more parts.
Toyota wanted too much for their IFS rear u-bolt brackets. I ended up
getting some u-bolts and an upper plate (from local off-road shop) so
now my u-bolts face up and will not get damaged by rocks. Welded some
shock mounts to the axle tube. remember to check that the axle you use
still has the brake tubing on it. original is too short. I also went to
a wire/rope store and got a piece of wire and some crimps to extend my
left side park brake cable. The store let me use their crimpers
(completed in their parking lot).
One Item for Jay, how much tire gets stuffed into the wheel well? Is it
worth the extra droop you might gain by putting in longer bump stops to
prevent fender trimming?
I am in the proccess of building a new front bumper to open up the
corners in front of the tires. The top tubing will follow right below
my grill and wrap around the corners (directly below the park lights).
The bottom tub will run from my winch mount following the bend of the
sheet metal right behind my turn signals (mounted on smittybuilt bumper)
wrap around and bend up to the top tube. I will try and get some pics
scanned when I am finished. Should help a lot for steps and should not
have it hit crossing the 'crack' in Moab. Still have not attempted the
crack with my new reinforced steering arm (still have flashbacks of
broken steering arms) Should test it before the Rubicon trip.
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 17 Sep 1997 13:03:34 -0700
From: "Jay Kopycinski"
Subject: Overkill?
To: "Toyota 4x4 List"
Subject: Time: 12:33 PM
OFFICE MEMO Overkill? Date: 9/17/97
DRM033@aol.com wrote:
>> I was just wondering if anyone had any pros or cons on swaping in
>> custom built dana 60s front and rear into a toyota pickup? Even I think it
>> would be overkill but I don't think breakage would be much of a concern.
>> The only bad points I can come up with is
>> -weight, over all tax on springs front and rear>>
>
>No real tax on springs worth mentioning.
I assume you are talking about a live axle setup here. The biggest
cons I see to such a swap are reduction in ground clearance and
the weight increase.
A rear swap is not too hard and can be done with off-the-shelf
internals. Some Ford vans used Dana 60s with an offset dif.
By cutting down the long side of the housing and running short
side shafts in both sides the cut-down width is about perfect
for a Toy.
The front swap gets kinda tricky 'cause you have to modify
or change the following:
spring perches (the passenger side one will be the hardest to do)
brake master cylinder (bigger to run the larger bore calipers)
steering system (completely different)
driveshaft mating
wheel lug pattern changes
I think if this swap were done it would be highly worthwhile
using reverse cut axles to keep the pinion up higher.
>Why 60's? I said in a post a few weeks ago that you will really sacrafice
>ground clearance with 60's unless you are using 36" + tires. Why not custom
>44's or 9 inchers?
Yep. There are differing strengths in the various 44s and 60s. Some 44s
have relatively weak axle shafts (similar to Dana 30 shafts) and some
60s have shafts similar to 44s.
Runar had asked me about the possibility of mating Toyota tubes and/or
flanges to a Dana 60 housing and running Toyota axle shafts (and brakes)
into a Dana 60 dif. Both use 1.30" - 30 spline axle shafts. I found out that
the spline shape is slightly different between the two. However, Summers
Brothers supposedly makes a Toyota/Dana 60 axle that uses the Dana 60
dif with Toy axle shafts. They simply run the Toy shafts thru the 60
spline tooling to slightly modify the Toy splines.
I have yet to break an axle (knocking on wood now). I don't feel a swap
to 44s would buy me enough extra strength to make it worthwhile. It
would make doing crossover steering easier though. For what I do, I
think 60s would be way too bulky. So my philosophy (as if someone
actually asked ;-) ......babble babble) is that I'm fine until I break
an axle. When I do break one, I'll replace it with one of the spares
I carry. The way I see it, I don't need to upgrade to bigger axles
until breakage becomes repititive (and annoying) in my case. Toy
axles are really quite strong........
One thing too.....if you do build a custom axle and then break it,
you had better have a "custom" spare with you to repair it
'cause your buddies stock spares won't fit. But.....if you never
break the 60 or whatever......it won't matter.
Now steering arms.....that's another matter..........snap it went.
______________________________________________
Jay Kopycinski '85 Toylet (ROKTOY)
Gilbert, AZ '91 4Runner (hers)
ryna10@email.sps.mot.com '72 Jeep Commando
http://www.netzone.com/~jayk '97 H-D Sportster
Arizona Lo-Rangers 4WD Club TLCA #3243
______________________________________________
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 13 Oct 1997 10:15:57 -0700
From: "Jay Kopycinski"
Subject: Stronger Toy axles
To: "Toyota 4x4 List"
Subject: Time: 9:01 AM
OFFICE MEMO Stronger Toy axles Date: 10/13/97
I saw a vendor display this past weekend for a company out of Washington
called Turbo Direct. They are building high perfomance Toy front and rear
live axles. What they basically do is cut the third member circle out of the
middle of a Toy axle and replace it with a Chrysler 8.75" housing circle.
So....you end up with an axle with all the Toy axle tubes, brackets, flanges,
etc. but with a heavier third member. You simply swap your axle shafts,
brakes and other goodies into the axle housing they sell you.
They can provide open, limited slip, or locker carriers and they use specially
splined carrier pieces to accept the Toy axles. The Chrysler unit uses a third
member that looks quite similar to the Toy third member, but everything is
much beefier. The carrier is bigger, the pinion gears and shaft are larger,
and the ring gear is much heavier.
I talked to the guy a while and he commented on how the Toy units fail under
hard use. When lots of power is applied the ring gear will flex away from
the pinion and good gear contact is lost. The resulting slop or minimal gear
contact causes the ring and pinion teeth to shear in this case.
In cases where lots of power is repeatedly clutch dumped into the carrier
the pins holding the spider gears actually wear the cast iron carrier so
the spider gears start to move around a bit. After some time, things start
wearing and breaking.
They have front live axles and both width rear axles available. They recommend
having a custom driveshaft (or parts) made to mate to the Chrysler open yoke
end. Ground clearance loss is 3/4".
The idea sounds pretty good. What this does not address is the weakest link
in the front axle and that is Birfield breakage. Looks like a good
application for these axles is hard street or mud use when coupled with a
hot V6 or V8 engine.
Their kits include new ring & pinion, seal, bearings, new carrier bearings,
new spider gears, new seal kit installed, new gasket and crush sleeve.
M-T79-M-U85 rear assembly is $1795
M-T86-M-U95 add $150
rebuilt positraction unit add $400
Richmond gears add $205
new positraction unit add $195 more
$200 core charge refunded immediately on receipt of core
It ain't cheap........but it is a nice clean bolt-on setup.
______________________________________________
Jay Kopycinski '85 Toylet (ROKTOY)
Gilbert, AZ '91 4Runner (hers)
ryna10@email.sps.mot.com '72 Jeep Commando
http://www.netzone.com/~jayk '97 H-D Sportster
Arizona Lo-Rangers 4WD Club TLCA #3243
______________________________________________
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 11:08:27 -0700
From: "Mathieu Noualy"
Subject: welding to axle
Luke,
I did the traction bar on my rear diff about a three weeks ago and did weld
to the housing without removing it. It makes it a bit tougher to weld. Since
I was going to change the oil anyway, I left it in to dissipate the heat. I
highly recommend changing the oil after your done welding since the
localized heat with thermally crack the oil. Damaging gaskets and seals?
Depends on where you weld. If it's right beside the third member, it
shoudn't be any problem.
Mathieu Noualy
1985 4runner, 5"springs, 3" body, 350 Chev, TH350 trans, 4.37's,
front & rear Lockrights, custom bumpers, Warn 8000, 35" Kelly DTR's, etc...
____________________________________________________________________
Luke P Miller wrote:
Subject: Welding to axle
What's the consensus on welding to the axle housing (not the third member
itself)? Should the third member be pull out, and everything inside
cleaned? Or could I just weld next to the third member with it still in
place? Mainly I'm worried about damaging stuff with the heat (or blowing
myself up).
I'm guessing that with gear oil still in place, the heat from welding
would be absorbed, lessening the chances of hurting something. I'm just
thinking about mounting a traction bar to the rear axle at some point in
the future.
Luke Miller
============================================================================
Toyota 4x4 page: http://www.off-road.com/4x4web/toyota
------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 14:59:40 -0800 (PST)
From: rick99@jps.net (Rick Murray)
Subject: welding to axle
I had a traction bar welded to my rear axle. No problems.
Purchased it from RMOR in Colorado, and had it welded on by
someone who knows how to weld. I'm not a welder, myself.
OK to do, so long as its done right. Toyota axle housings
are beefier than most, and can take a weld.
##################################################################
Rick Murray 22R motor ; 3-inch lift
84 Toyota 4Runner SR5 33" BFG M/Ts ; 4.88 gears
Rancho Cordova, Ca. Rancho 9000's ; on-board air
http://www.jps.net/rick99/ Marlin TCase #67 ; TRD LSD
##################################################################
============================================================================
Toyota 4x4 page: http://www.off-road.com/4x4web/toyota
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 22:38:22 -0700
From: "jskaggs"
Subject: Re: Rear Axle
>I'm about to buy a used complete rear axle assembly. I know that 86 and
>ups have a 3" wider track. I'm wondering what experiences, good or bad,
>people have had with swapping to the wider axle.
>
>For example, when in mud, does the rear get squirelly because it can't sit
>in the same ruts as the front? or is this good, giving the rear better
>traction?
It doesn't seem to have any problems like that.
>Do you find yourself catching the rear on obstacles more?
No, not that I've noticed. It is three inches wider but that's only 1 1/2"
on each side.
>I know that it will vastly improve articulation and stability.
I don't know for sure if it vastly improved articulation because I did a
suspension change at the same time.
You will also need to get the 86 and up U-Bolts and clamp or perch or what
ever it is called the part that the shock mounts to, because the axle tube
is larger in diameter.
John Skaggs
TLCA# 5560
Visalia, CA
thunder90@msn.com
------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 23:39:15 -0700
From: "jskaggs"
Subject: Re: wider rear axle
>I was wondering if anyone who has switched to a
>wider (86 and up) rearend on a solid axle toy could
>provide me some info.
>
>1) Is there 3 different width rear ends?
> 79-85 then 86-89 then 90-up?
Not sure about this one.
>2) Is the diameter of the axle tube wider on the 86up axles
> compared to the 79-85? I want to use the Ubolt and shock
> mount plate that are on my 81 rearend.
Yes it is a larger diameter tube, no you can't use your 81 U-bolts or
mount plate.
>3)Will my drums bolt onto the newer axles.
> I plan to go to discs in the future so this might save me a
> bit of screwing around.
No-your old drums will not bolt up to the new axle. The axle has larger
brakes and also a larger flange.
>Any other tips that anyone could provide me that have done
>this swap would also be greatly appreciated.
Nothing else I can think of right now.
John Skaggs
TLCA# 5560
Visalia, CA.
Thunder90@msn.com
85 4Runner
---------------------------
Back to the top of this thread
Back to the top of the Hub-Axle-Tire Threads Group
Back to the top of the Technical Discussion Groups
Back to the top of the Toy Thread Tree