D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net
to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around
here.

But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if
it still uses the c-clips.

And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Mike,
They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

> GzrGlide wrote:
>
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the
> net to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily
> around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's
> the point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem
> area in the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to
> an 8.8 if it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
> work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Mike,
They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

> GzrGlide wrote:
>
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the
> net to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily
> around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's
> the point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem
> area in the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to
> an 8.8 if it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
> work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Mike,
They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

> GzrGlide wrote:
>
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the
> net to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily
> around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's
> the point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem
> area in the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to
> an 8.8 if it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
> work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
c-clip itself.

The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.

So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).

So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
stronger than expected.

Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
other applications.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.

But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
still uses the c-clips.

And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
c-clip itself.

The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.

So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).

So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
stronger than expected.

Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
other applications.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.

But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
still uses the c-clips.

And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
c-clip itself.

The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.

So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).

So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
stronger than expected.

Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
other applications.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.

But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
still uses the c-clips.

And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
> tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
> c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
> other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
> shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
> c-clip itself.
>
> The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
> axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
> at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
> So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
> the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
> the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
> goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
> So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> stronger than expected.
>
> Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
> and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> other applications.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
> I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
> swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
> d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
> tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
> c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
> other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
> shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
> c-clip itself.
>
> The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
> axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
> at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
> So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
> the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
> the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
> goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
> So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> stronger than expected.
>
> Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
> and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> other applications.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
> I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
> swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
> d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
> tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
> c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
> other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
> shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
> c-clip itself.
>
> The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
> axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
> at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
> So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
> the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
> the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
> goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
> So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> stronger than expected.
>
> Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
> and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> other applications.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>
> "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford 8.8.
> I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do the
> swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in the
> d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.

Jerry
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> > That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> > axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
wive's
> > tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
a
> > c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
the
> > other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
the
> > shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
the
> > c-clip itself.
> >
> > The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
the
> > axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> > wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
will
> > at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
> >
> > So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
with
> > the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
that
> > the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
c-clip
> > goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
> >
> > So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> > recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> > stronger than expected.
> >
> > Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
racers
> > and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> > other applications.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> > news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> > I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
8.8.
> > I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> > d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
the
> > swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
> >
> > But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> > point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
the
> > d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> > still uses the c-clips.
> >
> > And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
work?
> >
> > Mike
> > 98 TJ SE
> > 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> > A bunch of home-made stuff.
> >
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> Pronunciation: 'jEp
> Function: noun
> Date: 1940
>
> Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
> 1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
> World War II.
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.

Jerry
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> > That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> > axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
wive's
> > tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
a
> > c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
the
> > other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
the
> > shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
the
> > c-clip itself.
> >
> > The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
the
> > axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> > wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
will
> > at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
> >
> > So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
with
> > the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
that
> > the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
c-clip
> > goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
> >
> > So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> > recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> > stronger than expected.
> >
> > Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
racers
> > and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> > other applications.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> > news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> > I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
8.8.
> > I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> > d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
the
> > swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
> >
> > But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> > point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
the
> > d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> > still uses the c-clips.
> >
> > And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
work?
> >
> > Mike
> > 98 TJ SE
> > 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> > A bunch of home-made stuff.
> >
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> Pronunciation: 'jEp
> Function: noun
> Date: 1940
>
> Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
> 1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
> World War II.
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.

Jerry
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> > That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
> > axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
wive's
> > tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
a
> > c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
the
> > other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
the
> > shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
the
> > c-clip itself.
> >
> > The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
the
> > axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
> > wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
will
> > at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
> >
> > So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
with
> > the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
that
> > the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
c-clip
> > goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
> >
> > So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
> > recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
> > stronger than expected.
> >
> > Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
racers
> > and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
> > other applications.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> > news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
> > I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
8.8.
> > I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
> > d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
the
> > swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
> >
> > But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> > point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
the
> > d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
> > still uses the c-clips.
> >
> > And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
work?
> >
> > Mike
> > 98 TJ SE
> > 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> > A bunch of home-made stuff.
> >
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> Pronunciation: 'jEp
> Function: noun
> Date: 1940
>
> Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
> A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
> 1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
> World War II.
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

GzrGlide wrote:
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net
> to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around
> here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
> the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if
> it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
because they are 31 spline instead of 27.

im going to get rid of my NON C-CLIP dana 35 for one. and it will be an
upgrade, no question.. the C-CLIPS do not fail! the shafts of the 35 do.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

GzrGlide wrote:
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net
> to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around
> here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
> the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if
> it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
because they are 31 spline instead of 27.

im going to get rid of my NON C-CLIP dana 35 for one. and it will be an
upgrade, no question.. the C-CLIPS do not fail! the shafts of the 35 do.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

GzrGlide wrote:
> I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
> 8.8. I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap
> for the d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net
> to do the swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around
> here.
>
> But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
> point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
> the d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if
> it still uses the c-clips.
>
> And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators work?
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
because they are 31 spline instead of 27.

im going to get rid of my NON C-CLIP dana 35 for one. and it will be an
upgrade, no question.. the C-CLIPS do not fail! the shafts of the 35 do.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Thanks!

Jerry Bransford wrote:

> "twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
>
>>There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
>>pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
>>this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>
> The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
> shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
> stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
> easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
> quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
> prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.
>
> Jerry
>
>>Jerry Bransford wrote:
>>
>>>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>>>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
>
> wive's
>
>>>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
>
> a
>
>>>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
>
> the
>
>>>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
>
> the
>
>>>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
>
> the
>
>>>c-clip itself.
>>>
>>>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
>
> the
>
>>>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>>>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
>
> will
>
>>>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>>>
>>>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
>
> with
>
>>>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
>
> that
>
>>>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
>
> c-clip
>
>>>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>>>
>>>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>>>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>>>stronger than expected.
>>>
>>>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
>
> racers
>
>>>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>>>other applications.
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>--
>>>Jerry Bransford
>>>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>>>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>>>See the Geezer Jeep at
>>>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>>>
>>>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
>>>I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
>
> 8.8.
>
>>>I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
>>>d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
>
> the
>
>>>swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>>>
>>>But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
>>>point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
>
> the
>
>>>d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
>>>still uses the c-clips.
>>>
>>>And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
>
> work?
>
>>>Mike
>>>98 TJ SE
>>>3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
>>>A bunch of home-made stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>tw
>>03 TJ Rubicon
>>01 XJ Sport
>>
>>There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
>>-- Dave Barry
>>
>>Pronunciation: 'jEp
>>Function: noun
>>Date: 1940
>>
>>Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
>>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
>>1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
>>World War II.
>>
>>http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
>>(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>
>
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Thanks!

Jerry Bransford wrote:

> "twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
>
>>There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
>>pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
>>this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>
> The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
> shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
> stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
> easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
> quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
> prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.
>
> Jerry
>
>>Jerry Bransford wrote:
>>
>>>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>>>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
>
> wive's
>
>>>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
>
> a
>
>>>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
>
> the
>
>>>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
>
> the
>
>>>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
>
> the
>
>>>c-clip itself.
>>>
>>>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
>
> the
>
>>>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>>>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
>
> will
>
>>>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>>>
>>>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
>
> with
>
>>>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
>
> that
>
>>>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
>
> c-clip
>
>>>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>>>
>>>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>>>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>>>stronger than expected.
>>>
>>>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
>
> racers
>
>>>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>>>other applications.
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>--
>>>Jerry Bransford
>>>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>>>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>>>See the Geezer Jeep at
>>>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>>>
>>>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
>>>I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
>
> 8.8.
>
>>>I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
>>>d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
>
> the
>
>>>swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>>>
>>>But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
>>>point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
>
> the
>
>>>d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
>>>still uses the c-clips.
>>>
>>>And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
>
> work?
>
>>>Mike
>>>98 TJ SE
>>>3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
>>>A bunch of home-made stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>tw
>>03 TJ Rubicon
>>01 XJ Sport
>>
>>There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
>>-- Dave Barry
>>
>>Pronunciation: 'jEp
>>Function: noun
>>Date: 1940
>>
>>Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
>>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
>>1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
>>World War II.
>>
>>http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
>>(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>
>
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Thanks!

Jerry Bransford wrote:

> "twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:DGamb.739$Md5.710@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com. ..
>
>>There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
>>pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
>>this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>
> The key items that makes the 8.8 stronger are its larger diameter axle
> shafts and larger ring & pinion gears. I would assume its axle housing is
> stronger too. The 8.8 is a better conversion for a CJ/YJ because it's
> easier to bolt up due to them all being leaf spring designs. The 8.8 needs
> quite a bit more work (adding brackets for the control arms and trackbar) to
> prepare it for a coil sprung TJ.
>
> Jerry
>
>>Jerry Bransford wrote:
>>
>>>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>>>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old
>
> wive's
>
>>>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how
>
> a
>
>>>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on
>
> the
>
>>>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when
>
> the
>
>>>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at
>
> the
>
>>>c-clip itself.
>>>
>>>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if
>
> the
>
>>>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>>>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which
>
> will
>
>>>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>>>
>>>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's
>
> with
>
>>>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and
>
> that
>
>>>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the
>
> c-clip
>
>>>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>>>
>>>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>>>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>>>stronger than expected.
>>>
>>>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag
>
> racers
>
>>>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>>>other applications.
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>--
>>>Jerry Bransford
>>>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>>>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>>>See the Geezer Jeep at
>>>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>>>
>>>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:nl3mb.11221$0M6.15635@news1.mts.net...
>>>I'm starting to do some research into changing the D35c axle to a Ford
>
> 8.8.
>
>>>I'm looking at the 8.8 because it seems to be a very common swap for the
>>>d35c on Tjs, because there's a ton of info out there on the net to do
>
> the
>
>>>swap and because I could probably get one fairly easily around here.
>>>
>>>But....I just read on a website that the 8.8 uses c-clips. So what's the
>>>point of swapping it out. I thought the c-clips were the problem area in
>
> the
>
>>>d35c. Why would I want to go to the trouble of switchng to an 8.8 if it
>>>still uses the c-clips.
>>>
>>>And can someone give me a detailed answer about how c-clip eliminators
>
> work?
>
>>>Mike
>>>98 TJ SE
>>>3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
>>>A bunch of home-made stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>tw
>>03 TJ Rubicon
>>01 XJ Sport
>>
>>There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
>>-- Dave Barry
>>
>>Pronunciation: 'jEp
>>Function: noun
>>Date: 1940
>>
>>Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
>>A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
>>1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
>>World War II.
>>
>>http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
>>(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
>>________________________________________________ ___________
>>
>
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
have the one piece upgrade:
http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

twaldron wrote:
>
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
have the one piece upgrade:
http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

twaldron wrote:
>
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
have the one piece upgrade:
http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

twaldron wrote:
>
> There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
axles for my AMC 20

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> have the one piece upgrade:
> http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> twaldron wrote:
> >
> > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
axles for my AMC 20

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> have the one piece upgrade:
> http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> twaldron wrote:
> >
> > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
axles for my AMC 20

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> have the one piece upgrade:
> http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> twaldron wrote:
> >
> > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Be aware that some aftermarket "one piece" AMC 20 axles are nothing more
than cheap imports where they were originally two-piece axles that were
cheaply welded and made to look like a one-piece axle. The only brand I
truly trust is Superior Axle and to some extent, the less beefy Moser.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"Greg" <greglc84@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYimb.168673$9l5.15945@pd7tw2no...
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> > The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> > have the one piece upgrade:
> > http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > twaldron wrote:
> > >
> > > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Be aware that some aftermarket "one piece" AMC 20 axles are nothing more
than cheap imports where they were originally two-piece axles that were
cheaply welded and made to look like a one-piece axle. The only brand I
truly trust is Superior Axle and to some extent, the less beefy Moser.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"Greg" <greglc84@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYimb.168673$9l5.15945@pd7tw2no...
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> > The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> > have the one piece upgrade:
> > http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > twaldron wrote:
> > >
> > > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Be aware that some aftermarket "one piece" AMC 20 axles are nothing more
than cheap imports where they were originally two-piece axles that were
cheaply welded and made to look like a one-piece axle. The only brand I
truly trust is Superior Axle and to some extent, the less beefy Moser.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"Greg" <greglc84@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYimb.168673$9l5.15945@pd7tw2no...
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:3F9982D6.F1CCA5DC@cox.net...
> > The AMC 20 is stronger than the Dana 44, once like the 44, they
> > have the one piece upgrade:
> > http://www.ring-pinion.com/tech/tech.asp?page=g0898
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > twaldron wrote:
> > >
> > > There's some info. I didn't have. I thought the d44 and the 8.8 were
> > > pretty comparable. What makes the 8.8 stonger than the d44? Also, it
> > > this a logical conversion for a CJ with a 20 axle?
>
>

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Greg,
Be sure and use the palm of your hand to push the grease through
the bearing to pack them, if they came with the regular inner seal,
indicating they are not lubed by the differential lube, like the
Jeepettes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Greg wrote:
>
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Greg,
Be sure and use the palm of your hand to push the grease through
the bearing to pack them, if they came with the regular inner seal,
indicating they are not lubed by the differential lube, like the
Jeepettes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Greg wrote:
>
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Hi Greg,
Be sure and use the palm of your hand to push the grease through
the bearing to pack them, if they came with the regular inner seal,
indicating they are not lubed by the differential lube, like the
Jeepettes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Greg wrote:
>
> Nice to here since I just placed an order yesterday for Yukon one peice
> axles for my AMC 20

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:

>Hi Mike,
> They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
>keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
>Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
>they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Thanks for the link Bill.
Appreciate it.

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:

>Hi Mike,
> They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
>keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
>Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
>they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Thanks for the link Bill.
Appreciate it.

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:

>Hi Mike,
> They're just blocks that bolt over the now pressed on bearing to
>keep them from sliding out: http://www.precisiongear.com/cclip.htm The
>Ford axle is 1.32" opposed to Chrysler, Daimler's idea of 1.16", so
>they'll probably take the power of an old Rambler engine.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Thanks for the link Bill.
Appreciate it.

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Jerry Bransford wrote:

>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
>c-clip itself.
>
>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>stronger than expected.
>
>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>other applications.
>
>Jerry
>--
>Jerry Bransford
>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>See the Geezer Jeep at
>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>

Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
would make my day!

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Jerry Bransford wrote:

>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
>c-clip itself.
>
>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>stronger than expected.
>
>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>other applications.
>
>Jerry
>--
>Jerry Bransford
>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>See the Geezer Jeep at
>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>

Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
would make my day!

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

Jerry Bransford wrote:

>That they're a c-clip design does not diminish the strength of the 8.8's
>axle shaft which is stronger than that of the Dana 44. It's an old wive's
>tale propogated by those that are either naive or know nothing about how a
>c-clip axle works. Remember that the c-clip is inside the housing, on the
>other side of the splines that are held by the gear carrier. So when the
>shafts break, they break between the housing and the hub flange, not at the
>c-clip itself.
>
>The problem with c-clip axles is not with the c-clip itself, its that if the
>axle shaft does break, there is nothing left to hold the axle shaft and
>wheel to the housing... except if there is a disk brake caliper which will
>at least hold the broken shaft from sliding out of the housing.
>
>So with a Dana 35c, the weakness is not with the c-clip itself, it's with
>the skinny axle shafts (weaker housing, smalller ring gear, etc.) and that
>the axle will slide out if the axle shaft breaks. The part where the c-clip
>goes doesn't break, that is protected by the gear carrier (case).
>
>So a Ford 8.8 is actually quite a bit stronger than a Dana 44, like the
>recent Warn axle tests confirmed. In fact, Warn said the 8.8 was far
>stronger than expected.
>
>Finally, the 8.8's c-clip eliminator kit is only designed for drag racers
>and the manufacturers of that kit strongly recommend against its use for
>other applications.
>
>Jerry
>--
>Jerry Bransford
>To email, remove 'me' from my email address
>KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
>See the Geezer Jeep at
>http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/
>

Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
would make my day!

Mike
98 TJ SE
3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
A bunch of home-made stuff.

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

What years and models would these 8.8s be typically in?

GzrGlide wrote:


> Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
> The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
> would make my day!
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

What years and models would these 8.8s be typically in?

GzrGlide wrote:


> Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
> The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
> would make my day!
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Re: D35c to Ford 8.8 Swap. Why bother?
 

What years and models would these 8.8s be typically in?

GzrGlide wrote:


> Thanks for the explanation Jerry!
> The search is on. Now if I can find an 8.8 with 4.88s and a LSD, that
> would make my day!
>
> Mike
> 98 TJ SE
> 3" Redneck Engineering Lift, 30 x 9.5 BFG ATs
> A bunch of home-made stuff.
>
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940

Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________