replace it with a ford 8.8 which also has disk brakes.
cheap and stronger than a 44.
almost a bolt in fix.
old john

<Bertie Kemp> wrote in message news:OoOdnZixpt7dF8zfRVn-rg@is.co.za...
> Hello,
>
> I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to
replace
> the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
> Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
> scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should
not
> be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on
TJ
> parts but have a few questions:
> 1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a
TJ?
> (If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build,
will
> that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
> 2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
> (I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter
than
> the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to
be
> stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2
inch
> total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>
> Comments will be appreciated.
>
> Bertie.

 

replace it with a ford 8.8 which also has disk brakes.
cheap and stronger than a 44.
almost a bolt in fix.
old john

<Bertie Kemp> wrote in message news:OoOdnZixpt7dF8zfRVn-rg@is.co.za...
> Hello,
>
> I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to
replace
> the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
> Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
> scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should
not
> be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on
TJ
> parts but have a few questions:
> 1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a
TJ?
> (If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build,
will
> that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
> 2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
> (I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter
than
> the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to
be
> stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2
inch
> total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>
> Comments will be appreciated.
>
> Bertie.

 

replace it with a ford 8.8 which also has disk brakes.
cheap and stronger than a 44.
almost a bolt in fix.
old john

<Bertie Kemp> wrote in message news:OoOdnZixpt7dF8zfRVn-rg@is.co.za...
> Hello,
>
> I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to
replace
> the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
> Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
> scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should
not
> be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on
TJ
> parts but have a few questions:
> 1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a
TJ?
> (If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build,
will
> that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
> 2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
> (I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter
than
> the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to
be
> stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2
inch
> total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>
> Comments will be appreciated.
>
> Bertie.

 

(Hope my posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for the warning. Part of my D44 upgrade plan is to move the slip yoke
from the tranfer case output to the drive shaft. By shortening the TC shaft,
this will hopefulle compensate for the longer D44 pinion.

Bertie.

============
Steve wrote:
> At 3" lift you might risk punching the stock slip yoke home on the tcase
> tail shaft when you switch to a D44. With my swapped-in D44, 4.5" lift,
> longer rear spring shackles, and stock rear shaft, the slip yoke stops
> just short of hitting home in the tcase when the distance to the pinion
> is at the minimum. Be sure to test/calculate the excess slip space
> through your full range of rear suspension travel.
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>> Thanks, you confirm my suspicions (hopes). So a right-hand shaft is
>> not weaker when fitted to the left-hand side and asked to torque in
>> its opposite direction?
>> My Jeep is lifted (about 3" in the back).
>>
>> Bertie.
>>
>> ============
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> Note that the D44 pinion is 1" longer than the D35. If you are
>>> lifted, this is great, otherwise you may need a shortened drive shaft.

 

(Hope my posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for the warning. Part of my D44 upgrade plan is to move the slip yoke
from the tranfer case output to the drive shaft. By shortening the TC shaft,
this will hopefulle compensate for the longer D44 pinion.

Bertie.

============
Steve wrote:
> At 3" lift you might risk punching the stock slip yoke home on the tcase
> tail shaft when you switch to a D44. With my swapped-in D44, 4.5" lift,
> longer rear spring shackles, and stock rear shaft, the slip yoke stops
> just short of hitting home in the tcase when the distance to the pinion
> is at the minimum. Be sure to test/calculate the excess slip space
> through your full range of rear suspension travel.
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>> Thanks, you confirm my suspicions (hopes). So a right-hand shaft is
>> not weaker when fitted to the left-hand side and asked to torque in
>> its opposite direction?
>> My Jeep is lifted (about 3" in the back).
>>
>> Bertie.
>>
>> ============
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> Note that the D44 pinion is 1" longer than the D35. If you are
>>> lifted, this is great, otherwise you may need a shortened drive shaft.

 

(Hope my posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for the warning. Part of my D44 upgrade plan is to move the slip yoke
from the tranfer case output to the drive shaft. By shortening the TC shaft,
this will hopefulle compensate for the longer D44 pinion.

Bertie.

============
Steve wrote:
> At 3" lift you might risk punching the stock slip yoke home on the tcase
> tail shaft when you switch to a D44. With my swapped-in D44, 4.5" lift,
> longer rear spring shackles, and stock rear shaft, the slip yoke stops
> just short of hitting home in the tcase when the distance to the pinion
> is at the minimum. Be sure to test/calculate the excess slip space
> through your full range of rear suspension travel.
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>> Thanks, you confirm my suspicions (hopes). So a right-hand shaft is
>> not weaker when fitted to the left-hand side and asked to torque in
>> its opposite direction?
>> My Jeep is lifted (about 3" in the back).
>>
>> Bertie.
>>
>> ============
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> Note that the D44 pinion is 1" longer than the D35. If you are
>>> lifted, this is great, otherwise you may need a shortened drive shaft.

 

(Hope my posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for the warning. Part of my D44 upgrade plan is to move the slip yoke
from the tranfer case output to the drive shaft. By shortening the TC shaft,
this will hopefulle compensate for the longer D44 pinion.

Bertie.

============
Steve wrote:
> At 3" lift you might risk punching the stock slip yoke home on the tcase
> tail shaft when you switch to a D44. With my swapped-in D44, 4.5" lift,
> longer rear spring shackles, and stock rear shaft, the slip yoke stops
> just short of hitting home in the tcase when the distance to the pinion
> is at the minimum. Be sure to test/calculate the excess slip space
> through your full range of rear suspension travel.
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>> Thanks, you confirm my suspicions (hopes). So a right-hand shaft is
>> not weaker when fitted to the left-hand side and asked to torque in
>> its opposite direction?
>> My Jeep is lifted (about 3" in the back).
>>
>> Bertie.
>>
>> ============
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> Note that the D44 pinion is 1" longer than the D35. If you are
>>> lifted, this is great, otherwise you may need a shortened drive shaft.

 

(I hope this posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for alerting me to my out of sync postings. Because I never sent
messages to myself, and no-one else complained, I was not aware of it. Also,
my home language is not english, so when you spoke of Windows I thought you
meant Windows tm and not operating systems in general, same as some people
refer to all off-road 4WD vehicles as Jeeps. In my operating system the time
zone is determined by a variable called TZ which contains fields to describe
the actual zone, the relation to UTC, and information about the day light
saving period. TZ can be modified manually or set by the OS. As far as I can
determine, setting it by the OS gives a valid variable, unless standards have
changed recently (example BST = British Summer Time (in which I am not) or BST
= Bravo Standard Time (in which I am apparently now) although previously I was
in SAT = South African Time). Also, without day light saving, the rest of the
fields are zeros. However, this all seems to confuse the hell out of Mozilla,
which is still a work in progress, and after many trail e-mails to myself I
now have a day light saving (1 second) period of 1 day in January and yes, I
had to move to BST. This brought my postings to myself in sync and I hope it
works when crossing time zones as well. I still think the problem lies with
Mozilla.

Bertie.

============================
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I run Netscape too, but is your Operating System, that's place
> you enter your time zone, like where you are on this earth compared to
> Greenwich, England, so we may all be on the same page. This is what we
> see: http://www.----------.com/wrongTime.jpg you posted at 4/5/05 2:49
> AM, well it's only 4/4/05 10:49 PM PDT and it throws our news order out
> of sequence.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>>Thanks,
>>I shall ask about the YJs here.
>>My computer's time is fine. I do not run Windows so this must be a Mozilla
>>thing. Your message is shown as 8.45pm which, if you have replied soon after
>>I had posted, was our local time.
>>
>>Bertie.
>>
>>============================
>>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
>>
>>> It is rumored that all export YJs have the Dana 44, too.
>>> Many here convert to the 8.8", found in the small Fords, like the
>>>Mustang, Ranger, or Explorer:
>>>http://www.jedi.com/obiwan/jeep/ford88.html
>>> Your computer's time is set for the U.S.of A's mid west. If you are
>>>running Windows, You may correct it by right clicking the time in your
>>>lower right cornner, time zone, Cairo (?) if that's in your Longitude.
>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>"Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to replace
>>>>the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
>>>>Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
>>>>scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should not
>>>>be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on TJ
>>>>parts but have a few questions:
>>>>1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a TJ?
>>>>(If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build, will
>>>>that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
>>>>2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
>>>>(I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter than
>>>>the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to be
>>>>stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2 inch
>>>>total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>>>>
>>>>Comments will be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>Bertie.

 

(I hope this posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for alerting me to my out of sync postings. Because I never sent
messages to myself, and no-one else complained, I was not aware of it. Also,
my home language is not english, so when you spoke of Windows I thought you
meant Windows tm and not operating systems in general, same as some people
refer to all off-road 4WD vehicles as Jeeps. In my operating system the time
zone is determined by a variable called TZ which contains fields to describe
the actual zone, the relation to UTC, and information about the day light
saving period. TZ can be modified manually or set by the OS. As far as I can
determine, setting it by the OS gives a valid variable, unless standards have
changed recently (example BST = British Summer Time (in which I am not) or BST
= Bravo Standard Time (in which I am apparently now) although previously I was
in SAT = South African Time). Also, without day light saving, the rest of the
fields are zeros. However, this all seems to confuse the hell out of Mozilla,
which is still a work in progress, and after many trail e-mails to myself I
now have a day light saving (1 second) period of 1 day in January and yes, I
had to move to BST. This brought my postings to myself in sync and I hope it
works when crossing time zones as well. I still think the problem lies with
Mozilla.

Bertie.

============================
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I run Netscape too, but is your Operating System, that's place
> you enter your time zone, like where you are on this earth compared to
> Greenwich, England, so we may all be on the same page. This is what we
> see: http://www.----------.com/wrongTime.jpg you posted at 4/5/05 2:49
> AM, well it's only 4/4/05 10:49 PM PDT and it throws our news order out
> of sequence.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>>Thanks,
>>I shall ask about the YJs here.
>>My computer's time is fine. I do not run Windows so this must be a Mozilla
>>thing. Your message is shown as 8.45pm which, if you have replied soon after
>>I had posted, was our local time.
>>
>>Bertie.
>>
>>============================
>>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
>>
>>> It is rumored that all export YJs have the Dana 44, too.
>>> Many here convert to the 8.8", found in the small Fords, like the
>>>Mustang, Ranger, or Explorer:
>>>http://www.jedi.com/obiwan/jeep/ford88.html
>>> Your computer's time is set for the U.S.of A's mid west. If you are
>>>running Windows, You may correct it by right clicking the time in your
>>>lower right cornner, time zone, Cairo (?) if that's in your Longitude.
>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>"Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to replace
>>>>the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
>>>>Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
>>>>scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should not
>>>>be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on TJ
>>>>parts but have a few questions:
>>>>1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a TJ?
>>>>(If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build, will
>>>>that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
>>>>2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
>>>>(I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter than
>>>>the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to be
>>>>stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2 inch
>>>>total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>>>>
>>>>Comments will be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>Bertie.

 

(I hope this posting is in sync now.)

Thanks for alerting me to my out of sync postings. Because I never sent
messages to myself, and no-one else complained, I was not aware of it. Also,
my home language is not english, so when you spoke of Windows I thought you
meant Windows tm and not operating systems in general, same as some people
refer to all off-road 4WD vehicles as Jeeps. In my operating system the time
zone is determined by a variable called TZ which contains fields to describe
the actual zone, the relation to UTC, and information about the day light
saving period. TZ can be modified manually or set by the OS. As far as I can
determine, setting it by the OS gives a valid variable, unless standards have
changed recently (example BST = British Summer Time (in which I am not) or BST
= Bravo Standard Time (in which I am apparently now) although previously I was
in SAT = South African Time). Also, without day light saving, the rest of the
fields are zeros. However, this all seems to confuse the hell out of Mozilla,
which is still a work in progress, and after many trail e-mails to myself I
now have a day light saving (1 second) period of 1 day in January and yes, I
had to move to BST. This brought my postings to myself in sync and I hope it
works when crossing time zones as well. I still think the problem lies with
Mozilla.

Bertie.

============================
L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I run Netscape too, but is your Operating System, that's place
> you enter your time zone, like where you are on this earth compared to
> Greenwich, England, so we may all be on the same page. This is what we
> see: http://www.----------.com/wrongTime.jpg you posted at 4/5/05 2:49
> AM, well it's only 4/4/05 10:49 PM PDT and it throws our news order out
> of sequence.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> "Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>
>>Thanks,
>>I shall ask about the YJs here.
>>My computer's time is fine. I do not run Windows so this must be a Mozilla
>>thing. Your message is shown as 8.45pm which, if you have replied soon after
>>I had posted, was our local time.
>>
>>Bertie.
>>
>>============================
>>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
>>
>>> It is rumored that all export YJs have the Dana 44, too.
>>> Many here convert to the 8.8", found in the small Fords, like the
>>>Mustang, Ranger, or Explorer:
>>>http://www.jedi.com/obiwan/jeep/ford88.html
>>> Your computer's time is set for the U.S.of A's mid west. If you are
>>>running Windows, You may correct it by right clicking the time in your
>>>lower right cornner, time zone, Cairo (?) if that's in your Longitude.
>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>>
>>>"Bertie Kemp" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a 2000 model XJ with a D35c rear axle (ratio 3.73). I plan to replace
>>>>the axle with a D44 but there are limited options available here in South
>>>>Africa (no real XJ D44s, no Scouts or Explorers, etc.). Older Jeeps are
>>>>scarce but recent models of ZJs, KJs and TJs are more plentiful and should not
>>>>be difficult to find parts for. Therefor I would like to base the D44 on TJ
>>>>parts but have a few questions:
>>>>1 - Is there a difference in width between the rear axle of an XJ and a TJ?
>>>>(If I use TJ shafts in whatever D44 pumpkin and customised tubes I build, will
>>>>that fit underneath my XJ? I have no room to go narrower.)
>>>>2 - Can I build the axle using two right-hand shafts?
>>>>(I see that the left-hand shaft of a TJ D44 (29-1/4) is slightly shorter than
>>>>the right-hand shaft (29-11/16). (Why?) Or are these shafts treated to be
>>>>stronger in their designed rotational direction? This could gain me 1/2 inch
>>>>total width and I would only need to carry one spare shaft.)
>>>>
>>>>Comments will be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>Bertie.