Lift & Driveline problems
12-30-2003, 10:00 PM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
12-30-2003, 10:28 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
In article <MYmIb.315$9G5.226531455@newssvr11.news.prodigy.co m>, twaldron
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:28 PM
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
In article <MYmIb.315$9G5.226531455@newssvr11.news.prodigy.co m>, twaldron
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:28 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
In article <MYmIb.315$9G5.226531455@newssvr11.news.prodigy.co m>, twaldron
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<thomas@OBVIOUSrubicons.com> writes:
>I can attest to that, Jerry. We lifted two Rubis (autos) 4.5" and both
>had driveline vibes before the Tom Woods CV shaft kits. It _might_ have
>been possible to tune out the vibes with just the control arms (I doubt
>it though), but the driveshaft would have been too short anyway.
>
>In a small way, the slip yoke does contribute to the vibes in that it
>effectively shortens an already short shaft somewhat. The slip yoke
>eliminator kit lengthens the main shaft which will help eliminate vibes.
>The difference is probably minute, but every bit helps. The main thing
>you need to do is change the driveshaft attitude to eliminate them
>completely.
Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
does not have in stock form.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:47 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
Would you believe the '02 Factory Repair Manual has it pictured:
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:47 PM
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
Would you believe the '02 Factory Repair Manual has it pictured:
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:47 PM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
Would you believe the '02 Factory Repair Manual has it pictured:
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
http://www.----------.com/03TJCV.pdf I guess they forgot to follow their
engineers.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Don't discount the role of the CV joint on the driveshaft, which the Rubicon
> does not have in stock form.
>
> * * *
> Matt Macchiarolo
> www.townpeddler.com
> www.wolverine4wd.org
> http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
12-30-2003, 10:49 PM
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
12-30-2003, 10:49 PM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
12-30-2003, 10:49 PM
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Lift & Driveline problems
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
news:3FF23BDF.DDD8AFE1@***.net...
> WRONG, as any high school Hot Rodder could tell you! Because of
> it's design, "Constant Velocity" it may rotate without shaking it's self
> apart at about twice that of a Cardan joint, at about thirty degrees.
> Did someone else put that 44 in for you?
Bill, I'm sure even you would have to agree that Tom Wood at Tom Wood's
Custom Driveshafts has forgotten more about such stuff than either you or
I... Tom also disagrees with you where he says:
"Many people mistakenly believe that a double cardan or C.V. type drive
shaft will allow for greater operating angles than a conventional 2 joint or
single cardan drive shaft. This is not true. Some types of C.V.'s will
actually incur a binding interference at less of an angle than a standard
two joint drive line, again depending on the individual components used.
Additionally the C.V. itself is longer than more conventional components and
will create a greater operating angle on the driveline, especially on very
short shafts."
The above was from Tom Wood's Tech Info page at http://www.4xshaft.com/
Since I am CERTAIN you will argue the point, do so with Tom Wood since he is
the guy that set me straight years ago when I was mistaken about the same
subject. Tom has a nifty email form you can fill in and send him the
information that will prove him wrong.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
> >
> > No, a CV (double-Cardin) joint does not allow a greater angle than a
> > conventional joint does, that is an old wive's tale.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/