Notices

Cheap Axle Alternative

 
Old 06-03-2012, 09:30 PM
  #76  
blown 944
Super User
 
blown 944's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Firestone, Colorado
Posts: 4,826
Default

Originally Posted by 95ONE View Post
Sure it does. The transaxle always twists a certain way when under acceleration, and over time as the already loose tolerance trans mount wears, it allows more movement. This movement is always the same, twisting more and more as the mount wears, and binds the cage at angles it cant handle. This angle twists and moves in a way that puts more stress on the drivers side. That is why the drivers side is more apt to break.

This^

I have also looked into another reason the axle cages break after many miles and I have come to the conclusion that the cage and ball wear gets to the point where the ***** extend past the cage enough to become dis-engaged.

I found this when I heard the axle hitting the outer hub. I am working on a delrin plug that will limit the total lateral travel of the axle shaft so it will remain in the optimum position even when worn.
blown 944 is offline  
Old 06-03-2012, 11:17 PM
  #77  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by blown 944 View Post

I have also looked into another reason the axle cages break after many miles and I have come to the conclusion that the cage and ball wear gets to the point where the ***** extend past the cage enough to become dis-engaged.

I found this when I heard the axle hitting the outer hub. I am working on a delrin plug that will limit the total lateral travel of the axle shaft so it will remain in the optimum position even when worn.
The cage on my CV hasn't broken in fact it looks to be in pretty good condition. Although in time it may have if I hadn't caught it now. But had it gone onto break, it would have been for the lack of lubrication, and not just typical wear. At 95k I don't have any evidence that there was any excessive side way movement. The end of the axles are unscathed and the wheel hub still has grease in it nice and smooth. The picture is from the CV joint next to the TA. No way the axle could hit in the TA hub because its more funnel shaped and way to deep.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-03-2012, 11:22 PM
  #78  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by 95ONE View Post
Sure it does. The transaxle always twists a certain way when under acceleration, and over time as the already loose tolerance trans mount wears, it allows more movement. This movement is always the same, twisting more and more as the mount wears, and binds the cage at angles it cant handle. This angle twists and moves laterally in a way that puts more stress on the drivers side. That is why the drivers side is more apt to break.
No offense but there is some conjecture here. All things being relatively equal on both sides of the TA, how do you establish everything always twists in a certain way? How do you know that the movements are always the same and how is it known that it always puts more stress on only the driverís side? For all practical purposes, my TA mount looked as good as new. After I cleaned it up good, I could not find any cracks or striations of any kind. This is my point.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-03-2012, 11:32 PM
  #79  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Regarding cages breaking, there are some known issues with breakage sometimes when people buy a kit and rebuild themselves. Bill & I discussed this and the importance of re-assembling the cages correctly when repairing the joint. Although it’s relatively simple, there is a way the Cross Grooved Joints are to be reassembled that can be overlooked. Because Cross Grooved Joints are cut at an angle, unlike a Double Offset CV Joint which the grooves are cut perpendicular, (or parallel with the axel bar), the orientation of the Outer Housing to the Inner Race must be correct. If not, the cage will definitely break. Attached is a PDF specifying how to re-assemble the joint.

Last edited by lejams; 03-14-2013 at 12:42 AM.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-04-2012, 12:35 AM
  #80  
95ONE
Super User
 
95ONE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 4,245
Default

Originally Posted by lejams View Post
No offense but there is some conjecture here. All things being relatively equal on both sides of the TA, how do you establish everything always twists in a certain way? How do you know that the movements are always the same and how is it known that it always puts more stress on only the driverís side? For all practical purposes, my TA mount looked as good as new. After I cleaned it up good, I could not find any cracks or striations of any kind. This is my point.
Because it does. centrifugal forces, velocity vectors and all those fancy things taking into account rotational and transversal pulls on the transmission when considering the torque from the motor twisting the whole assembly and the "pull" of the axles. Assuming this is happening when accelerating forward and not going in reverse. How exact would you like me to be in explaining this? Same angle and direction of deflection relative to intensity using stock mounting points and tolerance that gets looser with age on both ends. Damage varies with intensity depending on drivers right foot and, well, left foot too, hence your nice looking cages. Things are not equal on both sides of the TA.
95ONE is offline  
Old 06-04-2012, 10:39 PM
  #81  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

95ONE - Thanks for explaining, guess I should have been clearer. I was looking for something more tangible.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-04-2012, 11:58 PM
  #82  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by robstah View Post
I take it you have never seen an engine twitch to the passenger side during free rev before. Certain BMWs have issues with moneyshifting solely due to the engine twisting enough to cause the user to think he is shifting up, but rather shifting down. Worn motor and trans mounts tend to expedite the situation.
I know that engines and trans-axles shift, (within the tolerance of design). Was just trying to find out, in this case, what is causing things to wear more in one direction than the other. This was designed by Porsche to move laterally. Given that is happening within the designed tolerances, was really trying to find out what if any other parts are wearing and contributing.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-05-2012, 01:24 AM
  #83  
acorad
User
 
acorad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Agoura Hills, CA
Posts: 293
Default

Originally Posted by robstah View Post
Plus, due to the transaxle mount design, the assembly in the rear doesn't simply twist, but swings towards the driver's side.
Sounds pretty tangible to me.
acorad is offline  
Old 06-07-2012, 09:16 PM
  #84  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by V2Rocket_aka944 View Post
accurate enough for me, if you get a chance to do it. do it by itself and then (with you holding it - you not holding it) to see if theres any difference with your scale.
Using a digital bath scale, both the original oem & EMPI weigh about the same, i.e. 13lbs.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-07-2012, 09:50 PM
  #85  
V2Rocket
Rainman
Rennlist Member
 
V2Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 42,601
Default

Originally Posted by lejams View Post
Using a digital bath scale, both the original oem & EMPI weigh about the same, i.e. 13lbs.
So who'll be the first to machine up some titanium axles
V2Rocket is offline  
Old 06-25-2012, 09:53 PM
  #86  
bouldersyncro
New User
 
bouldersyncro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2
Default

Great thread!

I found this thread searching for information about installing 944 axles onto a Vanagon and thought I would throw in my $.02.

Just to be clear, Vanagon axles are 21.25 (540mm) inches long. I think that lejams meant that the 944 axles measured 21 1/8, not 24 1/8.

Anyway, some of us in the 4WD Vanagon Syncro world have lifted our vans for better off road performance and are looking for a CV joint with a greater ďMaximum AngularityĒ. The internet reports that the type 2 CVís on a Syncro are rated at 17*, whereas the type 4 CVís on the 944 are rated at 22*.

Thanks to lejams we now know that EMPI claims no variation in maximum angularity exist between the different types of CVís. However, I replaced one of my stock Syncro axles with the EMPI 90-6805 and noticed that my maximum suspension droop (before the CV starts binding) increased by over an inch with the EMPI axle. So apparently there is some difference in maximum angularity, just maybe not with EMPI CVís. The EMPI axle also measured 2-3mm thicker than the original Syncro axle. This all seems like good news for those of you running EMPI Vanagon axles on a 944, as they seem to offer a thicker (stronger?) shaft and greater maximum angularity than the original Vanagon shaft.

However the general wisdom of the Syncro community is that EMPI axles and CVís are not to be trusted off road and are breaking at a significantly higher rate than the OE (GKN/Lobro) axles. These failures are in off road conditions, many times with one wheel off the ground and diff locks engaged and not while on a track (ha!) or daily driving. Being that AAA does not come get me if I break an axle up some Jeep trail I have just bought a pair of new Lobro 944 axles for my Syncro. Ironically new GKN Syncro axles are not available. Once they arrive Iíll compare them to the EMPI and OE Syncro axles and report back.
bouldersyncro is offline  
Old 06-26-2012, 11:23 PM
  #87  
dmcampbell
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
dmcampbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 436
Default

I found correct part on Parts Geek. Any track use updates on these axles? I need new ones and would rather swap than rebuild. Thanks, Mike

Last edited by dmcampbell; 06-27-2012 at 10:03 AM.
dmcampbell is offline  
Old 06-27-2012, 10:48 PM
  #88  
pontifex4
Super User
 
pontifex4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 3,388
Default

Originally Posted by bouldersyncro View Post
Great thread!

I found this thread searching for information about installing 944 axles onto a Vanagon and thought I would throw in my $.02.

Just to be clear, Vanagon axles are 21.25 (540mm) inches long. I think that lejams meant that the 944 axles measured 21 1/8, not 24 1/8.

Anyway, some of us in the 4WD Vanagon Syncro world have lifted our vans for better off road performance and are looking for a CV joint with a greater ďMaximum AngularityĒ. The internet reports that the type 2 CVís on a Syncro are rated at 17*, whereas the type 4 CVís on the 944 are rated at 22*.

Thanks to lejams we now know that EMPI claims no variation in maximum angularity exist between the different types of CVís. However, I replaced one of my stock Syncro axles with the EMPI 90-6805 and noticed that my maximum suspension droop (before the CV starts binding) increased by over an inch with the EMPI axle. So apparently there is some difference in maximum angularity, just maybe not with EMPI CVís. The EMPI axle also measured 2-3mm thicker than the original Syncro axle. This all seems like good news for those of you running EMPI Vanagon axles on a 944, as they seem to offer a thicker (stronger?) shaft and greater maximum angularity than the original Vanagon shaft.

However the general wisdom of the Syncro community is that EMPI axles and CVís are not to be trusted off road and are breaking at a significantly higher rate than the OE (GKN/Lobro) axles. These failures are in off road conditions, many times with one wheel off the ground and diff locks engaged and not while on a track (ha!) or daily driving. Being that AAA does not come get me if I break an axle up some Jeep trail I have just bought a pair of new Lobro 944 axles for my Syncro. Ironically new GKN Syncro axles are not available. Once they arrive Iíll compare them to the EMPI and OE Syncro axles and report back.
Great first post, and welcome!
pontifex4 is offline  
Old 06-27-2012, 10:52 PM
  #89  
lejams
User
 
lejams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Smoke Rise, GA
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by bouldersyncro View Post
Great thread!

I found this thread searching for information about installing 944 axles onto a Vanagon and thought I would throw in my $.02.

Just to be clear, Vanagon axles are 21.25 (540mm) inches long. I think that lejams meant that the 944 axles measured 21 1/8, not 24 1/8.

Anyway, some of us in the 4WD Vanagon Syncro world have lifted our vans for better off road performance and are looking for a CV joint with a greater ďMaximum AngularityĒ. The internet reports that the type 2 CVís on a Syncro are rated at 17*, whereas the type 4 CVís on the 944 are rated at 22*.

Thanks to lejams we now know that EMPI claims no variation in maximum angularity exist between the different types of CVís. However, I replaced one of my stock Syncro axles with the EMPI 90-6805 and noticed that my maximum suspension droop (before the CV starts binding) increased by over an inch with the EMPI axle. So apparently there is some difference in maximum angularity, just maybe not with EMPI CVís. The EMPI axle also measured 2-3mm thicker than the original Syncro axle. This all seems like good news for those of you running EMPI Vanagon axles on a 944, as they seem to offer a thicker (stronger?) shaft and greater maximum angularity than the original Vanagon shaft.

However the general wisdom of the Syncro community is that EMPI axles and CVís are not to be trusted off road and are breaking at a significantly higher rate than the OE (GKN/Lobro) axles. These failures are in off road conditions, many times with one wheel off the ground and diff locks engaged and not while on a track (ha!) or daily driving. Being that AAA does not come get me if I break an axle up some Jeep trail I have just bought a pair of new Lobro 944 axles for my Syncro. Ironically new GKN Syncro axles are not available. Once they arrive Iíll compare them to the EMPI and OE Syncro axles and report back.
Thanks for correcting my error on the axle length. You are correct and it should have read 21-1/8Ē.

Interesting about your findings on the differences between the EMPI & GKN/Lobroís. You may find it beneficial to talk with Bill @ EMPI sometime. Apparently, although the SAE standard on all Cross Grooved Joints as Bill read from the book, is a maximum angularity of 25 degrees. Maybe globally not all manufactures comply for one reason or another? I donít know under what circumstances, if or how, SAE standards interact globally, but in accordance with your finding, sounds like there can be differences.

I donít have many miles on the EMPIís yet, but so far so good. However, even though your use is off-roading, which probably neither manufacture intended to warrant, Iím a little disappointed to hear that the EMPIís are not meeting some of the same stresses as the Lobroís.
lejams is offline  
Old 06-27-2012, 11:00 PM
  #90  
Reimu
Super User
 
Reimu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NC Triad
Posts: 2,600
Default

How are you guys bracing the trans?
Reimu is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: