Flame this! Dana44 front Dana 60 rear (2 Viewers)

[White Stripe]

if I were to go for wider axles on a 80 for more stability I would go 100 series axle for the rear. 100 axles are 65" wide. 200 series are even wider I believe at around 70". You would have to redrill the flanges for 6 lug. For the front I would cut off the knuckle balls and modify lcwizards housing spacers to work with the 80 knuckle balls-should be pretty straight forward-which would put the front wms to wms at about 68". You would need custom inner shafts, and a longer drag link and tie rod.

 

[nukegoat]

JHC that looks like crap. Talk about redneck. Your priorities are highly suspect. Have you no shame? I mean, didn't they have any decent tape for that taillight? The color's off, and I'd bet there's adhesive issues. Embarrassing.

I can't afford to keep my rig pristine like you copper state cruiser types

 

[nukegoat]

Dana axles will lead to a domestic/import battle in your 80 like the Pacific in WW2, the failpoint always being the headgasket.

And since you’re going whole hog, a D60 will eat your heater valve & fan clutch just to spite you.

But if I was a super-duper wheeler & not just a poser, I’d have that palleted set of D44/60’s up FS on my local CL in my driveway too

So yeah, why the hell not? YOLO.

The man has a point about the head gasket issue

 

[ChaseTruck]

Not much to flame here, a front D44 is simply going to break with those tires.

I've broken the 1/2-ton front in my K5 (Chevy 10-bolt, pretty much same dimensions as a full-size D44) with 35's, 4.56 gears, stock t-case, and a plain 350, and I've been accused of driving timid/slow multiple times... U-joint failures I could tolerate; once I twisted a stub shaft apart (Moab/Pritchett) I got the D60. Better D44 shafts and u-joints might hold up a bit longer than stock; a friend of mine has made mincemeat out of those as well - on 35's, and on a much lighter rig than my K5.

Don't forget to build the 60 as well: on a Chevy D60, you'll need the non-neckdown inner shafts, and the stock stub shafts aren't much bigger that those in a 1/2-ton axle - you'll need to upgrade to 35-spline stubs & hubs. And to combat death wobble, you'll want either the PU plugs to replace the kingpin springs, or bronze bushings/springless steering arms.

I ran a D60 rear for many years on that truck, with 35's, and aftermarket (Moser) shafts, 30-spline, IIRC. Some Dodge D60 rears have the big spindle bore that'll accept 35-spline shafts. I think those housings will also accept a D70 carrier, but I found that route to be too cumbersome. My truck now has a shaved metric 14-bolt, providing better ground clearance as that D60 rear. Not to mention stock disc brakes.

It's still all a budget build, though. To succeed, the budget just needs to be large enough, as always...

 

[LINUS]

Not much to flame here, a front D44 is simply going to break with those tires.

I've broken the 1/2-ton front in my K5 (Chevy 10-bolt, pretty much same dimensions as a full-size D44) with 35's, 4.56 gears, stock t-case, and a plain 350, and I've been accused of driving timid/slow multiple times... U-joint failures I could tolerate; once I twisted a stub shaft apart.......

Don't forget to build the 60 as well..........shaved metric 14-bolt, providing better ground clearance as that D60 rear. Not to mention stock disc brakes.

It's still all a budget build, though. To succeed, the budget just needs to be large enough, as always...

Well, hell - why not just jump to full axle-tech/Rockwell then?

Oh, yeah.
Because a 1FZ makes ~240hp & those are MRAP axles.
You’ll burn all those horsies in drivetrain loss just rolling on level asphalt.

Despite my salty ass comment, we have a ‘84 Camper Special GMC tucked behind the shop.
The FF RR 14-bolt is a stout axle, but it’s got a RV-cam’d L88 to spin the diffs. Max TQ is at ~3K.
I **think** it has a few more FT/#’s to burn than a 1FZ.

 

[Qball]

If you want to swap axels the. Why not 60 front and 80 rear? Toyota quality axles are stronger since they are the same size and the birfs are way stronger than the cheap unjoints. And don’t forget the LS3 crate engine.

If you want hardcore crawler then go for mini trucks and old 4 runners. If you got money and want tails then JKU with the glowing red angry eyes!!!

 

[ChaseTruck]

Well, hell - why not just jump to full axle-tech/Rockwell then?
...

I'm too lazy to search - has anyone put Rockies under an '80?

 

[shocktower]

I would say this big axles you need more grunt, do a Cummins 6BT swap and break the axles and not blow head gaskets

 

[maxamillion2345]

Just as reference for anyone actually interested, 80 rear is WAY too big. If you want tons then 14 bolt, 70, or aam11.5 is the way to go. Skip the 60 rear.

80 rear would be good for some big boy tires with lots of torque but they weigh a million pounds and very expensive to build

 

[LINUS]

I'm too lazy to search - has anyone put Rockies under an '80?

Highly unlikely, not without a full big block or ideally a diesel drivetrain swap too.

An MRAP is 14-18 tons depending on armor/equip spec’d.
Steer axles are rated to a shy 20K #’s.

Like I said - I was going salt, not real life.

Something tells me if the ol’ @nukegoat is **getting by** on a D60, it would be plenty for any of us here

 

[nukegoat]

Highly unlikely, not without a full big block or ideally a diesel drivetrain swap too.

An MRAP is 14-18 tons depending on armor/equip spec’d.
Steer axles are rated to a shy 20K #’s.

Like I said - I was going salt, not real life.

Something tells me if the ol’ @nukegoat is **getting by** on a D60, it would be plenty for any of us here

The kind of people who put rocks under an 80 don't post here, either.

 

[ChaseTruck]

...
Something tells me if the ol’ @nukegoat is **getting by** on a D60...

"getting by" ... LOL. I'm sure you've seen his D60 build - the proper blueprint for "how to make a 550 lbs axle suddenly weigh 800 lbs..." ; sans tires, of course.

 

[nukegoat]

Just as reference for anyone actually interested, 80 rear is WAY too big. If you want tons then 14 bolt, 70, or aam11.5 is the way to go. Skip the 60 rear.

80 rear would be good for some big boy tires with lots of torque but they weigh a million pounds and very expensive to build

They're not that pricey to build, but they are chonk

 

[Qball]

Just as reference for anyone actually interested, 80 rear is WAY too big. If you want tons then 14 bolt, 70, or aam11.5 is the way to go. Skip the 60 rear.

80 rear would be good for some big boy tires with lots of torque but they weigh a million pounds and very expensive to build

The LC already have 9.5 inch rear so what’s the point of 60 or even 70 with all the expense and trouble? Go big or leave more than good enough alone.

LS3 or 6BT swap is needed to say the least.

 

[maxamillion2345]

The LC already have 9.5 inch rear so what’s the point of 60 or even 70 with all the expense and trouble? Go big or leave more than good enough alone.

LS3 or 6BT swap is needed to say the least.

Honestly theres no comparison to a 70 14bolt or aam 11.5 and a 9.5 lc l. Any of those axles is plenty of big tire and lots of torque.

I run a 14 bolt behind my 6bt with 40s... they’re beef. And you can get dual 40 spline shafts if you want to get real wild but the stock shafts are pretty beefy as is. They break but not often. The 10.5 ring is plenty and its on a massive carrier with a pinion pocket bearing so ring/pinion failures are pretty uncommon.

The 80s are so much bigger than my 14b or a 70 that its almost comical. Its extreme overkill.

The rear 60, yeah I’d agree... go bigger or stay stock. You can build a fairly beefy 60 rear but at that point you may as well just go to a 70 or 14b

 

[nukegoat]

Honestly theres no comparison to a 70 14bolt or aam 11.5 and a 9.5 lc l. Any of those axles is plenty of big tire and lots of torque.

I run a 14 bolt behind my 6bt with 40s... they’re beef. And you can get dual 40 spline shafts if you want to get real wild but the stock shafts are pretty beefy as is. They break but not often. The 10.5 ring is plenty and its on a massive carrier with a pinion pocket bearing so ring/pinion failures are pretty uncommon.

The 80s are so much bigger than my 14b or a 70 that its almost comical. Its extreme overkill.

The rear 60, yeah I’d agree... go bigger or stay stock. You can build a fairly beefy 60 rear but at that point you may as well just go to a 70 or 14b

It's everything, not just splines or shaft diameter or r&p diameter... You know this obviously but for others...

Housing rigidity, carrier side gears, pinion shaft support, spindles, brakes, etc.

All of that stuff gets beefier with big boy axles. And while the 9.5 is ok, it's still shy of a ff Dana 60. And certainly smaller than a d70 or 14b

 

[nukegoat]

One thing I hate about the 14b though is that the only selectable locker worth considering is the ARB.

 

[alia176]

Alright flame on,

Since we have no real gearing and the land cruiser is just about as heavy as any fully built JKU, which is the land cruiser 80’s nemesis......

What if, budget build, ....

I stopped reading right about here. Budget build and Dana anything is an oxymoron of the highest order.

 

[slow95z]

I stopped reading right about here.

dont forget he compared it to a truck that came out in 07 (JK) vs something that came out in 93 (using FZJ here for the better rear axle) so yeah... why not put it up against a nice 93 jeep. lets see those square headlights try to follow the 80 down the trail.

 

[nukegoat]

dont forget he compared it to a truck that came out in 07 (JK) vs something that came out in 93 (using FZJ here for the better rear axle) so yeah... why not put it up against a nice 93 jeep. lets see those square headlights try to follow the 80 down the trail.

It'd probably pass a stock 80. And a jk vs a 100 or 200? Give me a break