Dirty Bastard

mr jits

SILVER Star
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,916
Location
Tualatin, Oregon
Front is pretty much torn down with all that's left being some time with the flap discs and some wire wheel action. I'm looking at a couple of different trusses so just have to decide on something and burn it on. Whatever I use will need to be from C to C with some modification to tie in to the cast CAD sleeve (the RCV's delete the two piece axle). Rear is going to go much the same, but I already have a truss with link brackets and a tie in between the HD cover and truss itself. Oh, front and rear will run 35 spline Lock Rites.
 

Mace

rock scientist..
Staff member
s-Moderator
 
 
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2002
Messages
21,459
Location
Las Vegas
Why truss the front? And I'd do a 203/205 if you do not want to spend a huge amount of money and still want very strong. Having a 4+ to one rear tcase (and another 2:1) is not really necessary with a auto.

I'm looking forward to the build :)
 

GLTHFJ60

Rum Runnin'
SILVER Star
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
24,208
Location
Durham, NC
Trussing makes sense to provide an location for the upper link mounts, since he's doing a 4 link front and rear. I don't think he'll need it for axle housing rigidity.
 

Mace

rock scientist..
Staff member
s-Moderator
 
 
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2002
Messages
21,459
Location
Las Vegas
Easy enough to just make a upper mount. Then you don't worry about hitting things with a big ass truss as much..

It's not a right or wrong thing, I'm just wondering why Jits is doing a truss from inner C to inner C. That's a lot of weight and potential loss in suspension compression. I have not heard much by way of tube failures due to the Cast long side (CAD section he referred to) section. That may be it tho..
 

mr jits

SILVER Star
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,916
Location
Tualatin, Oregon
Easy enough to just make a upper mount. Then you don't worry about hitting things with a big ass truss as much..

It's not a right or wrong thing, I'm just wondering why Jits is doing a truss from inner C to inner C. That's a lot of weight and potential loss in suspension compression. I have not heard much by way of tube failures due to the Cast long side (CAD section he referred to) section. That may be it tho..
I'll integrate the strut mounts into the truss connecting to the outer C. The full length is as @GLTHFJ60 described, a primary attachment point for links, but also to strengthen the cast side (I know there are not many documented failures, but while I'm at it...). My lower links will be tied into the truss and the upper portion of the C with a ball joint saver tied into that (so I can still drive off trail if a ball joint fails). The truss will be low profile, so I'm hoping not to lose anything in regards to suspension travel.
A 203/205 doubler may be the route I go, but I'll be keeping the 4.10's for a while so would like some more options for gearing. A 300 gives me the option of 2.62, 2.00, and 5.24; which is pretty respectable with the axle gearing, especially with an auto.
 
Last edited:

Mace

rock scientist..
Staff member
s-Moderator
 
 
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2002
Messages
21,459
Location
Las Vegas
With a truss that long, you may want to invest in a alignment jig.. That's a lot of heat on one side of the axle.

Even at 4.11 axle gears, a 4:1 (overall) tcase gearset with an auto is very driveable while crawling. Ask around, see what others have to say. I know my 60 with a auto/203/splittcase goes as slow as I could possibly want. I honestly did not use double low much the times it has done the Con.

D300's just need a bit more upgrading than a 205 does to be strong. Good tcases tho..
 

GLTHFJ60

Rum Runnin'
SILVER Star
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
24,208
Location
Durham, NC
I've had a few issues with my Dana300 in the strength department, but it's likely magnified due to the amount of torque my engine puts out. I don't think that you'll have as many issues with a vortec.
 

mr jits

SILVER Star
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,916
Location
Tualatin, Oregon
I've had a few issues with my Dana300 in the strength department, but it's likely magnified due to the amount of torque my engine puts out. I don't think that you'll have as many issues with a vortec.
How much torque are you putting out? I've actually thought of running a 454 vortec just because they're cheap locally.
 

Mace

rock scientist..
Staff member
s-Moderator
 
 
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2002
Messages
21,459
Location
Las Vegas
Torque is multiplied, so the 4BTxgear ratio= whatever is going into the D300. Yours will be doubled, but may be "nicer" in application due to the auto.
 

mr jits

SILVER Star
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,916
Location
Tualatin, Oregon
Torque is multiplied, so the 4BTxgear ratio= whatever is going into the D300. Yours will be doubled, but may be "nicer" in application due to the auto.
I should probably just go 203/205 and if I need deeper gearing I'll go with something in the axles since it's pretty cheap to do in the dana's.
 

GLTHFJ60

Rum Runnin'
SILVER Star
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
24,208
Location
Durham, NC
How much torque are you putting out? I've actually thought of running a 454 vortec just because they're cheap locally.
I've not dynoed my truck, but I should be in the neighborhood of 400-500ft/lbs of torque.

Torque is multiplied, so the 4BTxgear ratio= whatever is going into the D300. Yours will be doubled, but may be "nicer" in application due to the auto.
Exactly. I suspect that with smoother power application via the automatic that it would be better. Having the doubler would probably negate that fact though.
 

mr jits

SILVER Star
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,916
Location
Tualatin, Oregon
Picked up some rock rings for the wheels, .25" steel plate. Parts are starting to amass for the build, I just need to get my friends 55 stripped so I can start building.
 
Top Bottom