Okay, so the reason for the above picture...
I don't recall how many took part in my attempt at explaining rear driveshaft geometry near the end of the evening of my going away party, but this is just a continuation of that. I know John and Sid come to mind as participants, possibly just because they were the biggest opposition to the point I was trying to make.
For a quick recap, the point I was trying to make is that driveshafts do not have to be "straight" as seen from the t-case output to the pinion input. Essentially, driveshafts are always "straight". Given the angles of the joints don't change, the direction that the tube "points" has no bearing on anything unless you want to add the fractional factors of gravity and gyroscopic forces in. The driveshaft really only has two-dimensional movement if you think about it, so how it rests in relation to the frame, body, suspension or axles is irrelevant.... again though, given the joint angles stay the same.
The above picture shows how this truck has a pretty good sideways angle on the rear d-shaft. And I would put money that says this guy is running some pretty high HP along with some pretty serious RPMs on that shaft. If there are any more arguments about why this setup SHOULDN'T work, I think rotational speed and horsepower are clearly debunked and invalidated as reasons. If there are any good reasons that don't involve U-joint angles, I'd love to hear them.
