RCVs or CVs for +2" Axle

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

No simplicity in anything.



image-2409488182.webp

Ryan,
I may need to hit Bohannon up for measures, if going this route, unless anyone knows these off hand measurements. Hahaha

http://www.rcvperformance.com/ifs-axle-form.aspx
image-2409488182.webp
 
Yeah...best of luck dealing with RCV. On any level :rolleyes:
 
spressomon said:
Yeah...best of luck dealing with RCV. On any level :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I've read about your trials, and know of, though they were über builds.

Hornsfan's order was without issue, though, and hoped for the best, considering my LT is the same set up as his, and they sent to him less than a couple of months ago.

Doesn't make sense. It'd be worth the trial and tribulation, considering the propensity of the LT axle failures, especially combined with front lockers, IF they were truly bulletproof.

All that said, if they can't be ordered easily, it negate my interest, considering the urgency for which this needs to occur.

I don't get it, personally. I realize the FJC and 100 series market may be relatively small, right now, but combined with 4RNRs and Taco's that all share similarities, I'd think the investment would reap return for RCV.
 
98% of the R&D/prototype process was complete. They just needed to adjust the outer axle diameter in their CAD file and it would have been done (at least from that one perspective).

But...two somewhat serious flaws based upon the two RCV prototype units I have: The inner seal is a single lip design versus the very well designed double lip seal from Toyota. Might be a non issue but the RCV looks like it would, more easily, allow contaminants to bypass their seal design and thus increase PM time/frequency.

And the range of articulation was less than OEM. Not sure about the FJC but I certainly wouldn't want less than OEM articulation on my 100.


The real insult to my experiences with RCV:
RCV invited a 100 owner to assist with the prototype process so agreed and subsequently sent them one of my used OEM CVs, on my dime BTW. So it wasn't as if I "talked" them into the idea of the process for a 100 CV assembly. So in the end I was out a ton o'time, some money and left with an exacerbating experience with RCV. Goofy.

I wouldn't want to rely upon them and their ****ed customer service (can't really call it "customer service" because that would imply they actually had "customer service"...) if needed: No matter how well designed and manufactured they could have been.

Just my 2 cents and maybe all its worth ;)
 
Last edited:
Half inclined to get OEM assemblies coming, and swap what I've got. Might as well get used to it, because I've a feeling it'll be common place with the 35s and TC front end.

I still find it ironic that the biggest marketing tool for most any off road product is overlooked, and disregarded. If I were RCV, I'd be sending out free, gold plated axles, so that you'd be posting how "they've changed" and "they're awesome", and attempting to rectify. There's a lot of IFS Toyota's and it's an open table. I'd think someone would want to capitalize.
 
Last edited:
Delancy said:
FJNewb's really the only one that's documents the travel restrictions of the RCVs. I believe on a thread here, too, but it was at a much greater degree than the long(er) travel kit I'm running is capable.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned before the travel numbers between a 3.5" and 2" kit are not what you want to be comparing in terms of restrictions.

Its the angle on the joint that is important. I can make a kit thats 5" wider and gets a lot more travel yet still have the same angle on the joint that you have with a 3.5" or 2" kit.
 
But they're not concerned about the angles, be it in conversation or the requested dimensions.


If the TC axle shaft is 2" longer than OEM, then there's little reason the RCVS couldn't produce a completed assembly, inserting the 2" dimension that's a given, correct?
 
Last edited:
Delancy said:
But they're not concerned about the angles, be it in conversation or the requested dimensions.
Click to expand...

You've mentioned my name and travel numbers and not pursuing "as much travel" several times in this thread comparing 3.5" to 2" (as I've quoted). Unless you are comparing the travel numbers for different track widths back to the angle on the joint there is no point in bringing up the travel numbers (or unless comparing apples to apples - i.e. hornsfan saying he had no issues between OEM 2" axles and RCVs replacement).



Delancy said:
Point being this, Brian.

If the TC axle shaft is 2" longer than OEM, then there's little reason the RCVS couldn't produce a completed assembly, inserting the 2" dimension that's a given, correct?
Click to expand...

I think there have been several examples provided that your statement is much easier said than done. The only way that'd work is if RCV has documented the exact setup before and there aren't any significant tolerance differences between setups (can be an issue). If they don't have Ryan's numbers they'd likely need more details than " 2" wider than OEM".

Just a few comments

1. You are assuming that kits advertised at 2" wider are exactly 2" wider than OEM. If not spot on it can cause issues

2. You are not simply making an axle 2" longer. The width of the joints is changing and so is the angular geometry. This is why they need the actual change in distance from the dif to the hub.

3. You can even have tolerance differences from the suspension vendor as well as from the factory which stack up and cause issues (even if using numbers from previous examples).

4. Any errors in the measurements or expectations on how much the joints can plunge can cause issues.


Its not black and white and even with the actual axle or exact measurements it might take a try or two to get everything spot on. RCV was good about working with us to get a workable setup (We provided them with exact measurements, not simply a " it needs to be 3.5 inches wider than OEM") and made modifications similar to Spresso's request and provided quick turn around times.

end my 2 cents.
 
Delancy said:
Twice. My apologies and corrected.

I have the length of the TC axle, and fully expected to provide the length of an OEM.
Click to expand...

Perhaps its me not communicating in the same terminology. Are you referering to the TC Axle/CV assembly and OEM axle assembly or the axle shafts themselves?

The length that they will be interested in, from my experience, is simply the dif to hub dimension at multiple points throughout travel (we gave them 3 or 4 when they built mine). The RCV axle shafts will not be the same length as TC shaft which is what I was trying to communicate in #2 above.

Full assembly they may be able to make some use out of and make a guesstimate on what will work (similar to spressos). The issue is the axle assembly doesn't give you details on change in length throughout travel or anything like that which is what they are trying to get a feel for in their requested measurements (function of suspension geometry).


Anyways just trying to clarify why they are looking for the information they requested if they don't have numbers from previous assemblies. Thought that clarification might help other folks who are interested in the product understand it a bit better.
 
Referring to either, really.

I have (on email, which iPhone isn't liking, today. Probably the 110 degrees subjected to yesterday) the TC axle shaft length and can get the OEM, relatively easily.

I can measure the distances requested, but lack time to rack, pull coil over, and cycle, so I was hoping that a company capable of producing a direct OEM replacement could insert the "x" into the equation, and simplify the process.

I understood their unwillingness to do so, prior to producing HFs and an OEM length.

At this point, it's beyond me as to the "why", unless it's simply minimizing their liability, which I would understand clearer if there weren't functioning products in place.

I don't have the time, on borrowed time, and not in a position to wait for an eternity.
 
Delancy said:
Referring to either, really.

I have (on email, which iPhone isn't liking, today. Probably the 110 degrees subjected to yesterday) the TC axle shaft length and can get the OEM, relatively easily.

I can measure the distances requested, but lack time to rack, pull coil over, and cycle, so I was hoping that a company capable of producing a direct OEM replacement could insert the "x" into the equation, and simplify the process.

I understood their unwillingness to do so, prior to producing HFs and an OEM length.

At this point, it's beyond me as to the "why", unless it's simply minimizing their liability, which I would understand clearer if there weren't functioning products in place.

I don't have the time, on borrowed time, and not in a position to wait for an eternity.
Click to expand...


I've noted the reasons why they are asking for such information above. I doubt they have documented the FJC suspension geometry and without that they can't extrapolate to other track widths (espeically without accurate measurments on how far out the hub has actually moved with the long travel kit). It is not as simple as submitting "x" into an equation with the other unknowns. Even using my final exact numbers on other 3.5" camburg products others have had the opposite issues of what I had occur due to tolerance variations from the mfg and from the suspension vendor. It simply isn't as easy as "extend it by 2" " when you factor in all the variations and tolerance changes.

If RCV doesn't have documents on the first Taco that they made their axles for (2" TC LT kit) or Ryan's then they'll need the numbers again. As noted in my example above the numbers don't neccessarily guarentee a perfect fit. Substantial changes in alignment between setups will influence the location of the hub throughout travel, but if not operating at the extreme of the joint things are often more forgiving. That being said RCV was very good about remachining the axles and changing things around after our intial measurements and made us fully aware that this might have to be done from the get go even with the numbers provided.:clap: Very upfront which I can appreciate and open to developing custom axle solutions for IFS. I went to several other vendors who weren't willing to touch the project.


Hornsfans seemed to bolt right in which is great to hear. Its awesome that they were spot on from the get go for him. It sounds like they've got the OEM track width option down to a bolt in solution as well. I'm sure the more track widths and setups they make their axles for the less chance of rework being needed. They are offering a sound alternative to the OEM CVs which no one else seems to be doing. :cheers:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom