QT rotation for centerline output shafts

[River Beast]

OK... Iknow... you think I'm nuts! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif But lemme explain. A while back when my SOA was a 'dream' package, I talked to Kenall on this particular mod. I haven't done it in my rig yet, but I have been playing in the back yard with a spare TH400/QT setup. If I rotate (clockwise viewed from rear) the adapter plate from its intended position, one bolt hole, it moves the output shafts to the direct centerline position under the tranny pan. Granted... it's not that easy to just rotate the plate and... TADA!!!.....NO,no,no... only 3 of the 6 bolts line up on the adapter plate once you rotate the QT... needs more mods. Just getting an idea for how it looks, clearance aspects and the like.

The rotation moves the output shafts to centerline, just like the Dana 20 rear output. This is close to 6-7" inboard from stock. This is where dual angles of the drivelines can become an issue, but seems to work fine with a Dana20...hmmm. Also, it drops the yokes 5.5"... a needed drop for the "big" lifted FSJ's. OF corse... with the rotation.... a modified complete custom x-member would need to be fabbed along with a funky lookin' bracket to bolt to the adapter plate to mount the torque arm and mount back to the new x-member.

Thanks to Kenall for this idea he gave me... dunno if he did it or not but curious.

Just would like other FSJer's to ponder the thought like I am...(Mark, Fullmetal, Scotty... to name a few) I will try to get a digital shot of the setup and post it for a good visual.

Comments are always welcome.... good and bad...don't be bashful...this is how we learn and play! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 11, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 11, 2000).]

[scotty]

i have also had this notion.i dont really need it(no extreme driveshaft angle here http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif ) i forget exactly why i was pondering it at the time,but i needed more clearance for something in my amc eagle.ooohhh yeah,i remember-in an eagle,the transfer case hangs down below the bottom of the car-its not all tucked in nice and neat like in a fsj.i was thinking about turning it clockwise to get more ground clearance. i could only run 31 inch tires on the eagle,and whenever i was hung up on something,9 out of 10 times i was high centered on that #@$! xfer case skidplate. anyway,i didnt actually do it because all the work to make it work wouldnt have been worth it. the eagle uses a new process case with driver side output(replaced the stock single speed,full time 119 with a 219,if anyone was curious) .rotating it one bolt hole clockwise would have tucked it up real nice,but it would have hit the floor.i would have had shifter problems,and it would have made my front driveshaft angle worse.

your situation is different,though. too bad youre not using a 727 and new process case with a driverside front axle,the circular bolt pattern has evenly spaced studs,and you could have rotated it counter clockwise to drop the output with no modifications whatso ever.

the first thing that comes to mine in rotating the quadra trac is will it hit your gas tank? a buddy of mine runs a centered output 20 with an offset q trac rear and hes got gas tank room,so i think youll be ok there.if you wanted to swap in a centered diff rear end,i think that you would have clerance trouble. in theory,the angle that you move it over should change the rear end angle the same amount(since the rear end is in a fixed spot),so the angles should still be more or less the same,and keep everything operating in the same plane. my buddy with the q trac rear and dana 20 is constantly eating u joints.he runs a t18 tranny,which im sure has some to do with it,and he maybe has some other gremlins we havent found yet,since ive talked to other people whove swapped centered out put t cases into q trac rigs and havent really had trouble with u joints with the rear drivesafht running over at an angle. you said the output will move over 6- 7 inches? id like to see some pics,is the t case now slanted at an angle from the tranny,or is it completely vertical(as viewed from the rear)? are the outputs now comletely centered,or still offset some? if it is vertical and the front output is now exactly centered,how bad does that make the left/right angle for the front drivehaft? i was picturig it being slanted,so the outputs are not exactly centered,but reading the post again gives me the impression that the t case is completely vertical. hmmm...

the second thing that comes to mind is that youll have to do soething funky with the low range linkage. ive never really looked at one that close,so im not sure how much of a pain that that would be.

the third thing is that now the fill plug is lower,correct? it may be neccessary to drill and tap another fill hole higer up so that you can be sure you ge the right amount of fluid in there. we should probably look real close at a q trac diagram and see if it looks like tings will still be properly lubricated with the outputs hanging lower.it may be neccessary to allow for extra fluid when relocatting the fill hole,im not really sure. seems that the chain always will spin,unless you install a part time kit,then does it still spin in 2wd? anyway,it seems that the spinning chain should lube things up as it spins and throws lube all over,so it seems that that shouldnt really be a problem,either.

the hardest parts will be the machine work on the plate, and making low range work. i dont think the crossmember mods will be that tough. i didnt want to modify my floor,but a new crossmember wouldnt be a big deal...

i think that you could make it work! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/cool.gif



------------------
scott
85 grand wagoneer
258/904/twin stick dana 300/dana 44/amc 20
38x15.5 gumbo mudders
snorkel/dual batteries/onboard air/"custom" convertable
3 inch body lift/mostly stock suspension/"modified" fender openings
custom front/rear bumpers and brushgaurd

[mark]

tj
get that pic up.machining is no problem for me.i would like to do this.ive got a spare q-track.but not a trans.lets see that pic! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif

------------------
mark
79 cherokee chief
11 in lift 42 in swampers
(ABOVE THE LAW)

[KENALL]

no i have not done this mod to my wag cuz i only use OE springs in me SOA...dont need it.

but if it were to be done, then the installer MUST replace both diffs/axles with centered units. the rear can be obtained from post 87 wags, but the front wood have to be custom.

U DONT want lateral offset shafts. cuz if u need this much lift, ur gonna use very large tires, and that being said, a lateral offset shaft is more likely to fail at the yokes, when on the trail than that yoke which is point directly at the shaft. even if u use the largest ujoints, the 1350s...


r we having second thots here http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
1966 Super Wagoneer
'The Predecessor' http://home.earthlink.net/~kenns9/index.html

[This message has been edited by KENALL (edited July 11, 2000).]

[mark]

DUH
ken is right .i forgot all about the front being centered too!although i did see some 2.5 ton military axles under a fsj recently and the front looked centered.check it out.its the purple pickup.awsome!


http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=937957&a=7144753




------------------
mark
79 cherokee chief
11 in lift 42 in swampers
(ABOVE THE LAW)

[scotty]

wow. 2.5 ton military axles-my god.that truck is certainly cool-plus its even purple,which is just about the coolest color in the world!
http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/cool.gif

id still like to see some pics-it would depend on the severity of the angles.the rear driveshaft is long enough that it may not matter.if you do have consistent trouble with u joints,a centered rear end wouldnt be such a big deal to swap in. im sort of inclined to think that a laterlly off set front shaft isnt necessarily worse than a front driveshaft trying to work at a 45 degree angle.especailly if its been converted to part time,and will only spin in 4wd with hubs locked.

hmmmm...



------------------
scott
85 grand wagoneer
258/904/twin stick dana 300/dana 44/amc 20
38x15.5 gumbo mudders
snorkel/dual batteries/onboard air/"custom" convertable
3 inch body lift/mostly stock suspension/"modified" fender openings
custom front/rear bumpers and brushgaurd

[River Beast]

Well guys... I really appreciate the input here. I have a stupid question to ask. I have seen 5 '67'-'73' FSJ's here where I live and all are running Dana 20 T-cases (centerline rear output shaft with offset rearends (5-bolt pattern) ... all rigs are factory from what the owners are telling me and they say they came that way... so if these rigs came with the driveshaft set at centerline of T-case and offset at the rear diff, what the difference if I do it with a rotated QT unit!?! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/confused.gif I understand that it's not good on the front shaft due the short length but if it's ok for the rear... why not the front...of course I would DEFINITELY do the P/T kit at that point( probably along with u-joints about every 3rd trail). Your thoughts on the issue....much appreciate it!

Pics are taken... 2 got corrupted during the transfer... but they are coming... keep looking here for the links. I will post them

Oh... to answer some of Scotty's questions... The QT rotates just fine in the way that the Low Range reduction is driven from the main shaft of the tranny and stays right behind the tranny in any position. It will not hit the tank... nor will the driveshaft with the QT being rotated with a 5.5" drop from the original location. The QT is completely vertical when rotated one bolt position. The Lo Range linkage is now located on top and nothing more than an extended rod can be used for a "push-pull" actuation. The drainplug is an issue I didn't even think of....hmmm. Kenall, you were right... LOTS of mods involved here but I'm not giving up!!!

Since I've been writing this... my pics came thru on my email. Here are the links...
http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life/QT01.jpg http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life/QT02.jpg http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life/QT03.jpg http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life/QT04.jpg http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life/QT05.jpg

Enjoy... oh... sorry about the sizing... didn't have time to resize. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

Lemme know what you think guys... it's important to me...


------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[scotty]

let me see-im not real sure how to explain this.the driveshaft does not knof if the angle that its operating at is completely vertical,or if its offset(down and over in this case).the u joint caps rotate on 4 sides-its not like the offset diff adds another angle to the vertical angle,its the same angle,just sort of "rotated" from its original position. as i mentioned,the angle at the rear diff should change proportionally to the transfer case movement,so things should still operate in the same plane.it may even be that the angle of being centered and 5" lower will be less of an angle than the original position.

i also have seen alot of angled rear shafts. some form people whove swapped something else into a quadra trac truck,and some,like you,who say that theirs actually came from the factory that way. none of them report bad vibes from the offset diff. as a matter of fact,my friends 79 wagoneer has the whole drivetrain from a widetrac cherokee-360,t18,dana 20, front/rear 44s,and the rear diff is offset,and that cherokee supposedly came from the factory that way(though i guess i couldnt really prove that) anyway, as long as you check your u joints frequently,i agree,its no different than the tons of people runing around with angled driveshafts. if it eats u joints,cross that bridge when you come to it...

im gonna check out the pics now,will post again if anything else comes to mind.



------------------
scott
85 grand wagoneer
258/904/twin stick dana 300/dana 44/amc 20
38x15.5 gumbo mudders
snorkel/dual batteries/onboard air/"custom" convertable
3 inch body lift/mostly stock suspension/"modified" fender openings
custom front/rear bumpers and brushgaurd

[River Beast]

Scotty... you bring up a good point. Not knowing the EXACT angles right now, I can still understand where you are coming from with the u-joint position. Since a u-joint operates at any given angle (to a point), what difference should it make weather the angle is vertical or lateral. Just as an example: say there is a 5 degree angle on the vertical plane of driveshaft.... now rotate the QT to the vertical. We will say that the output shafts of the QT and the pinion are now on the same plane (0 degree of angle after the rotation) even though it is far from that... lets use this for the example. The 0 degree of lateral angle from the orginal postion of the QT would now be changed to have a degree of angle. So if the degree of angles change, both laterally and verically, the offset of the difference between the two angles should relieve the overall driveshaft angle that the u-joint will operate... in theory. MAN... do I sound like a rambling geometry professor or what!!! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif I hope I made sense in what I just said. Comments...please correct me if I'm wrong..

As as you stated, Scotty, u-joints don't know what angle they work at... wether it is 5 degrees vertical or 5 degrees lateral or even a slight combo of the two angles. I think this will work as long as I do the math right when measuring on the rig (don't know when that'll be yet.. this is all in theory right now).

------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 12, 2000).]

[KENALL]

whether or not the ujoint 'nos' what angle they r operating at is immaterial. the point is that the ujoints will now work with 2 offsets instead of 1. is that good? http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/frown.gif think not.

yes...all 63-73 wags came with offset rear diffs (including mine) so the shaft wood clear the tank. now from the factory there is not problem with this configuration...but when u start adding a lift, things get hairy. ino...with me SOA b4 i swapped to the QT, i had a nasty vibe at 55mph.

from the factory the amount of tilt of the rear shaft from the horzontal and the vertical cood almost be the same, and therefore 'might' cancel ea other out..but, like i said, when u start lifting it, u get unequal angles, and more wear and tear. tear that happens at the worst times..when ur out having fun http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

now, with a centered front output and a offset diff yoke and a short shaft, it dont take much to see how long it will take and how much noise it will make just before the crack of the ujoint when u get a heavy foot.

next, many big lifts with short shafts have worked for years on the rears of CJs,. but theses r much lighter vehicles than ours.

so u cant just add a CV joint to the front of the xcase and call it a day. this whole project must be engineered for safety, not just to fit big tires... hence the desire for centered FnR diffs to match the now vertical QT http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

good luck...



------------------
1966 Super Wagoneer
'The Predecessor' http://home.earthlink.net/~kenns9/index.html

[scotty]

thats the point i was trying to explain.there are not 2 off sets.the operating angle is the operating angle,period.wether we percieve it as being in line,or as being offset,the angle does not change. my friend has a 79 wag with 360,t18,20 and offset 44,and 4 inches of lift,and he has no vibes.he does have u joint troubles,but no vibes.think of it this way: moving up and down has same affect on the u joint as left and right. look at the driveshaft in a truck with a 6 inch lift.take that angle and make rotate it until its now completely horizontal.you could now have the diff where the wheel is,or maybe even outside the truck,and the operating angle is the same-big lift,or big offset in rear.

dont misunderstand that i think big angles are ok as long as they are equal. i big angle eats joints quicker,wether its a big lift,or a big offset. as i mentioned,this is why i fit my tires with body lift and sawzall,instead of big suspension lift. all my suspension geometry and driveshaft angles are still factory. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif i wanted to keep it as close to stock as possible for relability,and wanted to keep CG low(lots of off camber spots in our trails)

it is a good point that a cj is lighter,but a friend of mine has a cj5 with 2 inch shackles and a 6 inch spring over,AND a very long t18 tranny.his rear driveshaft is 14 inches long,and you should see the angles there, http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif despite lowering the tranny and raising the pinion. if we can make THAT work,it sure seems we can figure this vertical q trac out without making a custom front axle assembly.

hmmmm... http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
scott
85 grand wagoneer
258/904/twin stick dana 300/dana 44/amc 20
38x15.5 gumbo mudders
snorkel/dual batteries/onboard air/"custom" convertable
3 inch body lift/mostly stock suspension/"modified" fender openings
custom front/rear bumpers and brushgaurd

[This message has been edited by scotty (edited July 12, 2000).]

[River Beast]

Scotty... we are definitely thinkin' on the same level. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/tongue.gif I did some research on the dual plane driveline angles here... http://www.drivetrain.com/driveline_angle_problem.html. I read this over and over... this is what make be believe this will work. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/wink.gif Check it out. Thanks again for the feedback.... keep 'em coming... http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 12, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 12, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by River Beast (edited July 12, 2000).]

[mark]

whew
finally got through.couldnt reach this site since my last post on this issue.just a few months ago i ran a centered dana 60 in the rear of my rig with a q-track.i had some serious vibration ALL the time.from the rear the angle looked ridiculous with the big lift and the q-track offsett.even with the big lift the pinion yoke would contact the gastank and hit it while spinning(not a pretty site!needless to say that rear came out as soon as i found a 60 with a big offsett.after seeing the severe angle in the rear with the long shaft i really dont think its feasable in the front with the short shaft.by the way we took the centered rear 60 and cut it up and were making it into a front 60.im keeping 44 yokes on the ends and im still gonna run 15 inch wheels on it.someone tell me im not nuts! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif

ken your rig looks good on the sticker on my side window.it will keep the cops away wont it?

[mark]

tj
WOW http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif
i just looked at those pics!i had no idea that it shifted it completely straight up and down.ive never taken them apart but is it possible to drill and tap NEW holes so it can be rotated about 45 deg?

[River Beast]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mark:
tj
WOW http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif
i just looked at those pics!i had no idea that it shifted it completely straight up and down.ive never taken them apart but is it possible to drill and tap NEW holes so it can be rotated about 45 deg?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No... there is no space on the adapter plate for new holes. I even took to a weld shop that told me the cast aluminum plate would be VERY difficult to make a custom flange stick to it (strength would be the major factor, I guess). I think I figured out a way to go half way between the bolts by making separate adapter plates attaching to the original ones with a mounting hole and spacer in the middle for the 45 degree rotation like you mentioned. I'll have to work on it...I never thought about retapping the aft of the tranny case though..hmmm... have to look at that. If I can get a pic(s) of the adapter plate I will post it. I will be measuring all angles here shortly (this weekend, I hope) and post the results. That will be the determining factor is this will work or not. It will take ALOT of time... have to measure it as is, then rotate it and do it all again http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif!!! Waht a pain, but I think it's worth it.

Oh... one more thing... when you rotate the adapter plate the mounting point of the adapter also gets rotated. Therfore, a custom bracket will also have to be made to put the mount back to the original position. This doesn't seem to hard to accomplish.... just measurements and proper placement for bolt alignment.


------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[BobBarry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by River Beast:
OK... Iknow... you think I'm nuts! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/eek.gif But lemme explain. A while back when my SOA was a 'dream' package, I talked to Kenall on this particular mod. I haven't done it in my rig yet, but I have been playing in the back yard with a spare TH400/QT setup. If I rotate (clockwise viewed from rear) the adapter plate from its intended position, one bolt hole,
[snip]
Just would like other FSJer's to ponder the thought like I am...(Mark, Fullmetal, Scotty... to name a few) I will try to get a digital shot of the setup and post it for a good visual.

Comments are always welcome.... good and bad...don't be bashful...this is how we learn and play! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One other thing to consider is lubrication; transfer-cases are designed to route the TC fluid in certain directions to feed the bearings. Turning your QT sidways may affect the flow of fluid, and prevent proper lubrication. You may need to provide some type of external routing of oil-lines, fed by an external-style oil-pump (like the Nascar guys use) driven off an output shaft to provide proper lubrication.

------------------
Bob Barry
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>* '78 Cherokee 4-door
* '88 Grand Wagoneer[/list]
http://studentweb.providence.edu/~rbarry/wheels/

[River Beast]

BB...GOOD POINT!!! http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif Glad you thought of it...in the vertical position the center diff of QT unit will be totally emmersed in QT fliud (this is a good thing), however the lo range reduction unit will be directly above it. The way it was intended to work, by design, the chain consistently throws fluid through journals in the rear half of the case to lube the lo range...hmmm... have to check out the location of the journals in the rear case half after rotation to ensure proper amount of lube can still get to lo range unit. Another thought.... if the output yokes are now veritcal, the bearings and all seals (lower end) will also be submersed in fluid CONSTANTLY.... good seals is a must. Thanks for getting more gears in my head turning. http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~zeimet/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
TJ
78 Wagoneer "River Beast"
360/TH400/QT
Dana 44's w/ 3.54's (soon to be 4.88's)
7" SOA conversion
4" Skyjacker Softride
3" Trailmaster Bodylift
33x12.50's on 15x10's
(soon 38.5x14.50's on 12's)
My FSJ site: http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life (http://www.geocities.com/~spazz4life)
"Where there's a hill...there's a way!"

[KENALL]

um, by inserting a fitting into the drain on the QT u can run a small pump, like a elec fuel pump that works only when the eng is on.

it wood pump fluid from the main drain plug to the LRs fill plug.

or u cood tap a nu hole into the, 'now top of the case', above the chain, and exit the pump hose there...

no, the pic of my wag wont keep the cops away, but it is a chick magnet...


------------------
1966 Super Wagoneer
'The Predecessor' http://home.earthlink.net/~kenns9/index.html