|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
decimated the rear end.
Totally destroyed the rear end, new engine isn't even broke in yet, maybe 250 miles, was leaving a stop light and it snapped inside. Very loud, not a good feeling. Was able to get it home, but as I pulled into the garage it snapped even louder, now I can lift the back end, hold the drive shaft still and spin the wheels, wheels no longer make drive shaft turn, or vice versa, I am on lock down. Little 7 1/4 didn't like my new build. Making all kinds of racket inside when I turn the wheels, clackety thunk. So mad! didn't even push it! never even hit any real rpm. And nowhere near enough money for a new rear end. Not happy, not good.
I totally had run a 7 1/4 in a 73 dart with a beast of a 360 in it, that one was a sure grip unit and I launched that thing hard, ran nitrous, never had a problem, so I thought this new 318 would be fine with a 7 1/4 behind it, this build can't be over 275hp, truthfully. It's just a 270 cam, 9:1 engine. And, I hadn't even launched it hard at all. I'm so mad. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
It sounds like it snapped an axel or popped a spider. Don't even bother to take it apart. Start looking for an 8.75 or a 8.25 rear.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I agree.....
7 1/4's are for /6 w/auto. I bought a new Volare years ago. Broke the 7 1/4 twice before putting in the 8 3/4.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Mike, if you can't find a cheap 8 3/4, (like, who can these days?) grab an 8 1/4 from whatever has the right perch-to-perch width and plug it in. You might need to mod the driveshaft, but the 8 1/4 will work fine for your motor, and parts are easy to get and not pricey. Recent Daks and Gr. Cherokees have an even beefier rear that might fit the Duster (axles and ring gear are slightly bigger).
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Revs aren't always the killer with rear ends... torque does the job...
By the way, did you look up 'decimate' or learn where the term comes from? Once you do you might want to change the title of the thread to 'Totalled the rear end'. It does sound like it's more than one-tenth gone. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Ray, the term is supposed to refer to decimation. Total absolute destruction.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
dec·i·mate (ds-mt)
tr.v. dec·i·mat·ed, dec·i·mat·ing, dec·i·mates 1. To destroy or kill a large part of (a group). 2. Usage Problem a. To inflict great destruction or damage on. Works for me. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
The term comes from the practice of the Roman army...
It's nothing like total destruction. If you look at the term, 'decimate' is obviously derived from 'decimal', or tenth. Check this (unfortunately I'm quoting from Wikipedia, but it will have to do): Quote:
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
I love hte learning of new info. Cool guys!
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
heh, here, this spider gear blew into about ten pieces....
Question is, should I weld the spiders into a spool for now? just temporary to be able to drive the car? My friend said DONT DO IT !! I just want to be able to move it in and out of the garage, really. This sucks. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
For that purpose, go right ahead...
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Has anyone here run a lincoln versaille 9" rear end in an A body?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
For the A body I use B body 8 3/4 inch rears (pre-1971). Only a slight push on the leaf springs is required to line up everything. Then I can fit wheels with more backspace in the A body. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And why not the '62 - '63 or the '64 B-body axle? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
The bolt-on axle flanges aren't as strong as the 1965 and newer axles. Putting the pre-1971 B-body rear in the A-body is pretty easy. There is only a slight difference in spring perch widths. I think it's about an inch, which would be a half inch on each side. With a B-body rear and 1973 and newer A-body disc brakes on the front you can have 4.5" bolt pattern wheels.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Now my ears prick up...how???
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
I forget how wide the 1964 to 1966 A-body rear is. With the 1967 and newer A-bodies the difference in the pre-1971 B-body perches is small enough to allow just pushing things in to place.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The '62 and '63 Phoenix rears are 58.5" across the drums (ie. wheel mount face to wheel mount face) while the '64 is 59.5", later Phoenixes are 2" wider. '62 to '64 have 10" drums on them, so they're about as good as you'd get on the last of the CLs and CMs. 58.5" is ball park a match for VH-CM rears. Everyone tends to poo-poo the tapered axles on these years, and they certainly present an issue on first dismantle. But you can grind the heads off the rivets of the drums to make them removable and I'm sure you could cut a hole through the flange so you can put a socket in there to dismantle things. Otherwise you need a really good puller to get the taper apart. I've read somewhere in the past couple of days that putting a lot of power through the tapered axles tends to shear the keys, but I can't see why. Remember that these axles were used when the first of the 426 Hemis came out, there was a plentiful supply of 383s and 413s out on the roads and drag strips thumping the power down through these axles. The taper takes the load, if it's in good shape and done up right it won't move. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2000 Durango 9.25" rear axel swap to 1998 dodge ram 1500 sst rear 9.25" axle | duck_sr00 | Durango Chat | 1 | 04-12-2009 11:54 PM |
rear end | 7273chargerguy | Vintage MOPAR chat | 8 | 05-21-2006 04:13 PM |
8-3/4 Rear end, or parts for rear end... | got_torque | Rear Wheel Drive - Parts Wanted | 6 | 10-06-2005 09:44 PM |
8-1/4 rear | blueduster340 | Performance Talk | 6 | 06-14-2004 01:14 PM |
78 3/4 ton rear noise- van rear work? | Geno | Ram Truck Chat | 3 | 03-25-2002 04:47 PM |