Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!



Go Back   Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! > Technical Forums > Performance Talk

Click here to search for Mopar cars and parts for sale.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-08-2012, 12:14 AM
wagnerjw wagnerjw is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Default 8.25 rear end problems!

Recently took my 74 Duster into a shop to swap the factory 2:73 gears out for 3:55's. My duster has the original 8.25 rear end and I thought it would be an easy trouble free swap of the pinion and ring gear. Come to find out today that the ring gear fits fine but the pinion doesn't come even close to hitting the teeth on the ring gear? The guy doing it says he's never seen one do this and he is suggesting I may need a new carrier. Anyone ever had this problem or know how to fix this? Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-08-2012, 06:32 AM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 86
Posts: 2,648
Default

New one on me, but these guys will probably know - Ian's been doing this stuff since the seventies, when we both worked at a Volvo store. He did the 8 1/4 in mine plus added an Auburn l.s. ten years ago. No issues.
http://www.iwerearendsonly.com/
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-08-2012, 09:06 AM
dakman1 dakman1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: eastpointe mi
Age: 59
Posts: 144
Default

Not positive , Though I do believe you do need a new carrier since your swapping from 2.73
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-08-2012, 01:37 PM
John Kunkel John Kunkel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NorCal
Age: 80
Posts: 10,059
Default

If it had 2.73 gears, the carrier should work; the carrier ratio breaks are 2.45 and down (numerically) and 2.56 and up.

There are 1/8" spacers for the ring gear but that's never a good idea.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-08-2012, 03:58 PM
wagnerjw wagnerjw is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kunkel View Post
If it had 2.73 gears, the carrier should work; the carrier ratio breaks are 2.45 and down (numerically) and 2.56 and up.

There are 1/8" spacers for the ring gear but that's never a good idea.
He was using spacers until he didn't think he should use anymore and it still wouldnt line up. Do you think that the pinion I got could be the wrong one? I got it at a swap meet and the guy said it came out of a early 90's Dakota. I questioned him a bit and he said a 8.25 is a 8.25 and they are all interchangeable.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-08-2012, 06:37 PM
JVMopar's Avatar
JVMopar JVMopar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Mellen, WI
Age: 43
Posts: 2,524
Default

Maybe you are mistaken and had 2.23 gears not 2.73. The ring and pinion from a dakota should bolt right in as long as your using the right carrier.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-09-2012, 12:18 AM
wagnerjw wagnerjw is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JVMopar View Post
Maybe you are mistaken and had 2.23 gears not 2.73. The ring and pinion from a dakota should bolt right in as long as your using the right carrier.
So what you are saying is the 2.23 uses a different carrier? My problem is how do I know what carrier to get now. I was told it had 2.73's or 2.76's but it may have a higher gear ratio. The thing seems that it has no top end so that would make sense. I've been looking at different carriers online and I'm lost at which one to get. Thanks for the input. Jeff
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-09-2012, 02:45 AM
JVMopar's Avatar
JVMopar JVMopar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Mellen, WI
Age: 43
Posts: 2,524
Default

That's where you have to be carefull. Some people will just list that the carrier is for a 8.25 and not what gear sets it's for. 2.45 and numerically lower uses one carrier because the pinion gear is so big the ring has to be moved further out. 2.56 and up uses another carrier because the pinion is smaller. Just gotta make sure you get the right one.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-09-2012, 05:12 PM
John Kunkel John Kunkel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NorCal
Age: 80
Posts: 10,059
Default

The 8 1/4" is a tricky rear end, not only are there carrier/ratio differences but year differences also. Even when using all of the correct parts some 3.55 installations require grinding on the housing...one gear supplier has a diagram of where to grind on their website.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:08 PM
wagnerjw wagnerjw is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kunkel View Post
The 8 1/4" is a tricky rear end, not only are there carrier/ratio differences but year differences also. Even when using all of the correct parts some 3.55 installations require grinding on the housing...one gear supplier has a diagram of where to grind on their website.
You guys were right. Found out it had 2.23 gears not 2.76 like the original owner had thought. I ordered a posi carrier just to bypass going back to the one-wheel wonder. Thanks for all the help, you guys are the best. Long live the Mopars!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
8 3/4 rear end problems mrjack10 Performance Talk 6 06-07-2006 03:06 PM
Rear End Problems zachary2001 Ram Truck Chat 13 03-14-2004 01:49 AM
8 3/4 rear end problems Stumann Drag Racing Forum 7 10-18-2002 12:38 PM
Rear end problems Sheffy Dakota Truck Forum 5 01-13-2001 05:55 AM
Rear-end problems? MeanGreen98Machine Ram Truck Chat 17 05-01-2000 06:06 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
. . . . .