[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

im guessing the cvs you fitted were AEU2522, landrover did make bigger cv's for the 101forward control, but these would not fit inside your swivel balls.

well i am jealous of your fabulous engine B)

so the only maxidrives you fitted were to the rear? and im guessing that when it snapped it was under full load? you were winching up hill?

i know even Mal Story would laugh if he heard someone say his shafts were good for 5000hp especially running 35's.

to put things in posective, when Mal started making shafts out of hytuf the biggest tyres running on rovers would have been 33 inch and that would have been very rare. and that doesnt take into account the increase in HP and the decrease in gearing that has come since then. the fact that for the most of it, his shafts have stood up to severe abuse says something to me.

i wasnt to keen on Ashcrofts original shafts, but there new ones seem to be a good product, although id like to see them made from 4340 300m, maybe they could do a batch of 300 marging for competitors. sure they would cost more, but at that end of the scale it would be worth it.

i still think a cv for rovers can be made better, but i dont have the money to do it. if you do come into trouble with your ashcroft cv's you should be able to make a longfield fj80 fit. im sure you are more than capable of that small machine work.

I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY DEALINGS WITH KAM, but after speaking to people that really do know what they are talking about, i am not impressed with what they do. and quite frankly if you want a cv with a fusable shaft, just fit early range rover cv's R60665, these have the seperate 10 spline stub shaft. alot of the guys competeing in rovers over here run these, the stub is the first to break and it is very quick to replace.

it sounds like you have taken the rover axle pretty far, and it says they are capable of something. they will never be as strong as a toy,nissan ford or dana built to the same spec. but LR dont come with those.

i have a LRdef110, with sals rear. for my needs i wont need to go to another brand of diff. i do not compete.

Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

Lara, can you give us some more info on what you were running and doing when breaking your shafts?

what cv's?

what size tyres?

what r+p?

what sort of driving conditions?

the reason i ask is because it seems that shafts are generally last to break(if running good ones). you mentioned Ashcroft not being available at the time, does this also mean you were not running there cv's at the time?

your truck would have had 32spline cv inputs from factory yes?

i know you have said Quaffie diffs, Ashcroft cv's and your shafts, but this is where you have evolved to. just wondering what package/s you have tried and what was breaking.

cheers, Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

Yes I know, VERY expensive, But I must have replaced 20 or more halfshafts before doing it so was just fed up with forking out and not going anywhere!

I have no choice over here in Belgium if I want to keep it fully legal, we can't change the axles, (visibly anyway)

I thought about Longfields etc but one of my mates runs a Toy on Simex and does brake them, so wasn't so sure.

I also wanted my truck to be a "jack of all trades" for expedition and competition, which it did fine until needing to compete in competitions designed for and against Tray backs Too much body damage now!

I use Ashcroft CVs and to date have not had any issues,

I run Quaife Diffs that argument the Traction Control perfectly, But probably help the life of the CVs compared to ARBs, although it didn't seem to help the half shafts, I also refrain from full power on lock if I can help it.

CW&Ps are now Ashcroft 3.5:1 Pegged,

I had std 3.5s until recently but just blew both front and rear last November within 30 minutes of driving from one another!

Was to be expected though as I had just got the VGT sorted

Back on thread, I think Hy-Tuf, 300M and 4340 are about as good a materials you will ever get for commercial use,

As you see the use of Maraging is just Silly Money.

Lara.

i personally think the longfield/ashcroft cv, which are made by the same company, are good but could be made better.

im not a fan of the small ball, and they should make the whole thing from 4340 300m or hytuf, not just the star.

for the landrover they should have just got an aeu2522 and made the OD of the bell as big as possible to still fit in the swivel housing.... keep the balls the stock size and waist the stub shaft.

i actually contracted a company to make 4 cv's for me, turned out they were using the same manufacture as longfield, Ashcroft wasnt available at the time, but in the end it didnt happen, i guess i should be lucky that i got my $3000 back. these were going to be like the r60665 as in they would use a sepperate stub shaft. but be as big as possible, 23 spline input and output. totally made from either 4340 300m or hytuf. the idea was that if in production, one cv was made and the stub shaft just changed to suit the different applictaions....

and back to the thread, my point is simply that there has been good axles available for along time that it seems strange when companies make them not as good.

if the original poster is getting mog axles custom made, make them atleast out of 4340 300m or hytuf, sure they are much bigger and stronger, but for christ sake, do it right the first time....

Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

I think you'll find we have both ends of the spectrum, we have Lucas but we also do quite well at removing all traces of Lucas from our cars

the other day, my mate made comment on how good/easy it was to remove the bonnet on my 98def110 was, i told him that rather than design a good engine, they just made it easier for the mechanics..............

serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

Hi Serge,

Yes, mine were made in Maraging 300,

They cost 3500 Pounds for the four

1500 of that was just the material cost!!

BUT I saved a lot of money compared to the amount of time and expense I was spending on changing others every single outing

Yes, mine is the stroked 2.8 TD5.

Thank you for your compliment, but think I have no more skill than a lot of people on here, just maybe access to more

Your comments are absolutely spot on though, I too would say that Maxidrive are as good as you get, Never tried Ashcrofts as they were not available at the time but these too seem very good, and as you say, NOTHING is indestructible, not even mine I am sure.

I have my own business to run and don't want to get into Landrover parts, especially as Mr Ashcroft is doing a fine job of shafts etc at the mo and no need to make everyone's job harder with unneeded competition.

OK it may not be that simple but it is a fairly straight forward engineering design / production job, "Cost" is probably the limiting factor more than anything though, As always, materials are not cheap at the moment, and keeping stock takes a fair investment. And of course, the more suppliers the more the customers get watered down!

Can sell you some Lagonda shafts though, they are 1 3/4 thick

Regards,

Lara.

well 3500 for 4 axle shafts is Au$8750

thats alot of Maxidrive or HI-TOUGH Alxes, and i think we are not comparing apples to apples! your playing with the pinical of motorsport there. im sure Ashcroft or HI-TOUGH could make comp axles using top tear exotic material and heatreating. you have proven that. BUT would it be commercially viable, probably not.....

for that sort of money a person could build custom axles like TRU-HI9 35spline shafts and longfields monster cv..... or even maxi portals are near you cost!

what diff's are you running?

what cv's are you running?

i think that id like to know just the knowledge you have forgotten, but for must of us we can only read,and drive. leave the building of components to the pro's....

i like landrover's, its all i have ever owned, but if i was building something to compete, or play real hard in, it may start out as a rover but would be not very rover by the end. there diffs/axles have limitatons, probably something to do with the fact that the original LR stole parts from rover cars to get things going, then the landrover engineers stuck there head in the sand from then on, and in many other areas other than driveline.

im still to be convinced that the english have a basic understanding of electricity

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

Anti-squat and anti-dive are just different terms to distinguish between 2 different situations (one accelerating and the other decelerating).

At the rear, squat (during acceleration) is an issue, while at the front, dive (during deceleration) is an issue. Both these affects are due to weight transfer when accelerating/decelerating. Suspension geometry can be designed to counteract (anti-) the squat/dive by creating forces that assist the springs.

I'm not sure that there is a correct term for the jacking affect you described. The kinematics are the same as anti-squat/dive.

It is a problem with steep link angles. You may have noticed the better set-up nissans with big suspension lifts 6" etc. use drop boxes to lower the chassis end of the radius arms - for castor correction and this jacking affect.

i would have thought that the body mounts could be cut and strengthend to do there job and maintain clearence. drop boxes would have to hang down and become a issue for clearence

well it sounds like that longer radius arms with a bit of thought could be a good option for lifted vehicles. even if only 2 inch lift. maybe not the out right flex of a 3 link but for a road going vehicle i think they might work.

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

Serg,

I think you meant anti-dive not anti-squat.

Since we are discussing front geometry and longer radius arms, and simplifying the situation, you can judge the ant-dive (anti-squat if reversing) behaviour from the angle that the radius arms make to the horizontal - steeper angle will increase the anti's. Under brakes, the force in the arms will try to lift the chassis, countering (to a degree) the increased downward load on the front springs due to inertia of the vehicle mass at the vertical centre of gravity.

With the same suspension lift, longer arms will be flatter. But most of us have lifted suspension anyway.

Lessened anti-dive is not dangerous, IMHO it's mainly a feeling (for occupants) that is at issue.

Hi John,

i just saw your reply. yes i ment anti-dive and thats what i reffered to in my first reply. Bill referred to anti-squat so i went with it... i didnt know any better and to me its all the same. vehicle wants to sqaut down on the chassis. but im guessing there is more difference than that.

also whats it called when the chassis mount to contact patch is steep and you are travelling forward, hit a bump and the axle wants to climb back under the vehicle? because this will be helped when the arms are longer.

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

Unfortunately Serg the library such as it was, and located in my old caravan was destroyed and eaten by mice and rats a few years ago.

Your understanding of the crosswind stability principal is bang on.

I don't beleive 50% longer arms would not make the vehicle dangerous re antisquat. Many vehicles including some road cars don't have any antisquat geometry whatsoever built into their suspension and they seem to do ok. I just think it is a useful commodity to have particularly on a SWB to reduce the chances of rear wheel lock up during heavy braking. Also when I originally converted from front leaf springs (no anti squat) to hockey sticks the improvement in front end traction on steep climbs was immediately apparent.(Antisquat geometry give squat when the front axle is pulling.) I later changed to 3 link but the antisquat geometry is not that much different to the hockeysticks.

Bill.

im think more along the lines of a 110defender so swb wont play in too much. sounds like anything with a 3inch spring lift or something running MD portals would benefit from longer arms.

the reason i think its a good option is: uses all stock bushes, no axle moddifications.

also are people rasing the panhard rod mount on the axle on lifted vehicles, to bring it back to level, im thinking you'd also need to bring the front steering link parallel with the panhard....

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

OK Serg, this is how I understand things as it would apply to a road registered Landrover that is used for regular medium to long distance touring in addition to occasional serious offroad usage.Unregistered Winch challenge or other short course vehicles can probably compromise more towards crosscountry than allround performance.

Longer front hockey sticks would of course permit greater articulation for the same size bushings. They also should give more precise directional stability over undulations and under brakes due to maintaining a more constant castor angle. Antisquat under brakes, or front end squat when climbing would be reduced a bitwith the longer arms but would still be positive compared to say a 4 link plus panhard. Generally,although there are exceptions, a 4 link with an appreciable degree of antisquat geometry will have compromised articulation capabilities due to bushing bind.

Standard length LandRover front and rear control arms are probably a compromise between on road handling and crosscountry performance. I heard or read somewhere a long tim ago that crosswind stability was also a consideration in determining the lengths and operating angles of these control arms. Apparently when the force of a crosswind pushes say against the right hand side of the body of a softly sprung RangeRover, the body roll that this produces,due to the control arm geometry pulls the r/h/s front and rear wheels slightly closer together whilst the l/h/s front and rear wheels are pushed slightly further apart causing the vehicle to steer into the wind instead of being pushed off the road or into the path of oncoming traffic in left hand drive countries.I'd imagine longer flatter front and rear control arms would reduce this crosswind stability slightly.

Bill.

thanks Bill, i'd love to see your libary, let alone understand half of it

with regards to the crosswind stability: wind hits side of vehicle, trys to push it, tyres have grip so body gets pushed, which results in compression on the left side as the right is raised. this compression of the suspension makes the arms travel up becoming more level, which pushes the axles away from there location.opposite is happening on the right, axle goes into down travel and gets closer(shortens the wheel base) so although the body has leaned to the left the car wants to steer to the right.

is this correct?

so as an example would you think that an arm 50% longer would be dangerous with regards to antisquat?

dont worry i wont hold you to it

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

anyone else? would like to here Bill and John's input.

what about anti-dive?

Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

Serge,

Halfshafts are not rocket science! believe me.

Any well trained and properly experienced engineer will be able to design a good pair of halfshafts, and make them for that matter,

Heat treatment is one of the major factors and this is the one point that it is better to take advice on if not 1000% sure.

The big question is the bit about "well trained and properly experienced"

I got so Mildly miffed of with breaking halfshafts, including Maxidrive (now Hi-tough) and Kam etc etc that I designed my own, spec-ed the material and had them made by the gent in my last mail, and we then had them heat treated by the guys who do Mclaren's and Williams's drive shafts, and to the same specs as they are made from the same material.

Had them in a long time now and not even marked them! And I am no rocket engineer!

If you read my post, I didn't say "use any design and any material but heat treat it correctly"

My advice was this.

Design them or have them designed by any reputable machine shop, get the heat treatment correct (and as this is usually not done by the machine shop themselves) make sure the heat treatment is up to quality and completely reliable.

The materials you quote are all fine, 4340, 300M (which is actually a slightly modified 4340 VAR) and Hy-Tuf (AMS 6418)

And all would work on most vehicles, even if the design was not perfect,

But all are totally useless unless heat treated correctly.

Did you have yours made from 300 marging?

what did your axles cost?

are you the guy with the stroked td5?

if so i would say, first of well done, and secondly you may have a much better grasp of whats going on than most. like i said before why arnt alot more companies just pumping out good axles? why dont you do it?

my point is for a commercially viable drop in solution HI-TOUGH Engineering and Ashcroft are good.

Maxidrive first made there axles from en25(or26) and then went to AMS 6418. they have been making them for along time and have sold many many sets world wide to tourers, competitors and military vehicles. so i cant understand how someone making a axle now could not make them as good if not better. they have something to copy. people talk about maxidrive faliures, and yes i know they have. but i would bet everything that there % of faliures would be the least of the major aftermarket suppliers. and they probably have sold the most, so that gives them a disadvatage as there are more out there to fail.

Serg

[Portalrover Ltd.]

Why all the fussing about shafts? The Mog ones are massive, with a reduction hub on the end which reduces the load on the drivetrain. If you break one, you're doing something wrong. Or you're DirtyDiesel.

because they are getting axles made anyway, you may as well do it right and use good design and materials. or you could just get them made from mild steel.... big wont solve all your problems

Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

Hughie, wash your mouth out !

for the record, they do not,

i have always been under the impression that Ashcroft make there own shafts, and Kam, a different company, make there own.

Ashcroft have changed the material in the shafts and now are better than before. i didnt think there original shafts were that good, i heard that hey were breaking BEFORE stock OEM cv's. Dave correct me if im wrong. there new shafts seem better now.

i see the pic of the mog vs rover, of coarse its going to be bigger, but if you are going to the trouble of making them, get them made from as best as materila as possible, like 4340 300m or ams 6418

then the design and heat treating are a large factor as well.

for those looking for top quality series axles HI-TOUGH Engineering in Australia make them.

Serg

[Portalrover Ltd.]

To be honest, ANY good reputable machine shop in the UK can make halfshafts, just spec the material and heat treatment you want / need and of you go!

No reason you need to go to axle or gear specialists!

Just make sure they make it out of what they say and the heat treatment is perfect.

Lara.

Geoff Harris

01189 344140

Tell him Julian Messent sent you

Ask his advice and trust him

i dont agree, if that were the case alot more would do it. axle design has alot going on even though they look simple enough. and a maker needs a complete understanding of the end result to determine material choice, production methods and heat treating, just saying make sure its heat treated properly doesnt make it so....

Serg

[Kam Shafts taken from Portal rover thread]

im not overly impresed with kam's work. but if your happy with what they are making for you that is all that is important.

Serg

[Portalrover Ltd.]

what material are your half shafts being made from?

maybe post some pics of your work for all to see.

good luck, dont be affraid to look world wide for ideas and techniques.

Serg

[Mr UPS arrived today with gifts]

Fair point but I wanted the best available.

price wise without the measuring error they would have come in the same price as Mach5 bead locks

and I wouldn't have them. so single bead locks were the next option but I wanted double beadlocks.

So Stazworks was the only choice for me.

any reason you wouldn,t run the Mach 5's?

Serg

[Mr UPS arrived today with gifts]

just wondering why you wouldn't buy something from the UK? like the Mach 5's, i believe you can get these in alot of widths and any offset...... even bead locks

Serg

[3 Link front ends]

thoughts from a carpenter:

something i dont see being addressed is the relation of the chassis mount and center of contact patch of the tyre. this only gets worse on lifted vehicles and when bigger tyres are fitted.

what do you all think of this?

looking at a stock coil rover front end, stock wheels and tyres, what effect would increasing the lenght of the radius arms by 50% and mounting the chassis end of the arm at the same height as the stock mount have on off road and on road characteristics?

Serg

[2007 defender gearbox]

Ratio's are 1st = 5.443

2nd = 2.839

3rd = 1.721

4th = 1.223

5th = 1.000

6th = 0.742

rev = 4.935

transfer ratio = 1.211 and 3.269

finally a good first gear, great for towing hill starts and offroading.

but imo 2nd is too big a gap and all the others to close.

but i'm no gearbox ratio designer.

at 66-1 1st low stock axles and cv's should snap like bread sticks.

hope you have lots of replacements in stock dave. should be on a winner

cheers serg