Jump to content
dangerous doug

New product from xcess4x4

Recommended Posts

A while back while dropping some big bolts(m125) off to nigel we got to talking about strengthening an axle case for an up and coming build I have. The I mentioned the KAM Solutions (cds tube down the case and fill the void with resin) to wich nige rolled his eyes and groaned.....can’t really remember the exact wordings but to summarise he said “don’t” and lead me down to the shed where he had prototype no1 of his new axle truss. Big mistake nigel, I proceeded to become a royal pain in the arse asking when they will be done once or twice a month(atleast). Today they arrived. These are only a prototype batch sent out to around 20 people to “try” and report back on figment issues or anything else to be changed. Super light weight but also super strong as it is made from that domex stuff he makes the clutch fork braces out of. in other words double hard person I'm not that keen on steel! And only 3MM!

 

A0EDEDB5-2DEC-45A9-8AC8-152EBCC4CB92.jpeg.77aca2675760638091a1524c8208b476.jpeg

 

so like I say, today they arrived......at 3 o clock and I had to leave to pick my daughter up at 4. Alot to do there....I’ll have a go! So this is what I came up with in just under an hour, not bragging about work speed or anything, it just illustrates how good the fit up is out of the box! 

 

Forgive the mess, still going through a tidy up 

 

start with a freshly blasted axle case

E3A95C04-E666-48A1-9D9B-D383B1664DE7.thumb.jpeg.bad6a89a491cab7bf29ed3c5f79268f9.jpeg

 

offer up truss and draw around it to identify where where I need to grind off the primer I specifically asked to be left off!

 

 

FDDB4C10-2DD9-481E-83CD-CD31C06D89D7.thumb.jpeg.78c3cfcd0a22d924ca7be27d84e74fc9.jpeg

CB7174DA-1469-45DB-871B-2BB2EB176E3A.thumb.jpeg.7f4cb0fdfcb802273ba80a4c8156c96e.jpeg

 

A few teeny tiney fitment issues that a tickle with the grinder sorted.....

106A652D-BD63-49CD-A6C6-916328E2AAAF.thumb.jpeg.e6fb53b4b730e50f414e5f41ef3830e9.jpeg

and to put that fitment to the test we got the tig out!

E72C135E-F104-4C0B-AF1C-91F4AE64F5A5.thumb.jpeg.b209b2b3e5fe7a17a17cafa59eaa30d4.jpeg

basically ignored the instructions. Not because I know better but I wanted to see how this would all react(test donkey remember) and all seemed fine!

so now you know @Hybrid_From_Hell you have to really mess up to ruin it!

 

24EF26CB-71BC-4B35-99AC-D4DB3D2C65D6.thumb.jpeg.8387ff2098c02e51cc527e20bca4a3bf.jpeg

the main divergence from the instructions was I started the tacks in the middle and worked my way out. My thinking then was if something did warp and lift it would be easier to lose that in an end rather than the middle

5D01E8B3-AE3D-45FA-9ADA-5784C9C125FE.thumb.jpeg.cee0072a3f9f115f231bdd58c32cf74c.jpeg

EC940778-79F7-4EDE-8572-C5FE69EE8D17.thumb.jpeg.662baf589eb089aff067d0f1671c8eea.jpeg

ABCA5950-9BDA-4A50-B465-93A025CF7C1E.thumb.jpeg.8f82d349b40220ece147e71dd58cd208.jpeg

 

A few little problems cause by me going in guns blazing but nothing too bad. Be nice, I havnt picked up my tig for nearly a year so the welds arnt my best. 

 

all in all its a very nice thing, some minor fitment issues but that is probably down to my casing rather than the design of the truss. 

 

The only thing that that bugs me are those holes. They are very nice but I think the weight gained by it filling with thick mud will out weigh the lightness of speed holes. however there are drain holes in the bottom so I could be proven wrong. This case won’t see combat for a long time yet so others will have to find that out for me. 

 

And Although he says there isn’t a market for it I still think there needs to be a domex weld on diffpan to go with the trusses. those 6mm ones are heavy and it would finish it off just right.

 

anyway, thought I would share. I think after the prototypes are all fitted there will be tweeks to the next batch to make them even better.

 

and the best part is they are cheaper than a front and rear set than the kam/terrafirma counterpart! 

 

Feedback welcome

 

Doug 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the axle case still straight? I'd be a bit suspicious of it pulling it out of true when cooling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bowie69 said:

Is the axle case still straight? I'd be a bit suspicious of it pulling it out of true when cooling.

A good question and one I will answer on Sunday! This axle is having the diff flipped in it so I made some bungs to go in each end and a bar that passes through the diff to aid in that. We will see if it all still fits and if it’s still straight. But that is another reason I wanted to use the tig as I don’t think it heats the sourounding material as much as an arc or mig while still delivering the penitration 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks nice !

Didn't Series axles have a reinforcement like that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What size tungsten did you use for that?  I find the TIG still fires a fair amount of heat into stuff when the Amps are wound up, the trusses look like a nice piece of kit though.

one question...wtf do you need to bolt with a M125?? :o

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Scotts90 said:

What size tungsten did you use for that?  I find the TIG still fires a fair amount of heat into stuff when the Amps are wound up, the trusses look like a nice piece of kit though.

one question...wtf do you need to bolt with a M125?? :o

 

Tower crane base bolts ;) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any reason to do this rather than the Tomcat style inner tubes? (not with epoxy..... no idea why KAM ever thought of that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that that amount of Tigging would pull the axle case out of true.

Nice job Doug and Uncle Nige.

Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Arjan said:

Looks nice !

Didn't Series axles have a reinforcement like that ?

Yes as did the WOLF. 

What Land Rover discovered during the WOLF trials ( a friend from uni was on the Land Rover team) was that the Salisbury axle would bend more easily than a Rover axle, under certain circumstances. Hence the reinforced Rover axle cases on the WOLF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2018-07-21 = LR Hybrid Rover verstevigde achteras.jpg

Yes - have found a picture of the Hybrid's axle

Thanks for the Wolf part.

Goes to show that some things never change...😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, neil110 said:

Yes as did the WOLF. 

What Land Rover discovered during the WOLF trials ( a friend from uni was on the Land Rover team) was that the Salisbury axle would bend more easily than a Rover axle, under certain circumstances. Hence the reinforced Rover axle cases on the WOLF

I think it was the Sals axle tubes pulling out under chronic overloading, or at least that's what happened here in Oz.

As a consequence the Telstra 130 extended cab TD5's here had heavily trussed Wolf rear ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lightweight axles were also reinforced.  I'll grab a photo in a mo.

 

G.

 

 

IMG_20180721_141708.jpg

IMG_20180721_141745.jpg

IMG_20180721_141720.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that Rover put the strengthening at such an angle. Facing partially into the direction of travel.

This from a  1972 lightweight that had VLK armour retro fitted in service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slight angular variations aside, the biggest difference between Land Rover stiffeners for Series axles, and the fitted example of the new product, is that the new product has been fitted above the axle, and the underside left with nothing, whereas LR put Series axle stiffening on the underside of the axle casing.

In the pictures of the fitted product in this thread I have taken the position of the axle breather to indicate the top of the axle casing.

Judging by the alignment of the name on the new product, the positioning on top of axle casing is what is intended.

Regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, David Sparkes said:

Slight angular variations aside, the biggest difference between Land Rover stiffeners for Series axles, and the fitted example of the new product, is that the new product has been fitted above the axle, and the underside left with nothing, whereas LR put Series axle stiffening on the underside of the axle casing.

In the pictures of the fitted product in this thread I have taken the position of the axle breather to indicate the top of the axle casing.

Judging by the alignment of the name on the new product, the positioning on top of axle casing is what is intended.

Regards.

You are right but the front lr axle is two identical Half’s welded together so if desirable you could weld on on the bottom aswell/instead 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it depends on where the damage is coming from? I'd prefer above, ground clearance and all that, but Rover must have had good reason to go below.  Perhaps they saw the risk coming from rocks, or IEDs. Don't know.

 

I should pull out the rear axle and see if it's the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found TIG puts in waaay more heat than MIG but maybe that's cos I'm slow? :blush:

Was sort of tempted but bit blingy for me and don't really have a need and don't have any spare cash so that solved that.

I had the same thought over the holes and mud. Curious to know how a dimple die setup would compare to domex on strength vs weight vs cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gazzar said:

Interesting that Rover put the strengthening at such an angle. Facing partially into the direction of travel.

This from a  1972 lightweight that had VLK armour retro fitted in service.

My lightweight axle stiffener didn't look anything like that.... was square to the road surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What year?

Was it in Northern Ireland?

 

G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80, ex RAF I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bowie69 said:

80, ex RAF I think.

I wonder if they changed the specification? Is that a full width axle, or has it the short half shafts?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short, flat ended shafts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 1968 lightweight had the strengthened front and rear axles, the front one was still bent despite the reinforcing!

If you look carefully, as well as being fitted with the additional VPK aeon spring mountings the front casing in photo above is reinforced on the short side too - bump stop is braced to the spring locating foot on front and back of front axle. Both my 1980 lightweights had standard unreinforced axles.

Edited by oneandtwo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good spot, I think that was done to support the Aeon support springs, it doesn't look as factory as the strengthening.  On this lightweight both front axle rear spring chassis mounts had serious structural cracks where the tube was breaking away from the chassis.  Goodness knows what the army did to them, aside from chucking them out of helicopters!

 

G.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy