Club 80-90 Forums

Have any of you looked at running uj's (or hardy splicer if you prefere) in driveshafts instead of cv joints? Im looking at options to do some serious lift work on the single cab, prob around 3-4 inch lift, i think evan porsche cvs will strugle with the required angle with out braking the first time it leaves the tarmac

Any thoughts would be a good help, ive made my own lft kits for most jap 4x4s and landrovers for years but this is the first time ive gone mad on a syncro, i know i can make it work but if its already been done then a kick in the right direction will save me alot of RnD work

vw bay window syncro used cardan joints I believe Andrew will be along with a pic in a mo....

Aidan wrote:vw bay window syncro used cardan joints I believe Andrew will be along with a pic in a mo....

How did you know .........



One prototype Bay Window Syncro!

cheers lads, thats along the lines of what i was thinking Does any one do a conversion off the shelf or am i going to be making it all from sctratch? Its not a prob either way, i either work and buy them or make it all and dont do paying work and still end up skint

could you possibly modify the UJ from a prop shaft ?

Why bother.... a CV is better than a UJ anyday, that why we use them!

Yes a cv joint may be a little more reliable but it wont work to such a tight angle that a uj will allow, in effect meaning a bigger lift and/or more articulation is possible.
Yes a lot of work for might seem small gains but as im looking at making as big lift kit for the single cab its somthing thats got to be concidered as a possible option. Im still bouncing ideas around and looking at my options at the mo, its not a big prop to modify or make compltly new syspension system. Im stuck in the possition that if i bastadise it to much it wont be worth any thing, but on the oter hand if its a bolt on kit it could be reversed at a latter date. may be i should be a little more normal and keep me thoughts inside he box

some sort of booting for the outer one would be required I think, inner less of an issue as self clearing to an extent.
108mm driveshafts easier option, not cheap but readily doable, Russel seems to get good results with those

cheers bud, will get on to finding out how much they are, ujs wouldnt be cheap either so it could be a viable option

I think the clue is in the name.
Constant velocity.
Further you take the UJ away from linear, the bigger the varience in speed.
Seems daft to me to use them, no one uses them anymore for a reason.

This is very true, im just bouncing ideas at the mo, from a rough measure up i dont think the cv joints will take the angle needed to get the lift i want to achive, if i can find a set of 924 cv joints they will do as they should work to aprox 40 deg where as the standards wont go much past 30 deg with beaking. Feel free to corect m if im wrong on this, im used to farm stuff
Will give you a ring in the morning simon, i cant get pay pal to work at the mo to order a few bits for my engine

I've got to go with Simon on this one. The CV joint was designed to address the problems associated with the Hardy Spicer (or Universal Joints) in terms of binding at acute angles. To achieve an acute angle the yoke of a UJ has to be slim to avoid binding with it's opposite yoke. This obviously places limits on the articulation and power transmission achievable with a UJ. Whereas the CV Joint's articulation is limited only by the depth (or thickness if you like) of the outer component. If you look at the common applications for the joints you will see that UJs are used for propshafts (low angle articulation), power transmission shafts (low angle articulation) and driving through swivel joint hubs (low angle articulation again) and the CV joint is used mainly for driveshafts (medium to high angle articulation depending on the application).

Simon has a nice line of heavy duty Birfield Joints.... dont you Simon!