grizbait
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Southwest MT
I wanted to throw this out for some opinions - topic that's been beat to death but a new twist. (also cross posted on jeepforum).
Here's the specs from jeepforum on the 8.25 axle:
Chrysler 8.25 - 27 spline, 1.17" diameter shafts, 8.25" ring gear, 3" axle tube - used 91-96
Chrysler 8.25 - 29 spline, 1.21" diameter shafts, 8.25" ring gear, 3" axle tube - used 97-01
And this post is a nice writeup of relative strengths: http://www.naxja.org/forum/showthread.php?t=983204
Here's one piece of info that was in it:
AXLE STRENGTHS:
COT - Continuous Output Torque
MOT - Maximum Output Torque
Dana 35 ........................ COT: 870 MOT: 3480
AMC 20 .........................
Chrysler 8.25 .................
Dana 53 ........................
Dana 44 ........................ COT: 1100 MOT: 4460
Ford 8.8 28 spline ........... COT: 1250 MOT: 4600
Ford 8.8 31 spline ........... COT: 1360 MOT: 5100
Dana 60 semifloat ........... COT: 1500 MOT: 5500
Dana 70 ........................
Rockwell 2.5 Ton ............
I'm considering swapping out my Dana 35 for an 8.25 (I have a bead on a D44 out of an MJ though) I have a 99XJ/Auto/AW4 D35 rear.
What I'm wondering. A 91-96 XJ C8.25 shaft is not much larger than the D35 (though the ring gear and tubes are) I think everyone agrees that an 8.25 is better, but I assume it should be the 97+ 8.25 axle with 1.21" diameter shaft. How significant is the axle tube diameter in this discussion?
Am I splitting hair here? Is the pre-97 8.25 still signficantly stronger than the D35? Is the 97+ 8.25 that much better than the 91-96 8.25 or negligible?
For keeping w/ stock specs for a 97+, I could see the benefits of waiting for a later model 8.25, there's one I can buy now out of a 91-96 pretty cheap though.
Any thoughts or input appreciated.
Here's the specs from jeepforum on the 8.25 axle:
Chrysler 8.25 - 27 spline, 1.17" diameter shafts, 8.25" ring gear, 3" axle tube - used 91-96
Chrysler 8.25 - 29 spline, 1.21" diameter shafts, 8.25" ring gear, 3" axle tube - used 97-01
And this post is a nice writeup of relative strengths: http://www.naxja.org/forum/showthread.php?t=983204
Here's one piece of info that was in it:
AXLE STRENGTHS:
COT - Continuous Output Torque
MOT - Maximum Output Torque
Dana 35 ........................ COT: 870 MOT: 3480
AMC 20 .........................
Chrysler 8.25 .................
Dana 53 ........................
Dana 44 ........................ COT: 1100 MOT: 4460
Ford 8.8 28 spline ........... COT: 1250 MOT: 4600
Ford 8.8 31 spline ........... COT: 1360 MOT: 5100
Dana 60 semifloat ........... COT: 1500 MOT: 5500
Dana 70 ........................
Rockwell 2.5 Ton ............
I'm considering swapping out my Dana 35 for an 8.25 (I have a bead on a D44 out of an MJ though) I have a 99XJ/Auto/AW4 D35 rear.
What I'm wondering. A 91-96 XJ C8.25 shaft is not much larger than the D35 (though the ring gear and tubes are) I think everyone agrees that an 8.25 is better, but I assume it should be the 97+ 8.25 axle with 1.21" diameter shaft. How significant is the axle tube diameter in this discussion?
Am I splitting hair here? Is the pre-97 8.25 still signficantly stronger than the D35? Is the 97+ 8.25 that much better than the 91-96 8.25 or negligible?
For keeping w/ stock specs for a 97+, I could see the benefits of waiting for a later model 8.25, there's one I can buy now out of a 91-96 pretty cheap though.
Any thoughts or input appreciated.