• NAXJA is having its 18th annual March Membership Drive!!!
    Everyone who joins or renews during March will be entered into a drawing!
    More Information - Join/Renew
  • Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Swapping out the double cardan for single cardan joint ?

1-tonxj

NAXJA Member
NAXJA Member
Location
Colorado
I have been thinking of swapping out the double cardan at the t-case in favor of a single cardan joint but I'm wondering how they will run if I don't set pinon angle to flat to out them in phase. My ORI strut axle side mounts would need to be cut off and reworked after rotating the axle down this is easy on the rear but my front lower mounts are a lot more involved than just a couple tabs on a truss so I'd like to avoid redoing them . Anyone run a single cardan on dedicated trail rig without correcting the pinion for them ?
 
I am pretty sure people with dedicated trail rigs are not worried about getting the u joints in phase. Just keep them greased
 
I have been thinking of swapping out the double cardan at the t-case in favor of a single cardan joint but I'm wondering how they will run if I don't set pinon angle to flat to out them in phase. My ORI strut axle side mounts would need to be cut off and reworked after rotating the axle down this is easy on the rear but my front lower mounts are a lot more involved than just a couple tabs on a truss so I'd like to avoid redoing them . Anyone run a single cardan on dedicated trail rig without correcting the pinion for them ?

Why??? Most people go the other direction. The point in the dual cardan is to cancel the cyclical accelleration and decelleration as it flexes. With a DC, you point the pumpkin at the DC so that joint is running straight.
 
Why??? Most people go the other direction. The point in the dual cardan is to cancel the cyclical accelleration and decelleration as it flexes. With a DC, you point the pumpkin at the DC so that joint is running straight.

Strength the 1350 DC uses same centering ball as the 1310 DC . I still have 1310 DC at the case my yokes are a sun of a bitch to reach so I'd like enough beef to not worry about it Everytime I have to gas it when I can't crawl it .
 
Your not making any sense? When I ran a 241OR tc I had 1350's at the tc and 1310's at the axle!
 
Your not making any sense? When I ran a 241OR tc I had 1350's at the tc and 1310's at the axle!

Right and currently I have 1310 DC at the case the axle is irrelevant But my front is still 1310 as well at the axle and rear is 1350 at the axle . My question is simply who has run single cardan shafts that they did not correct the pinion to t-case output angled on for a crawler and how did it work out . I ask because strength wise a 1350 or 1410 single cardan is stronger than a double cardan due to the centering ball of the 1350 being sized the same as the 1310 cardan also single cardan takes up less room and has more angle before bind . The upside to a DC is as Old man pointed out just like my RCV shafts work vs standard u joints when they turn . I have 1350 cv yokes sitting in a box for the atlas but I'm not sold on building 1350 DC shafts . I don't break the 1310s infact I only broke when my angle was off and they bound up then they ripped out if the yoke ears the u joints were fine which that mostly because stock 1310 slip yokes are not forged like 1350 so they are pretty soft . I just want more beef so I have less worry about changing shafts on trail because the belly skid and size of the atlas really make reaching the yoke bolts a bitch
 
The stress on the centering ball in minimal vs the other bearings. In all my years of wheeling, I have never seen a centering ball broken. I have seen them dry and worn out, but the joint still worked, only with vibes and noise.
 
You are correct in the fact that the alignment of the rear axle is different for a DC vs a single joint. On a single joint, the pinion needs to be parallel to the tcase output. In a DC, the pinion needs to be pointing roughly at the DC, minus a degree or so to compensate for axle wrap.
 
Are your links all fixed length? Or are the links that close to contacting the brackets during flex? This seems like a problem that could mostly be solved by shortening an upper link or two and maybe grinding a bracket for clearance.

I have 1350 at the Dana 60 pinion, 1310 at the carrier bearing, 1310 CV at the Atlas, 1410 at the Atlas rear, and 1350 Wobble at the Dana 70. I worry about the two-piece mid shaft pulling apart again.
 
Bringing it back from the dead-ish but this seemed interesting.

I can’t say I have ever heard of someone switching to a single cardan setup. I believe it would be due to the travel involved with their suspension and if its not that, they have been told DC is the only way to go. Rather than fully understand drivelines.

Regardless, I wouldn’t do it, but I would encourage you to try it out and see for science for your own benefit. If the angles are appropriate and pinion is adjusted to parallel to Tcase, then worst case you find out by breaking a joint :dunno:.

For what its worth, the centering ball of a DC does not hold the load. That is specifically what the Joint caps are for in the H yoke. That was already mentioned above, just supporting that notion. If that is the only reason you want a single 1350 approach, then in my opinion it won’t really matter.

Check out a Neapco or Spicer parts catalog and see what joints have the largest max operating angle. Just my .02.
 
Go look at most any dedicated higher end trail rig.

You won't see many CV's...for good reason.

I ditched my front CV for single cardan (1350 at both ends), and if my rear weren't a Toyota CV, it would be gone too.

CV's are weak and just additional failure points.

The real purpose of a CV doesn't matter for something that might see 40-50 in short blips.
 
Go look at most any dedicated higher end trail rig.

You won't see many CV's...for good reason.

I ditched my front CV for single cardan (1350 at both ends), and if my rear weren't a Toyota CV, it would be gone too.

CV's are weak and just additional failure points.

The real purpose of a CV doesn't matter for something that might see 40-50 in short blips.


This is what I was thinking since my rig is usually going all of 5mph on good trails and sees very limited time at even 30 on access roads . I think I've made my choice here since my outputs are a bitch to reach with belly skid and cross member clearance and replacement mid trail is something that I want as little chance of as it's going to be an hour or two under there not 10-15 minutes .
 
Back
Top