Making My CJ5 Into A CJ6/II

Thanks..........Your project is also pretty Cool. I think we both have tore into these Jeeps pretty well..........The good news is yours is done!.........and I'm still playing with mine! I'm South of Walnut Creek in San Ramon , Love to see yours some day.

 

Be careful you don't become a victim of paralysis by analysis. Although since I don't run sand and maybe you are planning to, I've never thought that front driveline angles were that critical for slow trail use. I can see how in the sand with the power you will have available the angle would be more relevant. Awesome work, as usual, Terry.

 

So I've re-read the last couple of pages, are you going sua or soa? It seems like you're needing to cut a lot. Looks good though.

 

I wounder, looking at you thread why you dont go with a coil spring set-up? at least for the front...

 

John , Nah........Yep some Sand.......But you know me , If the stuff is not right it just will not leave here. I'm committed to the 9" and the weight savings , strength and support. Using the 1-ton inner C's up there makes things real tight........Would really be no issue if I was going full width axles..........but I'm trying to keep this fairly narrow around 60-61" WMS.......... I'll get it to work or start over!.........I had a 2 + inch offset to start with that is slowly going away. Compound angles on any U-joint is nothing but a time delayed fuse!

Spring under 2.5" lift on 37" like to keep the COG down........were working on the bump travel........the droop is no issue, those are longer than normal 2.5" springs. And Yes I am cutting allot.........and will both get to see where it all goes , if I can't get what I want I'll just make some other changes.............nothing but sparks at this point in time!

Thanks for the comments.

 

Come on up, you are welcome anytime. I do get down to Walnut Creek - wife at the mall, me at the cigar lounge. I sent you a reply regarding the rear fenders, not sure it went through, let me know. Looks like you"re well stocked for shop equipment, but if there's anything you need to use - let me know.

 

Johney, Right now everything is on the table.........

 

Got that message and Thank You!...............and Yes will have to get together sometime........I'm up at Sonoma at the Track all the time. I was just curious on how you did those in the rear...........I mean sometimes I get off on a tangent trying to make or duplicate a part and then someone clues me in on a completely different approach and I go Duhhh! Anyway , I'll give you a call in the next few days.

 

i would go with a front coil spring set-up instead of leaf.

if you were keeping the old frame i wont have suggest that but going with a brand new custom frame i would suggest the coil spring set-up. At least for the front. You're going to have the pumpking on driver side. You don't have a big mess with the trac-bar for having built a set-up for my jeep. Also you will be able to bring the front frame ending strait at the tire for a better attack angle.

it will slole the problem you have because coil spring outboard the frame so you won't end up with leaf going over the pumpking.

 

Yes Johney , that Coil option has already been discussed and on the table for quite sometime...........although I must admit I'm a little old school and still like the simplicity of the leafs over running Links...........I think these extended leaf Deaver Springs I'm working on have allot of promise for leafs sprung vehicles that have at least 100" of wheelbase to work with. For right now , I'm going to throw some more time & sparks at that Front Housing and see where it takes me...........Keep Watching!

 

You have a nice project keep on going.

I know that the link that come up with the coil could be a little headache. That's for this reason i went with broncos radius arm, simplicity, juste as easy as leaf to set, just need to assemble the wedge and arm on axle, don't weld it and you can move the axle as you wish, when finished just weld the wedge in place juste like you can do with spring perch.

 

Terry how long ago was it we had ^this discussion ?

 

Which discussion? There has been so many???????

 

Back to the Build.............Sure hope this is going to work!

WELL IT'S GETTING CLOSER , THAT 2.5" WIDE LEAF SPRING IS GIVING ME FITS.



DO TO THE FACT THE AXLE TUBE WOULD NOW BE ALSO MOUNTED INBOARD ANOTHER PROBLEM SURFACED. THE THROUGH STUDS IN THE AREA OF THE TUBE WILL HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO THREADED INSERTS.......JUST NO ROOM IN THAT AREA ANYMORE..SO I MACHINED UP 4 ON THE LATHE AND THEN BORED AND COUNTERSUNK 4 HOLES IN THE HOUSING TO ACCEPT THE THREADED INSERTS.



NOW THAT'S BETTER

A LITTLE MORE WORK TO GETTING THESE BULKHEAD PLATES TO FIT CORRECTLY........I ALSO HAD TO BORE A LARGE PILOT HOLE IN THE PLATES SO MY SPECIAL BORING FIXTURE AND SHELL MILL ONLY HAS TO BORE OUT THE LAST .400 THOUSANDS


LOOKS PRETTY GOOD......NEXT I'LL WELD THESE IN.

 

Are you planning a truss of some kind?

 

John , What am I planning? How about a Vacation away from this!

In answer to your question..... Yes, No, Don't know..............How's that for an answer?.........

Not allot of room on the short side at the 1-ton inner C. Plus the U-bolts will have to find there way through there somehow.....maybe just an opening in that area? I did a template the other day and I think I can make it all work and still look OK..........That short side stub may really be of no issue as that's where the inner bulkhead comes into play for strength , plus I'm staring at some killer sized axle tube here........3.00 OD x .375 wall. If this axle was full width and not 61" as I want , It would not be much of an issue............Just going to have to keep making sparks and see where it takes me.

 

I'm having a heck of time with the passenger side on mine.... A 5/8s u bolt barely fits in there... I'll be watching to see what you come up with. I'm sure it'll be nice...

 

I wasn't thinking about a truss to support the tubes so much as supporting the connection of the tube to the housing. Just doesn't seem like much contact area between the tube and the housing. But hey, I barely qualify as a shade tree engineer/mechanic/fabricator. Maybe less than barely. Hang in there, have a and breathe.

 

John, All good points........and I'm not going anywhere as I do enjoy the challenge!

To your concerns: I would guess that in my eyes they are one in the same , that is making that connection strong enough........and without getting into the shear values which I already have and other mechanical logic's of strength and attachment , one might really look at the use factor first and then also if the arm or length of that lever which in this case would be the axle tube , tire and wheel mass are substantial enough that it could put enough force to that joint to cause it to fail........In reality the only thing that has changed here is the moment at which point the attachment is now being made.......that area at the housing although moved inboard some is actually greater in volume and strength with the addition of the outer wall and inner bulkhead. Basically the axle joint at the outer face next to the spring is not where the axle shear now is.........that would be now between the two joints. Hence the reason for the .375 wall tubing.

In the absence of any suspension , that would obviously be an area of concern........or if the vehicle would be involved in high speed jumping whereby the suspension would be put into full bump or compression on a landing.

I think with the addition of a front horizontal brace or truss of sorts that goes across the front of the axle would be just frosting on the cake.

Although right now there are some other issues that continue to bother me more than that joint.