Narrow axles—newer cj

[Militarymetal]

I know the early CJ5 has narrower axles and that the spring perches are in a different location than the 80s CJs. I was wondering if it would function and look okay to use the narrow track axles on a newer CJ? Or are they going to be obviously too narrow—even with wider tires and rims.

 

[3b a runnin]

I don't think the axle lengths are much different, some, maybe someone with more exp will chime in. In 76 I think, the D44 gave way to the AMC 20, which had the spring perches set wider, because the frame was widened in the rear. I think really the only change in the D30 up front was the conversion from a 6 bolt caliper mount to a 2 bolt mount. Of course the D30 did not come on an early CJ.
Weren't all CJ bodies 60in. wide?

 

[Heath_N]

The width of the body never changed to my knowledge. Mine is late cj5 from 78 and the body is 60" wide. My axles are still narrower than an 80's cj7.

When they got wider axles they just added plastic flares to the fenders.

 

[garage gnome]

All the front axles have the same spring perch locations. I can take my wide track D30 from my CJ7 and bolt it into my 1949 3A. In '76, the rear of the frame was widened, so the rear axle spring perches will be in a different location that the 75 and old CJs. Not hard to modify those spring perches.

 

[colojeepguy]

There's the differential ofset to consider as well. 71- Older rear diffs are offset. Newer are centered.

 

[Militarymetal]

All the front axles have the same spring perch locations. I can take my wide track D30 from my CJ7 and bolt it into my 1949 3A. In '76, the rear of the frame was widened, so the rear axle spring perches will be in a different location that the 75 and old CJs. Not hard to modify those spring perches.

Excellent! Thank you.

 

[Sierra Bum]

There have been different axle variations over the years in cj’s with different wms measurements. True “wide track” axles only came in cj7’s and cj8’s starting in 1982. My understanding is that the cj5 never had these “wide track” axles from the factory. Even “narrow track” axles varied through the years by axle model in wms. Not sure what you’re conjuring up, but anything 72-81 have the same wms measurements. The early front ends (25 and 27) are narrower than the “narrow” 30s. As mentioned, spring perches are easy to modify/replace. I would not put a a 25 or 27 in the front of a late model CJ since it has a 30 in it already. Width is often adjusted with wheel spacers. You always read how terrible it is and then you show up at the Loon Lake trailhead, and everyone has wheel spacers and not a single problem.

WMS Specs
Dana 25 and 27: 50.5” or 51”
Dana 30 NT: 53”
Dana 30 WT: 56”
Dana 44 - AMC 20 NT: 50.5” or 51”
AMC 20 and Dana 44 WT: 54.5”

 

[duffer]

There have been different axle variations over the years in cj’s with different wms measurements. True “wide track” axles only came in cj7’s and cj8’s starting in 1982. My understanding is that the cj5 never had these “wide track” axles from the factory. Even “narrow track” axles varied through the years by axle model in wms. Not sure what you’re conjuring up, but anything 72-81 have the same wms measurements. The early front ends (25 and 27) are narrower than the “narrow” 30s. As mentioned, spring perches are easy to modify/replace. I would not put a a 25 or 27 in the front of a late model CJ since it has a 30 in it already. Width is often adjusted with wheel spacers. You always read how terrible it is and then you show up at the Loon Lake trailhead, and everyone has wheel spacers and not a single problem.

WMS Specs
Dana 25 and 27: 50.5” or 51”
Dana 30 NT: 53”
Dana 30 WT: 56”
Dana 44 - AMC 20 NT: 50.5” or 51”
AMC 20 and Dana 44 WT: 54.5”

The D25/D27's are actually closer to 49 13/16" and the WT D30's 56.5". And yes, replacing a D30 with a D25/D27 is absolutely completely silly. You may find yourself institutionalized doing something like that.

I wouldn't even replace a rear D44 two piece axle with the AMC20. You gain very little if anything other than better stock brakes. FWI, the Willys wagon and 58+ FC 150 axles are all within an inch (actually 0.5") of the WT CJ axles.

 

[Fireball]

Newer are centered.

Except the Quadratrac CJ-7s with full-time 4wd. Those had an offset pumpkin. I'm assuming they were all AMC Model 20s.

 

[Fireball]

Except the Quadratrac CJ-7s with full-time 4wd. Those had an offset pumpkin. I'm assuming they were all AMC Model 20s.

Here's a picture of one of the offset AMC 20s for Quadratrac:

 

[Militarymetal]

Thanks everyone for the comments. Where my mind is going is to find a 80s CJ5 frame and move the axles, transmission, and body from my 67 over to it. That would make repowering to a V6, brake upgrading, and steering upgrading easier. Am I all wet here? The Dana 44 I have is free floating. The Dana 27 would need a two hole knuckle. Or, replace it entirely with a Dana 30. I was leaning toward keeping it. Any comments on this approach?

 

[garage gnome]

Seems like a lot of work for no gain.

 

[colojeepguy]

Thanks everyone for the comments. Where my mind is going is to find a 80s CJ5 frame and move the axles, transmission, and body from my 67 over to it. That would make repowering to a V6, brake upgrading, and steering upgrading easier. Am I all wet here? The Dana 44 I have is free floating. The Dana 27 would need a two hole knuckle. Or, replace it entirely with a Dana 30. I was leaning toward keeping it. Any comments on this approach?

Short answer is, it won't work. LOTS of changes in the CJ starting in 76. Externally the body looks the same but underneath it is different. You'd have to totally rework the body mounts and firewall.

 

[duffer]

Except the Quadratrac CJ-7s with full-time 4wd. Those had an offset pumpkin. I'm assuming they were all AMC Model 20s.

The 58*+ FC 150 rear axles are also offset. What I used to build the current rear axle in the CJ 3B. One complication I ran into was to keep the axle centered on the frame, the right side spring perch ended up part way over the center housing casting similar to front axles. No room to cheat like Willys/Kaiser did on the offset D44's and have some horizontal angle to the rear driveshaft.

 

[Keys5a]

Thanks everyone for the comments. Where my mind is going is to find a 80s CJ5 frame and move the axles, transmission, and body from my 67 over to it. That would make repowering to a V6, brake upgrading, and steering upgrading easier. Am I all wet here? The Dana 44 I have is free floating. The Dana 27 would need a two hole knuckle. Or, replace it entirely with a Dana 30. I was leaning toward keeping it. Any comments on this approach?

Keep in mind, the wheel base up through 1971 is 81”. The intermediates (‘72-‘75) have an 84” wheelbase, and this continued through to the end of the CJ5 model. The CJ7 got a 94” wheelbase.
Your ‘67 tub can be made to fit, but your existing hood and fenders will be too short on an ‘80s chassis.

 

[Fireball]

Keep in mind, the wheel base up through 1971 is 81”. The intermediates (‘72-‘75) have an 84” wheelbase.

Yep, 72 and up fenders and hood would be required to keep the wheels centered in the fender openings.

 

[FinoCJ]

Where my mind is going is to find a 80s CJ5 frame and move the axles, transmission, and body from my 67 over to it.

Seems like a lot of work for no gain.

agreed

Am I all wet here?

yup

The Dana 27 would need a two hole knuckle.

why? I assume you still have the ross box and are considering going to power saggy box? You can run that with a single hole knuckle and double hole TRE. The two hole knuckle is better - especially for manual steering where it gives a bit more leverage on the knuckle steering arm, but for power, not a necessity. Why do you think you need a D30? not saying its not better than a D27, but at the same time, what are you really doing that necessitates it? Heck, even with a v6 swap I don't think its needed. I am still running a D27 with a locker in front of a v6 and it gets wheeled more than most around here with 33s. It might one day break, and if it does, I probably wouldn't put money into fixing it, but why not run it until it dies. Some good things about a D30 include options for traction devices (specifically selectables), improved turning radius (although the leaf springs often block that more anything). So, up to you, but I always get the feeling you think you NEED to do these things to use your jeep...maybe I just have the wrong read...

 

[duffer]

Heck, even with a v6 swap I don't think its needed. I am still running a D27 with a locker in front of a v6 and it gets wheeled more than most around here with 33s. It might one day break, and if it does, I probably wouldn't put money into fixing it, but why not run it until it dies. Some good things about a D30 include options for traction devices (specifically selectables), improved turning radius (although the leaf springs often block that more anything). So, up to you, but I always get the feeling you think you NEED to do these things to use your jeep...maybe I just have the wrong read...

I blew the spider gears out of New Blue's D27 just backing up to turn around on the original trail up the South Meadow drainage bottom (a trail very similar to the current North Meadow trail). The Jeep was only a year old at that point. I can't think of a single engineering aspect of a D30 that wasn't a rather large improvement over the D25/D27.

Over the years, I ran both the Y TRE and the 2 hole knuckle in my 3B with a Saginaw box. The two hole knuckle allowed more draglink/spring clearance. I'm currently back to a Y TRE now but not a problem with the now "flipped" tie rod.

 

[Militarymetal]

Thanks everyone for the very constructive information and comments. I am now in the process of assembling the bits needed to upgrade my 67 using the Dana 27.

 

[colojeepguy]

I posted this on another thread-
I have a Dana 27 with 4.88s, PowerLok, 2 hole knuckle, drilled 11" drums, knuckle studs. Just about everything you can do the 27.
And it's probably getting swapped out soon because I want a front selectable.

The 27 may be fine, depending on your intended use.