Forget about driveline angles... - Chevelle Tech
2014 General Tech Forum from 2014

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 73 (permalink) Old Nov 26th, 14, 1:03 AM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Forget about driveline angles...

As some of you might know, I have been running a CV driveshaft in my 1970 GTO for a few years now. The driveshaft that I have uses a CV joint at the slip yoke and a 1350 joint on the pinion yoke. This has worked very well for me, but there is always room for improvement. Since that time, The DriveShaft Shop has really expanded their line of products for this type of driveshaft.

Today I got a couple of beautiful driveline parts from The DriveShaft Shop. These will be going in a 1967 Cougar that I am working on, but they can just as easily be used in any car, Chevelles included.

Goodbye 100 years old u-joint technology and welcome to the 21st century...



First is this 27 spline slip yoke for my T56 transmission:



I do believe that a 32 spline version is also available that will work with TH400, etc...

It is set up to use one of their 100mm CV joints.



This beauty is a pinion flange for the 9" rear end. There are versions for the 12 bolt also available.



It is machined to accept one of their 108 mm CV joints.



Once I get everything installed I will measure for an aluminum driveshaft (with CV joints t both ends) to go in the middle. Concerns about driveline angles will be a thing of the past. The front and rear operating angles don't have to be equal and opposite anymore, as long as the operating angles don't exceed 9 degrees.

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 73 (permalink) Old Nov 26th, 14, 1:08 AM
Senior Tech Team
Jim
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Carver, MA
Posts: 2,604
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Andrew, those are very impressive. Can you give us some kind of idea how much this technology costs?
Thanks

72 Chevelle SS conv
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
72ragtop is offline  
post #3 of 73 (permalink) Old Nov 26th, 14, 8:49 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 72ragtop View Post
Andrew, those are very impressive. Can you give us some kind of idea how much this technology costs?
Thanks
You're looking at about $179 per yoke if you get a complete driveshaft to go with it (which you pretty much have to...). This is less expensive than billet u-joint yokes from Mark Williams...

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
 
post #4 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 8th, 14, 6:16 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Nobody else sees the benefit of these parts?

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #5 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 8th, 14, 7:02 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Mike
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rochester, IL
Posts: 1,083
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Very cool Andrew!! Please post pictures of the finished product when you get the driveshaft. How is the strength compared to a quality 1350 series u-joint?

Mike

Mike
66 Chevelle Pro Touring build in progress


My 66 Chevelle build thread-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike McMasters is offline  
post #6 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 8th, 14, 7:26 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike McMasters View Post
Very cool Andrew!! Please post pictures of the finished product when you get the driveshaft. How is the strength compared to a quality 1350 series u-joint?

Mike
Mike,

I have a similar driveshaft in my 1970 GTO already. Here is the transmission yoke for it:



Here is the pinion side:



Here is the driveshaft:



What's cool about the current parts is that:

1. The transmission yokes are now billet and made specifically for this application (my slip yoke started as a Spicer yoke that was machined and welded).

2. There are now pinion yoke available so that a double CV (Rzeppa joint technically speaking) driveshaft can now be made.

The torque capacity is vastly higher than a 1350 joint, because these joints are also used on drive axles of RWD cars. The drive axles see much more torque than the driveshaft. The driveshaft sees (engine torque x 1st gear ratio). The drive axles see (engine torque x 1st rear ratio x rear axle ratio). The 108 mm CV made by The DriveShaft Shop is rated at 7000 lb/ft, whereas a 1350 is rated at 1240 lb/ft for short durations.

This makes for the ultimate in smooth running high speed driveshaft technology previously unavailable for out old cars...

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #7 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 8th, 14, 8:01 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Dave
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Agawam, MA / Sarasota, FL
Posts: 2,722
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Nice Andrew. I don't see any direct reference on their web site though. I have followed your posts/threads on other forums with great interest. Keep up the great work.

Dave
USAF Retired (1968-1988)
UTC Aerospace Systems, Space Systems International - Retired (1989-2014)
David Bates is offline  
post #8 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 8th, 14, 8:14 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bates View Post
Nice Andrew. I don't see any direct reference on their web site though. I have followed your posts/threads on other forums with great interest. Keep up the great work.
Thanks Dave. They have been busy with SEMA and now PRI, and this is just one of many products that they offer. Here is a nice write up:

http://driveshaftshop.com/blog/?p=567

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #9 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 11:10 AM
Team Member
Dan
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fairfax, Va
Posts: 1,955
Send a message via Yahoo to ss3964spd
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Interesting. So this technology eliminates drive line angle issues (within reason) all together? Transmission output shaft angle no longer has to be accounted for, pinion angle can be up or down (in relation to the then trans output, and within reason) and it doesn't matter?

In the photos of the GTO bits above, you're using a CV + U joint shaft. The trans yoke is fairly large diameter - any issues with clearance to the floor or bracing? I thought there was more angle change at the rear so why the CV at the front instead of the rear? Could it be either and still achieve the same results? What application would necessitate CV's at both ends?

Interesting.

A
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
fer cyrin out loud, it's that IMPALA guy again.
If I recall correctly my memory is excellent. My ability to access it is not.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ss3964spd is offline  
post #10 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 11:55 AM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ss3964spd View Post
Interesting. So this technology eliminates drive line angle issues (within reason) all together? Transmission output shaft angle no longer has to be accounted for, pinion angle can be up or down (in relation to the then trans output, and within reason) and it doesn't matter?
That is correct. For this particular application, where the CVs are rotating at a relatively high speed (higher than they do in their place at the drive axles), the upper limit of misalignment is 9 degrees from center, so a total of 18 degrees. Less misalignment is always better because this reduces heat and consumes less power.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ss3964spd View Post
In the photos of the GTO bits above, you're using a CV + U joint shaft. The trans yoke is fairly large diameter - any issues with clearance to the floor or bracing? I thought there was more angle change at the rear so why the CV at the front instead of the rear? Could it be either and still achieve the same results? What application would necessitate CV's at both ends?

Interesting.
The CV slip yoke is only slightly bigger than a 1350 size yoke. The O.D. of the front CV is 4.25". You can see some scuff marks on my floor, those were from the 1350 slip yoke when I was trying to position it as high as possible to minimize my front operating angle. Of course depending on your transmission, the slip yoke will be in different places, and the available room may vary due to under floor bracing, etc...

From the factory, engines are positioned slightly down to the rear and at stock ride height the driveshaft also points down from the trans to the rear. This results in a small front operating angle, and small rear operating angles.

With my car (and many others) the engine still points down slightly to the rear, but since ride height has been lowered, the rear axle is now riding higher in the chassis. This causes the front operating angle to increase. This condition can't be cured by altering the pinion angle. Altering the pinion angle can make the front and rear operating angles equal and opposite, as is required for smooth operation, but it can't make the angles smaller. Which is ultimately what causes the high speed vibrations that so many of us experience.

With the set-up in the GTO, I set my pinion angle such that it points slightly down in relationships to the driveshaft angle, like this: \ /

Because the rear pinion angle is dynamic under power, you want to to oscillate from this \ / to this - - to this / \ (exaggerated here of course). This assures that the rear u-joint operating angle is as small as possible as it moves around under power. Hope that makes sense...LOL

The single CV solution is totally acceptable and it works, but ideally you want a CV in the rear as well. The rear u-joint will still speed up and slow down as it rotates and without the front u-joint to cancel out the motion it isn't ideal. But since the operating angles of the rear u-joint are so small (no more than 1 degree from center) the oscillation is not felt. Using a rear CV ensures that the driveshaft does not have any harmonics as it rotates.

Again, this is not a cure all for all high speed vibrations. This is a solution for a vibration that is caused by an excessive front operating angle (and subsequently a high rear operating angle).

When I installed the GTO shaft, there were no solutions for the rear, otherwise I would have done it (I may still upgrade in the future). With the Cougar, the rear pinion angle will change a lot because of the leaf spring rear suspension. My goal will be to set the transmission position and the pinion angle such that the front and rear operating angles are as small as possible, yet without concern for them being equal and opposite. As long as I don't exceed the 9 degree limit, the shaft will operate very smoothly. If you look under any modern high end front engine RWD car, you will see this type of driveshaft being used.

Have a look at the latest Dana (Spicer) catalog. This type of CV is called the Rzeppa joint.

Dana Catalog

Hope my explanation is clear.

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #11 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 12:34 PM
Team Member
Dan
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fairfax, Va
Posts: 1,955
Send a message via Yahoo to ss3964spd
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

I understand.

Can't one solve the operating angle issue by using a double cardan joint, either at the rear or at the front and rear?

I believe Cadillac, and perhaps others back in the day, used a DC joint.

A
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
fer cyrin out loud, it's that IMPALA guy again.
If I recall correctly my memory is excellent. My ability to access it is not.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ss3964spd is offline  
post #12 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 12:40 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Bob
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Middle River, MD
Posts: 5,037
Garage
Question Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb70 View Post
Nobody else sees the benefit of these parts?

Andrew
You said $179 per yoke, but (unless I missed it) never mentioned driveshaft price.

What is TOTAL cost for this complete setup?

$179 yoke +
$179 yoke +
driveshaft =
---------------
????
rel3rd is offline  
post #13 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 12:45 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rel3rd View Post
You said $179 per yoke, but (unless I missed it) never mentioned driveshaft price.

What is TOTAL cost for this complete setup?

$179 yoke +
$179 yoke +
driveshaft =
---------------
????
Here is a comparable dual CV aluminum shaft:

http://www.driveshaftshop.com/domest...earance-issues

It will be slightly less than that ($899?) because there won't be a need for the adapter in the above shaft.

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #14 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 1:17 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech Team
Andrew
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Druid City
Posts: 2,122
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ss3964spd View Post
I understand.

Can't one solve the operating angle issue by using a double cardan joint, either at the rear or at the front and rear?

I believe Cadillac, and perhaps others back in the day, used a DC joint.
Yes, DC joints are a type of CV joint, but they are heavier and don't offer the flexibility or smoothness compared to a Rzeppa CV design.

When I started my research about this topic back in 2008, the DC was my solution, until I found this option.

Andrew


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Instagram @projectgattago

"You were the gun, your voice was the trigger, your bravery was the barrel, your eyes were the bullets."
andrewb70 is offline  
post #15 of 73 (permalink) Old Dec 9th, 14, 2:43 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Mike
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rochester, IL
Posts: 1,083
Re: Forget about driveline angles...

When I get to this point, I will probably pick your brain a little if you don't mind. I ended up buying a Legend 700 and Jody (Jody's Transmissions) doesn't think I will have to alter my existing tunnel but being as the car will be lowered substantially, I will still run into some drive line angle issues.

If these will hold up to the abuse like you say, I'm in!!

Mike

Mike
66 Chevelle Pro Touring build in progress


My 66 Chevelle build thread-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike McMasters is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chevelle Tech forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address. Note, you will be sent a confirmation request to this address.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Old Thread Warning
This Thread is more than 1573 days old. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
If you still feel it is necessary to make a new reply, you can still do so though.

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome