Dana 30 44 Hybrid axle and knuckles - JeepForum.com
 5Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 11-27-2019, 12:54 AM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Dana 30 44 Hybrid axle and knuckles

I have been reading a bunch of post and I see where they say Knuckles from a chevy etc. and then wagoneer hubs etc... But why can't you use an Early Bronco Dana 44 Knuckles, hubs, brakes, etc? Why cant I just take that assembly and bolt it to the Dana 30?


Thank You,
Joe Zeppe807

momo2 likes this.
zeppe807 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 11-27-2019, 08:57 AM
TerryHowe
Registered User
 
TerryHowe's Avatar
1949 CJ3A 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Durango
Posts: 82
Garage
EB knuckles, hubs and brakes are just harder to find and probably more expensive. Don't Dana 44s use a 297 u-joint? I thought at least some Dana 30s used a smaller u-joint. I obviously haven't been following the Dana 30 upgrade threads. It seems like it would be kind of not worth while because you'd be more likely to break the splined end of the shaft than the j-joint or hub which would make repair harder.
zeppe807 likes this.

Terry Howe
'49 Willys CJ-3A
TerryHowe is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 11-27-2019, 09:50 AM
BrutusBlue
Senior Member
1982 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 712
http://www.billavista.com/Tech/Artic...xle/index.html

Check out “Billavista.com” for this very topic. Lots of good information.

The answer is yes, you can but it may not be worth the cost or effort just to say you did it that way. You can have D44 size shafts cut to fit D30 diff and run anything on the outside you want but it’s not the cheap.
zeppe807 likes this.
BrutusBlue is offline  
 
post #4 of 16 Old 12-01-2019, 08:44 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Thanks. After much discussion and investigation, I think I am going to just go with cut down Wagoneer axles.

That Bellavista article is good. I am wondering if I can bolt the 80 Bronco F150 knuckle and hub assembly on the wagoneer axle.... The next thing to confirm. It would be nice to have a all the same parts so I am not mixing and matching. My buddy just had the wagoneer hubs and rotors re drilled to a 5 on 5.5 pattern. It works, but I would like standard parts.

Thanks,
Joe
zeppe807 is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 12-02-2019, 07:02 PM
BrutusBlue
Senior Member
1982 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 712
I have the cut the Jeep 44’s a few times. The only parts I have ever had to replace were brake pads and one caliper. In time, I may have to turn the rotors but not so far.

Im sure you could use straight F150 parts from the C’s out since they are spaced the same as GM/Jeep C’s.

I choose the small Chevy spindle, Ford hub and Chevy caliper option with GM flat top knuckles because I like the flat top knuckle on the passenger side on a CJ and the parts are easy to find. I have the passenger side machined for a flat top tie rod arm and use a flat pitman, no drop pitman. The drag link and tie rod end up being parallel to each other this way. May not clear for your setup though.

I imagine if you go the F150 knuckle way, without flat top knuckles, you may have to use a drag/tie rod with an inverted y type steering setup, like a stock Wagoneer.
zeppe807 likes this.
BrutusBlue is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 12-05-2019, 11:07 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutusBlue View Post
I have the cut the Jeep 44’s a few times. The only parts I have ever had to replace were brake pads and one caliper. In time, I may have to turn the rotors but not so far.

Im sure you could use straight F150 parts from the C’s out since they are spaced the same as GM/Jeep C’s.

I choose the small Chevy spindle, Ford hub and Chevy caliper option with GM flat top knuckles because I like the flat top knuckle on the passenger side on a CJ and the parts are easy to find. I have the passenger side machined for a flat top tie rod arm and use a flat pitman, no drop pitman. The drag link and tie rod end up being parallel to each other this way. May not clear for your setup though.

I imagine if you go the F150 knuckle way, without flat top knuckles, you may have to use a drag/tie rod with an inverted y type steering setup, like a stock Wagoneer.
Perfect! I was suggested to use the jeep waggy hubs and then have a machine shop fill and redrill them and the rotors to a 5x5.5" so that I can retain the big bearing spindle and hubs. Still thinking of that one. I will have to price it out.
zeppe807 is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 12-06-2019, 12:20 PM
BrutusBlue
Senior Member
1982 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 712
Why would you want to pay for a custom made part? You want off the shelf parts that bolt on and go. If your talking about going Ford all the way then you get the correct wheel pattern without changing or making anything. If you want to retain the large spindle on the Jeep hub, my question would be why? Remember the Ford and GM/Jeep spindles are different bolt patterns and not compatible with the same knuckles. Do you have Jeep D44 axle yet?
BrutusBlue is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 12-07-2019, 11:49 PM
CSP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 17,030
x2 to what BrutusBlue said.

There's zero advantage to the big bearing spindles other than you may already have them.
CSP is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 12-08-2019, 05:14 PM
BrutusBlue
Senior Member
1982 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 712
One more thing to consider...are you running stock width CJ springs in front?

If you choose a Dana 44 then you might consider a 2.5” wide front spring, since you would need to refab a new front setup on both sides anyways.

Why?The passenger side leaf spring u bolts will not set firm against the spring using stock CJ leaf springs and will create unwanted shift on the passenger side. Jeep/GM Dana 44’s use a 2.5” spring in front. You can account for the difference in width of the spring on the driver side but the width of the spring perch that’s cast into the Dana44 diff vs the Dana30 diff on the passenger is 1/2” wider. Make sense? The diff on the passenger will not seat a 2” wide spring sufficiently. I would not run a narrow CJ leaf on a Dana44 for this reason. Consider the wider 2.5” YJ or even a Wagoneer type leaf in front.
BrutusBlue is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 12-09-2019, 09:37 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutusBlue View Post
Why would you want to pay for a custom made part? You want off the shelf parts that bolt on and go. If your talking about going Ford all the way then you get the correct wheel pattern without changing or making anything. If you want to retain the large spindle on the Jeep hub, my question would be why? Remember the Ford and GM/Jeep spindles are different bolt patterns and not compatible with the same knuckles. Do you have Jeep D44 axle yet?
The Ford 5x5.5 spindle is much smaller and closer to a Dana30 in size. I guess if I were to go to a Dana 44 and then choose the Small Bearing Spindle then there would still be a larger ring gear, axle shaft, and housing.

I have not gotten the Dana 44 yet, I am scheduled to pick it up on Saturday. Narrow Track Jeep Wagoner, then I will cut the short side and bring it in to about 57inches.
zeppe807 is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 12-09-2019, 09:58 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutusBlue View Post
One more thing to consider...are you running stock width CJ springs in front?

If you choose a Dana 44 then you might consider a 2.5” wide front spring, since you would need to refab a new front setup on both sides anyways.

Why?The passenger side leaf spring u bolts will not set firm against the spring using stock CJ leaf springs and will create unwanted shift on the passenger side. Jeep/GM Dana 44’s use a 2.5” spring in front. You can account for the difference in width of the spring on the driver side but the width of the spring perch that’s cast into the Dana44 diff vs the Dana30 diff on the passenger is 1/2” wider. Make sense? The diff on the passenger will not seat a 2” wide spring sufficiently. I would not run a narrow CJ leaf on a Dana44 for this reason. Consider the wider 2.5” YJ or even a Wagoneer type leaf in front.
I have converted the springs to 2.5" OME rear heavy YJ Leaf packs in both the front and the rear. I agree the 2.5" springs are the way to go!
zeppe807 is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 12-09-2019, 10:00 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Here is the Link to my Instagram, and how the Jeep sits now. It gets used. I pull trailers, I pull stumps and tractors and trucks out of the mud, I wheel, I travel, and I love my Jeep.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BvCM-Tsj..._web_copy_link
zeppe807 is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 12-09-2019, 10:06 PM
CSP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 17,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeppe807 View Post
The Ford 5x5.5 spindle is much smaller and closer to a Dana30 in size. I guess if I were to go to a Dana 44 and then choose the Small Bearing Spindle then there would still be a larger ring gear, axle shaft, and housing.
The size of the spindle has absolutely nothing to do with strength. You'd be hard pressed to find one example of a spindle breaking from four wheeling.

The "small" spindle to use is the '74-77 GM/Jeep spindle that is compatible with the Ford wheelbearing hub to keep the 5 on 5.5" lug pattern.
CSP is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 12-09-2019, 10:19 PM Thread Starter
zeppe807
Registered User
1981 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSP View Post
The size of the spindle has absolutely nothing to do with strength. You'd be hard pressed to find one example of a spindle breaking from four wheeling.

The "small" spindle to use is the '74-77 GM/Jeep spindle that is compatible with the Ford wheelbearing hub to keep the 5 on 5.5" lug pattern.
Well, I guess I am the lucky guy then. My best friend and dad has broken them, and since doing it multiple times they have gone to the big bearing ones. I have seen it done. That is why they are pushing me this route, and why I am heading down this path.

Here's a picture of one of their Jeeps. This one was a lot of fun.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BRlrJN8B..._web_copy_link
zeppe807 is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 12-11-2019, 09:38 AM
schardein
Registered User
 
schardein's Avatar
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Success
Posts: 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrutusBlue View Post
One more thing to consider...are you running stock width CJ springs in front?

If you choose a Dana 44 then you might consider a 2.5” wide front spring, since you would need to refab a new front setup on both sides anyways.

Why?The passenger side leaf spring u bolts will not set firm against the spring using stock CJ leaf springs and will create unwanted shift on the passenger side. Jeep/GM Dana 44’s use a 2.5” spring in front. You can account for the difference in width of the spring on the driver side but the width of the spring perch that’s cast into the Dana44 diff vs the Dana30 diff on the passenger is 1/2” wider. Make sense? The diff on the passenger will not seat a 2” wide spring sufficiently. I would not run a narrow CJ leaf on a Dana44 for this reason. Consider the wider 2.5” YJ or even a Wagoneer type leaf in front.
I have a 77 J10 D44 axle in the front of my CJ, cut down to about stock wide track width. I've run Rancho CJ 2.5" lift (2" wide) springs for 13 years with no issues. I did upgrade to thicker spring plates and 5/8" u-bolts about 2 years ago. Previous to that, I was using modified CJ spring plates and 1/2" (stock CJ) u-bolts.

I get what you're saying, and I've considered going to 2.5" wide springs in front. But, my current setup works so well, I don't see the point. Consider that it's only a 1/4" gap on each side.
BrutusBlue likes this.

1983 CJ7, 5.3, NV3550, D300 4:1, Fr D44 Detroit, Rr D44 OX, 4.56, 35" SSTs on beadlocks
schardein is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com 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 e-mail address for yourself.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

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