Alternatives to Toyota Front Axles for SAS's (rear options too...)
05-10-2006, 05:26 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Alternatives to Toyota Front Axles for SAS's (rear options too...)
Steve Schaefer (Sonoran Steel) posted up some great axle info in my engine swap thread and I didn't want to see that info buried in that thread, so we thought a new one was in order.
The discussion surrounded my reluctance to cut the IFS off my rig - valid concerns about the 7.5 diff and IFS strength, axle strength with the solid Toyota axles and diffs with the power of a V8 going through them, etc. We also got into an information filled discussion about links w/coils vs links w/coilovers vs soa leafs and sua leafs (that discussion is for another thread, but pertinent to this topic as well)
Steve has done a ton of research on the subject and as usual has been doing the R&D so the rest of us don't have to
As a preface to the following, we were discussing the merits of SUA (Spring Under Axle) in an effort to keep a low COG (center of gravity). The Toyota solid front axles are a bit narrow to do this - even when widened (which happens out past the axle ball). Then there's the strength debate... There is testing to support Toyota axles being as strong as Dana 60's, but they are pretty pricey to build to that point.
The discussion surrounded my reluctance to cut the IFS off my rig - valid concerns about the 7.5 diff and IFS strength, axle strength with the solid Toyota axles and diffs with the power of a V8 going through them, etc. We also got into an information filled discussion about links w/coils vs links w/coilovers vs soa leafs and sua leafs (that discussion is for another thread, but pertinent to this topic as well)
Steve has done a ton of research on the subject and as usual has been doing the R&D so the rest of us don't have to
As a preface to the following, we were discussing the merits of SUA (Spring Under Axle) in an effort to keep a low COG (center of gravity). The Toyota solid front axles are a bit narrow to do this - even when widened (which happens out past the axle ball). Then there's the strength debate... There is testing to support Toyota axles being as strong as Dana 60's, but they are pretty pricey to build to that point.
Originally Posted by sschaefer3
Grand Wagoneer is 61" WMS to WMS front and 58" WMS to WMS rear. 6 bolt Toyota pattern with SAE studs, which can be changed to Metric Studs.
I'll have to check out the Isuzu, but from what I heard and what Cheese (The Ultimate 4X Web Search Engine) has seen, the center is pure Dana 44. Don't have a clue on the Isuzu width.
3rd Gen 4Runner rear axle is 60.5 WMS to WMS
OK, Here is more Updated info. I am suppoed to go look at/buy one of these today. We'll see if they come through.
So far from what I found is that there are a TON of these in yards already. Also first thing out of every Junkers mouth is $500-750. All you have to do is mention that EVERYONE else is selling them for i/2 to 1/3 of that. They know it and magicly the price comes down. This is not a TOYOTA axle, there is not a demand, the high prices are for Insurance Companies apparently. I even found some in the Midwest for 100 bucks. A rear Dana 44 with disc brakes. I still have to verify the 60" WMS to WMS. I may just look and not buy if they raped too much off of it. Best I can do in Phoenix is $250 WITH calipers. We'll see, I can pass on it as I don't NEED it. Evenif it's good I'll offer 200, they have many of these in the yards, no shortage.
Here is the "correct" info I have collected from the Junkers:
Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport 91-97 (R) Dana 44 ??" (SUA Leaf) Value in Class 4/10
Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport 98-04 (R) Dana 44 63" (4-link, ABS, 4.10 & 4.30 Ratio) Value in Class 3/10
I suspect that the older Rodeo axle is 60" and the 98 and newer is 63", they run really far backspaced inward wheels on these things.
It's one beefy mother.
1990-1995 4Runner: value in class 5/10
1996-2002 4Runner: value in class 5/10
1998-2004 Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport Rear Dana 44:
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.56 ratio (41/9 teeth, HC6)
4x2 (drum brakes), 3.73 ratio (41/11 teeth, 6NW)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.10 ratio (41/10 teeth, GT5)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.78 ratio (43/9 teeth, S2J)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.30 ratio (43/10 teeth, S7C)
4x4 (disc brakes), 4.10 ratio (41/10 teeth, GT5)
4x4 (disc brakes), 4.30 ratio (43/10 teeth, S7C)
1999 Isuzu RODEO Recall ID from NHTSA: 00V058000
Auto Recall Date: 03/02/2000
Vehicle Component: SUSPENSION:REAR
Estimated Vehicles Affected: 213736
1999 ISUZU RODEO Defect Summary:
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. PAINT WAS APPLIED UNEVENLY ON THE REAR AXLES, RESULTING IN INSUFFICIENT PAINT HARDNESS. SHOULD THIS OCCUR ON THE SURFACE THAT CONTACTS THE REAR AXLE LOWER LINK BRACKET BOLT HEAD AND/OR NUT, THE NUT MAY LOOSEN.
Defect Consequence:
THE BOLT COULD DETACH FULLY, CAUSING SEPARATION OF THE LOWER LINK FROM THE REAR AXLE, INCREASING THE RISK OF LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.
Remedy:
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE REAR AXLE LOWER LINK JOINT NUT AND BOLT.
Notes: ISUZU MOTORS LIMITED,
I'm cutting the link stuff off, but hey tell the junker about how the axle was never fixed under this re-call. They won't know. Junkers will take all your money if you let them.
I have to verify that a 1985-1991 Jeep Grand Wagoneer Dana 44 will be a perfect match. I'm off to measure the Isuzu axle.
I'll have to check out the Isuzu, but from what I heard and what Cheese (The Ultimate 4X Web Search Engine) has seen, the center is pure Dana 44. Don't have a clue on the Isuzu width.
3rd Gen 4Runner rear axle is 60.5 WMS to WMS
OK, Here is more Updated info. I am suppoed to go look at/buy one of these today. We'll see if they come through.
So far from what I found is that there are a TON of these in yards already. Also first thing out of every Junkers mouth is $500-750. All you have to do is mention that EVERYONE else is selling them for i/2 to 1/3 of that. They know it and magicly the price comes down. This is not a TOYOTA axle, there is not a demand, the high prices are for Insurance Companies apparently. I even found some in the Midwest for 100 bucks. A rear Dana 44 with disc brakes. I still have to verify the 60" WMS to WMS. I may just look and not buy if they raped too much off of it. Best I can do in Phoenix is $250 WITH calipers. We'll see, I can pass on it as I don't NEED it. Evenif it's good I'll offer 200, they have many of these in the yards, no shortage.
Here is the "correct" info I have collected from the Junkers:
Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport 91-97 (R) Dana 44 ??" (SUA Leaf) Value in Class 4/10
Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport 98-04 (R) Dana 44 63" (4-link, ABS, 4.10 & 4.30 Ratio) Value in Class 3/10
I suspect that the older Rodeo axle is 60" and the 98 and newer is 63", they run really far backspaced inward wheels on these things.
It's one beefy mother.
1990-1995 4Runner: value in class 5/10
1996-2002 4Runner: value in class 5/10
1998-2004 Isuzu Rodeo/Honda Passport Rear Dana 44:
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.56 ratio (41/9 teeth, HC6)
4x2 (drum brakes), 3.73 ratio (41/11 teeth, 6NW)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.10 ratio (41/10 teeth, GT5)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.78 ratio (43/9 teeth, S2J)
4x2 (drum brakes), 4.30 ratio (43/10 teeth, S7C)
4x4 (disc brakes), 4.10 ratio (41/10 teeth, GT5)
4x4 (disc brakes), 4.30 ratio (43/10 teeth, S7C)
1999 Isuzu RODEO Recall ID from NHTSA: 00V058000
Auto Recall Date: 03/02/2000
Vehicle Component: SUSPENSION:REAR
Estimated Vehicles Affected: 213736
1999 ISUZU RODEO Defect Summary:
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. PAINT WAS APPLIED UNEVENLY ON THE REAR AXLES, RESULTING IN INSUFFICIENT PAINT HARDNESS. SHOULD THIS OCCUR ON THE SURFACE THAT CONTACTS THE REAR AXLE LOWER LINK BRACKET BOLT HEAD AND/OR NUT, THE NUT MAY LOOSEN.
Defect Consequence:
THE BOLT COULD DETACH FULLY, CAUSING SEPARATION OF THE LOWER LINK FROM THE REAR AXLE, INCREASING THE RISK OF LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.
Remedy:
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE REAR AXLE LOWER LINK JOINT NUT AND BOLT.
Notes: ISUZU MOTORS LIMITED,
I'm cutting the link stuff off, but hey tell the junker about how the axle was never fixed under this re-call. They won't know. Junkers will take all your money if you let them.
I have to verify that a 1985-1991 Jeep Grand Wagoneer Dana 44 will be a perfect match. I'm off to measure the Isuzu axle.
Originally Posted by sschaefer3
Corvettes ran IRS Dana 44's so I think this may be strong enough for you.
Update, late 5-10-2006 Looks like I bought an Isuzu Axle. I was going to blow it off, but one of the places I called yesterday called and said it was on the truck to be delivered, so I said OK. WTF.
We'll see what a dual disc Dana 44 looks like. Tomorrow I go to Tellico though.
Update, Evening: It's here, one beefy mother. Certainly a Dana 44 no doubt about that. I got a great deal, hub to hub complete with brakes, calipers, rotors, links, trac bar, brake lines, etc.
Bad news is it's 63". So I'm willing to be the 91-97 drum unit is 61" those are a dine a dozen, I can measure one in a U-Pull it.
This axle is quite impressive. It will work perfect on the 4Runner if I dump another set of 5.29's. I'll have to run 4.5" BS rear rims. With the 3.5 up front on the 61" Waggy, it will be fine. Buggy Axle ???
Pics when I get back from Tellico.
Update, late 5-10-2006 Looks like I bought an Isuzu Axle. I was going to blow it off, but one of the places I called yesterday called and said it was on the truck to be delivered, so I said OK. WTF.
We'll see what a dual disc Dana 44 looks like. Tomorrow I go to Tellico though.
Update, Evening: It's here, one beefy mother. Certainly a Dana 44 no doubt about that. I got a great deal, hub to hub complete with brakes, calipers, rotors, links, trac bar, brake lines, etc.
Bad news is it's 63". So I'm willing to be the 91-97 drum unit is 61" those are a dine a dozen, I can measure one in a U-Pull it.
This axle is quite impressive. It will work perfect on the 4Runner if I dump another set of 5.29's. I'll have to run 4.5" BS rear rims. With the 3.5 up front on the 61" Waggy, it will be fine. Buggy Axle ???
Pics when I get back from Tellico.
Last edited by Cebby; 05-11-2006 at 03:10 AM.
05-10-2006, 06:18 PM
#3
Contributing Member
I found this on off-road.com
Toyota Axle Width Table
1979 - 1985 Front Axle 56"
1979 - 1985 Rear Axle 55"
1986 - 1995 Rear Axle 58"
1991 - 1997 FJ-80 Front Axle 63.5"
Toyota Axle Width Table
1979 - 1985 Front Axle 56"
1979 - 1985 Rear Axle 55"
1986 - 1995 Rear Axle 58"
1991 - 1997 FJ-80 Front Axle 63.5"
05-10-2006, 09:06 PM
#4
Registered User
I like Diamonds spec'd as follows:
Front-66.5" WMS to WMS
Rear- 64" WMS to WMS I plan to run spacers because of a planning goof.
Wait, I like them cause I have them.
Yes, that is almost a foot wider than a stock mini.
Using a stock mini front with anything other than SOA is silly IMHO. It is really narrow for linking and not set for SUA.
On 86-95 trucks it is hard to go spring over and have any compression without adding height. I am hoping to combat a tallish truck with width.
On the rear, I would think hard about something starting at an 8.8 Taco/Tundra as a minimum if it gets wheeled. I lost teeth on one standard 8" rear geared at 5.29
Front-66.5" WMS to WMS
Rear- 64" WMS to WMS I plan to run spacers because of a planning goof.
Wait, I like them cause I have them.
Yes, that is almost a foot wider than a stock mini.
Using a stock mini front with anything other than SOA is silly IMHO. It is really narrow for linking and not set for SUA.
On 86-95 trucks it is hard to go spring over and have any compression without adding height. I am hoping to combat a tallish truck with width.
On the rear, I would think hard about something starting at an 8.8 Taco/Tundra as a minimum if it gets wheeled. I lost teeth on one standard 8" rear geared at 5.29
06-04-2006, 11:12 PM
#6
Registered User
Thread Starter
Steve - any pics yet?
Questions -
The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of an SUA setup.
Questions -
- Will the discs from the 98-04 fit the pre 98 rears? If I'm at 58 or so now, I can work with 60 with my stock wheels.
- Any idea if 2nd Gen alloys will clear the calipers? IIRC, the 98+ Rodeos had 16" wheels...
The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of an SUA setup.
06-04-2006, 11:19 PM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Here's some info I came across on PBB:
Originally Posted by pike2350
You can break this down even more:
Manual/auto tranny availible in all,v-6 powered different engines though etc.etc.
91-92 you get 3.1L V6 GM engine, Gm 10 bolt rearend.
93-95.5 you get 3.2L SOHC Isuzu Engine, Dana 44
95.5-97 Slightly higher HP(190 V 175) newere engine design, New, updated interior. IMHO you also get the best IFS front end. Longer A-arms, CV's like a 2nd gen, but you get to keep the Ball steering, not R&P.
98-02 2nd gen. 3.2 DOHC engine, linked rear end.
02-04, same as the 98+ except you have "big nut" hub, so no manual hubs(04 option of Direct Injection)
Overall it depens on what you mean be trail rig. If you are going to SAS it, then it doesn't matter, just get what you can afford...and has the engine you want. If you are going to keep it IFS for awhile, I prefer the 95.5-97 since you have what I consider the better Front end., however it is all opinions...just like Bansil stated.
Originally Posted by Originally Posted by Bansil
There are basically 3 gens of rodeos.
1st gen =92-95.5 most had dana44 w/disc brakes in the rear,leaf spring rear torsion bars front,10 bolt front.
1.5 gen =96-97 dana44rear w/disc wider front end w/more travel,leaf springs in rear,torsion bar front,10 bolt front.
2nd gen=98+ Modified d44 rear,modified 10 bolt front,wider front/rear stance
coil spring rear torsion bar front disc all around(like most rodeos).
1st gen =92-95.5 most had dana44 w/disc brakes in the rear,leaf spring rear torsion bars front,10 bolt front.
1.5 gen =96-97 dana44rear w/disc wider front end w/more travel,leaf springs in rear,torsion bar front,10 bolt front.
2nd gen=98+ Modified d44 rear,modified 10 bolt front,wider front/rear stance
coil spring rear torsion bar front disc all around(like most rodeos).
91-92 you get 3.1L V6 GM engine, Gm 10 bolt rearend.
93-95.5 you get 3.2L SOHC Isuzu Engine, Dana 44
95.5-97 Slightly higher HP(190 V 175) newere engine design, New, updated interior. IMHO you also get the best IFS front end. Longer A-arms, CV's like a 2nd gen, but you get to keep the Ball steering, not R&P.
98-02 2nd gen. 3.2 DOHC engine, linked rear end.
02-04, same as the 98+ except you have "big nut" hub, so no manual hubs(04 option of Direct Injection)
Overall it depens on what you mean be trail rig. If you are going to SAS it, then it doesn't matter, just get what you can afford...and has the engine you want. If you are going to keep it IFS for awhile, I prefer the 95.5-97 since you have what I consider the better Front end., however it is all opinions...just like Bansil stated.
Trending Topics
06-05-2006, 05:25 AM
#8
Contributing Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cebby
Steve - any pics yet?
Questions -
The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of an SUA setup.
Questions -
- Will the discs from the 98-04 fit the pre 98 rears? If I'm at 58 or so now, I can work with 60 with my stock wheels.
- Any idea if 2nd Gen alloys will clear the calipers? IIRC, the 98+ Rodeos had 16" wheels...
The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of an SUA setup.
Alot has happened, I'll post it all up when it's done. It is an outstanding axle, a few things to work out yet and I really don't see a problem with 15" wheels, but I have not tested any yet.
It's easier to get parts from Honda that Isuzu.
06-13-2006, 09:31 AM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
OK, so we know that the common Toyota Axle ratios (factory AND aftermarket) are:
4.10
4.30
4.56
4.88
5.29
5.71
What are the D44 options for the Waggy/Rodeo? (Here's the whole list of D44 options from Randy's)
4.09
4.27
4.55
4.56
4.88
4.89
5.13
5.38
5.89
The 4.56 and 4.88 are noted as "thick R & P" and "fits 3.73 CSE". What does that mean?
4.10
4.30
4.56
4.88
5.29
5.71
What are the D44 options for the Waggy/Rodeo? (Here's the whole list of D44 options from Randy's)
4.09
4.27
4.55
4.56
4.88
4.89
5.13
5.38
5.89
The 4.56 and 4.88 are noted as "thick R & P" and "fits 3.73 CSE". What does that mean?
06-13-2006, 05:22 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dana axles have a carrier break. there is a carrier for 3.73 and down (numerically) gears and another for 4.10 and up (numerically) gears. the thick gearsets use the 3.73 and down (numerically) carrier and lockers.
06-13-2006, 10:24 PM
#11
Registered User
Thread Starter
Great info Peter. Thanks!
OK - rear disks are a must IMO (I live in the muddy East!). Are any of the D44 rears that have disks a full floater design?
OK - rear disks are a must IMO (I live in the muddy East!). Are any of the D44 rears that have disks a full floater design?
06-14-2006, 05:42 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
personally, I have seen too many toy 5.29 R&Ps go. granted the rig is running 39.5 iroks, but still. the longfield cryo gearsets last a lot longer, but eventually they go. its always in the rear too. the front HP gears are always in good shape.
i would go with a tacoma 3rd with the one-peice bearing caps to prevent deflection.
if i decide to go to deeper gears than the 4.88s im running now, my rear axle of choice will be a GM corp 12 bolt with toyota outers and shafts.
i would go with a tacoma 3rd with the one-peice bearing caps to prevent deflection.
if i decide to go to deeper gears than the 4.88s im running now, my rear axle of choice will be a GM corp 12 bolt with toyota outers and shafts.
06-14-2006, 05:51 AM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Napoleon047
personally, I have seen too many toy 5.29 R&Ps go. granted the rig is running 39.5 iroks, but still. the longfield cryo gearsets last a lot longer, but eventually they go. its always in the rear too. the front HP gears are always in good shape.
i would go with a tacoma 3rd with the one-peice bearing caps to prevent deflection.
if i decide to go to deeper gears than the 4.88s im running now, my rear axle of choice will be a GM corp 12 bolt with toyota outers and shafts.
i would go with a tacoma 3rd with the one-peice bearing caps to prevent deflection.
if i decide to go to deeper gears than the 4.88s im running now, my rear axle of choice will be a GM corp 12 bolt with toyota outers and shafts.
For a 12 Bolt/Toy outers-shafts are you talking about a Diamond housing?
06-14-2006, 06:34 AM
#15
Registered User
so what are you shooting for? 60 ish wms-wms?
what about a ford 8.8 out of an exploder. comes with rear disks and ABS and somewere in that 60" range. could you redrill the shafts for the yota bolt pattern, or use spacers to change your pattern?
what about a ford 8.8 out of an exploder. comes with rear disks and ABS and somewere in that 60" range. could you redrill the shafts for the yota bolt pattern, or use spacers to change your pattern?
06-14-2006, 07:03 AM
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
60 ish WMS to WMS sounds right. Gotta keep my tires covered in PA.
I thought the Exploder 8.8 was narrower - that's a popular swap with the JGC ZJ folks.
I thought the Exploder 8.8 was narrower - that's a popular swap with the JGC ZJ folks.
06-14-2006, 10:07 AM
#17
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by EWAYota
I found this on off-road.com
Toyota Axle Width Table
1979 - 1985 Front Axle 56"
1979 - 1985 Rear Axle 55"
1986 - 1995 Rear Axle 58"
1991 - 1997 FJ-80 Front Axle 63.5"
Toyota Axle Width Table
1979 - 1985 Front Axle 56"
1979 - 1985 Rear Axle 55"
1986 - 1995 Rear Axle 58"
1991 - 1997 FJ-80 Front Axle 63.5"
06-14-2006, 10:26 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Napoleon047
personally, I have seen too many toy 5.29 R&Ps go. granted the rig is running 39.5 iroks, but still. the longfield cryo gearsets last a lot longer, but eventually they go. its always in the rear too. the front HP gears are always in good shape.
06-14-2006, 10:54 AM
#19
Registered User
Convertiyota built up a nice 90's minitruck taco with a D44 in the front with a 3-link and air shocks. The build is on Pirate, he built it to be a daily driver but it is now forsale 97% finished.
06-14-2006, 11:05 AM
#20
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by rockota
Haven't heard this. Have any info on the % of cryo'd gears that Bobby is losing?
