• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' the posts that you read.

SAS swap 1994 ford ranger


1994fordranger

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Washington
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0 ohv
Transmission
Manual
Hi everyone, new to the forum, i have a 1994 ford ranger with the ttb up front and was looking to do a SAS on it, i was wondering how much weaker the dana 35 is compared to the dana 44, and how much easier it would be to do the 35 swap compared to the 44 swap? im using this truck as a DD/ wheeler aswell, looking to put 35s on it in the future, thanks!
 


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: 4FF3E9EEA14805 Expires: October 1st, 2020

cammeddrz

Active member
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
Solid Axle Swap
TRS Banner 2010-2011
Joined
Nov 26, 2009
Messages
1,810
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
Ford/chevy
Engine Size
efi 350vortec
Transmission
Manual
ok as far as the axle strength difference question goes:

The numbers with 2 zeros added indicate the maximum output torque. Ex. 44 is rated for 4,400 ft.lbs.; a 60 is rated for 6,000 ft.lbs. That's max torque, continuous rated torque is quite a bit less. Load rating for a Dana 44 is 3,300 lbs. I guess because the earlier 44's with the 2 piece axles have bigger wheel bearings, their rating is a tad higher at 3,500 lbs.

You can find this info on the Dana website,
but that is only referring to the carrier itself, a TTB d35 has pivot points, and additional u-joints. which each one is a weak point that a solid axle doesn't have
 

4x4junkie

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 19, 2001
Messages
10,408
Reaction score
270
Points
83
Location
So. Calif (SFV)
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Bronco II
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
35x12.50R15
Use of the Search bar could've pretty easily answered this, but to put it semi-brief:

The D35 TTB and D44 (SA or TTB) use the same axle u-joints, which tends to be the weak point on either axle, not so much the diff or gears (my own experience with both axles as well as that of others I see out on the trails supports this).

The D44 does have better wheel ends (bigger brakes, primarily), though the D35's ends can be upgraded to some extent as well (better hubs, aftermarket brakes, etc.). It's also possible to put the D44 ends onto the D35 too.


As for swap difficulty... '93-'97 trucks not having a D35 should have a D28/35 "hybrid" axle of sorts. Swapping to an actual D35 on these trucks is simply a matter of unbolting the D28 pumpkin from your axle beam, and swapping a D35 one on. You'll also need the two innermost axle shafts that enter into the diff housing (the outer stub shafts as well as the passengerside mainshaft are all the same).

Hope that helps, Welcome to TRS.
 

UrbanRedneckKid

Active member
Solid Axle Swap
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Age
33
Location
Cass Co, Missouri
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Manual
Hi everyone, new to the forum, i have a 1994 ford ranger with the ttb up front and was looking to do a SAS on it, i was wondering how much weaker the dana 35 is compared to the dana 44, and how much easier it would be to do the 35 swap compared to the 44 swap? im using this truck as a DD/ wheeler aswell, looking to put 35s on it in the future, thanks!
Whoa! People do stuff like that...? I didn't know you could put different axles under different trucks... That's crazy!

Let me know what you find out, I'm to lazy to use the search button.

...seriously, there is a sh*t ton of awesome information on this site. There are hundreds of pages that answer your questions. Research is key, and the search feature is your friend.

PS, find a D60. Build it once...

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
 

cammeddrz

Active member
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
Solid Axle Swap
TRS Banner 2010-2011
Joined
Nov 26, 2009
Messages
1,810
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
Ford/chevy
Engine Size
efi 350vortec
Transmission
Manual
The TTB-vs.-SA debate is never ending, take everyone's opinion, and decide which is best for you.

The D35 TTB and D44 (SA or TTB) use the same axle u-joints, which tends to be the weak point on either axle
but ttb has 1 more u-joint than a SA, i.e. one more "weak point" (the passenger side axle literally has 2 u-joints on it)

i've also never seen a guy twist and destroy the entire housing of a solid D44 front. but a search will yield a handful of guys who have mangled their TTB housings, not because the carrier or gears failed, and not beause the u-joints failed, but because the way a TTB front end is, it is much more vulnerable to catastrophic impacts

and third, the more ttb is made to flex, the more you need to not only modify shcks, springs, and links such radius arms (as you would an sas) but you also need to modify the diff itself to improve flex, this is done by opening up the "window" that the axle passes through, allowing it to move around more inside the housing. that's right, in order to improve flex, you need to take an axle that already has additonal weak points, and cut material out of it.

that doesn't even address the need to "cut and turn" the housing

whereas no integral modifications are needed on an SA to facilitate flex, it is all done with shocks, springs, and links,


TTB can be really awesome. but in my opinion when compared to a DANA 44 SA, the TTB has inherent (sp?) weak points, and pitfalls that outweigh whatever benefits TTB has.
 
Last edited:

UrbanRedneckKid

Active member
Solid Axle Swap
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Age
33
Location
Cass Co, Missouri
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Manual
What he said... It's all junk.

And the one argumentive point that's always over looked is the "mud plow" properties of the TTB. It's harder to go through something your pushing. Then the front of your truck weights another 100 lbs, and then if you back up... It's like a shovel, and adds another 150 lbs of mud to the front of your truck.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
 

1994fordranger

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Washington
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0 ohv
Transmission
Manual
Thanks for the information guys! much appreciated ill continue to research, i definanately am trying to get away from the TTB ASAP
 

hockeyryan

Member
TRS Banner 2012-2015
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
285
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
Vancouver, BC
Vehicle Year
1997
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4L
Transmission
Manual
well dont give up on the ttb lol personally i think the ttb can keep up pretty dam well. Im only doing a sas cuz my truck if a trail truck now and im getting into harder stuff. BUT for a dd/weekend wheeler the ttb should be fine. upgrade to a dana 35 and call it a day. Just my opinion.
 

4x4junkie

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 19, 2001
Messages
10,408
Reaction score
270
Points
83
Location
So. Calif (SFV)
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Bronco II
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
35x12.50R15
The TTB-vs.-SA debate is never ending, take everyone's opinion, and decide which is best for you.
Well, to give my opinion on the points you made (more for everyone to ponder :) )


ttb has 1 more u-joint than a SA, i.e. one more "weak point" (the passenger side axle literally has 2 u-joints on it)
Yes, there is a 3rd u-joint on it, however I don't see that one as a "weak point" because it rarely, if ever sees the same operating angle as the steering u-joints, therefore it should be less likely to fail (unless of course it gets bound up because of too much suspension droop... Clearancing the yoke if needed or installing limit straps/cable(s) would eliminate that possibility. Simple as giving the axle a half-turn by hand with the suspension at droop to check).


i've also never seen a guy twist and destroy the entire housing of a solid D44 front. but a search will yield a handful of guys who have mangled their TTB housings, not because the carrier or gears failed, and not beause the u-joints failed, but because the way a TTB front end is, it is much more vulnerable to catastrophic impacts
I have. Both SA and TTBs.
In numerous TTB cases I've seen, it was because someone was driving around on it without the pinch bolt installed behind the diff. Ford (Dana?) put that bolt there for a reason.
Cases with SAs were because someone (ignorantly) welded radius arms directly to the housing during their SAS (broke the welds and spun the tube in the pumpkin), another dude tore a link bracket off and the tube cracked & buckled right at that spot.
I've seen BOTH destroyed by high-speed impacts into rocks, tree stumps, etc., and by ruthless jumping w/o the proper equipment.
Point being, ANY axle can be destroyed under the right conditions/abuse.


and third, the more ttb is made to flex, the more you need to not only modify shcks, springs, and links such radius arms (as you would an sas) but you also need to modify the diff itself to improve flex, this is done by opening up the "window" that the axle passes through, allowing it to move around more inside the housing. that's right, in order to improve flex, you need to take an axle that already has additonal weak points, and cut material out of it.
Around the window is not a weak point. Weak point is on the backside where the beam opens to a C-channel section (there's a few reports floating around of cracks right where the weld ends). Box it up with plate. Done.

Ok, so you still think the window is weak... Then plate the beam above & below it. If that provides you comfort, great! Certainly it doesn't harm anything.


that doesn't even address the need to "cut and turn" the housing
Cut & turn is only desirable if you're doing the jumping/prerunning thing. It's not actually "needed" anywhere (and does have a couple drawbacks as well).


whereas no integral modifications are needed on an SA to facilitate flex, it is all done with shocks, springs, and links,
As is also the case on a TTB, the only exception being the widening the beam window you already mentioned (ok alright, and make sure the p-side radius arm bolts don't protrude too far into the beam).


TTB can be really awesome. but in my opinion when compared to a DANA 44 SA, the TTB has inherent (sp?) weak points, and pitfalls that outweigh whatever benefits TTB has.
Everyone does have an opinion (and I respect that). Solid axles also have their place for sure. Certainly they are more readily accepted as "something decent"...
My personal observation is there will always a number of people that won't be happy with the TTB even if it were to give them exactly 0 problems. Perhaps they relate easier to the SA since it's just a simple straight beam with a wheel at each end... Or maybe they did have a (usually fixable) issue but then somebody else came along and said it's junk for "that reason" and they don't want to think about it any further. Whatever the case, a SA is the only thing they're willing to consider, which is fine. Certainly it works, and very well at that, provided the swap is done correctly.
For hard-core guys, the SA is their only choice (without possibly breaking into $five figures anyway) as axles like the venerable D60 only came in a SA version.

For myself and many others however, the TTB works perfectly fine, and to me it makes no difference how goofy it might look when it twists in it's own way offroad. As long as it gets it done with no fanfare, doesn't affect my tires negatively, is reliable, and is low-cost to maintain, I couldn't care less what kind of setup it is.
Lately I've been bombing it around at faster speeds with this vast desert fairly close by me. A SA is gonna have a tougher time with this type of use... TTB (or any IFS for that matter) takes speed a lot better due to lower unsprung weight. With it also capable of the same slow-speed-ability as a SA when set up right, what's to lose?

BUT for a dd/weekend wheeler the ttb should be fine.
My rig probably does fit the "DD/weekend-wheeler" category somewhat better than it does "hardcore-extreme", as it still spends time on the street (and needs to be comfortable on long trips). I also like to do the traveling-while-wheeling/camping thing (seems the latest trendy word for this is "overlanding", though I prefer to simply call it camping). That doesn't stop me from hitting a decent trail like Rubicon though, and it handles it just fine (guys I wheel with often marvel at the ttb, they don't expect to see anything but a solid axle do what it does on some of the trails we go lol).

Finally, yes there are pitfalls with the TTB... Almost all of them are there because of obsolete suspension lift designs (the too-short drop pitman arm screwing the steering linkage angle is by far & large the biggest one). Learn a little about it and there should be no unseen pitfalls. TRS is probably the best resource on the web for this.
 

4x4junkie

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 19, 2001
Messages
10,408
Reaction score
270
Points
83
Location
So. Calif (SFV)
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Bronco II
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
35x12.50R15
What he said... It's all junk.
A typical TTB hater response :thefinger:

Your point isn't completely without merit... However your coils being sacked out is what turns these things into a big-time plow (not just in mud, but snow too).
Boost it up a little (coil spacers, slightly bigger coils, whatever). You can put the diff up way higher to where it's probably no worse as a whole than any solid axle, and has better clearance in non-mud environments such as rocks.

Again this is complaining about something easily resolvable.
 

Sasquatch_Ryda

Well-known member
Ford Technician
OTOTM Winner
Solid Axle Swap
Forum Staff - Retired
TRS Banner 2012-2015
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
7,914
Reaction score
90
Points
48
Age
32
Location
Terrace, BC, Canada
Vehicle Year
1991
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
Solid Axle Swap 4x4
Tire Size
40s
As I have run the shit out of a D35 on 36" tires and now a D60 on 40" tires....

If you are keeping to 35" and under tires the D35 can fit the bill perfectly.

37" plus....skip the bullshit and put a 60 in it.
 

1994fordranger

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Washington
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0 ohv
Transmission
Manual
ok guys thank you very much, a dana 35 SA would come out of a jeep cherokee right?
 

hockeyryan

Member
TRS Banner 2012-2015
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
285
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
Vancouver, BC
Vehicle Year
1997
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4L
Transmission
Manual
A dana 35 SA is a rear axle out of a jeep
Im pretty sure most of us, well i was atleast talking about a ttb dana 35 which should be under most 1990 4L rangers. Correct me if im worng...
 

hockeyryan

Member
TRS Banner 2012-2015
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
285
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
Vancouver, BC
Vehicle Year
1997
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4L
Transmission
Manual
going from a dana 28 to Dana 35 is a direct bolt in job, as far as i know
 


Top