driveshaft questions

[noslofiveoh]

ok, just the other day my rear u-joint failed and dropped the shaft resulting in un useable condition. anyway i cant track down a replacement shaft (sounds crazy but they don't exist here for some reason) so i can either have a new end welded on and balanced for about $100. or i can try and track down a 1-piece shaft and do the conversion from the tech library. not sure which way i should go with this. also my truck is an 88 supercab and has a 4 inch lift on it so it has a bit of drive shaft angle. which way would be better for durability and longevity?

 

[adsm08]

well, overall the 1-piece shaft is the superior unit. The only catch is the carrier bearing cross-member. I think the 87 and 88 are the same, and the carrier cross-member will intersect the new 1-piece. If you look closely at the pictures in the tech article, its the same member, just flipped over, but its still structural. What I did was cut the 4 building rivets out with a die grinder and air chisel and bolted it back in upside down with some 10 mm grade 8's. Be careful since the gas tank and brake lines are right there on the drivers side.

Also remember that you need to get a new flange for the front of the shaft and get it put on the back so it fits the axle flange's bolt spacing.

 

[noslofiveoh]

well, overall the 1-piece shaft is the superior unit. The only catch is the carrier bearing cross-member. I think the 87 and 88 are the same, and the carrier cross-member will intersect the new 1-piece. If you look closely at the pictures in the tech article, its the same member, just flipped over, but its still structural. What I did was cut the 4 building rivets out with a die grinder and air chisel and bolted it back in upside down with some 10 mm grade 8's. Be careful since the gas tank and brake lines are right there on the drivers side.

Also remember that you need to get a new flange for the front of the shaft and get it put on the back so it fits the axle flange's bolt spacing.

where did you source the parts from?

 

[adsm08]

I got my drive shaft out of a 98 in a local JY, I got the flange from a local drive line shop. You can't get the flange from Ford, they only sell it as part of a shaft.

 

[noslofiveoh]

well i ust got off the phone with a local yard here and he said he has a shaft from a 98 mazda, so i think i can make it work. why cant i use the flanges i already have? are the universal joints different size or something? sorry for all the questions i'm new at all this stuff. thanks for the replys

 

[Sasquatch_Ryda]

well, overall the 1-piece shaft is the superior unit. The only catch is the carrier bearing cross-member. I think the 87 and 88 are the same, and the carrier cross-member will intersect the new 1-piece. If you look closely at the pictures in the tech article, its the same member, just flipped over, but its still structural.

It is not structural what so ever. You remove it, plain and simple. It is only attached to the bottom of the frame rails, thus not adding anything strength wise to the frame. Toss it.

Mine, along with many others on here have been that way for years without problems.

 

[LittleBigFoot]

If you have a custom one made, you can opt for yokes that accept the 1350 or 1330. Rangers are 1310 right? It's been such a long time since I've had to deal with Ranger parts.

In my crawler I'm running 1350 at the drive shaft yoke and 1330 at my 9" rear.
Same thing in the front.

The 1350/1330 non-greaseable conversion joint I'm running cost about as much as a standard replacement U joint, but allows me to run a 1350/14whatever conversion joint when the time calls for it.

The larger yoke was like 5 bucks more then the 1330.

Good luck and build for the future.

 

[adsm08]

It is not structural what so ever. You remove it, plain and simple. It is only attached to the bottom of the frame rails, thus not adding anything strength wise to the frame. Toss it.

Mine, along with many others on here have been that way for years without problems.

The tech lib article said the piece was structural. I went with that. If you guys have been running without them for years, well, as my auto prof says "can't argue with success"

 

[noslofiveoh]

i got my drive shaft and as it turns out it has the 3" spacing on the rear flange of the shaft to match the explorer rear end. so other than the crossmember being in the way it should be a bolt on deal?

 

[pimtool]

Change the yoke coming off the carrier bearing and you can use explorer driveshafts all day long.

On my 90 the rear portion of the 4door explorer and my s/c (supercab)ranger were the same length, but the splines were different, so I changed the yoke with one from an explorer.

I couldnt find any either, now they are everywhere at the yards. I think even newer s/c use the same splines.

 

[AllanD]

well i ust got off the phone with a local yard here and he said he has a shaft from a 98 mazda, so i think i can make it work. why cant i use the flanges i already have? are the universal joints different size or something? sorry for all the questions i'm new at all this stuff. thanks for the replys

in 1990 ford switched to a larger diameter flange on the rear axle and the

The "assembly" is called a "companion flange" and the flange on the axle is only half of it, the other half is the square piece with the two ears for the
U-joint.

Many one piece shaft have the same larger diameter flange on the front as well.

AD

AD

 

[noslofiveoh]

in 1990 ford switched to a larger diameter flange on the rear axle and the

The "assembly" is called a "companion flange" and the flange on the axle is only half of it, the other half is the square piece with the two ears for the
U-joint.

Many one piece shaft have the same larger diameter flange on the front as well.

AD

AD

mine had the smaller flange on the transfer case. now that i have the rear done i should go thru the front this weekend.

 

[adsm08]

I need to get my front shaft back in. I'm just worried that I'm gonna have another starter or hydraulic failure and have to take it out again.

 

[AllanD]

It is not structural what so ever. You remove it, plain and simple. It is only attached to the bottom of the frame rails, thus not adding anything strength wise to the frame. Toss it.

Mine, along with many others on here have been that way for years without problems.

'86-88 use the "high" center bearing support crossmember.

1989 used a different design.

1990 added the pedestal and many 1989's were retrofitted
with the "pedestal" under an NVH TSB.

AD