Anyone ever seen this type of setup connected to what i believe is a turbo 400 trans. It looks like one drive shaft coming from trans to some bracket and then a second driveshaft? is this even safe or acceptable to do? if so is it a cheap hack? Kind of confused and sure would like to understand what this is. Thank you GP
There may be cheap hacks in that pic, but it's not the driveshaft. Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
What kind of car is this? A carrier bearing is not necessary in most regular hot rod applications. You will see them under some GM X frame cars like Impalas, but your basic Model A Ford shouldn't need one. The fab work under this car is not spectacular, but the ungusseted ****** mount should be handled sooner rather than later. Good luck, -Abone.
show us the top of the vehicle, maybe we can figure out what's going on there..... But yeah, a two piece driveshaft similar to that is very common in 3/4 ton pickup trucks.
This is just off the top of my head, but i believe 72 inches is the magic number. Anything longer needs a carrier bearing to prevent whipping of the driveshaft. My guess is someone had that laying around and "made it work"... Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
The whole drivetrain is off a 3/4 ton chevy transplanted into a old 50 chevy pickup. I just had not seen that before. Just wondered if this was a weaker setup than one shaft..better or worse.
I don't think a carrier bearing is needed in that short run, so the builder probably used what he had from the 3/4 ton and shortened the tubes. Extra U-joints are always more maintenance. Hitchhiker, I've heard 60", but a driveline shop probably has a formula that includes length, diameter, wall thickness, rpm and torque.
Short wheelbase S-10 pickup has a one-piece driveshaft, but the long wheelbase S-10 has a two-piece driveshaft and carrier bearing.
2005 mustang went with the two piece driveshaft. Some installations have to do with ground / body clearance.
Two piece driveshaft has been around for a while..seems like Chevy started using it in cars in 1958 and I can't remember how long ago trucks and buses started using them.
That is a cool looking set up. Do you know what there reasoning was on this? Clearance issue? does not look like it would have any differential action as the shafts go to each wheel. Jim Ford
You can get rid of the carrier bearing and get a 1 pice driveshaft made. Modify the crossmember that the carrier bearing is sitting on. Allow for full suspension travel, weld in a tube or loop. Looks like another crossmember was cut, where the tailshaft of the trans is, figure out how to tie that together.
Am not sure of all the details, but there is something about the tail shaft on a 400 trans not being long enough for the yoke to have enough travel. That is why the slip joint is in the rear shaft behind the carrier brg. A friend ran into this problem, had the local drive shaft shop make up a one piece drive shaft with a slip joint in it. If anyone wants more info, pm me and I will get the details from my friend.
And by asking that question it becomes obvious that you have no concept of what you are looking at. The center does not have a u joint nor does it need one. The center is a support bearing which is usually mounted into a vulcanized rubber and steel carrier ***embly. It is a steady bearing meant to stabilize a long driveshaft.
I see. Tell me then, what happens to this carrier ***embly support mount when the drive shaft (with no center joint) moves up and down with the rear end?
Light duty trucks and large p***enger cars can be equipped with two piece drivelines. This type of driveshaft will use a center support bearing, mounted on a frame crosspiece, to hold up the front half of the driveshaft. With the two piece driveshaft, the slip yoke is not used at the transmission. Instead a slip joint is placed between the front and rear halves of the driveshaft, at the center support bearing. The slip joint works in the same manner as the slip yoke, sliding in and out, to compensate for suspension height changes.
Read the article you cut and pasted from a little better. You cannot have a center support bearing on a shaft that cannot 'hinge' (i.e. U-joint) at the support if that shaft has to move up and down at one end. It's really quite simple. Try this: Take a long 2x4, that's the drive shaft. Nail it down at one end, that's the trans. Nail it down in the middle, that's the support bearing. Now try and lift the other end, that's the rear suspension moving up and down. No amount of slip yoke is going to compensate for that. BTW, I went through probably 25 center support bearings in my '58 Impala before I eliminated it and went to a one piece shaft to compensate for the increased angle. Those cars do use a slip joint at the trans, as well as many others. Here is the article you quoted, sort of. http://www.auto-repair-help.com/automotive_maintenance/driveshaft_ujoint.php If you still disagree, show me a vehicle with only two u-joints, a rear end that moves and a center support bearing.
I'm not disagreeing at all. it's been a while since I was under a 70's Chevy truck working on the driveshaft replacing the center support bearing. I should have been clearer in my first response as I had thought you were looking for a u joint in the shaft on the right before the support bearing. All this for nothing so to speak. Here is how the setup is typically laid out.
I think most of the folks, at first look, thought the U-joint at the left in the OP's photo was the one on the pinion. It's not, that's the front of the "back half" of the driveshaft.....
We use them in 4x4 applications , adding a very long slip joint to make up for long suspension travel. Check the 4x4 and rock crawler mags they have some stout parts.
The Jalopy Journal
