4bangerjp.com
General Forums => The Mess Hall => Topic started by: sharpxmen on January 20, 2012, 03:26:36 PM
-
I started working on my doubler box setup - here's the quick rundown of where i'm at so far
did some reading about the klune, blackbox and blackbox-i and Atlas 4
I already have an overhauled Dana300 with stock 2.6 ratio. I picked up a 4:1 NP241 out of an '03 Rubicon that had the case broken pretty bad (unusable) to scavenge out the giant 4:1 planetary assembly.
the solution i was looking for was a klune type but using the 4:1 planetary out of this busted 241, shafts are available from various vendors so that i didn't think would pose a problem.
once i took it apart though there were 2 challenges that i could foresee with this planetary assembly using the pre-made shafts that are common for the doubler boxes
- the pilot bearing is larger, the 231 uses a 1.125 diameter shaft (where it goes in the pilot bearing), the 241 has a larger one (1.25 or larger, can't remember).
- the shift collar is different so the question was if the splines were the same, luckily enough the spline count and diameter is identical between the 231 and the Rubicon 241
so the only thing to consider remained the pilot bearing, i decided that i could sleeve a pilot bearing for the 231 input shaft so that it will be pressed instead of the larger 241 one.
next step was to decide the overall design - the doublers made out of chopped 231s or the klune-v (and i'm not 100% sure on this one) don't seem to have an output bearing, from what i read is not necessary but my common sense tells me it will be better to have support there since the splines are not pressed but slide in with some free play. The other issue that i am seeing is that the mating between the doubler output and the t-case input will add some unnecessary length (about 3 to 4 inches) as compared to an Atlas 4 speed where the doubler output is integrated with the input at the t-case.
Luckily there is such a doubler as in blackbox-i which basically transforms a Dana300 into a 4 speed just like the Atlas, the problem is that they only make a 2.7:1 version, is great if the t-case has 4:1 gears but in my case i have 2.6:1 stock D300 ratio and it really wouldn't be a true 4 speed but more like a 3 speed - so i picked up the phone and called Northwestfab and they were great, answered my questions and provided measurements to help me figure out if i can use their output shaft for my doubler - i ended up ordering one for the D300 that will allow me to use my input gear from it so it will integrate with the t-case and not have to use a connecting shaft as with the 231 doublers or the klune. I also ordered their sealed bearing so i can use it on the output shaft. If you have a 4:1 t-case and want a doubler this is a great option and these guys are really a pleasure to deal with so i highly recommend you give them a call (they have other parts too but my interest at this time was restricted to the crawl box).
I also had to order a wide input bearing for the 241 planetary (it is same OD and ID as the 231 but about 50% thicker at .940 compared to .629'' and i think is either a double row ball bearing or a roller bearing), a new input shaft seal and a pilot bearing to be sleeved and pressed into the planetary input shaft.
next steps are to get all the measuremets, make some blueprints and finalize the design, fab the parts, take the D300 out, remove the input shaft and attach the doubler box (sound like a long project already) - should give me a nice 4 speed Dana300 with a 10.4, 4, 2.6 and 1:1 ratios, long ways to go but if it works i'm pretty much set as far as crawl ratios (i mean would be nice if it can go lower but should be a heck of an improvement over the 2.6:1)
I will need to redo the driveshafts and the dual t-case shifters since this will move the t-case back about 4 or 5 inches
once i make more progress will get some pics and a thread in the member's projects, since it's not sure yet if it will be a success i'll just post some notes in "the mess hall" for now. I welcome ideas or bashing if you thing i took the wrong route (as opposed to a klune for example which would have saved a ton of work and probably not that much more expensive in the end).
-
Wow, it would be amazing if you ended up with only 4" or 5" inches extra drivetrain length. If anybody can pull it off, it would be you. Looking forward to the build.
Supposedly the Atlas 4 speed redesign was to put another bearing in there, so that seems like a good idea for a heavy duty doubler. The Atlas also uses a planetary assembly from a "NP241-HD" TC according to the Advance Adapters web site.
-
The Atlas also uses a planetary assembly from a "NP241-HD" TC according to the Advance Adapters web site.
i didn't know that, not sure if they are the same, the rubi 241 planetary ring gear diameter is 8.5'' OD and seems huge compared to the 231. I'll post some pics of the 2 side by side next few days.
EDIT: the planetary gear on 241HD seems smaller than the 241OR by quite a bit
241HD
(http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=349706&stc=1&d=1201543832)
241OR
(http://image.off-roadweb.com/f/28453549+w750+st0/1005or_15_+guide_to_common_transfer_cases+np241or_transfer_case.jpg)
-
A couple more thoughts on this.
Ideally, the most reliable setup would be to have 4:1 gears in the D300 and a 2.72 planetary in front of it. This would keep the 4:1 mega torque away from the TC internals. But, in practice it will probably not matter.
Also, it might be good to move the rear drivetrain mount to the doubler case, to keep the mega torque away from the rear of the tranny case. This also avoids having two rear mounting points (tranny and rear of TC, if you decide on anything like that) which can cause a problem if one of those points gets pushed up independently of the other (major skid plate damage). This scenario could put a lot of leverage on the tranny and TC cases and could cause some breakage. Two mounting points could also hinder pivoting horizontally which might be good to allow due to frame flex.
-
A couple more thoughts on this.
Ideally, the most reliable setup would be to have 4:1 gears in the D300 and a 2.72 planetary in front of it. This would keep the 4:1 mega torque away from the TC internals. But, in practice it will probably not matter.
Also, it might be good to move the rear drivetrain mount to the doubler case, to keep the mega torque away from the rear of the tranny case. This also avoids having two rear mounting points (tranny and rear of TC, if you decide on anything like that) which can cause a problem if one of those points gets pushed up independently of the other (major skid plate damage). This scenario could put a lot of leverage on the tranny and TC cases and could cause some breakage. Two mounting points could also hinder pivoting horizontally which might be good to allow due to frame flex.
i was thinking about that, didn't make a decision yet to be honest, i am still in between adding a mount at the doubler (where it mates with the D300) or keeping the current trans mount and adding one at the rear output of the D300 (I am inclined to do the latter though but still thinking about it).
as far as ratio and which should be where, i think you're right and it would be better to have the lower ratio at the t-case, however in my situation it is not an option at this point and it would be cheaper to just buy an Atlas 4 speed instead if i was to replace the D300 gears to a 4:1, those kits are something like $1000 so really no point of even trying to address it. The guys at northwestfab said they had their doubler boxes coupled with D300s behind 800HP motors and they don't think my 2.5L will pose any problems to the setup, so i hope they're right :lol:
-
I don't think an extra support will be necessary unless you're planning on some high HP. More then 300/300. I know Bill Vista on POR added a support to the rear housing that's got is own cross member.
Like neale said, optimally, you'd want the deeper gears in the TC but that's a lot of money since you'd have to buy new gears for the TC. Jeep-Eater/Rock Lobster/etc... This was one of the reasons I wanted the Atlas 4.0. There's no reason not to do it the other way around though. That's how Klune V recommends it to me years ago when I was inquiring.
-
i didn't know that, not sure if they are the same, the rubi 241 planetary ring gear diameter is 8.5'' OD and seems huge compared to the 231. I'll post some pics of the 2 side by side next few days.
EDIT: the planetary gear on 241HD seems smaller than the 241OR by quite a bit
The 231 and the 241's use the same planetary. The 241 also uses the 1.25" wide chain and sprocket set standard. The 241's just 6 gear instead of 3 gear which are also interchangeable.
-
Took a look at the BillaVista article. He sure didn't worry about having too many rear mounting points! He has 3.
-
Wow, it would be amazing if you ended up with only 4" or 5" inches extra drivetrain length. If anybody can pull it off, it would be you. Looking forward to the build.
Supposedly the Atlas 4 speed redesign was to put another bearing in there, so that seems like a good idea for a heavy duty doubler. The Atlas also uses a planetary assembly from a "NP241-HD" TC according to the Advance Adapters web site.
You can always move the 4 banger forward to utilize the space in front of the engine and end up with decent length rear driveshaft
-
You can always move the 4 banger forward to utilize the space in front of the engine and end up with decent length rear driveshaft
hmm, might be worth the work to keep my current driveshafts, thanks for the tip.
-
The 231 and the 241's use the same planetary. The 241 also uses the 1.25" wide chain and sprocket set standard. The 241's just 6 gear instead of 3 gear which are also interchangeable.
you're not talking about the Rubicon one (NP241OR) - the planetary is very different and only uses 4 gears and not 6 or 3, they are also about 3 times the size of the 231 ones.
-
you're not talking about the Rubicon one (NP241OR) - the planetary is very different and only uses 4 gears and not 6 or 3, they are also about 3 times the size of the 231 ones.
No the OR is completely different then any of the 200 family.
-
hmm, might be worth the work to keep my current driveshafts, thanks for the tip.
You can move it 4-6" without too much trouble. Just need to relocate the mounts in the engine compartment. BUT, you'll probably be adding lift, IIRC since the frame rises up but by doing this you can keep the TC in the stock location. You'll have to bend the shifter and cut a new hole though, not really a big deal.
-
You can move it 4-6" without too much trouble. Just need to relocate the mounts in the engine compartment. BUT, you'll probably be adding lift, IIRC since the frame rises up but by doing this you can keep the TC in the stock location. You'll have to bend the shifter and cut a new hole though, not really a big deal.
Well Sharp is, the mention of the 4:1 ratio and the pic of the transfercase is a dead giveaway. With forced induction and the size tire you use building some kind of just 4:1 transfercase should be more than adequate for your Jeep
-
Well Sharp is, the mention of the 4:1 ratio and the pic of the transfercase is a dead giveaway. With forced induction and the size tire you use building some kind of just 4:1 transfercase should be more than adequate for your Jeep
only thing is that is cheaper to build the doubler than swapping gears and the advantage of haing a 4 speed t-case, otherwise you're right, 4:1 would have been just enough.
-
A 4:1 with 4.88 axle gears and the NV3550 reverse ratio of 3.57 would give you a reverse ratio of 69.7:1. So the question is, how well would this low a ratio work if having to rock out or back out of mud or sand? Forward, you can use higher tranny gears but in reverse you are stuck with this in low range. This is one of the best reasons to go with the doubler in a general purpose Jeep.
-
You know, if you have the 241OR, can you see if a 231 input shaft will work on it? After thinking about the 231 and 241 using the same planetary, it came to me that you could use a 241 on the AX-5. I'm curious to see the OR's planetary and if it's similar enough to the 200's to use the same input shaft.
-
You know, if you have the 241OR, can you see if a 231 input shaft will work on it? After thinking about the 231 and 241 using the same planetary, it came to me that you could use a 241 on the AX-5. I'm curious to see the OR's planetary and if it's similar enough to the 200's to use the same input shaft.
i doubt it, they are different, the 241 input shaft has a thicker bearing (so the snap ring groove is at a different location), the other think is the pilot bearing, it is way bigger in the 241 (although that can be sleeved which is what i am doing. Also from what i recall the clutch sleeve is bigger on the 241OR and but the splines on the output shaft are the same. I am not sure of the planetary tooth cut, but even if they are same diameter and step the rest of it is so different that is more than just a simple swap, you'd be better off swapping the transmission rather than messing with the input shaft. As an alternative you could be looking at a klune or a 231 doubler mated to the 241OR (that is probably the best option).
-
i doubt it, they are different, the 241 input shaft has a thicker bearing (so the snap ring groove is at a different location), the other think is the pilot bearing, it is way bigger in the 241 (although that can be sleeved which is what i am doing. Also from what i recall the clutch sleeve is bigger on the 241OR and but the splines on the output shaft are the same. I am not sure of the planetary tooth cut, but even if they are same diameter and step the rest of it is so different that is more than just a simple swap, you'd be better off swapping the transmission rather than messing with the input shaft. As an alternative you could be looking at a klune or a 231 doubler mated to the 241OR (that is probably the best option).
I've already chosen which road I'll be going down. Was just curious though.
-
ok, i have an issue - i can't seem to find what bearing is used on these Rubicon NP241, i found a bearing that had the same dimensions listed for NP241 (p/n BD50-8), i ordered it and when i received it everything is exactly the same except for the snap ring location, the one from the Rubi has the snap ring right in the center of the outer race, the one i ordered has it close to one of the sides just like the narrow one in the NP231
I googled and searched everywhere and can't seem to find a part number or someone selling parts for this Rubi t-case, if any of you can help that would be greatly appreciated
-
i hope i figured it out
what i got was bearing p/n BD50-8
what i need apparently is BD50-8-A-T86NRX-01
or the Chrysler p/n 5072458AA
both are $40.99
($107 at the stealership :rant:)
-
this is the plan
(http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g222/sharpxmen/Drivetrain_Upgrades/Doubler/doubler_side.jpg)
(http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g222/sharpxmen/Drivetrain_Upgrades/Doubler/doubler_front.jpg)
(http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g222/sharpxmen/Drivetrain_Upgrades/Doubler/doubler_back.jpg)
(http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g222/sharpxmen/Drivetrain_Upgrades/Doubler/doubler_view.jpg)
(http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g222/sharpxmen/Drivetrain_Upgrades/Doubler/doubler_exploded.jpg)
the multiple holes on the front plate would give following degree clocking options
3, 6, 9, 15, 21, 24, 30
I would have liked to also have 12 and 18 deg option but i could only do it with 8 bolts, 12 bolts won't allow for the extra holes and since the NV241OR from which i scavanged the planetary gear and input shaft had 12 bolts on the front cap i decided to go the same route.
the front plate and the input snout will be aluminum, everything else steel, the diameter of the body is 8-5/8'' (closest seamless pipe i could find), distance between the mounting faces (transmission and t-case sides) 6'' by my early calculations but i won't know the exact numbers until i take the D300 out and design the new input snout - should be within +/- 1/4''
-
It looks good. I think the stock clocking for the NP231 is 13 degrees. From 9 to 15 you have a 6 degree jump. The Atlas 4 speed jumps from 7 to 14 and in that range I think the front output height changed about 1.5". You might want to change the degrees you make available to make sure it fits exactly the way you need (you may have done that already), since 1.5" can make a difference in terms of fit.
-
It looks good. I think the stock clocking for the NP231 is 13 degrees. From 9 to 15 you have a 6 degree jump. The Atlas 4 speed jumps from 7 to 14 and in that range I think the front output height changed about 1.5". You might want to change the degrees you make available to make sure it fits exactly the way you need (you may have done that already), since 1.5" can make a difference in terms of fit.
i would like to get the 15 deg but it's a matter of hitting the floor or the reinforcing channel under the tub, that's pretty much why i focused on 3, 6, and 9 degrees so i can have baby steps available to do the mockup. Difference between 13 and 15 or 7 and 9 is quite negligible so that's not a worry but indeed the 12 deg would have been nice to have. I think mine is clocked about 20 deg at this point so if i ever decide to cut the floor i could get it horizontal. I need to measure the current clocking and how much room i have to move up at that point i can decide the final location of the holes, i would still lose one of the options, i might just try to skip the 3 and 15 and get the 12 and 18 instead, the number of holes won't change, just the initial position of the extra ones so they line up to the new deg options.
how much is yours clocked down btw?
-
It ended up at 14 degrees. The new skid/crossmember is about 3/4" higher than stock at the mounting holes. Taking this into account, a rib under the floor had to be cut into to make it fit, keeping in mind that this is with no body lift.
I think that with a body lift, 7 degrees would have been possible, and the skid could be almost flat, maybe only 1" drop.
I think the belly-up kits use a different tranny mount, something like a plate with rubber disks out to the sides. This helps to get it almost flat with only 1" body lift.
-
It ended up at 14 degrees. The new skid/crossmember is about 3/4" higher than stock at the mounting holes. Taking this into account, a rib under the floor had to be cut into to make it fit, keeping in mind that this is with no body lift.
I think that with a body lift, 7 degrees would have been possible, and the skid could be almost flat, maybe only 1" drop.
I think the belly-up kits use a different tranny mount, something like a plate with rubber disks out to the sides. This helps to get it almost flat with only 1" body lift.
there is a step-up mounting plate that can be used for the transmission mount with AX15, NV3550 or NSG370 (about 1'' up from the current mounting plane), i think YJ 4.0L came with those, i have one i plan to use and tie in at the end of the doubler where it mate with the t-case (or close to that end) so i will use 1 mount in the center between the transmission and t-case right under the doubler - only problem is that i don't know if the larger diameter doubler will allow it, need to do some measuring - if not i'll just make a flat one following the same idea, would make the assembly stronger and i won't need a rear t-case mount.
based on what you said that it could be isntalled at about 7 deg (i have a 1'' b/l) i should be fine with a 15 deg clocking but unless i make a 3D model of the floor i won't know for sure until everything is bolted together, i'll try and get it close though. once i get under the Jeep i'll know more :lol: - been raining here like crazy so I stayed indoors.
-
15 degrees should be really easy, and 9 will probably be doable with minor under floor mods.
-
15 degrees should be really easy, and 9 will probably be doable with minor under floor mods.
with a lot more holes and 16 bolts i can do every 3 degrees, not sure if it's worth it though. I'll have to give it some more thought.
-
with a lot more holes and 16 bolts i can do every 3 degrees, not sure if it's worth it though. I'll have to give it some more thought.
I don't think it's worth it unless you're going to produce these for multiple applications.
-
I don't think it's worth it unless you're going to produce these for multiple applications.
yeah, it is not - i am even contemplating if i should get more than 2 positions if not just 1, only concern is if i run into any issues to not be able to adjust it. I'll see how i feel, there's lots of holes so that could be the deal breaker - might just measure 15 times and get the final clocking and have it set. I could just do 2 positions also like 6 to 10 deg apart so that would only mean another 12 holes rather than an extra 84 (and they would all be done by hand and not on a CNC :yikes:)
-
yeah, it is not - i am even contemplating if i should get more than 2 positions if not just 1, only concern is if i run into any issues to not be able to adjust it. I'll see how i feel, there's lots of holes so that could be the deal breaker - might just measure 15 times and get the final clocking and have it set. I could just do 2 positions also like 6 to 10 deg apart so that would only mean another 12 holes rather than an extra 84 (and they would all be done by hand and not on a CNC :yikes:)
12 sounds ok. 84 holes, not so much. :lol:
-
12 sounds ok. 84 holes, not so much. :lol:
yeah, no kidding
i did find another solution, 12 bolts, 4 holes per set on the back ring = 48 threaded holes, 3 holes per set on the front plate = 36 thru holes and based on the angles in each set i can get the following clocking options (0 degrees is the default clocking of course)
0,1,3,6,9,12,13,15,19,21,24,25,30,31 (and so on, didn't calculate past that as it would be past horizontal)
or
0,1,4,6,10,12,13,16,19,22,24,25,30,31
or
0,1,5,6,11,12,13,17,19,23,24,25,30,31
or
0,3,4,6,10,12,15,16,21,22,24,27,30
and so on, all based on how many degrees the front plate holes are spaced at
but unlikely i will drill that many holes - i will measure the current angle and plan to be somewhere 1/2 way to the horizontal so i won't hit the floor/tub and call it a day.
only problem i'm having now is if i can machine that pipe on my lathe, it is very close to its max capacity and i need to get my 8'' chuck fitted to the spindle to be able to clamp it.
-
My bet is something around 7 will work well.
-
i hope i figured it out
what i got was bearing p/n BD50-8
what i need apparently is BD50-8-A-T86NRX-01
or the Chrysler p/n 5072458AA
both are $40.99
($107 at the stealership :rant:)
ok, the bearing saga continues - i ordered the NSK BD50-8-A-T86NRX-01 and was the same as the B50-8 one i ordered before, i returned them both. Next i ordered the 5072458AA which just came in and the same issue with the snap ring groove being located to one end rather than the center of the outer race. I went to another dealership and I was given the same part number. I called Magna (owners of New Process/Venture Gear) and they transferred me to their parts sales, left a message but did not hear back yet. I think i am just going to cut a new groove but this is extremely annoying, what in the world are you going to do if you own a Rubi and need a replacement bearing, the dealership doesn't even seem to have the correct part or part number.
-
I'll post this here to avoid messing up the new thread.
It looks like the Klune company has experience with how to support a doubler and transfer case setup:
http://www.high-impact.net/transmission_and_gear/Klune-V_Applications_Manual.htm#Mounting Foot
They mention two options: 1) moving the support to the doubler and 2) using a "snubber" under the rear output of the transfer case. This indicates to me that there have been problems with doubler/TC setups without supports farther back. I'm running a rear support ring, which I now think is necessary for a doubler/TC setup but probably not for just a heavier TC like an Atlas or Dana 300.
-
C&P
In some applications, it is preferable to not use the transmission or transmission adapter mounting locations at all. A steel "mounting foot", available from Klune-V, can be bolted in with the Crawler. Then the original cross member is re-located farther back on the frame rails, or a new crossmember is fabricated and bolted up to the frame rails. A rubber mount such as a GM transmission mount or a Jeep rubber transmission support should be used between the Mounting Foot and the Crossmember. In this case, the rear snubber is not necessary.
I am using the mounting foot with a GM style rubber mount. It's between the Klune and D20. So far so good.
I have a buddy that just finished a 231/300 (D&D machine) He wants to make a rear output support. I am gonna give him a hand when he is ready for the support. He just finished the project and has 1 run on it so far. So far he loves it. Just the stock gears in each box.
-
Actually I messed up my post. What I meant was that if the support is not moved to the doubler, then a rear support is needed. But the foot at the doubler seems like the best setup overall because it avoids the problem that can come up if one of the supports gets bent upward (by a rock hit) and the other does not.
-
i am planning to run a plate between the transmission mount location and the end of the crawl/doubler box (where it mounts to the D300) - this would give it a lot of rigidity and can be used for the rubber mount. using more than 1 mount would not completely eliminate the problem as in the end will be both flexible and not rigid, i think this approach would be better and stronger - you'll see what i mean when i get there with my project, won't be too soon :lol:
-
Sounds like a good way to do it, looking forward to seeing it.