![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
You are not logged in. Would you like to login?
1 of 1
Offline
I wonder if anyone thought about using Ford Aerostar or F150aluminum driveshafts shortened for Jag halfshafts.
Last edited by 260MGB (5/16/2011 12:25 am)
Offline

The only problem would be clearance between the the halfshafts and the stock mounting position of the shocks. Halfshafts can be made up by a driveshaft shop anyway you wish.
Last edited by Ralphy (5/16/2011 5:07 am)
Offline

The idea is a good in theory, but IMHO there are two things one might want to take on to consideration. The first weight vrs speed. The half shafts are much lighter because of their length than a typical drive line and they turn slower than the drive line because of the rear end ratio. When a person chooses aluminum it is to reduce mass on a drive line that is spinning at high RPMs. The higher the RPMs the more critical the mass is. A steel half shaft will probably still weigh less than an aluminum drive shaft and with the RPMs being some where around 1/3 of that of the drive line I would be willing to bet that there would not be much improvement with aluminum half shafts. To make matters worse the trade off for speed is torque. there is on average at least 3 times more torque applied to the half shafts than a drive shaft and I would worry that that the aluminum would not be up to the task. So the idea of reducing weight and rotating mass is a great one, but I am not sure that it would do much for the project and it would be difficult to do, not to mention expensive.

Offline

Its probably completely unfounded, But i would never trust aluminium half shafts, especially when there used as a control arm to
But thats just me
Offline

The Corvette C4 was, is factory aluminum.
Last edited by Daze (5/16/2011 8:33 pm)
Offline

yes but those must be 4" or 5" in diameter which is way to wide to fit between the Jag shocks

Offline

That's what I said several posts ago. Aluminum drive shafts seem to be a larger diameter then steel tube shafts. My guess is 3".
Looks like 4".
Last edited by Ralphy (5/16/2011 9:14 pm)
Offline

Ralphy wrote:
That's what I said several posts ago.
yes and I was agreeing
For the life of me I cant see why GM did that. It makes the part more expensive and due to the lower RPMs and shorter shaft the difference in rotating mass would be neglegable as I said before... maybe they did it due to that whole unsprung weight thing... oh weight that is a different thread
![]()

1 of 1