Is it possible to use a u joint on the front for a powerglide, and the torque tube flange to flange on the rear? or does a u joint have to be used on the front and rear? info will be appreciated... Thank you..
In theory the front and rear universal joints should be identical. A drives haft oscillates back & forth as it spins. Any other unequal arrangement of joints forces the drive shaft to oscillate in strange ways, depending on the relative differences. That being said I've seen drive shafts with Spicer joints on the front and Detroit joints on the rear, and they work OK. Not the ideal situation, but acceptable in most situations.
I'm unsure what you're asking especially after reading first reply. Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
hi... I am asking if it will work? the U Joint up front and a Torque tube flange on the rear of the drive shaft to rear end. Ulu.. thanks it is something Ive seen as well .. but unsure of..
Hmmm...the torque tube arrangement has no rear joint does it? If there is a slip joint in the shaft it'll work. If there's no slip. the front u-joint will try to bang the driveshaft twice per revolution. They make the shaft go back & forth as they turn.
So: you want to retain a closed drive rearend with and open drive yoke conversion on the front? I'm sure someone could come up with the right parts, some hand made. However, if you have already changed the engine and trans since you mentioned a powerglide, why not go ahead and change the rearend? Tim
Henry J Rear end... ,, I know the gears are high.. this is a temp thing till I can afford a proper change over.. No city driving .. no highway driving.. just macking it mobile..
""They make the shaft go back & forth as they turn."" Yes but not to the sevarity you are implying as it varies with angle...No angle, no difference..Early Fords with torque tube [and others] do not have a problem as long as the angle is under 5° or so...
It's not just a difference in angle that's a factor. The geometry of the joint causes the drive shaft to move fore and aft as it rotates. The u-joints are phased so the trans and axle may remain stationary as the shaft "floats" between them. If there's only one u-joint & it's without a slip-joint, or the two don't match, there will be a net vibration transmitted to the powertrain. (AFAIK None of this applies to CV type joints BTW.) I don't know what the Henry-J joint looks like so I'm not certain there's a realistic issue in this specific case. My general experience with drive shafts is that it's all too easy to throw them out of wack.
It worked on every PG Chev made before 1955. They all had torque tube drive. They abandoned the torque tube for good reasons, and changed to the open drive system. Not quite sure what you are trying to do but recommend you forget it. Install the rear axle you are going to use, and make a proper drive shaft. In the meantime, you will have to tow the car or push it around by hand.
Thanks everyone... Ill try to find a rear end and make it easier... thanks for your replies.. and pushing it will be till then...
I would think Double Cardan Joint[edit] A double cardan joint consists of two universal joints mounted back to back with a center yoke; the center yoke replaces the intermediate shaft. Provided that the angle between the input shaft and center yoke is equal to the angle between the center yoke and the output shaft, the second cardan joint will cancel the velocity errors introduced by the first cardan joint and the aligned double cardan joint will act as a CV joint.
I'll give you a country boy answer.....NO.....now, does that help.......you can do it, but something is going to get torn up...the drive shaft bolted straight to the rear end wont let the rear end pinion angle work up or down because the rear end is not floating.
Cadillac used this system to make their driveshafts smoother back when they were like 10 feet long. A Cardan joint is the same thing as a Spicer BTW. Cardan designed it, and Spicer (among others) makes them. This is the style of single cardan driveshaft I ran in the '47 Plymouth with the stock running gear. https://www.google.com/search?q=car....boursin.perso.sfr.fr%2Fpdgtran1.htm;1590;912 This is how the double cardan joint would work with a torque tube where the pinion and driveshaft are in line. https://www.google.com/search?q=car...2Fwww.4xshaft.com%2Fdouble_cardan.asp;600;208
Can you tell me the overall width on that? At one time I was considering a Lincoln rear for my '47, but I think it would be too narrow unless I tub the wells a bit or something. (That was my plan then...) I don't know if that rear is anywhere as strong as the 9" Fords & I'm thinking that while the Maverick Grabber had a stouter rear than the vanilla models, it probably wasn't 9" either. But I haven't owned a Ford in 40 years & haven't a clue really. Edit: I just googled up Grabber & found the axles weren't that strong, but a 9" Lincoln Versailles rear with disks swaps right in the Maverick & with even the same perch dimensions, so maybe later you'll be able to fit the better Versailles axle in without headaches.
out side drum to outside drum 56" not including studs.. center to center on the leaf spring perch 42.5" axle housing backing plate to back plate 50.5"
The Jalopy Journal
