01 Mounty on Tons!

marty79 said:
But there's no seal at the back of trans like I'm used to seeing at all. You can see the drum inside the trans so clearly fluid must flow through there and its kept out by the tcase gasket as you mentioned
Click to expand...
I know with my 4L60e, there’s an o-ring that seals up next to the big six studs around the perimeter. It alone won’t hold which is why you put some grey Permatex or RTV on the mating surfaces. There isn’t an external seal around the output shaft.
 
Last edited:
BigSouth said:
I know with my 4L60e, there’s an o-ring that seals up next to the big six studs around the perimeter. It alone won’t hold which is why you put some grey Permatex or RTV on the mating surfaces. There’s isn’t an external seal around the output shaft.
Click to expand...
I've seen that too, this one dont have either. It didn't leak, original tcase wasn't over neither was trans so guess I'm going to put everything back on and go with it
 
marty79 said:
But there's no seal at the back of trans like I'm used to seeing at all. You can see the drum inside the trans so clearly fluid must flow through there and its kept out by the tcase gasket as you mentioned
Click to expand...
I'd bet the transfer case input is the seal. That is how the xj works. The input on the tcase goes in the output seal. That looks like the tcase seals the rear of the transmission.
 
ghost said:
I'd bet the transfer case input is the seal. That is how the xj works. The input on the tcase goes in the output seal. That looks like the tcase seals the rear of the transmission.
Click to expand...
Ah good thought
 
I'd venture to say MOST 4wd transmissions don't have an output seal and the transfer case it what seals it up. I know nothing GM that I've ever messed with has had a seal.
 
GotWood said:
#1 forgot about it.

#2 Been busy working out of town when not at FD

I'll try to get it this week.
Click to expand...
sweet that's all i lack to get the rear completely done is mocking up a gas tank. thanks (leave me a little bit of the metal lines when you cut em, as for those pesky filler tubes that are annoying to work out, you can cut em if you want)
 
Got a little more work done. Ended up with only 3/4" difference of vertical separation between axle side and frame side while still able to mount lower links pretty high up. Front just about identical to rear. 42" lowers, 39.25" uppers..they are tight squeeze all the way up in there. Gonna have to dent that oil pan corner slightly to reach full bump..or maybe an aftermarket one we'll see. I'm happy with it.
Freaking Ford engineers, nothing on both sides of frame are symmetrical. I found that out the hard way "after" making lower links, then something seemed off and nothing on each side of frame I pulled off was the same. This stinking ford is already on my bad side lol.
How its sitting at ride height, whew that was some work getting those upper links in there.
20210504_120303.jpg
20210505_160912.jpg
20210505_160926.jpg
20210505_200829.jpg
20210505_200846.jpg
20210505_200945.jpg
 
Might need to beef up your lowers being at 42” inches. Maybe sleeve them again with a bigger square tube since you are already using square tubing.
 
NickMaul said:
Might need to beef up your lowers being at 42” inches. Maybe sleeve them again with a bigger square tube since you are already using square tubing.
Click to expand...
Guess what..the torsion bars I took off are 1" solid steel and that's what's inside of the tube lol. Freaking heavy ass links
 
Jody Treadway said:
Is that ride height?
If so, making the uppers more parallel to the ground would def be a benefit.
Something to consider.
Click to expand...
Well there really isn't a way to make uppers unless I brought everything down on frame side like 8"..but then I'm loosing so much clearance which with 122" wheelbase I don't want that so I picked a middle ground and went with it
 
And it might turn quickly into just a crawler lol if this setup dont drive that good on street
 
marty79 said:
Well there really isn't a way to make uppers unless I brought everything down on frame side like 8"..but then I'm loosing so much clearance which with 122" wheelbase I don't want that so I picked a middle ground and went with it
Click to expand...

That's why I mentioned buidling a subframe earlier. It would allow you to accomplish what you want to.
Don't take that statement as being negative, just clarifying.
 
Jody Treadway said:
That's why I mentioned buidling a subframe earlier. It would allow you to accomplish what you want to.
Don't take that statement as being negative, just clarifying.
Click to expand...
I know but it would be a really low subframe so I opted out and said "well it'll be a crawler if street manners aren't worthy ".
 
marty79 said:
I know but it would be a really low subframe so I opted out and said "well it'll be a crawler if street manners aren't worthy ".
Click to expand...
Again, not being negative, just pointing something out.
Better link angles are just as (if not more) important for a trail rig than a street rig.
Since you already mentioned a concern with wrap and suspension performance, this is the time to reconsider your design.
Look at buggies, monster trucks and even modded full frame Jeeps, they all utilize a subframe even though it costs them ground clearance.
 
Back
Top