Project XXXJ

[siksaschevy]

Hey guys, ive got a few ?s about an axle swap in my 1995 xj. im going to put a wagoneer dana 44 in the front with custom mounts and 4link. and going to put a isuzu dana 44 with 4link in the rear. both with 488s, im going to be running 33TSL's locked f+r. and i wheel it pretty hard. my question i guess is has anyone had this setup in there XJ or any other jeep. and how did you like the setup. its mostly going to be for uwharrie and gulches and deep NC black mud. the isuzu axle i have is from like an 04 or something and has coil buckets and everything already on it. so its going to be easier and make more sense to 4 link it. ive never messed with these axles and am curious about them. any tips on where to get some coil bucket mounts for the waggy front axle would be helpfull, im doing all this myself in my yard so im trying to keep it on the cheap. thanks

 

[sharksanddanger]

nope. never been done.

 

[jeepmkcomin]

For the price I would personally just find a rear 60 for it to allow for "future expansion". M.O.R.E makes brackets... I believe TNT customs has a truss you can weld on now with upper arm mounts.

 

[ghost]

If you are not going bigger then 33's the front D44 is a waste of money. If I were to build an xj on 33's I'd get an xj D44 for the rear and keep the front like it is. JMHO.

 

[Scooter402]

You're going to need to build a complete sub frame if you plan on wheeling anything more than curbs. The unibody of the xj won't last long. Visual aid shown here:

 

[braxton357]

You would be better served by taking all of the factory brackets off of the trooper 44 and building your own as well... (or welding leaf spring perches to it)

 

[ghost]

You're going to need to build a complete sub frame if you plan on wheeling anything more than curbs. The unibody of the xj won't last long. Visual aid shown here:

that looks like a snatch to the rear when it was not properly built. And no you do not need a complete subframe. I wheeled the heck out of my 84 and even floped it twice.

 

[McCracken]

I agree not an entire subframe but I think you do need to strengthen the unibody. Also, I've seen XJs on 44s do amazing. The guy I knew used a waggy 44 and leaves. it was one of the best functional rigs I've seen. no joke.

 

[braxton357]

The stock xj 8.25 will work fine for 33's too...

 

[siksaschevy]

thanks guys. yah i had planned on making new crossmembers for the link mounts. the reason why im using the isuzu dana 44 is for a couple of reasons. first my other truck is gm 6lug, so i can use the nice new rims that have never even been mounted. second i was going to regear the 8.25 down the road anyway, i also was going to put disc brakes on it. why do all that separate when the isuzu 44 has all the things done to it that i was going to do anyway. i know the 8.25 and dana30 will handle 33s all day long. but im not set on running those forever. but i also dont want to have to regear or at worst swap the axles later on down the road when i decide to go up. and the whole 4 link rear. its just different on an XJ, not alot of people have done that yet. i hate following the trend.

 

[Scooter402]

that looks like a snatch to the rear when it was not properly built. And no you do not need a complete subframe. I wheeled the heck out of my 84 and even floped it twice.

Yes and no. It was a snatch from the rear, the guy that had the cherokee was snatching a full size. Properly built? I wouldn't go that far. He has a HP 44/ 9" combo, running 38" tsl's, I forget the gears. He's obviously going to do a full subframe this time around. Still obviously had the leaves in the rear, was using coils up front with Ford radius arms. Was a pretty sick setup that worked really well.

 

[Mac5005]

I can't imagine stock ford radius arms working to well under an XJ. I bet his anti-dive and anti-rise numbers were rediculous.

Snatching in general, is not a wise move in any situation. (Unless it is a purpose built, bumper to bumper truck pulling rig). Try to pull with a strap, or its time to pull some cable. It will defintely save you a headache in the long run.



siksaschevy, I'd go for it. Use both of the 44's you have, link the rear, w/ a good crossmember where the links mount to the frame, and use good rebuildable joints.

On the front, either try to get some brackets off a ford or a tj or a dodge, or just build your own. Just use good rebuildable joints, and a good crossmember where all the links mount to the frame just like in the rear.

Then to tie your crossmembers together, just use some angle iron or channel iron to strengthen your unibody between the crossmembers and you'll be happy.

Just a little tip, try to make the 4 points where your upper links meet the frame adjustable vertically, so that you can play with your suspension geometry to get it to work like you want it to. You also may want to play with a 4link calculator before you build just get all your mounting points in the ball park.

here are some pics of a well built xj, that still runs leafs in the rear. He did a great job on strengthening the unibody.

 

[RRADFORD9ER]

Was it really necessary to post the exact same thing in multiple sections on the forum?

(See how the redundancy can be annoying as hell?)

 

[Scooter402]

I can't imagine stock ford radius arms working to well under an XJ. I bet his anti-dive and anti-rise numbers were rediculous.
Snatching in general, is not a wise move in any situation. (Unless it is a purpose built, bumper to bumper truck pulling rig). Try to pull with a strap, or its time to pull some cable. It will defintely save you a headache in the long run.

It worked just the same as it did under a Ford. If it worked for one make of vehicle, why wouldn't it work for another? Setting it up as Ford did wouldn't be difficult...Jig the setup before it comes out, then torch it out, unbolt it, whatever your fancy...then set it up in the new rig the same way. He built a sub-frame in the front for that setup. Worked really well. I'll see if I can find closer pics. Still had stock leaves in the rear. Just so you don't think I'm full of sh!t:

Now he has, on multiple occasions, used his Cherokee for a recovery vehicle, since it is on 38's. It was a pretty damn sunk-in full size, and a tug wasn't doing it. Obviously the guy didn't have any cable to pull, that's why he was calling for help. I agree with you that snatching is a bad idea...But now this guy is going to fix it to the setup that he wants.

 

[Scooter402]

Okay, I lied. They were "Ford-style" radius arms. But still the same, they were radius arms. Here's some pics of his setup:

 

[uncc civilengineer]

I cant offer much... but I ran a Isuzu D44 in my XJ and Waggy 44 up front... 5.13's, Lockrights, Warn Premium hubs, etc.

My Isuzu 44 was out of a 94 I believe so it's pretty narrow and required 1.25" wheel spacers to get it back to Waggy width.

The Isuzu D44 is plenty strong (I ran 37" comp Trepadors on it and it never flinched). It has 1.5" shafts, factory Disc brakes, etc. ALso is a LOT easier to find and a LOT cheaper than XJ 44's... You can pull one a junk yard for probably $100.

I did truss it through...

Everyone's different.. The front 44 was chromo'd and the hubs were the weak link (hub fuse did go once)... But to be honest a 37" Comp Trepador is probably comparable in mass to a 42" Irok... Again the rear was stock w/ stock shafts and never a single issue.. I seriously doubt a XJ 44 would hold up to it...


Side shot for width purposes.. the rear was maybe 1/2" narrower than the front total (1/4" each side)

 

[Mac5005]

I agree that If it worked good, and from the pics it looks like it flexes well, then it works good and don't mess with it.

The problem with radius arms on both the left and right side of the same axle, is that when the axle articulates, the axle will bind and fight itself. The guy witht he white XJ, he did make a wise move in pussing joints where the arms meet the frame.

What happens with radius arms, when one side droops, the pinion is forced to rotate in the same arc as when stationary. However the pinion is actually trying to rotate upward as the axle droops, with the radius arm locating the axle. But the problem is created b/c on the one side that is drooped the pinion is trying to rotate upward, meanwhile, the side that is compressed or at ride height, the pinion is held at the same point as at ride height, or rotates down. This is why the dual radius arm design creates bind in the axle mounts when articulating.

The good thing with radius arms, is that the pinion stays pointed on a plane, that is parallel to the plane that runs from the axle centerline, to the frame mount of the radius arm. This is good b/c if you run a double cardan style front driveshaft, you have alot less bind, b/c if setup correctly, the pinion stays pointed directly at the transfer case.

This is why a Radius are setup is great for when the front is mere moving evenly on both sides up and down, w/o any side to side articulation. But this is also why radius arms on both the left and right create bind when the axle is articulate, with one side being at droop and the other at bump.



All i'm saying is, if radius arms work, and the driver likes them, and they hold together then by all means run them.

If not, There are alot better designs out there that reduce ALOT of bind in the suspension as it cycles.