![]() |
Quote:
Thanks to all that have contributed toward a solution & for sharing their knowledge/experiences. |
When you say down on the pinion do you mean \ or /(Looking from the drivers side of the car) We mean \ or same plane as the driveline.
|
Quote:
|
In that situation you would add the front working angle and subtract the rear. So you have -3.9 front and -1.3 rear.
Front: \/ Opposite planes Rear:// Same plane If it was me, I'd raise the trans or the ride height. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
You have to play with your own set up. You should be able to use washers or similar to mock it up and find the sweet spot.
My guess is another 1-1.5 degrees down get's you close to equal - numbers. With the pinion moving 1.5 you should end up with approx. .2 up driveshaft angle. That would give you -3.2 front and -3.7 rear. Moving the pinion 1 degree shoud give you approx. .45 up driveshaft angle. That will net you around -3.45 front and -2.95 rear. |
Quote:
|
The Program
Quote:
Keep in mind that someone wrote that program and they got their information from a collection of formulae. These formulae were developed to explain, mathematically, what goes on in an ideal, distraction free environment such as outer space. It is impossible to quantify all of the real world variables and interactions of the components affecting the drive shaft. Every text I have listing and describing the use of these formulae contains some version of this quotation from Rockwell: "The engineer must use trial and experience as a guide". Always design some adjustability into your drive train set up. You may not need it but if you do you will be able to tune the set up without reaching for the cutting torch. Greg |
I sincerely hope this is not really aggravating everyone :_paranoid ..... & I apologize to those that easily see/understand the info here. I'm just trying to understand the 'whys'. We played around w/it again today. My buddy even came out to read & interpet the reference material from this thread from his perspective. I/we understand the optimum: 3.0° dn @ the drivetrain, a level d.shaft, & 3.0° up @ the pinion. Equal 'working' angles on opposite sides of the d.shaft canceling each other out.
The one question that we continued bumping up against because of our lack of subject knowledge (& that would be good to know in a situation such as this) is what are the options if that perfect set-up can't be achieved? Since several options exist when it comes to moving things, which option is the lesser of 2 evils? Is A) the incline slope of the d.shaft from the trans to the pinion w/equal & opposite angles better or worse from a physics perspective vs. B) equal angles on the same side of a d.shaft that's level or @ a slight (.1-.5) decline from the trans to the pinion? I played around w/some settings & raised the front end an additional .500". I then checked the pinion angle as is (2.0° range pointing down toward the front of the chassis). Knowing the pinion angle, I raised the drivetrain until I achieved a similar angle (2.4° pointing down toward the rear of the chassis). This arrangement got the d.shaft just about level but the angles are on the same side of the d.shaft. I checked the pinion angle @ max drop in this configuration (just to know what it was) & it was @ 3.5°. Greg, I'm going to try & give you guys a call tomorrow. |
Driveline angles seem simple but they are confusing as hell!
Sounds like you have two scenarios: Equal and opposite(Guessing at 2 degrees of upward driveshaft slope) Driveline 2.4+2=-4.4 working angle at ride height Pinion 2.0+2=+4.0 Unconventional Driveline 2.4+or-0=-2.4 Pinion 2.0+or-0=-2.0 It's late and I'm tired, I'm assuming leaf springs? I'd try one and if it doesn't work, change it to the other. Go by Greg's recommendation. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net