|
Post by sigmfsk on May 3, 2012 17:05:05 GMT -5
Have you given thought to the radiator yolk mounts? Rubber, aluminum or other? Yes. A few months ago, the panel beaters pointed out that I might want rubber mounts so that it gave some give to the radiator. I told them to go with steel or aluminum unless they heard otherwise from me. So I showed up and had aluminum: It seemed to me that it would be easiest to have body / frame / subframe / radiator yoke / downbars / subframe connectors, all mounted together solidly as one piece without any give. And then I could allow some things to have some compliance if they needed it. So I could mount the radiator via rubber isolators (as compared to the stock setup of mounting the radiator solid to the yoke, and having the yoke mounted to the subframe via rubber isolators). I hadn't thought about galvanic corrosion between aluminum and steel. I'm going to be very sad if in 10 years my body biscuits / mounting surfaces have been eaten away. Is this a real concern? This looks interesting: > Eck® is the only patented corrosion barrier to prevent dissimilar metal > corrosion ( such as steel and aluminum ). > Simply brush, dip, spray, or squeeze on Eck® during assembly. www.vannay.com/> When dissimilar metals come in contact, use a nonabsorbent insulate > between them. A polypropylene tape of 1.7 mils minimum thickness with > a dielectric strength of 300-400 volts/mil is adequate for most trailer > and body applications. trailer-bodybuilders.com/mag/trucks_deal_dissimilar_metals/> As a preventative measure, whenever possible, > aluminum should be isolated from other metals with a > non‐absorbent, non‐conductive, insulator like bitumastic > paints or polymer sleeves and washers. www.cmiengineer.com/whitepapers/aluminum_corrosion.pdfyour friend in blumo longevity, arthur
|
|
|
Post by blusmbl on May 3, 2012 20:56:20 GMT -5
WOW!! The car is looking great! It has really come along way in a relatively short time from what it was to what it is now. How far away is I.C. will you have to fly there or a long road trip to see it or email pics and ideas back and forth? I can totally see this car being featured in several magazines when it's finished. Arthur's Marin County Muscle-From Fleet to Street! Unlimited C body madness!!
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 4, 2012 4:17:27 GMT -5
WOW!! The car is looking great! ... How far away is I.C. will you have to fly there or a long road trip to see it or email pics and ideas back and forth? Thanks, Blusmbl! I was reading an article in some car magazine recently that talked about the feeling you get when your project starts to look more like an actual car than just a pile of parts, and I'm getting that feeling! I'm in the Detroit area, right next to the underground secret Canadian-US Monaco importation tunnel: that Steam uses from time-to-time: > If someone in the US buys this car I'll bring it "across" myself. I know a > place ... > > Cars are put on lightweight flatbeds and assisted through the recently > enlarged tunnel by a diesel pusher, hence the ventilation. As an added > convenience, and rather fortuitous, the American side of the tunnel is in > close proximity to Arthur's house, as determined by the inset map. from www.bluesbrotherscentral.com/forum/topic/7292-sold-canada-1974-monaco-police-special-alberta/page__st__20#entry107101I.C is here: www.industrialchassisinc.com/in Phoenix, AZ. So it's a pretty serious haul. When I shipped my cars here, I used "Worry Free Transport", and loved them. www.bluesbrotherscentral.com/forum/topic/8996-good-auto-shipping-companies/#entry110970But when I shipped here, the cars had brakes, and I didn't particularly mind if they put a big dent in the side. When the car ships now, it will not have brakes. The panel beaters said with the high dollar engine and trans in the car, I might want to select a dedicated shipment - they put it in a truck and drive it straight there, without swapping it on and off the trailer. Being that when it comes time to ship I'll have some flexibility in timing, I'll shoot our own Scatpack a message and see what he might be able to do. So I don't know now how I'll get the car to AZ, but let's say it get's there OK. Then what... My plan is to refer I.C. to www.dk41u4d.comwhere I'll have pages with my thoughts for all the efforts that I think they could be involved with. Then let Steve think it over, then sometime I'll fly down over a weekend and visit and talk in person about some of them. And then hopefully we can work through the project with e-mails, pics, and phone calls. That's my line of thinking. A few folks have suggested that there should be any number of capable chassis shops local, and they're likely right. But I'm not that much in the know, and when I found a place that seems capable of doing the work, and willing to do the work, and has time to do the work, it seems wise for me to be happy, even though its far away. your friend in planning, arthur
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 4, 2012 11:32:38 GMT -5
There's only so much I can fit in my head before I need to write it all down. Here's what I have for RLTC CAN bus messaging: www.dk41u4d.com/canbus%20120504.htmSummary: Put BOSCH M4 ABS, RLTC, and RPM module all on a separate CAN bus from the FAST XFI. And this is something that I can do entirely after I get the car back from I.C. The only connections that I need to add to the car are: The BOSCH M4 CAN connector The standard tach signal of the coil +12V ground Injector harness And none of that will impact I.C or the panel beaters. I'm not expecting anyone to proof my plan listed there, but if you do read and notice anything weird or wrong, please let me know. I'm quite open to improving/correcting it. thanks, arthur
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 4, 2012 15:30:11 GMT -5
This trivia block raised some concerns > 9.1 CAN bus trivia > CAN message > • 11 Bit (standard) or 29 Bit (extended) identifier > • Up to 8 bytes of data payload > CAN bus > • Needs termination resistors (120 Ohm) in wiring harness > • All devices connected to the bus must use identical data rate www.bosch-motorsport.de/content/downloads/Documentation/DDU7_Manual_E_2012_03_08.pdf11-bit CAN (base frame format) is CAN 2.0a. 29-bit CAN (extended frame format) is CAN 2.0b. > The CAN standard requires the implementation must accept the base > frame format and may accept the extended frame format, but must > tolerate the extended frame format. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_busSo that's another area I need to check (that BOSCH M4 is not sending 29-bit CAN, while the RLTC only accepts 11-bit CAN). Also, this rule makes sense: > • All devices connected to the bus must use identical data rate but I hadn't thought about it before. It seems that there are different data rates used on CAN bussses. VW uses 500KBPS for the drivetrain messages and 100KBPS for other messages. > The CAN bus system is divided into 3 special systems due to the > different requirements regarding signal repetition rate and the large data > volume: > • Drive train CAN bus (high-speed) at 500 kbps with almost real time > requirements > • Convenience CAN bus (low-speed) at 100 kbps with low time > requirements > • Infotainment CAN bus (low-speed) at 100 kbps with low time > requirements www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_238.pdfThe following has the color coding for the the VW systems. > The colour codes of the CAN bus wiring are: > Powertrain CAN high wire Orange/black > Convenience CAN high wire Orange/green > Infotainment CAN high Orange/violet > CAN low wire, (all) Orange/brown www.my-gti.com/991/performing-repairs-on-can-bus-wiringWhen it says > CAN low wire, (all) Orange/brown I don't think it is saying that all 3 systems use the same orange/brown wire. I think it is saying that the 3 systems are entirely distinct, with each system having it's own dedicated 2-wire pair, but they all the use same convention that CAN LO is orange/brown. Anyway, I need to ensure that the BOSCH M4 wheelspeed messages are sent at the same KBPS data rate as the Racelogic MIM RPM sender. Note that data-rate isn't the same as update rate. BOSCH M4 updates wheelspeed every 10ms, while the Racelogic MIM updates RPM every 50ms (found it in the MIM manual). above, BOSCH M4 above, Racelogic MIM
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 5, 2012 7:55:51 GMT -5
And the rear also has an encoder wheel built into it: from www.1aauto.com/1A/wheel-bearing-hub-rear/Dodge/Charger/1ASHX00029/559655?utm_campaign=gb_api_nobr&utm_medium=comparisonshopping&utm_source=google_base&utm_content=SHX&gclid=CKK0huex6K8CFQlN4AodSBXc0QThat 4-bolt attachment system looks a lot like what bolts to a "bolt in axle". Here's a pic of a Chevy 12 bolt, and what it looks like stock (c-clip, on right), with how it looks after they cut the end off the axle tube and weld on a bolt-in end: from www.carcraft.com/techarticles/12_bolt_chevy_vs_9_inch_ford/photo_04.htmlDTS did that to my Marin County 9 1/4, so I have an 8 3/4 / Dana 60 bolt-in axle end. from bluesmobiles.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=owners&thread=45&post=73But I couldn't bolt that Charger bearing up to the axle housing, even if it lined up, as there would be no way to access the encoder wheel, which is read radially. The sensor would need to be inside the axle tube. The Charger doesn't have a solid rear axle. I couldn't find any vehicle that has a solid rear axle, with 5x4.5 bolt pattern, with an active ABS encoder wheel. Here's what the Charger rear "axle" assembly looks like (with brake rotor removed) from www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94445and the knuckle itself: The active ABS wheelspeed sensor mounts to the knuckle: from the page > "Does anyone know how to install a left rear speed sensor on a 2007 > Charger" www.chargerforumz.com/showthread.php?t=103531So what are my goals with the rear axle: 1) have a solid axle. The movie blumo doesn't seem to have any shots that clearly show a solid axle, but we know it had one, and I can get the performance I want with a solid axle. bluesmobiles.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=screen&action=display&thread=6902) strong The 9 1/4 is strong enough. The only part that bugged me a bit was the c-clips, and that can be rectified with bolt-in axle tube ends. So there's a huge benefit in using a 9 1/4: a) it matches what a 1974 Monaco police 440 had b) it matches what was surely at least in some of the movie shots c) I already have it 3) 5x4.5 bolt pattern (for blumo wheels) 4) have realistic axle flange center receptacle (and realistic basically means incorporating my Fury axle ends) 5) parking brake 6) disc brakes, with rotor/caliper that clears 15" blumo wheels 7) have an active ABS encoder wheel and sensor setup So let's say that I got a 2007 Charger rear knuckle, and bolted it to the end of my 9 1/4 axle tube (after most assuredly needing to shorten the tube, and weld on an appropriate mounting plate). I'll need an axle shaft made, with a threaded end for a 32mm nut. And then I can convert my Fury axle end into a spacer that fits against the Charger axle flange. I'll need to modify the knuckle to accept a Bosch DF11 sensor (or determine that the Charger uses a DF11 sensor). Then I'll need a rotor and caliper that clears a 15" wheel. It seems that the Charger could come with a variety of rotors/calipers. You could get the caliper on the left, while the SRT got the Brembo on the right: That pic is from the same thread I'm referencing a lot www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94445for which the purpose is to show how to modify your Charger from the caliper on the left to use the one on the right. It looks like rotors came in two diameters: 12.6" diameter 13.6" diameter and three widths: 0.33" 0.80" 1.04" 06 2006 Dodge Charger Base Brake Rotor Rear PBR Product SKU: W0133-1771715 Product Note: w/ Standard Brakes (Rotor Diameter - 320mm / Rotor Thickness 8.5mm - Solid) 07 2007 Dodge Charger Base Brake Rotor Rear PBR Product SKU: W0133-1812617 Product Note: w/ Performance Brakes (Rotor Diameter - 320mm / Rotor Thickness 20.5mm - Vented) (All AWD Vehicles came equipped with Performance Brakes) 08 2008 Dodge Charger R/T Brake Pad Set Front Akebono - With Shims Product SKU: W0133-1610583 Product Note: w/ Heavy Duty Brakes or Police Package (Rotor Diameter - 345 mm / Rotor Thickness 26.5 mm) www.partsgeek.com/mmparts/brakes/dodge/charger.htmlHere's a pic comparing two: from www.challengertalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-70169.htmlHere's the diagram from the manual for my Wilwood rear brake setup: from www.reillymotorsports.com/140-7144.pdffrom bluesmobiles.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=owners&thread=45&post=75The manual says that the rotors in the kit are: Rotor, .81” Thk x 12.19” Dia 0.81" thick, eh? The same thickness as one of the Charger options: 07 2007 Dodge Charger Base Brake Rotor Rear PBR Product SKU: W0133-1812617 Product Note: w/ Performance Brakes (Rotor Diameter - 320mm / Rotor Thickness 20.5mm - Vented) (All AWD Vehicles came equipped with Performance Brakes) So it seems that I could use a stock Charger knuckle / rotor combo, and reduce the diameter of the rotor from 12.6" (the stock charger diameter) down to 12.19" (the wilwood rotor diameter), and then use my wilwood caliper, and it would clear the 15" blumo wheel. On the stock charger, the knuckles for the brembo caliper are different than that for the smaller caliper. > No, you will need spindles from an SRT and don't forget wheels that will > clear the Brembo Calipers www.challengertalk.com/forums/f17/f-s-brembo-srt-8-rotors-calipers-sale-69901/#post963146> OK, First off, you do need the knuckles (also called spindles) front and > rear, to mount the SRT Brembos. www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94445But I don't want brembo calipers. I want specifically the 0.81" thick rotor. I think I could find a complete set from the junkyard, reduce the diameter of the rotor, and bolt to the axle tube. At least it sounds like a good starting point to propose to I.C. your friend in saying "bolt on" even if it requires 10 hours of design and welding, arthur
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on May 5, 2012 21:00:15 GMT -5
This sounds like it might be do able. But it seems like a lot of work.
I haven't sat down and thought this thru yet, but why can't you figure out a way to mount a tone wheel (may have to be specially fabricated and built) directly to the axle shafts you have, inside the axle tube, just inboard of the bearing, then drill a hole and weld a mounting flange to the axle tube to mount a sensor that protrudes into the axle housing next to the tone ring? This could be easily retrofitted to the rear you have with out much modification.
Just trying to keep it simple.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 6, 2012 8:52:25 GMT -5
...mount a tone wheel (may have to be specially fabricated and built) directly to the axle shafts you have, inside the axle tube, just inboard of the bearing, then drill a hole and weld a mounting flange to the axle tube to mount a sensor that protrudes into the axle housing next to the tone ring? That's a good idea. I suppose some of the thoughts in my head were that it would be good to have the encoder wheel out of the axle tube: 1) so that if there were problems I could see what's going on 2) if there were problems with the ring, I wouldn't need to disassemble the axle to work on it 3) to keep it out of the oily environment And a good part of it was "go with what you know". I can understand the concept of cutting and welding something. I know less about how encoder wheels work and fabricating a custom setup in a reliable manner. It seems most reliable to me to get a known working encoder wheel setup that's installed in many vehicles, and then just fabricate the portion to connect to my axle tube. And I think it's unlikely that I'll end up using the axle shafts I have now (due to length issues with me switching wheel widths, backspacing, and adding a Fury 9 1/4 wheel spacer), so changing to an axle shaft design with a nut doesn't seem to add any cost. And I think welding a new end on the axle tube won't likely add a significant cost, since I probably won't be using leaf springs, and the axle will already have a lot of welding that needs to be done to it. Something to think about would be you using my completed axle, and me using my 9 1/4 from the Fury, so that a lot of the work that's been done for Marin County's axle wouldn't be wasted. That might save money for both of us. Your idea highlights how complicated my idea is. So I need to think more about this and see what ideas I can get from Bosch and I.C. The Bosch M4 manual makes clear that the unit doesn't require DF11 sensors, just acceptable signal information: > Use only Bosch DF11 sensors, unless other sensor has been tested and > approved by Bosch Motorsport but if DF11 sensors are used, the encoder wheel must be: > a ferromagnetic incremental wheel Remember this cool "tester" pic: from bluesmobiles.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=owners&thread=45&post=4287I found that Baumer Electric has a wide variety of ring magnets and encoders. But their setup is for industrial and home exercise hula hoop uses: So I'd hate to get a ring magnet, and have it inside the axle tube and have it break due to heat, or have it outside the axle tube and have it break due to a rock hitting it. It seems using a proven encoder wheel setup offers great benefits. I've been looking for any type of a solid axle with active encoder wheels, and I can't find any (regardless of lug bolt pattern). The 2011 Mustang GT has a solid axle: > As far as the never ending live rear end vs. independent suspension > argument goes, we're saying the following: The 2011 Ford Mustang GT > sports the very best solid rear axle in the world. www.autoblog.com/2010/03/29/2011-ford-mustang-gt-first-drive/but it has an old-style passive ABS sensor (or at least I'm guessing it does, since the front does) from www.1aauto.com/1A/wheel-bearing-hub-front/Ford/Mustang/1ASHF00348/533527?utm_campaign=gb_api_nobr&utm_medium=comparisonshopping&utm_source=google_base&utm_content=SHFwhich is a bummer since there's an entire 2011 GT axle setup on e-bay: www.ebay.com/itm/2011-Ford-Mustang-GT-OEM-Rear-Axle-Assembly-3-73-1K-/310343685499It seems if I could find a vehicle with a solid axle and active ABS sensors, I could just cut the end off that tube, weld to my tube, and almost be there. So I'll keep poking around; thanks for the ideas, and please let me know if you know of any solid axle active ABS encoder wheel setups. The good news is that if the intake / dry sump / motor take long enough, the Mustang GT might have active rear wheel encoders by then, and I can use that setup. your friend in one's glass always being at least half full, arthur
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on May 6, 2012 14:05:33 GMT -5
I see what your saying but i dont think you are that far away from getting it to work. The set up I am suggesting is used in production vehicles. At least I know for sure on passive sensors. I can't remember the vehicle but when I figure it out I'll let you know. There are sensors that can run it the oil, again I know passive for sure. Plus there is not much oil out at the axle bearing, there is oil, but it is not submerged in oil. If you end up with problems, the sensor will be accessible from out side the axle, if the encoder has a problem, you already fixed half the problem by eliminating the c clips. Remove the wheel, remove the caliper, 4 bolts at the axle flang and the axle is out. I would love to use that rear axle, and it would be a bolt in deal, but I'm not sure that will be in the build budget at this point. It sounds like you have some time to get this figured out, so I will do some research and see if I can come up with som production comps. For some reason a Jeep Grand Cherokee comes to mind, I'll take a look. Ok, strike the jeep. Look at a Toyota Tundra. An 01 Toyota tundra uses a passive sensor mounted in the axle tube with a tone wheel inside the housing. A 2011 Tundra uses a hub style bearing with integral active sensor, but it is not splined, it uses a conventional (9.25 type axle shaft).
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 6, 2012 20:12:58 GMT -5
I see what your saying but i dont think you are that far away from getting it to work... It sounds like you have some time to get this figured out... An 01 Toyota tundra uses a passive sensor mounted in the axle tube with a tone wheel inside the housing. A 2011 Tundra uses a hub style bearing with integral active sensor, but it is not splined, it uses a conventional (9.25 type axle shaft). Hi Spanks: Thanks for keeping the ideas going. Yes, I have lots of time for the active wheelspeed sensor project. The axle can be one of the last things to get setup. I see several setups with an ABS wheelspeed sensor on each axle shaft of a solid axle. But they're all passive (tone ring), as far as I can find. I think this makes it easier to sense inside an axle tube, because the sensor can just point at the outside edge of the tone ring. But active sensors (from what I can tell), all point at the side of the encoder wheel. Here are pic of the setup on a 2005 Mustang, and based on the 2011 front wheel bearing above having a tone-ring, I expect that the latest year models are similar: from www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/2005-2010-mustang-talk/154723-right-rear-wheel-abs-sensor-rear-speed-sensor.htmlSome of a Nissan Titan rear axle: from www.titantalk.com/forums/titan-engine-transmission-drivetrain/118508-rear-passenger-axle-seal-leak-broken-abs-sensor.htmlfrom dallas.ebayclassifieds.com/m/ViewLargeImage?adid=7259569&index=5Here's a super titan tone-ring: www.titantalk.com/forums/titan-engine-transmission-drivetrain/105351-cruise-control-recovery-after-re-gearing.htmlA passive tone-ring seems quite straightforward to fab. Maybe I can wait for the 2013 Viper SRT to come out. > ABS is now 4 channels instead of 3. www.roadandtrack.com/future-cars/new-cars/eight-things-to-know-2013-srt-viperrear axle is: > Frame-mounted hypoid bevel gear with GKN ViscoLok speed-sensing > limited-slip differential; 3.55:1 www.allpar.com/cars/viper/viperspecs.html> For the first time the SRT Viper models will include both electronic > stability control (ESC) and traction control systems. The ESC system is > a four-mode setup with speed sensors at each wheel along with a yaw > sensor, lateral G and steering-wheel angle sensor. www.allpar.com/cars/viper/2012-dodge-viper.htmlSurely with all this fanciness, they're using new active-style wheelspeed sensors.
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on May 8, 2012 6:36:24 GMT -5
I will find some pictures for you, I have been a little slow the last few days as I am recovering from running my first full marathon this past weekend, and man was it a hot day.
The Titan set up is close but that sensing set up is behind the brake rotor and in front of the bearing. The Toyota mounts the ring being the bearing where it is the most inboard part of the axle shaft assembly. I am finding on the newer Toyotas, they use active sensors, and they to are kind of mounted inside the axle. The bearing and sensor are actually in a retainer that is bolted to the axle tube similar to a hub bearing arrangement but without the hub. This allows for a traditional flanged axle. Not a bolted / spline arrangement.
I just can't believe no one makes a active sensor ring to be used in custom applications such as this. I have been looking, as I'm sure you have been too.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 8, 2012 11:35:43 GMT -5
I will find some pictures for you, I have been a little slow the last few days as I am recovering from running my first full marathon this past weekend, and man was it a hot day. Rest up, my friend. Here's me at the halfway point of the Pikes Peak marathon: You can tell that I'm not exactly sprinting along. That briefcase slowed me down more than I expected. Now that I've got all my exercise out of the way, I can spend more time searching the web for active wheelspeed sensors. I am finding on the newer Toyotas, they use active sensors, and they to are kind of mounted inside the axle. The bearing and sensor are actually in a retainer that is bolted to the axle tube similar to a hub bearing arrangement but without the hub. This allows for a traditional flanged axle. Not a bolted / spline arrangement. That awesome! That's exactly what I'm looking for. I just can't believe no one makes a active sensor ring to be used in custom applications such as this. I have been looking, as I'm sure you have been too. Well, I hadn't even hoped to find a setup for custom applications, being that I couldn't find it in any applications. But since it seems you've found it in Toyota's, there's hope for custom. But who would they sell to? Race teams looking for active sensors in race categories that require a solid axle but allow traction control? Thanks for checking, and I'll keep checking, and may the spirit of the blues help guide your recuperation, arthur
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 8, 2012 18:46:16 GMT -5
I am finding on the newer Toyotas, they use active sensors, and they to are kind of mounted inside the axle. The bearing and sensor are actually in a retainer that is bolted to the axle tube similar to a hub bearing arrangement but without the hub. This allows for a traditional flanged axle. Not a bolted / spline arrangement. > In recent years, several new types of “active” WSS sensors have > appeared. These are used on many 1999 and newer Chrysler, Jeep and > Mercedes models with Teves Mark 20e and up Teves ABS systems. > Active WSS sensors are also found on the Ford Focus, Toyota Tundra > and other applications. www.brakeandfrontend.com/Article/46336/diagnosing_wheel_speed_sensors.aspx> Today, active wheel speed sensors are commonly built into the wheel > bearing. The sensor itself, if it can be removed, looks similar to other > two-wire sensors you've seen before, but the tone ring might not be > visible. Versions with dual sensing elements have a ring of tiny magnets > that looks like a roller thrust bearing, but often it can't be seen because > it's sealed inside the wheel bearing housing. On newer versions, the > magnets are built into the wheel bearing seal. Why Active Sensors? > > Beginning with the 2012 model year, all light trucks will be required to > have some type of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) system (see June > 2007 Motor Age). The Continental Teves system mentioned earlier was > developed for cars and introduced by Mercedes-Benz in 1995, but > today's size, weight and price of the components are low enough that > some manufacturers are installing ESC on all of their models. We're now > entering the second generation of ESC technology, and it usually uses > dual-element active wheel speed sensors. > > Toyota's Stability Control System introduced on the 2008 Tundra > (sometimes referred to in their service information as "Vehicle Skid > Control") is typical of what we'll see in the next decade. mbworld.org/forums/m-class-w163/389616-05-ml500-light-abs-exclamation-ce-p0730.html------------ Tundra's Stability Control may have been introduced in 2008, but 2007 had active encoder wheels in the rear axles. ------------ The axleshaft, brake backing plate, and outer bearing are held in place with four bolts. Many Toyota axles use a solid-state tone ring for each wheel speed sensor and the Tundra is no different. These rings look like an axle seal, but are actually embedded with magnets that allow the speed sensor to know how fast the wheel is turning and which direction, and are helpful for both antilock braking systems and traction control. Also note how large the axleshaft is at the bearing where it supports the weight of the truck. From there it gradually necks down to the splines. Read more: www.4wheeloffroad.com/techarticles/drivetrain/2007_toyota_tundra_rear_axle/photo_07.html#ixzz1uKAoKBPw------------ and check this out, a custom axle, using a Tundra wheel bearing/encoder wheel. It looks like some people still call it a tone ring. Currie Enterprises is famous in the off-roading sector for their Jeep rearends and other parts. They're not limited to the Jeep, though. Here's a Tundra bearing with tone ring to put a 9-inch or other rearend in a late model Toyota. Read more: www.4wdandsportutility.com/tech/1006_4wd_currie_enterprises/photo_05.html#ixzz1uKCOWV9g------------ This is all exciting news! Thanks, Spanks. I'll keep up the investigation.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 9, 2012 11:07:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on May 10, 2012 17:31:30 GMT -5
I spent some time on the Fury display case. I strung some 3/16" uncoated - galvanized wire rope as shown. It has a 840 pound load limit. So with 4 cables, it can hold 3360 pounds. I'm quite sure that the b-pillars will bend before then. My main reason for using 3/16" cable instead of a 1/8" cable was that the hardware for 3/16" was much less expensive. It seems to be a more common size. My plan is to install (3) shelves. Each shelf will be 74" long x 27" deep x 1/8" thick. Each shelf will be supported by (2) aluminum angle 1" x 1" x 72" long x 1/8" thick. Each angle will be supported by a cable stop on each cable that passes through it. The angle will have (2) holes for the cables to pass through. Each shelf will have (4) holes for the cables to pass through. Here's a visual: I plan on each sheet being 74" x 27" x 1/8" thick, which will be 25 pounds per sheet, according to: www.onlinemetals.com/calculator.cfmI could go 3/16" thick, which will be 37 pounds per sheet. Either option is well under the load limit. Looking at the wire cable, 3/16" seems unnecessary from a structural standpoint. But what thickness do you think would be "best" for a Monaco Museum of Amazement main display case? I plan on this museum supporting me through retirement and can't afford to have anything less than impressive at the start of the tour. I'll attach a poll. It's been a while since we had a poll.
|
|