Go Back   The Supercar Registry > General Discussion > Technical & Restoration


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-06-2013, 08:03 AM
Lynn Lynn is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,833
Thanks: 93
Thanked 3,616 Times in 1,526 Posts
Default U joints recommendations

69 Camaro.

Don't car about originality on these. Mostly don't want breakage.

Will be driven hard.

Won't side step the clutch, but will dump it from time to time with drag radials.

U joint recommendations?

Moog non-greasable 269?

Thanks for any help.
__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the internet ... Ben Franklin
Reply With Quote
Click here to view all the pictures posted in this thread...
  #2  
Old 03-06-2013, 10:20 AM
speed speed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Lewisburg PA
Posts: 200
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

Non greasable would be the strongest. I had no problems using NAPA's u-joint with my 470 bb. And i don't baby it [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/haha.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:15 PM
BlueSS454's Avatar
BlueSS454 BlueSS454 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Franklinville, New Jersey
Posts: 319
Thanks: 2
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
Send a message via AIM to BlueSS454
Default Re: U joints recommendations

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: speed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Non greasable would be the strongest. I had no problems using NAPA's u-joint with my 470 bb. And i don't baby it [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/haha.gif[/img] </div></div>

x2. I have been running the NAPA Precision Super Strength U joints for years in my cars, and mine don't get babied either on the track or on the street. I have never had a failure.
__________________
Tom Rightler
Vice President, Maryland Chevelle Club
MCC Newsletter Editor

1970 SS 454
1970 SS 454 Convertible
1969 Malibu
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-06-2013, 12:29 PM
Igosplut's Avatar
Igosplut Igosplut is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 554
Thanks: 95
Thanked 221 Times in 109 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

I use these <span style="font-weight: bold">Lakewood</span> U joints on my BB Nova. Haven't broke them yet with Quick-times and a 4 speed, and I'm not easy at <span style="font-weight: bold">all</span> with it....
__________________
WOT
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-06-2013, 04:35 PM
Kurt S Kurt S is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 3,105
Thanks: 2
Thanked 811 Times in 374 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

This is not a weak link. I agree with non-greasable to be stronger.
__________________
Kurt S - CRG
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-06-2013, 08:10 PM
Lynn Lynn is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,833
Thanks: 93
Thanked 3,616 Times in 1,526 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kurt S</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is not a weak link. I agree with non-greasable to be stronger. </div></div>

Good point.

So... what is your opinion regarding what is likely to break first.

For sake of discussion:

Modified small block about 425 to 450 horse, about 400 torque
factory z clutch set up (flywheel pp and disc all factory type)
unmodified m21 trans
factory drive shaft
factory eaton 4 series posi carrier
richmond 4.10 gears
drag radials
__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the internet ... Ben Franklin
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:01 PM
Igosplut's Avatar
Igosplut Igosplut is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 554
Thanks: 95
Thanked 221 Times in 109 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

The trans definitely if it doesn't have a 12 bolt. Even a steel bearing center plate would make a difference.....
__________________
WOT
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-07-2013, 02:44 PM
Kurt S Kurt S is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 3,105
Thanks: 2
Thanked 811 Times in 374 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Igosplut</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The trans definitely </div></div>
Agreed. There's a reason all these Muncies are MIA. The aluminum case allows the gear to spread, moving the tooth contact area into areas that cannot handle the load.
It will probably handle non-race usage, but it's being pushed.
__________________
Kurt S - CRG
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:06 PM
markjohnson's Avatar
markjohnson markjohnson is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: STL, MO.
Posts: 2,486
Thanks: 260
Thanked 591 Times in 235 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

Those 12-bolt spider gears don't like sticky tires either.
__________________
1962 Biscayne O-21669 MKIV/M-22
1962 Bel Air Sport Coupe 409/1,000
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-06-2013, 10:24 PM
69VN's Avatar
69VN 69VN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phila., Pa.
Posts: 1,262
Thanks: 0
Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
Default Re: U joints recommendations

Where would throwing a rod fall under??? [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/[/img] [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/laugh.gif[/img]
__________________
I currently own a 1969 Camaro SS350. Although the original drivetrain is long gone, this 4/speed car has a March '69 HC coded block with #041 heads. The transmission is an M20 Muncie #660 case and the rearend is a BS coded 12 bolt posi. Built in Van Nuys.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

O Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.