New Ashcroft Rover Differential? can anyone confirm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Rover diff will drop in to a P38 housing, but a P38 diff wont drop into a Rover housing, so based on that the Toy should be a comparable conversion to a P38 housing as it is to a Rover housing - although I'm not sure how the P38 housing CW cut out affects things.

---

I ask Dave that Slunnie as thats what I was going to do but he said it can't be done for some reason. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

I think Rick is talking about the physical size. The Rover type R+P is different design to the P38type, so you cant just switch R+P.

When I say drop in, I mean fit. The only diff center to bolt straight in is going to be the original P38 type. This is about what removable 3rd centers will physicaly fit in the housing.

The Toyota 8 or so inch hypoid has been mentioned. Now I know most will say they are a huge improvement over the Rover, but I have read a bit over the last few years and the mubblings arnt quite agreeing with that anymore. For my way of thinking, if you are going to the trouble of doing a custom job in the P38 type housing, make it as good as can be within reason.

So if a larger Toyota or Nissan center fits, then thats a start. What ever I would choose would have to be common and have a 3.54 or very close ratio....

Im guessing a diffferent 3rd would require either the studs being removed and weled up, or a spacer ring inbetween. The rear cover may have to be cut off and replaced if the ring gear is going to fowel....not such a bad thing as the cover is probably only 3mm thick....

---

Serg,IMHO the Toyota diff isn't a big enough improvement over the rover to justify the time or cost as all Tojo owners who get serious upgrade them so they aren't an upgrade,I've seen plenty of broken ones too but I don't bother saying anything about Toyota's anymore,I'm to biased apparently. Pat

Pat, most of the stuff I have read is from the USA, they are built Toy diffs and when comparing a built Toy in a rover housing to a built rover, they are falling a little short of the so called big improvement. Like you said, if your going to upgrade, why do 10% when you could possibly do more.

I have no horse in this race other than wanting to see bad things move in a better direction. I have a Sals with MD locker so it does me fine. I would prefer a fabbed housing with a removable 3rd.

If I had the time and a few $$$ I would source a p38 housing and some 3rds (say Nissan and Toy 60) and see whats what....but alas im busy and broke.

btw the Ruffstuff sixty9 housing for D60 has better ground clearance than a D60/Sals

I just want a stronger diff for towing/touring,I've got no need for a force 9 style diff and neither do 99% of people here. Pat

Pat, have you spoken to Ashcroft, is their locker/carrier better at supporting the ring gear compared to the stock carrier?

Mate I'd be happy with a 3.5 HD CW&P. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

Mate I'd be happy with a 3.5 HD CW&P. Pat

---

Exactly, the real only weak point in these IS the CW and P, the 4 pin carrier is more than adequate, and obvious axles are OK at 24 spline but easily upgradable.

JC

regarding the carrier, I wasnt so much thinking the 2 pin four pin argument, but wondering about carrier flex and how well the carrier supports the ring gear.

Even with a locker the weak points still there,as JC posted the carriers more than strong enough,look on ashcrofts site and compare the thickness of their CW to the original.Why they didn't just do it properly is beyond me. Pat

Trying to get my head around this Puma weak diff discussion.
What actually breaks and under what circumstances ?
Is it a front or rear diff issue or both ?
Is it an issue that should concern all Puma owners or is it just a pot luck kind of thing ?
If I buy a Puma should I not worry about it or live in fear of being stuck in the CSR with a stuffed Diff ?

I own a 20 year old D1 which came with 10 spline axles, I new what to do about that but this Puma thingy, I would be a new chum!!!

Ta.

Robert.