Thread: D2 front drive shaft problem?

Hi all I am planning on rebuilding the double cardan joint with new unis but retain the existing centre swivel bearings it shows only very minor wear on the centre pin (part of the shaft). Reckon it will be good for another 100k kms. My question is how many needle rollers should there be in this bearing, I have managed to find 21.
In other matters just wanted to put in my two cents in regards to the a/c condensate drain location - land rovers engineers saw it as a risk and was subsequently moved in the update d2, that would be a good enough reason for me to make the mod if mine was pre update.

Here's another question for this monster post:
Tom Woods prop-shafts seem to use the 1310 UJs, as an upgrade to the standard D2 shaft components.
The 'standard' D2 uses 1300 series, which are 'smaller'.
Makes sense right?
The thing is, the Hardy Spicer Catalogue suggests that the bearings (well the O/D of the 'cups' at least) are exactly the same size on the 2 types of UJ.
Have a look in here:
"http://www.hardyspicer.com.au/PDF_Files/Driveline/B2_Catalogue_2013-8lr.pdf"
On pages #19 and #23, the relevant size says 26.99mm or 1.06".
Now, the width of the UJ is greater in the 1310 series but, since a Double Cardan Joint is inherently out of balance when the driveline is not perfectly straight, I'm guessing that the 'smaller' UJs (with, apparently, the same size bearings) would be the better bet for this application.
I'm not hearing that shafts fail because the components - excluding the bearings - crack or break, rather that the bearing give up the ghost and then everything else comes unstuck.
The catalogue says that, in each case (1300 and 1310), there is a 'heavy duty' and greasable option.
Can anyone suggest why Tom Woods (or others overseas or here) would reccomend a 'bigger' series of joints and shafts, if the bearings are indeed the same size as the 1300s, other than the greater capacity for articulation?
If I'm guessing right, then increased articulation and greasability are the only reasons that people are having such success with the 1310s and, if the 1300 can manage the articulation required, they will be good enough (if refreshed and kept full of grease), or possibly better, when considering the vibration potential of the heavier units.
I'm happy to be proven wrong, since a lovely set of Tom Woods heavy-duty 1310 shafts appeals to both my instincts and my ego.

I have just rebuilt my standard size double cardon with the "heavy" duty spicer uni at about $60 each as a posed to the $23 each standard spicer unit. Don't have the part number but believe it is supplied in this thread already. It's very smooth without getting it balanced and I am confident that it will stand up to my 2 inch lift. Haven't fitted the lift but all good so far. They are bigger in the gut then the standard one and are apparently used in earth moving gear. But with the same size bearings and caps not sure they are worth 3 times the cost of the $23 jobs I used on the last one. I think the seals on the caps looked a bit higher quality.

Originally Posted by mattg

I have just rebuilt my standard size double cardon with the "heavy" duty spicer uni at about $60 each as a posed to the $23 each standard spicer unit. Don't have the part number but believe it is supplied in this thread already. It's very smooth without getting it balanced and I am confident that it will stand up to my 2 inch lift. Haven't fitted the lift but all good so far. They are bigger in the gut then the standard one and are apparently used in earth moving gear. But with the same size bearings and caps not sure they are worth 3 times the cost of the $23 jobs I used on the last one. I think the seals on the caps looked a bit higher quality.

What did you do about the small support bearing between the two uni's?

Originally Posted by Fast Freddie

Here's another question for this monster post:
Tom Woods prop-shafts seem to use the 1310 UJs, as an upgrade to the standard D2 shaft components.
The 'standard' D2 uses 1300 series, which are 'smaller'.
Makes sense right?
The thing is, the Hardy Spicer Catalogue suggests that the bearings (well the O/D of the 'cups' at least) are exactly the same size on the 2 types of UJ.
Have a look in here:
"http://www.hardyspicer.com.au/PDF_Files/Driveline/B2_Catalogue_2013-8lr.pdf"
On pages #19 and #23, the relevant size says 26.99mm or 1.06".
Now, the width of the UJ is greater in the 1310 series but, since a Double Cardan Joint is inherently out of balance when the driveline is not perfectly straight, I'm guessing that the 'smaller' UJs (with, apparently, the same size bearings) would be the better bet for this application.
I'm not hearing that shafts fail because the components - excluding the bearings - crack or break, rather that the bearing give up the ghost and then everything else comes unstuck.
The catalogue says that, in each case (1300 and 1310), there is a 'heavy duty' and greasable option.
Can anyone suggest why Tom Woods (or others overseas or here) would reccomend a 'bigger' series of joints and shafts, if the bearings are indeed the same size as the 1300s, other than the greater capacity for articulation?
If I'm guessing right, then increased articulation and greasability are the only reasons that people are having such success with the 1310s and, if the 1300 can manage the articulation required, they will be good enough (if refreshed and kept full of grease), or possibly better, when considering the vibration potential of the heavier units.
I'm happy to be proven wrong, since a lovely set of Tom Woods heavy-duty 1310 shafts appeals to both my instincts and my ego.

You're right on the money about the mechanics of it Freddie. The further apart the bearings in the uni joints are, the lower the force that is applied through it due to the additional leverage and if the forced in the bearings are lower then life will improve. Although the measurements are not significantly different as a raw measurement, when you work it out as a percentage change it becomes a bit more notable. With D2 front shafts, the angle that can be achieved typically isn't a limiting factor, and if it is Tom can modify the 1310 to regain angle.

Bit of history on Tom shafts, Ive dealt with Tom for prob 10 years now, his first 1310s had greasable unis, but not the centre bearing. He ran that setup because the available greasable centre bearings were not as strong as the non-greasable setup. This is where my ones were failing, in the centre bearing and never the Uni's, even if driven with a failed centre bearing. He later had cast from steel (not cast iron) his own but with greasable centres which he is happy are as strong as the old non-greasaable centre bearing ones. I understood this to be a TW part, not a spicer part. I Ve been running these one now for a few years in the front and back with absolutely no problems.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I Ve been running these one now for a few years in the front and back with absolutely no problems.

With the lift you have this makes a very strong case for TW shafts being good stuff.

Makes me happy as I have a TW and after fitting this I was sleeping better at night, knowing what the consequences can be with a failed shaft.

Originally Posted by d2dave

What did you do about the small support bearing between the two uni's?

New spicer unit. Cost about $80 but mine probably could have stayed there and not bothered. I go the old one out with a slide hammer and got the new bearing pressed in at the engineering joint. I recon a 20 ton press would do the job.

Originally Posted by d2dave

With the lift you have this makes a very strong case for TW shafts being good stuff.

Makes me happy as I have a TW and after fitting this I was sleeping better at night, knowing what the consequences can be with a failed shaft.

Absolutely Dave, they're very resilient. I'm not aware of any TW ones that have come apart either, but that's not at all to say that it can't be done. Life has gone out from 11.5-12 months and are still going, they are that much better. The 1310 centre bearing is also larger than the 1300 and the same used out to 1350 shafts.