Bent High Pinion Dana 30 4.10 axle housing replacement?

[Dougster123]

What should I replace my 1987 MJ bent front High Pinion Dana 30 4.10 Axle housing with ? Another one? Or, is there a better choice that will be an upgrade while I'm at it? There is an '86 Cherokee replacement at a local yard, but I'm a newbie to the Jeep world and not sure I wouldn't be buying another bent housing.

 

A buddy of mine suggests looking for a Rubicon D44 to gain strength and limited slip while I'm at it - but neither of us know if that would be a bolt-on replacement, or require fab (which I don't want to do).

 

Any suggestions for this newbie will be greatly appreciated.

[Incommando]

IIRC the TJ Rubi is a bolt-in? The Rubi's had selectable locker, not limited slips, to boot.

[Geonovast]

The Rubi front 44 isn't a true 44, only the center section is. The tube, the shafts, and Cs/knuckles are all D30. It is an upgrade, but not against tube bending.

 

The D30 is pretty stout. You'll be fine with another one.

[mvusse]

How do people bend their D30s? Jumping?

 

I abuse mine offroad, bouncing the front end sometimes as high as 3 feet while climbing hills and the only damage I do are pinion bearings, stub shafts and unit bearings. Unit bearings are because of 35" tires, stub shafts because of those tires and a locker.

[87Warrior]

Front Rubi 44 is a bolt in unit. I have one ready to go in my truck. The only thing I am not 100% sure of is the front Ujoint, if it needs a 1330/1310 joint or not. Maybe I will resolve that question this weekend, I just haven't done the research yet.

[SW86]

The Rubi front 44 isn't a true 44, only the center section is. The tube, the shafts, and Cs/knuckles are all D30. It is an upgrade, but not against tube bending.

 

The D30 is pretty stout. You'll be fine with another one.

 

 

x2 just get another d30. you can build them to last awhile. plus I'm sure another 30 costs a little less than a "44". if you really have a bending problem, add gussets

 

edit.

oops, truss as well :doh:

[mnkyboy]

I would get a non CAD d30 from a later cherokee and truss it.

 

You could also get a sleeve kit that goes inside the tubes to beef them up.

[87Warrior]

From ROF:

Many people are complaining that the Rubicon did not come with a real Dana 44. It is a real Dana 44. The 'Dana 44' refers to the housing, differential case and axle. What many people are complaining about is they feel that the outer axles, steering u-joints and bearings are not Dana 44. Well they are, since 1996 Jeep upgraded the Dana 30 outers to the equivilent to Dana 44's. So at this point both the D30 and D44 front axles used by Jeep are the same design as far as the outer portions go. You do have a stronger differential with the D44. No the Dana 44 is not the same as what Ford may use or the same as what Jeep may have used on the old Wagoneers, but it is still a Dana 44.

 

That said the HP30 is probably the better choice because it is cheaper and high pinion. Though, if a good deal comes along on a TJ rubi 44 I would jump on it. 4.10s and an air locker would cost a lot to upgrade a 30 (assuming it does not have 4.10s).

[64 Cheyenne]

I would get a non CAD d30 from a later cherokee and truss it.

 

You could also get a sleeve kit that goes inside the tubes to beef them up.

 

Not sure but I think a CAD axle is stronger, why? Because of the heavy cast CAD housing which also makes for a

 

beefy r/side upper control arm mount.

 

Sure it would need a one piece shaft and a new inner seal, but if your reading this and contemplating axle swaps then I

 

don't think this is undoable.

 

I do have to say that I am contemplating a sleeve kit and boxing the upper mount on my next D30 build though.

[mnkyboy]

I have heard arguments going both ways.

 

The CAD would have a stronger factory arm mount but I think having the tube split with the CAD housing tacked in between would make the axle tube weaker then a uncut tube

 

I also think it would be easier to build a truss on the non CAD axle

[Garvin]

From what I've seen (and personal experience), the CAD axle is weaker. I've managed to bend a CAD axle around the cast on part but was never able to bend the non-CAD one.

 

Truss is a lot easier for the non-CAD design and a lot stronger. You can't weld to that cast part on the axle tube all that well and that limits the length and strength bonus on the passenger side tube, compared to the non-CAD where you can bring the truss all the way to the UCA.

[Dougster123]

I would get a non CAD d30 from a later cherokee and truss it.

 

You could also get a sleeve kit that goes inside the tubes to beef them up.

 

But later Cherokee's don't have 4.10 gearing available correct?

[mnkyboy]

I don't see why not,the 2.5l 5spd was available in the later years.

[Geonovast]

4.10s lasted as long as the 2.5 did in XJs, which I believe was up into the late 2000.

[btm24]

I would get a non CAD d30 from a later cherokee and truss it.

 

You could also get a sleeve kit that goes inside the tubes to beef them up.

 

But later Cherokee's don't have 4.10 gearing available correct?

 

I found one :yes: check out car-parts.com to check at some Local junk yards.

 

Brandon

[Dougster123]

I have heard arguments going both ways.

 

The CAD would have a stronger factory arm mount but I think having the tube split with the CAD housing tacked in between would make the axle tube weaker then a uncut tube

 

I also think it would be easier to build a truss on the non CAD axle

 

Wow! I see what you mean. Here it is (haven't bought it yet) - That UCA mount looks wimpy compared to mine, but lots of room for gusseting. And, If I'm going to have gusseting welded on I might as well have a beefy after-market UCA mount put on too.