|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: Crizila]
#315110
05/12/09 09:06 AM
05/12/09 09:06 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,123
Grand Haven, MI
patrick
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,123
Grand Haven, MI
|
they suck. I put an auburn in my '96 ram with a 5 speed and 3.21 gears. it was totally dead in about 4 years. I picked up an 8 3/4 and put in my M body 22k miles ago, with a good used OEM cone style...it's dead, too, and I think something broke and is eating up the bearings.
next time I'm either finding a used OEM clutch style (no aftermarket Indian junk for me) or go straight to a detroit true-trac torsen style.
1976 Spinnaker White Plymouth Duster, /6 A833OD
1986 Silver/Twilight Blue Chrysler 5th Ave HotRod **SOLD!***
2011 Toxic Orange Dodge Charger R/T
2017 Grand Cherokee Overland
2014 Jeep Cherokee Latitude (holy crap, my daughter is driving)
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: polkat]
#315111
05/12/09 09:15 AM
05/12/09 09:15 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
|
Cone types SUCK!!! The reason one has to machine cones and add shims is because the units are GRINDING itself into little pieces. Next time you take one apart look at the bearings AND the gears with a magnifying glass and you'll see tiny pits were the metal particles passed between the cones and the rollers and gear teeth. To answer the question: Are they that bad? ... YES 
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: CJK440]
#315112
05/12/09 09:21 AM
05/12/09 09:21 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
i have had bad experience with those ones. I have never torn up the clutch type but have torn out 3 or the cone type.
1.was in a stock 318 barracuda. the pin in the middle came out and tore up the ring and pinion gears.
2.was in a 360 dart same thing happened
3. was in another 318 car.
they were all 4 speeds and so that was hard on them but only the 360 car had very much power, high 12's in quarter. i will never run another one of those units. trashed 3 sets of gears with them. i have never broken the clutch type and i have one behind my 440 dart.
The cone sure-grips only have 2 spider gears and they gall onto the center pin forcing it to break the locating pin and making the cross shaft spin in the case wallowing out the case holes. I'd say this is more of an issue than the "self destructing" complaint.
Chris the self destructing parts is what causes the the spiders to seize on the shaft , once the cones bottom out it turns into a one wheel wonder and the owner doesn't realize , it may still leave 2 black marks , but eventually the spiders seize on the shaft and the dowel breaks .
I opened up an open rear differential when doing a rebuild and it had one of the spiders galled up and was ready to seize on the shaft I had to use a hydraulic press to get it out.
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: hemiallen]
#315113
05/12/09 09:24 AM
05/12/09 09:24 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Or you could buy as good clutch 741 pig in the classified, Northern Cal, shipping may not be that bad.
741'S are stonger than your 12 second car needs.....
It's a 3.91 set, looks new and runs like new.
Allen
67 Satty , this is the unit I would buy if I were you .
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: burdar]
#315115
05/12/09 12:18 PM
05/12/09 12:18 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,976
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
There was an article on how to rebuild one in an issue of High Performance Mopar I think. The interesting thing was that they installed smaller springs inside the origonals to get more apply pressure. I think they used springs from the inside of a 727 trans. I would think that with more pressure, it would slip less and last longer.
I saw that , I couldn't see it helping that much as the only spring in a 727 that would fit is from the front clutch and 4 of them won't add up to much .
Rebuilding is a bandaid for the real ending , REPLACEMENT ...
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: mopars4ever]
#315117
05/12/09 04:05 PM
05/12/09 04:05 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 498
El Dorado Ca
65signet
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 498
El Dorado Ca
|
If you are using street tires that don't bite that hard they work O.K. if you use a street/ strip tire and do burn outs and the track, they will not last long, the last one in a small blk car that ran 12s lasted a year and that's with 7 inch tires.
1965 Plymouth Barracuda 273 M/SA
1970 Plymouth Duster 360/904 10.60s with J heads
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: 67Satty]
#315119
05/12/09 09:28 PM
05/12/09 09:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,285
Ohio
64dodge572
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,285
Ohio
|
Quote:
I know you can't rebuild them in the conventional sense. But how does their strength and actual traction capability compare to a clutch-type suregrip?
There is a 489 case, 3.91, cone-type suregrip available locally for $300. If I gamble and it works, it could save me $700 or so over getting a rehabbed center section.
In my opinion the gear-case-yoke is worth close to the asking price. The sure grip is a bonus. Sure its not the better of the 2 but it may hold up along time. I did break the cross pin in one about 7 years ago. 3.55 gear, 28" slicks, 3600# car and 12.50's 1/4 Probably had a couple hundred runs on it b4 it broke 
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: 64dodge572]
#315120
05/12/09 10:58 PM
05/12/09 10:58 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,573
md
mopars4ever
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,573
md
|
Quote:
Neither. Its the sides of the cones that wear. And yes, I have the stainless steel shim kits for rebuilding the 8.75. Is it a replacement for a clutch type? No.... but it is a viable fix for those on a budget.
I have a nos cone sure grip for 2.45 ratio. So I should be able to swap out the cones from it into my 2.76 up case and be good to go. Correct?
|
|
|
Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?
[Re: 67Satty]
#315121
05/13/09 09:15 AM
05/13/09 09:15 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,263
Southwestern Ontario Canada
racealittle
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,263
Southwestern Ontario Canada
|
I prefer to use the cone type sure grip in my street cars. I have found that they seem to work much better in wet or snow conditions.
I drive to the track (for over 30 years) and have had 5 different gear and sure grip combinations. The car has been driven in the worst snow conditions with a 4.10 gear and the cone type has worked best for me.
I've seen both units fail for others, I guess I have been lucky. My street 440 makes a broad 500 plus foot pounds of street torque. I have been quite abusive with all of them.
Too many cars, too many parts, too little coin, too little space to work in, too little time left to make it all happen!
Update: down to one ride, still too many parts, a little more jingle in the pocket, gaining space, and it's going to happen this year!
|
|
|
|
|
