Moparts

Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad?

Posted By: 67Satty

Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 09:42 PM

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.

This will be for a 12 second street/strip car. Thanks!
Posted By: MNobody

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 09:49 PM

Mine leaves identical track's right to left.
Posted By: 69Cuda340S

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 10:03 PM

If you buy it take the sure grip apart and machine and shim the cones if need be.
Posted By: HemiStan

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 10:08 PM

I like to burn rubber. Alot. As in 100 ft or more through several gears. Out of all of the Sure-Grips I have had, only one was a cone style and it seemed to "fishtail". Maybe it was worn out. I swapped it for a clutch style with the same ratio and now it burns rubber straight as an arrow. That's all I know.

Stan
Posted By: Crizila

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 10:13 PM

I run one in my 9 1/4. No problems so far. Third season with it.
Posted By: NachoRT74

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:02 PM

Maybe not that bad, but after all these years of use or abuse, they could it be some damaged, so not a guarantee of good working conditions.

Being the clutch kind are easier and cheaper rebuildable, kist are everywhere, and able to make it at home, thats an advantage. Cone kind will need to me machined as stated, not too cheap to make that.
Posted By: MNobody

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:14 PM

Quote:

Maybe not that bad, but after all these years of use or abuse, they could it be some damaged, so not a guarantee of good working conditions.

Being the clutch kind are easier and cheaper rebuildable, kist are everywhere, and able to make it at home, thats an advantage. Cone kind will need to me machined as stated, not too cheap to make that.




Not sure what it cost to rebuild the clutch style but gringing off a couple gears and adding washers can't be that expensive.
Posted By: polkat

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:14 PM

I had my cones machined for about $40. Also involves putting a shim washer between the cone and gear that's the same thickness as the amount machined. Worked great for about 50K miles. You can do this maybe twice, before they are totally dead. There are two websites about doing this out there, which you can probably find through Google.
Posted By: IronWolf

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:16 PM

Quote:

I like to burn rubber. Alot. As in 100 ft or more through several gears. Out of all of the Sure-Grips I have had, only one was a cone style and it seemed to "fishtail". Maybe it was worn out. I swapped it for a clutch style with the same ratio and now it burns rubber straight as an arrow. That's all I know.

Stan



Yes, on the street where there is good traction, (versus the test n' tune track, where they really don't give a flying flip whether you get good traction, and the kidz dump their A/C fluids) , my "sure grip " fishtails , too. Good luck finding a clutch unit, though. Limited availibility, no ?
Posted By: Crizila

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:36 PM

Quote:

Maybe not that bad, but after all these years of use or abuse, they could it be some damaged, so not a guarantee of good working conditions.

Being the clutch kind are easier and cheaper rebuildable, kist are everywhere, and able to make it at home, thats an advantage. Cone kind will need to me machined as stated, not too cheap to make that.

Actually, I would have gone to a clutch type ( for the rebuildability thing ), but they are not available for the 9 1/4 diff. Per Auburn gear, the check to see if your cone unit is still serviceable is easy ( applies to a 9 1/4 - don't know about others): Jack one tire off the ground. Put a torque wrench on a lug nut on that wheel ( radially out from the wheel center ). Break-away torque for a new unit should be 70 lbs or better. They claim the unit is serviceable down to 20 lbs. Below that, replace. They also suggest 80-90 gear oil only. No synthetic. An additive os ok if you have bad chatter on turns.
Posted By: dOrk !

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:37 PM

I have had VERY good luck with them.

The 741 2.76 SG I have in my 62 Belvedere right now came out of a 74 Monaco with 170k miles on it. It has been in there since the middle '90's, has run as quick as 12.30 and as fast as 5200 in high gear !

It is as tight as a drum !! ..
Posted By: dirt

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/11/09 11:49 PM

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.
Posted By: Crizila

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 12:14 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWVwpqzWstY
Posted By: 500ciDuster

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 12:20 AM

They have their place but the bad part is when they do slip it's metal on metal which ends up in the oil running through the bearings,seals, ring and pinion
Posted By: Crizila

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:14 AM

Quote:

They have their place but the bad part is when they do slip it's metal on metal which ends up in the oil running through the bearings,seals, ring and pinion

Actually it's metal to metal every time you turn a corner. I've run the same center section with three different sets of gears over the last 2 years. Haven't noticed any gear / bearing wear or metal in the oil. Now that I've said that, it will probably self destruck the next time I go out!
Posted By: scratchnfotraction

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:23 AM

they ar ok..just not good on longevity

as the cone wears it eats into the case and puts metal shving in the oil

most I have seen used have not had very good service on the oil change and the bearing are pitted up

but when in good working order they are just as good as a clutch one IMO

just wont last as long with out preventive maintanace and oil changes

look it over good so it not 700$ after the 300+ $ used

I have had one redone,its tight as a .....
well it chatters the tire on turns so its a grabin good lets say

runwhatyabrung

Posted By: 70Cuda383

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 02:15 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Maybe not that bad, but after all these years of use or abuse, they could it be some damaged, so not a guarantee of good working conditions.

Being the clutch kind are easier and cheaper rebuildable, kist are everywhere, and able to make it at home, thats an advantage. Cone kind will need to me machined as stated, not too cheap to make that.

Actually, I would have gone to a clutch type ( for the rebuildability thing ), but they are not available for the 9 1/4 diff. Per Auburn gear, the check to see if your cone unit is still serviceable is easy ( applies to a 9 1/4 - don't know about others): Jack one tire off the ground. Put a torque wrench on a lug nut on that wheel ( radially out from the wheel center ). Break-away torque for a new unit should be 70 lbs or better. They claim the unit is serviceable down to 20 lbs. Below that, replace. They also suggest 80-90 gear oil only. No synthetic. An additive os ok if you have bad chatter on turns.




Clutch types are available forthe 9.25 all the suregrip truck axles are a clutch type LSD. I know because I took one apart, and sold the empty diff with side gears to a kid who was going to rebuild it and put it in his Dakota--I pulled it out because it needed rebuilt and i wanted to go with a detroit true trac

now, if you're talking about an old 9.25 from a car, I don't know if they make one for that specific application (did the spline count change on them?) if so, you could buy one meant for a truck axle, and just get new axles for your older diff
Posted By: hemiallen

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 02:23 AM

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
Posted By: Crizila

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 12:20 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Maybe not that bad, but after all these years of use or abuse, they could it be some damaged, so not a guarantee of good working conditions.

Being the clutch kind are easier and cheaper rebuildable, kist are everywhere, and able to make it at home, thats an advantage. Cone kind will need to me machined as stated, not too cheap to make that.

Actually, I would have gone to a clutch type ( for the rebuildability thing ), but they are not available for the 9 1/4 diff. Per Auburn gear, the check to see if your cone unit is still serviceable is easy ( applies to a 9 1/4 - don't know about others): Jack one tire off the ground. Put a torque wrench on a lug nut on that wheel ( radially out from the wheel center ). Break-away torque for a new unit should be 70 lbs or better. They claim the unit is serviceable down to 20 lbs. Below that, replace. They also suggest 80-90 gear oil only. No synthetic. An additive os ok if you have bad chatter on turns.




Clutch types are available forthe 9.25 all the suregrip truck axles are a clutch type LSD. I know because I took one apart, and sold the empty diff with side gears to a kid who was going to rebuild it and put it in his Dakota--I pulled it out because it needed rebuilt and i wanted to go with a detroit true trac

now, if you're talking about an old 9.25 from a car, I don't know if they make one for that specific application (did the spline count change on them?) if so, you could buy one meant for a truck axle, and just get new axles for your older diff

Good info - thanks. I didn't know that. The 9 1/4 I have came with the car ( 79 300 - Cordoba ). It was originally open and I added the Auburn center section - cone clutch. I'm not having any problems with it so far. I'll probably stick with it for now.
Posted By: CJK440

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 12:53 PM

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.
Posted By: patrick

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:06 PM

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.
Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:15 PM

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

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:21 PM

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.
Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 01:24 PM

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 .
Posted By: burdar

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 02:58 PM

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.
Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 04:18 PM

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 ...
Posted By: mopars4ever

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 07:28 PM

What actually wears the case or the gears?
Posted By: 65signet

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/12/09 08:05 PM

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.
Posted By: TrWaters

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/13/09 12:37 AM

Quote:

What actually wears the case or the gears?



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.
Posted By: 64dodge572

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/13/09 01:28 AM

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
Posted By: mopars4ever

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/13/09 02:58 AM

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?
Posted By: racealittle

Re: Are Cone-type Suregrips That Bad? - 05/13/09 01:15 PM

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.
© 2024 Moparts Forums