Moparts

Pinion angle again

Posted By: RV2

Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:16 PM

Yes I know this topic has been run into the ground but I'm a dummy and I want to get this right the first time.
I have 4 degree down on the tail
I have 7 degree down on the pinion
This is a cal trac setup in an a body anywhere from 3100 to 3300 pounds.
Those reading put me at 3 degrees
Is this ok for a strip car?
Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:23 PM

I wuld run that up twocents That being said I think the location of the bolt up front matters more on Mopars than the other brands, most of the racer discussions I've seen on here on Cal Tracs say to use the lower hole and work on the preload and air gap to get thme to work shruggy I've never used them so keep that in mind up Is this a stick shift or automatic car?
Posted By: RV2

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:26 PM

I forgot to add that the springs perches are not welded yet and I currently have the pinion at 7
Should I weld them in there?
Car is flat on the ground
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:30 PM

Originally Posted By RV2
Yes I know this topic has been run into the ground but I'm a dummy and I want to get this right the first time.
I have 4 degree down on the tail
I have 7 degree down on the pinion
This is a cal trac setup in an a body anywhere from 3100 to 3300 pounds.
Those reading put me at 3 degrees
Is this ok for a strip car?
better re-calculate that. 4 up on the pinion would put you at 0*, then you would have to roll down to what ever you wanted it set from there. 7 down puts you at 11* down
Posted By: RV2

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:35 PM

So bring the pinion up to 4?
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:44 PM

o* on the pinion would be 4 down.
Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:46 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By RV2
Yes I know this topic has been run into the ground but I'm a dummy and I want to get this right the first time.
I have 4 degree down on the tail
I have 7 degree down on the pinion
This is a cal trac setup in an a body anywhere from 3100 to 3300 pounds.
Those reading put me at 3 degrees
Is this ok for a strip car?
better re-calculate that. 4 up on the pinion would put you at 0*, then you would have to roll down to what ever you wanted it set from there. 7 down puts you at 11* down

I was under the impression that you were the undisputed king of pinion angle setting. I seem to remember a video proving it. devil

Based on the measurements provided, the OP's pinion angle is currently 3º down relative to the tailshaft centerline. With leaf springs, I'd shoot closer to 5º, but I don't know how Caltracs affect that.

EDIT: After drawing it out, I agree with the pinion angle champ. The OP is currently 11º down.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/03/15 11:58 PM

glad i could help RV, as you can se now the other clowns will come out of the woodwork laugh2
Posted By: crackedback

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 02:31 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By RV2
Yes I know this topic has been run into the ground but I'm a dummy and I want to get this right the first time.
I have 4 degree down on the tail
I have 7 degree down on the pinion
This is a cal trac setup in an a body anywhere from 3100 to 3300 pounds.
Those reading put me at 3 degrees
Is this ok for a strip car?
better re-calculate that. 4 up on the pinion would put you at 0*, then you would have to roll down to what ever you wanted it set from there. 7 down puts you at 11* down


I can't believe I agree! LOL

With Cal Trac and the tail being down 4, you want the pinion at 1up to 0. That will give you a -3 to -4 setting. If Calvert says -2 to -3 then you want the pinion up 1 to 2.
Posted By: DaveRS23

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 04:26 PM

www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ-m9ov3wYM

Does this video help (or does it make things worse)? It uses the relationship between the tranny and the drive shaft and the drive shaft and the pinion rather than the relation between the tranny and the pinion.

I guess in an attempt to simplify the subject, the relationship between the tranny and the pinion is often used, and the drive shaft is then omitted from the calculations. Seeing both methods used has caused a good bit of confusion.

And then more confusion comes from the terms we use. On the tranny, we are using the output end to describe it as down. But then on the differential end, the input end to often used to describe the pinion as down.

What is really happening in the OP's example, is that the tranny line is descending from front to rear on the car and the differential line is ascending from front to rear on the car. So, while the pinion points down, the differential line is pointing up.

All that causes some people to measure the angle between the shaft and a yoke and while others measure the angle between the tranny and the pinion. And then some people use the direction the pinion is pointing while other people use the direction the line of the differential is pointing.

I am not trying to argue which way is right. I am just trying to describe what is I think is happening to cause all the confusion on this subject.

Does Calvert use the tranny to pinion measurement or drive shaft to pinion measurement?
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 05:11 PM

Let me get the haters and engineers stirred up off right here.........LOL!!!. This is a race car right? FORGET what the damn trans angle is. Measure the pinion to shaft angle and set it where you want it an go race the car. With the car "under power", you want the drive line angle to be as straight as possible. So do what you have to do to make that happen. And by straight, I don't mean equal angles or any of that other stuff. I mean STRAIGHT and as close to that as you can.

Whats going to happen.......is that after 20 pages of arguing, showing some drawings, the "god" illustration from Rossler, there is still going to be two sides to who is right........LOL!!!........But I won't be one of them. My one and only post right here and the way I have been setting up leaf cars for better than 30 years. In the end, do it how YOU want to

Monte
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 05:13 PM

it obviously works both ways, one has to choose which way they want it. I think it has been proven that set off the drive shaft it has created vibration issues and caused failures. I have no know knowledge of setting off the tail shaft ever causing problems
Posted By: B G Racing

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 07:33 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Let me get the haters and engineers stirred up off right here.........LOL!!!. This is a race car right? FORGET what the damn trans angle is. Measure the pinion to shaft angle and set it where you want it an go race the car. With the car "under power", you want the drive line angle to be as straight as possible. So do what you have to do to make that happen. And by straight, I don't mean equal angles or any of that other stuff. I mean STRAIGHT and as close to that as you can.

Whats going to happen.......is that after 20 pages of arguing, showing some drawings, the "god" illustration from Rossler, there is still going to be two sides to who is right........LOL!!!........But I won't be one of them. My one and only post right here and the way I have been setting up leaf cars for better than 30 years. In the end, do it how YOU want to

Monte


Nothing else needs to be said,doing it the same way for over 50 years.My 65 hemi has the same shaft and ujoints that were put in it 20 years ago. up
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 07:36 PM

One last thing.........."static" setting means NOTHING. The car is NOT static, going down the track under power. So, if you go to all the trouble to get "equal angles" when the car is "static" all that goes out the window as soon as you drop the hammer and it separates the rear. Now if static, the pinion already has a "nose up" attitude in relation to shaft, in an attempt to equalize angles, as the rear separates and pinion rolls up this angle gets worse. I fail to see how this could EVER be better.

And how has it been "proven" that setting off the shaft, creates vibration and failures. WHO proved that. I have been doing it my way on race cars for 30+ years and I have never had an issue. So are you saying that nobody who has ever set it the other way has EVER had an issue. Parts break in race cars and that's a fact. If the shaft is out of balance, I don't care how you set it, you will have a problem.

Bottom line, set it how you want, as there is obviously controversy in what is "right" for a race car, really makes no matter to me either car. The only thing PROVEN, is that people don't agree and in the end likely doesn't matter in a race environment, as long as the joint is not at a compromising angle.

Lets see what another "chassis builder" thinks
http://www.wolferacecraft.com/pinionangle.aspx
Posted By: 540DUSTER

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 09:14 PM

I'am going with the full MONTE,bY GEORGE him too!!!!!
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 10:27 PM

Originally Posted By DusterDave
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By RV2
Yes I know this topic has been run into the ground but I'm a dummy and I want to get this right the first time.
I have 4 degree down on the tail
I have 7 degree down on the pinion
This is a cal trac setup in an a body anywhere from 3100 to 3300 pounds.
Those reading put me at 3 degrees
Is this ok for a strip car?
better re-calculate that. 4 up on the pinion would put you at 0*, then you would have to roll down to what ever you wanted it set from there. 7 down puts you at 11* down

I was under the impression that you were the undisputed king of pinion angle setting. I seem to remember a video proving it. devil

Based on the measurements provided, the OP's pinion angle is currently 3º down relative to the tailshaft centerline. With leaf springs, I'd shoot closer to 5º, but I don't know how Caltracs affect that.




EDIT: After drawing it out, I agree with the pinion angle champ. The OP is currently 11º down.




Dave, I was going to correct you but you corrected yourself. Yes, the OP is 11* down, To extreme to just Go with.

Id probably spacer up the tail shaft abit and raise up the pinion to get around 4* down max.


To the OP, You are at a True 11* down. Measure your Pinion to Driveshaft to see what number you get there. Lets see in Your case how close to the True pinion angle you can get by measuring between those two. Lets see how That number compares to the True pinion angle.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 11:39 PM

Originally Posted By B G Racing
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Let me get the haters and engineers stirred up off right here.........LOL!!!. This is a race car right? FORGET what the damn trans angle is. Measure the pinion to shaft angle and set it where you want it an go race the car. With the car "under power", you want the drive line angle to be as straight as possible. So do what you have to do to make that happen. And by straight, I don't mean equal angles or any of that other stuff. I mean STRAIGHT and as close to that as you can.

Whats going to happen.......is that after 20 pages of arguing, showing some drawings, the "god" illustration from Rossler, there is still going to be two sides to who is right........LOL!!!........But I won't be one of them. My one and only post right here and the way I have been setting up leaf cars for better than 30 years. In the end, do it how YOU want to

Monte


Nothing else needs to be said,doing it the same way for over 50 years.My 65 hemi has the same shaft and ujoints that were put in it 20 years ago. up
I can top that, my car hasn't used a drop of fuel since july of last year. Just pickin at you Bob laugh2
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 11:47 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
One last thing.........."static" setting means NOTHING. The car is NOT static, going down the track under power. So, if you go to all the trouble to get "equal angles" when the car is "static" all that goes out the window as soon as you drop the hammer and it separates the rear. Now if static, the pinion already has a "nose up" attitude in relation to shaft, in an attempt to equalize angles, as the rear separates and pinion rolls up this angle gets worse. I fail to see how this could EVER be better.

And how has it been "proven" that setting off the shaft, creates vibration and failures. WHO proved that. I have been doing it my way on race cars for 30+ years and I have never had an issue. So are you saying that nobody who has ever set it the other way has EVER had an issue. Parts break in race cars and that's a fact. If the shaft is out of balance, I don't care how you set it, you will have a problem.

Bottom line, set it how you want, as there is obviously controversy in what is "right" for a race car, really makes no matter to me either car. The only thing PROVEN, is that people don't agree and in the end likely doesn't matter in a race environment, as long as the joint is not at a compromising angle.

Lets see what another "chassis builder" thinks
http://www.wolferacecraft.com/pinionangle.aspx
it wouldn't do any good to post links of known problems caused by vibration, been there done that. you just poopoo them laugh2
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/04/15 11:48 PM

For you guys that use the drive shaft... a very simple way
to check is using the U-joint at the rear.... put a spacer
on the cup(this is to get you out far enough to get it flat..
take a reading on the spacer making sure its at the bottom..
turn the shaft 90* and do the same... the difference is your angle
and adjust if needed... remember the U-joint is attached to both
the shaft and the diff
wave
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 03:26 AM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
One last thing.........."static" setting means NOTHING. The car is NOT static, going down the track under power.

Sport. True its very dynamic. You try to set a pinion angle that's going to work in the best sweet spot.



Monte;
So, if you go to all the trouble to get "equal angles" when the car is "static" all that goes out the window as soon as you drop the hammer and it separates the rear.


Sport;
Ok, your scaring me here. Who does that? Do you really even understand the concepts of pinion angle/ujoints.?

Neither Camp/sides sets for "equal angles" when the car is "static"

The Idea of Both camps and sides is to get it closer to 'equal angles" under power in a dynamic environment.

Monte;
Lets see what another "chassis builder" thinks
http://www.wolferacecraft.com/pinionangle.aspx



Shame on Wolfy for putting bad info out there on pinion angle. Just another Misinformed individual helping the confusion.

If he stated Pinion angle with a 0 degree tranny/driveshaft driveline his info would be correct, but he doesn't state that.

I think Wolfy should be hung up by his toe nails and slapped around abit for that poor incorrect info.

Also, Not a hater or a engineer, just the Facts. No matter Who I am, these Ujoints like to work in a ideal parameter. Both Camps do try to achieve that. Ones just more Accurate.


Edit, I mean all this in a Friendly way. Clicked on a bunch of smileys but they didn't show. I think we are all a big Family.

Posted By: NITROUSN

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 04:41 AM

Quote:
If he stated Pinion angle with a 0 degree tranny/driveshaft driveline his info would be correct, but he doesn't state that.


He did say car level.
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 05:28 AM

Who's right? Depends. If you can achieve the desired pinion angle AND the desired equal and opposite operating angles of the front and rear u-joints at the same time, congratulations. To do so requires the engine/ trans assembly and the rear end to be at the correct heights, angles, and distance apart. Usually only achieved on a car built from scratch. For example, if the tail shaft is angled down from front to rear and the front u-joint is lower than the rear u-joint, you can't make the pinion and the tail shaft parallel without having the pinion angle go positive which is never ok. Pinion angle is most important and can't be made wrong in order to get the pinion parallel with the engine/transmission.
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 05:48 AM

I'm almost positive Larry Morgans chassis book showed a straight line at 0 degrees from the tail shaft on the trans back to the rear then so many degrees down according to rear suspension type and that's how I do mine.
Posted By: BuckeyeBrawler

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 03:29 PM

If your tail is down 4 set your pinion to 0 or +1 and weld the perches on and it'll be good to go. My tail is down, 3 pinion @ zero. All good
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 05:08 PM

Wolfe's picture SHOWS the driveshaft at a down angle and he doesn't even mention trans angle, because it DOESN'T matter in a RACE CAR. It is what it is and is for the most part not adjustable. As usual, guys confuse pinion angle and driveline angle. And one more time, if you do manage to achieve perfect driveline angle in a static condition, or set it where you THINK it will be perfect under power, it will NOT be so going down the track, as it goes through a big range of movement. And as McAllister said, it should NEVER go positive, regardless of what is perceived to be "right".

And yes Sport, I totally understand drive angles as well as how a driveshaft works............do you? Shame on Wolfe huh?, Yep, he is just some scrub chassis builder that has no idea what he is doing and should be slapped around. Guess Bob George is the same, as I believe he agreed as well. So tell me this, Mr driveline expert. If the front yoke happens to be closer to the ground than the pinion yoke, which frequently happens, because of engine angles, ride heights, tire sizes, etc, that you still think it would be RIGHT to achieve proper and equal joint angles, even though that would put the pinion in a positive condition, as compared to shaft..............Is that what you are saying. Must be, as the proper operating angle seems to be the only thing you care about.

Monte
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 05:19 PM

Monte you know i respect you as one of the most knowledgeable guys on the board or anywhere as far as that goes. is there any negative to setting off the tail ?
Posted By: GomangoCuda

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 05:32 PM

Pinion angle posts are the most entertaining thing on Moparts. catfight fan That's why we do it so often. laugh2

What happens to the driveline angles in a leaf spring bracket or street car is totally different from what happens in a promod car. Your going to set it up differently regardless of what the popular standard theory says.

Never forget: "If it's wrong but it works then it's not wrong".

Does anybody stress this much over what happens to the pinion angle when your standing on the brakes?
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 06:17 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte you know i respect you as one of the most knowledgeable guys on the board or anywhere as far as that goes. is there any negative to setting off the tail ?
What if that is the lowest joint and the tail points down........whatcha gonna do then. Would you go positive, if the angles dictated you do that to make it RIGHT in your thoughts, even though positive pinion angle is NEVER desired in a performance car. That's the only question that needs to be answered. What would YOU do in above scenario. Your car, his car, that car..........doesn't matter whos car. If the rule is the rule, what are gonna do if the trans is pointing down and the driveshaft runs uphill. Think about that and then ask "does it hurt" to measure off the tail.

Most big tire cars, with stock floor pans(backhalf cars) that have the motor in the stock location and angle........if the car sits anything resembling low and has a long trans, like a 727......the front joint is almost always lower than the rear. That's why there is always SO MUCH question on this stuff. They slide under there, start looking and measuring. Try to do it like the internet "experts" say and then look at it and say "that can't be right"............And they are correct, it's NOT right.

If you want your car to ride down the road 100,000 miles, be smooth as glass and never have a problem, yes sir, concern yourself with overall driveline angle. Because YES, opposite angles are the smoothest in THAT scenario. But in a RACE CAR, it just flat doesn't matter, PINION ANGLE matters and the two are NOT the same. In a ten second car, you are worrying yourself to death over something that MIGHT be in the condition you deem ideal for about 3 seconds. Other than that, it is all over the place. Just put a go-pro under your car and WATCH the angle and see how long it stays static..........So, you want to measure off the trans, knock yourself out........but it is a TOTAL waste of time. Now I don't CARE what you do. But the fact that you and others think that you have to convince the whole world that it is the ONLY RIGHT way to set one up.........well, that I have a problem with, because in EVERY scenario, it is NOT right.
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 07:26 PM

A 9" Ford with a 32" tire has the pinion about 13" off the ground. Danas and 12 bolts will be higher. In a stock front end backhalf car, that has likely been lowered and with the engine and trans in the original location, the front u-joint will likely be lower than the rear. Typically in the stock location, the engine/trans will angle down front to rear about 2 or 3 degrees. In this situation which is very common, in order to make the pinion and tailshaft parallel requires the pinion angle to go positive which you just don't do. It is not unusual in these cars to end up with what is called the "broken back" configuration. Not the optimum set up, but many times you have to compromise and do the best you can with what you have. The alternative is to relocate the engine/trans mounts. If you are building a car ground up, these things are taken into account and positioned correctly, but in a stock bodied, back half car, you usually don't have the luxury of everything being in exactly the right place.

I'm not saying the parallel tailshaft and pinion configuration is wrong, because it is the most correct way to set the driveline up. I'm just saying that sometimes you can't get there and you can't set-up the pinion angle incorrectly to make it happen.
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 07:45 PM

Most of the big tire cars around here are four link and ladder bars. Does the pinion angle really change that much on them? I can't see them rotating near as much as a leaf spring car.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 07:53 PM

Originally Posted By justinp61
Most of the big tire cars around here are four link and ladder bars. Does the pinion angle really change that much on them? I can't see them rotating near as much as a leaf spring car.


Still matters.... you just dont want it going positive ...
but the 4-link and ladder bar move about 1* to 2* where a
leaf car moves about 6*
EDIT
I should say... you would like it to line up straight under
full power
wave
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 08:07 PM

I understand it still matters, as I said I don't think they'll rotate as much as a leaf spring car.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 09:10 PM

Originally Posted By justinp61
I understand it still matters, as I said I don't think they'll rotate as much as a leaf spring car.


Your correct.. they move way less.. pinion angle on a 4-link is
1* or less but not zero.. and the ladder bar is 1 1/2* to 2*
wave
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 10:58 PM

Originally Posted By CMcAllister
A 9" Ford with a 32" tire has the pinion about 13" off the ground. Danas and 12 bolts will be higher. In a stock front end backhalf car, that has likely been lowered and with the engine and trans in the original location, the front u-joint will likely be lower than the rear. Typically in the stock location, the engine/trans will angle down front to rear about 2 or 3 degrees. In this situation which is very common, in order to make the pinion and tailshaft parallel requires the pinion angle to go positive which you just don't do. It is not unusual in these cars to end up with what is called the "broken back" configuration. Not the optimum set up, but many times you have to compromise and do the best you can with what you have. The alternative is to relocate the engine/trans mounts. If you are building a car ground up, these things are taken into account and positioned correctly, but in a stock bodied, back half car, you usually don't have the luxury of everything being in exactly the right place.

I'm not saying the parallel tailshaft and pinion configuration is wrong, because it is the most correct way to set the driveline up. I'm just saying that sometimes you can't get there and you can't set-up the pinion angle incorrectly to make it happen.
ok when you say the tail is lower, give me an angle on the trans? is the tail pointing up? how many degrees?
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/05/15 11:02 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte you know i respect you as one of the most knowledgeable guys on the board or anywhere as far as that goes. is there any negative to setting off the tail ?
What if that is the lowest joint and the tail points down........whatcha gonna do then. Would you go positive, if the angles dictated you do that to make it RIGHT in your thoughts, even though positive pinion angle is NEVER desired in a performance car. That's the only question that needs to be answered. What would YOU do in above scenario. Your car, his car, that car..........doesn't matter whos car. If the rule is the rule, what are gonna do if the trans is pointing down and the driveshaft runs uphill. Think about that and then ask "does it hurt" to measure off the tail.

Most big tire cars, with stock floor pans(backhalf cars) that have the motor in the stock location and angle........if the car sits anything resembling low and has a long trans, like a 727......the front joint is almost always lower than the rear. That's why there is always SO MUCH question on this stuff. They slide under there, start looking and measuring. Try to do it like the internet "experts" say and then look at it and say "that can't be right"............And they are correct, it's NOT right.

If you want your car to ride down the road 100,000 miles, be smooth as glass and never have a problem, yes sir, concern yourself with overall driveline angle. Because YES, opposite angles are the smoothest in THAT scenario. But in a RACE CAR, it just flat doesn't matter, PINION ANGLE matters and the two are NOT the same. In a ten second car, you are worrying yourself to death over something that MIGHT be in the condition you deem ideal for about 3 seconds. Other than that, it is all over the place. Just put a go-pro under your car and WATCH the angle and see how long it stays static..........So, you want to measure off the trans, knock yourself out........but it is a TOTAL waste of time. Now I don't CARE what you do. But the fact that you and others think that you have to convince the whole world that it is the ONLY RIGHT way to set one up.........well, that I have a problem with, because in EVERY scenario, it is NOT right.
lol I am not trying to convince anyone about anything. I have never run into a situation where the angle is so much that it puts the rear in a positive mode. if the tranny is low and points up the rear has to point down to get to zero. then you have to roll down from there to what ever you want.
Posted By: DaveRS23

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 01:26 AM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith

Whats going to happen.......is that after 20 pages of arguing, showing some drawings, the "god" illustration from Rossler, there is still going to be two sides to who is right........LOL!!!........But I won't be one of them. My one and only post right here.......................................................
Monte


Just too much fun to resist, isn't it?
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 02:47 AM

Originally Posted By DaveRS23
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith

Whats going to happen.......is that after 20 pages of arguing, showing some drawings, the "god" illustration from Rossler, there is still going to be two sides to who is right........LOL!!!........But I won't be one of them. My one and only post right here.......................................................
Monte


Just too much fun to resist, isn't it?
absolutely laugh2
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 06:08 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By CMcAllister
A 9" Ford with a 32" tire has the pinion about 13" off the ground. Danas and 12 bolts will be higher. In a stock front end backhalf car, that has likely been lowered and with the engine and trans in the original location, the front u-joint will likely be lower than the rear. Typically in the stock location, the engine/trans will angle down front to rear about 2 or 3 degrees. In this situation which is very common, in order to make the pinion and tailshaft parallel requires the pinion angle to go positive which you just don't do. It is not unusual in these cars to end up with what is called the "broken back" configuration. Not the optimum set up, but many times you have to compromise and do the best you can with what you have. The alternative is to relocate the engine/trans mounts. If you are building a car ground up, these things are taken into account and positioned correctly, but in a stock bodied, back half car, you usually don't have the luxury of everything being in exactly the right place.

I'm not saying the parallel tailshaft and pinion configuration is wrong, because it is the most correct way to set the driveline up. I'm just saying that sometimes you can't get there and you can't set-up the pinion angle incorrectly to make it happen.
ok when you say the tail is lower, give me an angle on the trans? is the tail pointing up? how many degrees?


Typically on a backhalf car because of a taller tire and lowering of the car, the rear axle is higher in the car than original. Yes, typically the engine/trans (tailshaft) is 2-4 degrees down from front to rear on stock mounts. The OP says his is 4 degrees down. As a result of the rear being higher in the car, the front u-joint ends up lower than the rear u-joint. Often I find the driveshaft very close to level with the tailshaft down a couple of degrees and the pinion angle also down a couple of degrees as it should be. Total difference between the tailshaft and the pinion ends up being 4 or 5 degrees, maybe more. This is the "broken back" configuration. Lots of cars running like this and I see no problems as a result as long as it doesn't get to far out of whack. Raising the back of the trans on the mount can help, if there is room to do that.
Posted By: 383man

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 06:19 AM

Myself I deal mostly with stock body cars and the eng/trans and pinion paralell line theory works good when the trans is higher then the pinion. But after reading alot of this to me on any type of very modified race car you just need to know the height of both the trans and pinion so you can take into account how to set it up since you cant just assume the trans is higher. Myself I like to make a drawing and write down all my readings so I can visualize what I need to do since as was said on some race cars you could run into alot of different setups and on some you just have to use common sense. Ron
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 07:03 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By CMcAllister
A 9" Ford with a 32" tire has the pinion about 13" off the ground. Danas and 12 bolts will be higher. In a stock front end backhalf car, that has likely been lowered and with the engine and trans in the original location, the front u-joint will likely be lower than the rear. Typically in the stock location, the engine/trans will angle down front to rear about 2 or 3 degrees. In this situation which is very common, in order to make the pinion and tailshaft parallel requires the pinion angle to go positive which you just don't do. It is not unusual in these cars to end up with what is called the "broken back" configuration. Not the optimum set up, but many times you have to compromise and do the best you can with what you have. The alternative is to relocate the engine/trans mounts. If you are building a car ground up, these things are taken into account and positioned correctly, but in a stock bodied, back half car, you usually don't have the luxury of everything being in exactly the right place.

I'm not saying the parallel tailshaft and pinion configuration is wrong, because it is the most correct way to set the driveline up. I'm just saying that sometimes you can't get there and you can't set-up the pinion angle incorrectly to make it happen.
ok when you say the tail is lower, give me an angle on the trans? is the tail pointing up? how many degrees?
I know of NO factory installed engine, that points the trans up in the rear. What he is saying is the same thing I said....which IS, if the FRONT joint is LOWER than the rear joint(which is common) the shaft is obviously running uphill. And even if the trans and pinion were dead level the shaft is STILL running uphill.......soooo, if you set it up to try and achieve parallel angles, the pinion is GOING to be positive angle.......that's a no-no. Bottom line, if the front joint is LOWER than the rear joint and the trans is either level, or down, the theory of "equal angles" goes right out the window.......So I ask again, in THAT scenario, how are YOU going to set the angle, if you maintain the angles must be even.

And if your answer is that you have never seen a car like this............well then you haven't set up many cars, because this is a VERY COMMON scenario. Even my daily driver Challenger that sits low and has a 315 radial on the back, has the shaft running uphill in the rear. And we KNOW factory Mopars had an angle on the motors from the factory. Amazing that it doesn't toss driveshafts out on the road or rattle my teeth out I guess.

Monte
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 07:10 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte you know i respect you as one of the most knowledgeable guys on the board or anywhere as far as that goes. is there any negative to setting off the tail ?
What if the front is the lowest joint and the tail points down........whatcha gonna do then. Would you go positive, if the angles dictated you do that to make it RIGHT in your thoughts, even though positive pinion angle is NEVER desired in a performance car. That's the only question that needs to be answered. What would YOU do in above scenario. Your car, his car, that car..........doesn't matter whos car. If the rule is the rule, what are gonna do if the trans is pointing down and the driveshaft runs uphill. Think about that and then ask "does it hurt" to measure off the tail.

Most big tire cars, with stock floor pans(backhalf cars) that have the motor in the stock location and angle........if the car sits anything resembling low and has a long trans, like a 727......the front joint is almost always lower than the rear. That's why there is always SO MUCH question on this stuff. They slide under there, start looking and measuring. Try to do it like the internet "experts" say and then look at it and say "that can't be right"............And they are correct, it's NOT right.

If you want your car to ride down the road 100,000 miles, be smooth as glass and never have a problem, yes sir, concern yourself with overall driveline angle. Because YES, opposite angles are the smoothest in THAT scenario. But in a RACE CAR, it just flat doesn't matter, PINION ANGLE matters and the two are NOT the same. In a ten second car, you are worrying yourself to death over something that MIGHT be in the condition you deem ideal for about 3 seconds. Other than that, it is all over the place. Just put a go-pro under your car and WATCH the angle and see how long it stays static..........So, you want to measure off the trans, knock yourself out........but it is a TOTAL waste of time. Now I don't CARE what you do. But the fact that you and others think that you have to convince the whole world that it is the ONLY RIGHT way to set one up.........well, that I have a problem with, because in EVERY scenario, it is NOT right.
I have never run into a situation where the angle is so much that it puts the rear in a positive mode. if the tranny is low and points up the rear has to point down to get to zero. then you have to roll down from there to what ever you want.
That's NOT what I said and you did NOT answer the question. Read it again..........And YES, you ARE trying to convince people. Because every time this comes up, you and SportFury 440 are the first ones on the scene to tell us all about how if you don't set it up with the proper angles, it's wrong. He even wants to hang Wolfe up by his privates and flog him apparently for giving out BAD information as he calls it. But guess what, Wolfe also sets up a LOT of stock suspension type cars(Mustangs) with the motors in stock locations and angles. So he also knows that driveshafts running uphill is common and is the reason he says to do it like he does.

Lets use your own logic against you. Would you agree, that most every factory car, has some downward angle in the rear of the motor, from the factory. Most would agree yes and be right. That factory car is set up for a certain size tire and to achieve "proper" driveline angle that you preach about......agreed?........Now, put a TALLER tire on the back, but give the car the SAME ride height. Factory geometry immediately wrecked because the pinion is HIGHER and any attempt to get "proper angle" results in positive pinion angle.........Think about that one a while.............LOL!!!
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:37 AM

there is a difference between trying to convince someone and explaining how you do it. so you are trying to convince someone every time you post? ok show me 1 post where I said it's wrong? and I haven't posted on this subject in a long time, and the only reason I did is because the op was so far off on his calculations. I knew I would get hammered by the normal crowd it happens every time. laugh2
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 02:07 PM

Ideally, you want the pinion to become parallel to the transmission when the vehicle is under power. This works regardless of weather the transmission is mounted higher OR LOWER than the rearend.

For example, if the front joint is lower than the rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front, the result is a 3 degree negative pinon angle. In other words, the pinion must rotate upward over 3 degrees before the angle goes positive.
Posted By: Jerry Kathe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 02:29 PM

The input from doctor differential is spot on....if you want it right.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 05:13 PM

Originally Posted By DoctorDiff
Ideally, you want the pinion to become parallel to the transmission when the vehicle is under power. This works regardless of weather the transmission is mounted higher OR LOWER than the rearend.

For example, if the front joint is lower than the rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front, the result is a 3 degree negative pinon angle. In other words, the pinion must rotate upward over 3 degrees before the angle goes positive.
prepare for your beating laugh2
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 05:26 PM

watch this, then imagine that at 20k rpm
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=470937339716400&fref=nf
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 07:02 PM

Originally Posted By DoctorDiff
Ideally, you want the pinion to become parallel to the transmission when the vehicle is under power. This works regardless of weather the transmission is mounted higher OR LOWER than the rearend.

For example, if the front joint is lower than the rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front, the result is a 3 degree negative pinon angle. In other words, the pinion must rotate upward over 3 degrees before the angle goes positive.
No, that's driveline angle and positive pinion angle. If the pinion is pointing up and the shaft is running uphill to attach to it, that is positive PINION angle in anybodys world..............You guys want positive pinion angle in your race cars........knock yourself out.........I'm done
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 07:48 PM

No, that's 3 degree negative pinion angle. I did not mention any specific driveline angle.

This should be obvious to anyone who thinks about what I posted for more than 5 seconds.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 08:37 PM

Say what?.......sure you did and I quote "for example, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front"



If the front joint is lower, the driveshaft is most assuredly running UPHILL........if the pinion is ALSO pointing UP and these two rising lines meet, they form a point at the top correct?.......and you are telling me that is not POSITIVE pinion angle..........okie dokie then.

PINION ANGLE.....one more time PINION ANGLE is the relationship from pinion to driveshaft and nothing else. If the angle is like a teepee that's positive, if it's like a V that's negative

Quotes from Hot Rod Network...."Pinion angle simply refers to the angle of the differential’s pinion in relation to the driveshaft. But ask 10 guys about optimal pinion angle and a lively debate will ensue. To get a range of opinions, we spoke to several well-known and respected chassis builders about pinion angles"

"Pro Stock chassis builder Jerry Bickel assures us, “there is no mystery to pinion angle.” Setting the pinion angle is the final step in driveline alignment. The goal is to create a straight line from the back of the crankshaft through the transmission, driveshaft, and the pinion of the differential—under load. Due to the tendency of the pinion to rise under load, some angle must be present at rest".






Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 08:51 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Say what?.......sure you did and I quote "for example, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front"



If the front joint is lower, the driveshaft is most assuredly running UPHILL........if the pinion is ALSO pointing UP and these two rising lines meet, they form a point at the top correct?.......and you are telling me that is not POSITIVE pinion angle..........okie dokie then.

PINION ANGLE.....one more time PINION ANGLE is the relationship from pinion to driveshaft and nothing else. If the angle is like a teepee that's positive, if it's like a V that's negative

Quotes from Hot Rod Network...."Pinion angle simply refers to the angle of the differential’s pinion in relation to the driveshaft. But ask 10 guys about optimal pinion angle and a lively debate will ensue. To get a range of opinions, we spoke to several well-known and respected chassis builders about pinion angles"

"Pro Stock chassis builder Jerry Bickel assures us, “there is no mystery to pinion angle.” Setting the pinion angle is the final step in driveline alignment. The goal is to create a straight line from the back of the crankshaft through the transmission, driveshaft, and the pinion of the differential—under load. Due to the tendency of the pinion to rise under load, some angle must be present at rest".

FTW drumhit
Posted By: Al_Alguire

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:01 PM

This should make things clear as mud smile

Attached picture pinion.jpg
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:14 PM

No. I mentioned 3 degree negative pinion angle.

I did not mention any specific (2, 3, 5 degree) driveline angle.

BTW, your quote from Jerry Bickel is correct. You want the pinion to become parallel to the transmission (which is a "straight line" in some cars) when the vehicle is under power.

If you can't build a race car so the drivetrain becomes a STRAIGHT LINE under power, you build the car so the drivetrain becomes PARALLEL. This is true weather the rearend is above or below the transmission.

I thought you were "done"?
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:24 PM

That chart is fine as long as the trans stays higher as is pictured. Make the trans lower than the rear, connect the dots with a line (driveshaft) and see what happens to the relationship between the pinion and driveshaft (pinion angle). If you're thinking about stock mounts in a full body car, use the 2 degree trans down line to get close to what it likely actually is.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:26 PM

While I hate to get into these discussions about pinion angle
I do it both ways... but if I build the chassis and set the
engine/trans in it I go through a pretty decent set up.. I use
a laser that mounts into the #5 main(the laser has been trued to
the mounting block in my lathe) and I point the engine/trans dead
on to the pinion center line.. once the build is done I roll the
pinion to get the pinion angle I want.. so basically I use the trans
but when I check it from then on I use the drive shaft as reference
wave
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:37 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
While I hate to get into these discussions about pinion angle
I do it both ways... but if I build the chassis and set the
engine/trans in it I go through a pretty decent set up.. I use
a laser that mounts into the #5 main(the laser has been trued to
the mounting block in my lathe) and I point the engine/trans dead
on to the pinion center line.. once the build is done I roll the
pinion to get the pinion angle I want.. so basically I use the trans
but when I check it from then on I use the drive shaft as reference
wave


Perfect. If you built the car and know how it is set up, it is a simple matter to put the rear at ride height, set the angle, tighten the jams and forget about it. Everything else was taken care of when it was built.
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:38 PM

Monte beats dead horse meat. lol

https://youtu.be/UPw-3e_pzqU
Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 09:52 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Monte beats dead horse meat. lol

https://youtu.be/UPw-3e_pzqU

laugh2
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 10:27 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Say what?.......sure you did and I quote "for example, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, and the transmission slopes 5 degrees downward toward the rear and the pinion slopes 2 degrees upward toward the front"



If the front joint is lower, the driveshaft is most assuredly running UPHILL........if the pinion is ALSO pointing UP and these two rising lines meet, they form a point at the top correct?.......and you are telling me that is not POSITIVE pinion angle..........okie dokie then.

PINION ANGLE.....one more time PINION ANGLE is the relationship from pinion to driveshaft and nothing else. If the angle is like a teepee that's positive, if it's like a V that's negative

Quotes from Hot Rod Network...."Pinion angle simply refers to the angle of the differential’s pinion in relation to the driveshaft. But ask 10 guys about optimal pinion angle and a lively debate will ensue. To get a range of opinions, we spoke to several well-known and respected chassis builders about pinion angles"

"Pro Stock chassis builder Jerry Bickel assures us, “there is no mystery to pinion angle.” Setting the pinion angle is the final step in driveline alignment. The goal is to create a straight line from the back of the crankshaft through the transmission, driveshaft, and the pinion of the differential—under load. Due to the tendency of the pinion to rise under load, some angle must be present at rest".






positive in relation to what? the ground, the car or what? work
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 10:34 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Monte beats dead horse meat. lol

https://youtu.be/UPw-3e_pzqU
sixpackgut beats his own meat laugh2 laugh2
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 10:47 PM

The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle
wave
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 10:52 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle
wave
iagree so what is he talking about when he said it goes positive?
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 10:55 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle
wave
iagree so what is he talking about when he said it goes positive?


He is referring to the relationship of the DS and the pinion
the teepee aspect
wave
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 11:01 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle
wave
iagree so what is he talking about when he said it goes positive?


He is referring to the relationship of the DS and the pinion
the teepee aspect
wave
what angle was the drive shaft?
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 11:28 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle
wave
iagree so what is he talking about when he said it goes positive?


He is referring to the relationship of the DS and the pinion
the teepee aspect
wave
what angle was the drive shaft?


I dont recall the numbers.. go back and look
EDIT
if I recall it was 3* rear of the shaft up
wave
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/06/15 11:58 PM

hmmmm i didn't see the shaft even mentioned?
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 04:37 AM

Originally Posted By DoctorDiff
No. I mentioned 3 degree negative pinion angle.

I did not mention any specific (2, 3, 5 degree) driveline angle.

BTW, your quote from Jerry Bickel is correct. You want the pinion to become parallel to the transmission (which is a "straight line" in some cars) when the vehicle is under power.

If you can't build a race car so the drivetrain becomes a STRAIGHT LINE under power, you build the car so the drivetrain becomes PARALLEL. This is true weather the rearend is above or below the transmission.



This is the simple answer here, as whether or not the rear end is above or below the front universal. I concur, as it is True info. No toenail hanging rack or slapping around needed, like for wolfy. That prior statement in my other post was just some humor, lighten up there louise, lol No one is supposed to get angry. Come on ,its just the old pinion angle argument. If you don't get that, theres some room left on the toe nail rack. Never said anything about hanging from private parts, that was, well you know.

Its my hopes, someday that all of us pinion angle arguers are all on the same page. Not 25 pages.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 05:37 AM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
[quote=Quicktree][quote=Monte_Smith

Lets use your own logic against you. Would you agree, that most every factory car, has some downward angle in the rear of the motor, from the factory. Most would agree yes and be right. That factory car is set up for a certain size tire and to achieve "proper" driveline angle that you preach about......agreed?........Now, put a TALLER tire on the back, but give the car the SAME ride height. Factory geometry immediately wrecked because the pinion is HIGHER and any attempt to get "proper angle" results in positive pinion angle.........Think about that one a while.............LOL!!!


You need to think about that. When considering the pinion angle, you are not concerned about the ground. The car could be hanging from a toe rack, with the pinion straight above.

Trust me , you will get this. Thumps up. You have Nitrous nailed, but not pinion angle yet. Thumbs up again, since the icons aren't working for me.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 07:12 AM

I never mentioned anything about the ground, because the ground doesn't matter. Put a taller tire on and keep the same ride height, means the pinion is higher in the car, because the car sits over the tire more........... And as far as a handle on pinion angle, my handle is plenty good, some others around here, I am not so sure.

And Quicktree, if you have to ask me what positive pinion angle is, why are you even IN this discussion.

And still.......NOT ONE GURU has answered the question. Which WAS, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, the trans points toward the ground(and since some are SO caught up in exact numbers, lets say 3* tail down), which means the shaft runs UPHILL to pinion, would you roll the pinion UP 3*, to maintain a parallel angles, even though that HAS to put the joint broken over the WRONG way(positive).......when we ALL KNOW, or at least SHOULD know, that on acceleration the pinion climbs MORE and will make that joint angle even MORE wrong............waiting on an answer

How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 09:14 AM

Here's a couple video's that show the importance of having the trans and pinion centerlines parallel. Pretty simple concept, really. The only trick is to determine where the pinion angle needs to start at so the 2 angles are PARALLEL UNDER POWER. But this should put to rest any of the nonsense that has already been beat to death about the angles not needing to cancel each other out - but I doubt if it will. Enjoy the videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmV4qwLfOMY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4P75ZQvpws
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 09:44 AM

[i]
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith


How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!



If in your picture the angles are in fact being measured under power, making the trans 3* down, and the pinion 3* up, this makes the tailshaft and pinion parallel - HOW IN THE H*** IS THE U-JOINT GOING OVER CENTER? It's the mirror image of the front, and would cancel out the angles. Since in most cases this would be a big tire - ladder bar/4 link situation with little movement from static to loaded, I would set the pinion at 0-1* up, figuring it would only gain 2* under power and end up at 3* UP to cancel out the 3* DOWN of the tailshaft. At that point the u-joint IS NOT "OVERCENTERED" - it hasn't went past the front u-joints mirrored angle.
Posted By: dthemi

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 11:53 AM

Since all these threads always spin out of control, like a winter time valve lash discussion, why not just....?

Put the drive shaft in it, slap the angle finder on the shaft, and check it against the pinion. It's a door car that you're not going to change the driveline angles in, so knock that off the worry list. It needs pinion to bite.

Put three in it, hit it, and see. The object is to get to the track right? I've been as high as 10 degrees on a ladder bar before.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 12:29 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
I never mentioned anything about the ground, because the ground doesn't matter. Put a taller tire on and keep the same ride height, means the pinion is higher in the car, because the car sits over the tire more........... And as far as a handle on pinion angle, my handle is plenty good, some others around here, I am not so sure.

And Quicktree, if you have to ask me what positive pinion angle is, why are you even IN this discussion.

And still.......NOT ONE GURU has answered the question. Which WAS, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, the trans points toward the ground(and since some are SO caught up in exact numbers, lets say 3* tail down), which means the shaft runs UPHILL to pinion, would you roll the pinion UP 3*, to maintain a parallel angles, even though that HAS to put the joint broken over the WRONG way(positive).......when we ALL KNOW, or at least SHOULD know, that on acceleration the pinion climbs MORE and will make that joint angle even MORE wrong............waiting on an answer

How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!
Monte you know I am not asking you what positive pinion angle is. I was asking you what you were basing your statement off of. what is it in relation to. Positive to what??????
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 12:29 PM

Originally Posted By dthemi
Since all these threads always spin out of control, like a winter time valve lash discussion, why not just....?

Put the drive shaft in it, slap the angle finder on the shaft, and check it against the pinion. It's a door car that you're not going to change the driveline angles in, so knock that off the worry list. It needs pinion to bite.

Put three in it, hit it, and see. The object is to get to the track right? I've been as high as 10 degrees on a ladder bar before.
absolutely, thats the way we did it 40 years ago
Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 02:03 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
I never mentioned anything about the ground, because the ground doesn't matter. Put a taller tire on and keep the same ride height, means the pinion is higher in the car, because the car sits over the tire more........... And as far as a handle on pinion angle, my handle is plenty good, some others around here, I am not so sure.

And Quicktree, if you have to ask me what positive pinion angle is, why are you even IN this discussion.

And still.......NOT ONE GURU has answered the question. Which WAS, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, the trans points toward the ground(and since some are SO caught up in exact numbers, lets say 3* tail down), which means the shaft runs UPHILL to pinion, would you roll the pinion UP 3*, to maintain a parallel angles, even though that HAS to put the joint broken over the WRONG way(positive).......when we ALL KNOW, or at least SHOULD know, that on acceleration the pinion climbs MORE and will make that joint angle even MORE wrong............waiting on an answer

How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!
Monte you know I am not asking you what positive pinion angle is. I was asking you what you were basing your statement off of. what is it in relation to. Positive to what??????

Positive with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Monte has explained several times that the driveline (trans/engine angle) is not considered, only the relationship of the back end of the driveshaft to pinion. Under power, you want the pinion to be in perfect alignment (or as close as possible without ever going positive) with the back end of the driveshaft, so you'll want to set the pinion angle several degrees negative with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Hopefully that is an accurate interpretation of what Monte is trying to drive into the skulls of the unwashed masses.....LOL
Posted By: j.mcconnell

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 02:22 PM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
[i]
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith


How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!



If in your picture the angles are in fact being measured under power, making the trans 3* down, and the pinion 3* up, this makes the tailshaft and pinion parallel - HOW IN THE H*** IS THE U-JOINT GOING OVER CENTER? It's the mirror image of the front, and would cancel out the angles. Since in most cases this would be a big tire - ladder bar/4 link situation with little movement from static to loaded, I would set the pinion at 0-1* up, figuring it would only gain 2* under power and end up at 3* UP to cancel out the 3* DOWN of the tailshaft. At that point the u-joint IS NOT "OVERCENTERED" - it hasn't went past the front u-joints mirrored angle.


I believe Monte drew that at static conditions. At the hit on leaf springs, that will end up ~+6 over center. Just hammering home the point that mirroring the trans and pinion angles at static conditions do not work in every situation.
Posted By: Jerry Kathe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 02:27 PM

Pinion angle is only relative to the front joint angle and has nothing to do with drive shaft angle.....what is so difficult to understand about this?

If your measuring from drive shaft to pinion your doing it wrong.....period.

Additionally.....pinion angle has absolutely nothing to do with bite/hook......holy smokes!!!!
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 03:03 PM

Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Pinion angle is only relative to the front joint angle and has nothing to do with drive shaft angle.....what is so difficult to understand about this?

If your measuring from drive shaft to pinion your doing it wrong.....period.

Additionally.....pinion angle has absolutely nothing to do with bite/hook......holy smokes!!!!


Ding, Ding, Ding - we have a W I N N E R !

The driveshaft doesn't even have to be in to check or set PINION angle.

And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 03:35 PM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Pinion angle is only relative to the front joint angle and has nothing to do with drive shaft angle.....what is so difficult to understand about this?

If your measuring from drive shaft to pinion your doing it wrong.....period.

Additionally.....pinion angle has absolutely nothing to do with bite/hook......holy smokes!!!!


Ding, Ding, Ding - we have a W I N N E R !

The driveshaft doesn't even have to be in to check or set PINION angle.

And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles.


So I assume you make it parallel to the trans then rollin
the pinion angle..... sure am glad you didnt set the pinion
angle on my old Jeep.. with the 33" tires and set up your
way the U-joints would have been in bind just sitting there
wave
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 04:37 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Pinion angle is only relative to the front joint angle and has nothing to do with drive shaft angle.....what is so difficult to understand about this?

If your measuring from drive shaft to pinion your doing it wrong.....period.

Additionally.....pinion angle has absolutely nothing to do with bite/hook......holy smokes!!!!


Ding, Ding, Ding - we have a W I N N E R !

The driveshaft doesn't even have to be in to check or set PINION angle.

And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles.


So I assume you make it parallel to the trans then rollin
the pinion angle..... sure am glad you didnt set the pinion
angle on my old Jeep.. with the 33" tires and set up your
way the U-joints would have been in bind just sitting there
wave


I think we both know that lifted trucks - especially short wheelbase ones - have totally different issues and guidelines to follow. You generally try to minimize u-joint angles and any resulting vibrations are expected and are usually masked by the aggressive tire designs. Comparing the two applications is comparing apples to chicken wing seasonings. Why even go there?
Posted By: savoy64

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 04:47 PM



And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles. [/quote]
it is the same person that said the pinion snubber does some other magical thing besides keeping your overloaded cars driveshaft from rubbing in the tunnel...redneck traction control----hahahaha
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 05:06 PM

Originally Posted By savoy64


And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles.

it is the same person that said the pinion snubber does some other magical thing besides keeping your overloaded cars driveshaft from rubbing in the tunnel...redneck traction control----hahahaha [/quote]

A snubber can have it's merits in certain applications. While they do help control axle rotation and spring wrap-up, they do nothing to help keep the engine torque from trying to pick up the pass side tire. I've had decent success getting mild street cars to work using a snubber, clamping the front spring segments, and using a rear sway/anti roll bar.

Who-ever came up with the bright idea of using leaf springs (in high horsepower apps) to transmit power also needs a punt to the junk. A spring, by nature, is designed to store and release energy - TOTALLY WRONG for the application. Any fix always involves taking the "spring" out of the front section. But that's a whole different argument.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 05:14 PM

Originally Posted By DusterDave
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
I never mentioned anything about the ground, because the ground doesn't matter. Put a taller tire on and keep the same ride height, means the pinion is higher in the car, because the car sits over the tire more........... And as far as a handle on pinion angle, my handle is plenty good, some others around here, I am not so sure.

And Quicktree, if you have to ask me what positive pinion angle is, why are you even IN this discussion.

And still.......NOT ONE GURU has answered the question. Which WAS, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, the trans points toward the ground(and since some are SO caught up in exact numbers, lets say 3* tail down), which means the shaft runs UPHILL to pinion, would you roll the pinion UP 3*, to maintain a parallel angles, even though that HAS to put the joint broken over the WRONG way(positive).......when we ALL KNOW, or at least SHOULD know, that on acceleration the pinion climbs MORE and will make that joint angle even MORE wrong............waiting on an answer

How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!
Monte you know I am not asking you what positive pinion angle is. I was asking you what you were basing your statement off of. what is it in relation to. Positive to what??????

Positive with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Monte has explained several times that the driveline (trans/engine angle) is not considered, only the relationship of the back end of the driveshaft to pinion. Under power, you want the pinion to be in perfect alignment (or as close as possible without ever going positive) with the back end of the driveshaft, so you'll want to set the pinion angle several degrees negative with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Hopefully that is an accurate interpretation of what Monte is trying to drive into the skulls of the unwashed masses.....LOL
get out of here, we are talking cars that go down a track not show poodles laugh2
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 05:15 PM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
Originally Posted By savoy64


And I'd like to punch the person that started the M Y T H that changing pinion angle changes traction right in the boy marbles.

it is the same person that said the pinion snubber does some other magical thing besides keeping your overloaded cars driveshaft from rubbing in the tunnel...redneck traction control----hahahaha


A snubber can have it's merits in certain applications. While they do help control axle rotation and spring wrap-up, they do nothing to help keep the engine torque from trying to pick up the pass side tire. I've had decent success getting mild street cars to work using a snubber, clamping the front spring segments, and using a rear sway/anti roll bar.

Who-ever came up with the bright idea of using leaf springs (in high horsepower apps) to transmit power also needs a punt to the junk. A spring, by nature, is designed to store and release energy - TOTALLY WRONG for the application. Any fix always involves taking the "spring" out of the front section. But that's a whole different argument. [/quote] iagree same here
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 06:46 PM

Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 07:18 PM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
Here's a couple video's that show the importance of having the trans and pinion centerlines parallel. Pretty simple concept, really. The only trick is to determine where the pinion angle needs to start at so the 2 angles are PARALLEL UNDER POWER. But this should put to rest any of the nonsense that has already been beat to death about the angles not needing to cancel each other out - but I doubt if it will. Enjoy the videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmV4qwLfOMY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4P75ZQvpws


These are excellent videos. I have no argument with either one. However, neither addresses the issue which is, what happens when the tailshaft is 3 degrees down and the rear u-joint is higher than the front and negative pinion angle HAS to be maintained.
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 07:27 PM

If that sketch depicts the parallel relationship between the pinion and transmission when the vehicle is UNDER POWER, the sketch is accurate.

If you think the drivetrain should be set up differently when the vehicle is UNDER POWER, please correct the sketch. Go ahead and draw the "correct pinion angle" over the top of the sketch that is "full of hooey".
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 07:39 PM



Here are 2 drawings. In each the engine/trans assembly is lower than the rear and is in the car with the tailshaft 3 degrees down. In the top one the pinion angle is 6 degrees positive and the centerlines are parallel. In the bottom one it is 3 degrees negative and the centerlines are not parallel. Which way would you set up your car?
Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:04 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By DusterDave
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
I never mentioned anything about the ground, because the ground doesn't matter. Put a taller tire on and keep the same ride height, means the pinion is higher in the car, because the car sits over the tire more........... And as far as a handle on pinion angle, my handle is plenty good, some others around here, I am not so sure.

And Quicktree, if you have to ask me what positive pinion angle is, why are you even IN this discussion.

And still.......NOT ONE GURU has answered the question. Which WAS, if the front joint is lower than rear joint, the trans points toward the ground(and since some are SO caught up in exact numbers, lets say 3* tail down), which means the shaft runs UPHILL to pinion, would you roll the pinion UP 3*, to maintain a parallel angles, even though that HAS to put the joint broken over the WRONG way(positive).......when we ALL KNOW, or at least SHOULD know, that on acceleration the pinion climbs MORE and will make that joint angle even MORE wrong............waiting on an answer

How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!
Monte you know I am not asking you what positive pinion angle is. I was asking you what you were basing your statement off of. what is it in relation to. Positive to what??????

Positive with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Monte has explained several times that the driveline (trans/engine angle) is not considered, only the relationship of the back end of the driveshaft to pinion. Under power, you want the pinion to be in perfect alignment (or as close as possible without ever going positive) with the back end of the driveshaft, so you'll want to set the pinion angle several degrees negative with respect to the back end of the driveshaft. Hopefully that is an accurate interpretation of what Monte is trying to drive into the skulls of the unwashed masses.....LOL
get out of here, we are talking cars that go down a track not show poodles laugh2

Show poodles need proper pinion angle, too! devil
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:12 PM

If the transmission and pinion centerlines are parallel, the pinion angle in relation to the transmission is zero, not 6 degrees positive.
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:20 PM

Originally Posted By DoctorDiff
If the transmission and pinion centerlines are parallel, the pinion angle in relation to the transmission is zero, not 6 degrees positive.


I will agree with that. However, the difference between the driveshaft and pinion centerlines, which is what my definition of "pinion angle" is, is 6 degrees. If the d-shaft is running uphill 3 degrees and the pinion is pointed up 3 degrees, that's 6. The actual numbers would depend on height difference between the front and rear joints and the length of the d-shaft.
Posted By: Ohio Joe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:34 PM

Originally Posted By DoctorDiff
If the transmission and pinion centerlines are parallel, the pinion angle in relation to the transmission is zero, not 6 degrees positive.
. I agree when both parallels are the same, it's when u change the elevations and angles of those parallels and try to transmit power from one to the other that things get interesting!!!
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:44 PM

Notice in the top drawing on my diagram, that the pinion centerline is above the tailshaft centerline. If the trans and the front u-joint are higher than the rear, those lines would be reversed and it would be fairly easy to make them parallel and maintain the desired negative pinion angle at the same time.
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 08:51 PM

You must always take into consideration suspension type, vehicle usage and traction when setting up driveline angle and static pinion angle.

Regadless of the application, a 2 joint driveshaft will ALWAYS operate the best when the pinion is parallel to the transmission. Of course, the driveline operating angle can't be too severe that the U-joints bind.
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 09:11 PM

Once again, it does not matter if the pinion is higher or lower than the transmission. The same procedure applies:

1. Make the pinion parallel to the transmission as a base-line
2. Set the pinion downward an additional X degrees to compensate for suspension wind up.
3. The result is X degrees negative (static) pinion angle.

This is a perfect example of why the "other way" does not always work.
Posted By: skicker

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 09:12 PM

Originally Posted By CMcAllister


Here are 2 drawings. In each the engine/trans assembly is lower than the rear and is in the car with the tailshaft 3 degrees down. In the top one the pinion angle is 6 degrees positive and the centerlines are parallel. In the bottom one it is 3 degrees negative and the centerlines are not parallel. Which way would you set up your car?


I would be interested in knowing which of the above sketches is correct... I'll admit being a dumba$$...I have my yoke 3 degrees down from whatever the driveshaft is.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 10:54 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 11:05 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


I'm a slow car.. but I'm not telling anyone what to do.. I
do it my way.. and it works... my U-joints have been in there
so long its embarrassing
wave
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/07/15 11:06 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


I'm a slow car.. but I'm not telling anyone what to do.. I
do it my way.. and it works... my U-joints have been in there
so long its embarrassing
wave
same here
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:13 AM

I just now finished scaling and adjusting a stock front clip, backhalved, 9 second stickshift car. 4 link. Dana 60. 3500# full of fuel.

The trans is tail down 1.25 degress with a spacer under the mount to lift it up some. The drivesahft runs up towards the pinion 1.5 degrees. The pinion is 2.7 degrees down for a pinion angle of 1.2 negative. Kind of looks like the bottom drawing. That's how I sent it to the race track, again.

To make the centerlines parallel on this car would require a 3 degree positive pinion angle. And the front u-joint operating angle would likely exceed 4 degrees because rotating the rear around that far would raise the rear of the driveshaft up increasing the difference between the trans and the d-shaft. Everyone has an opinion of what is correct, and that's OK. This is how I did it.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:14 AM

Any of you that think the drawing I showed is CORRECT.......then there is no need for me to even continue in this discussion. In a RACE CAR, if you think it is desirable the have the u-joint over center, making the shaft and pinion come together to form a teepee, then there is nothing left for me to say, other than you have no clue how to set up a RACE car.

And whoever said the driveshaft doesn't even come into play as far as "pinion angle" is concerned is DEAD WRONG. Pinion angle is nothing more than the angle of the pinion TO the driveshaft, so yes, the driveshaft matters VERY much. The rest of this crap about parallel angles is "driveline" angle and does not matter when it comes to pinion angle. All I can say is Google is your friend.

It's apparent some don't get it and never will, so the rest of you can hash it out from here......McAllister, Bob George and a few others get it, but that's a short list........LOL!!!

Skicker........the bottom drawing is correct

Monte
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:57 AM

What does a caltracs car rotate when launching? What would the proper resting pinion angle be.
Posted By: skicker

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:17 AM

I have some parts to finish bolting back on the engine and then I'm going to check mine out...You guy's all have me curious as to what it really is. work
Mine would be a low 12 second car at best with probably zero traction issues but I would just as soon have it right... thumbs
Monte...the bottom diagram is similar to mine however with a stock 69 Dart chassis I don't see the trans being downhill at that extreme of an angle. I'll check it and find out...Thx...
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:22 AM

I don't see a problem with the set-up you posted.

If the transmission slopes downward 1.25 degrees toward the rear of the car and the pinion slopes downward 2.7 degrees toward the front of the car, the static pinion angle is 3.95 degrees negative, which is acceptable.

The pinion will "go positive" only if it rotates upward more than 3.95 degrees under power. In other words, 3.95" of upward rotation will cause the pinion to become parallel to the transmission.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:31 AM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
[i]
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith


How about a picture. So according to some of you THIS would be considered CORRECT since the engine/trans and rear are on the same angle. Even though the rear joint angle is over center and going to get worse on accel.........OK, find me a chassis guy who would set a rear angle up like this on a race car, thinking that is good to go and I will be quiet. For further clarification, we will even say this is where it is under power. Now I was always taught, that you NEVER want the rear joint to go over center under power in a race car.........but apparently it seems all those people who say that are full of hooey......LOL!!!



If in your picture the angles are in fact being measured under power, making the trans 3* down, and the pinion 3* up, this makes the tailshaft and pinion parallel - HOW IN THE H*** IS THE U-JOINT GOING OVER CENTER? It's the mirror image of the front, and would cancel out the angles. Since in most cases this would be a big tire - ladder bar/4 link situation with little movement from static to loaded, I would set the pinion at 0-1* up, figuring it would only gain 2* under power and end up at 3* UP to cancel out the 3* DOWN of the tailshaft. At that point the u-joint IS NOT "OVERCENTERED" - it hasn't went past the front u-joints mirrored angle.





Monte, Read this ABOVE, Do YOU , see any TP, angles here????

If SO, Show me. From YOUR Drawing, Nobody ever stated setting a rear up static and a Parallel angle with NO pinion adjustments as you would do with a Straight driveline for racing. You do it for BOTH. I SAY it Again, YOU do it for BOTH!!!!!!!

Your Drawing was a What if, but you stated happens many times. "SO HERE IS YOUR ANSWER"

Simply put, on a drivetrain that has a lower front u-joint pointed 3* down and a higher rear u-joint pointed 3* up,

That's a" Parallel Driveline".

Now, a True race car, Straight driveline, IF set up like you Should. "RIGHT" Its Also a "Parallel Driveline"


FROM there "BOTH" "BOTH" need pinion Adjustments FROM PARALLEL to account for axel wrap up.

Without that Adjustment, EVEN a Straightline driveline will "TEEPEE"


WHAT, if anything don't you understand about the above.

You stated I was a Expert, Im here to answer any further Questions for you. AS is, CAS, Evil Spirit, and others

SINCE, in Your mind, You keep thinking TP Effect, that tells me, your not getting it yet, clear as day to me.
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:37 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


You guys arguing with Monte, BG and whoever. I'm just sitting back laughing. In what are you faster? Do you even have a car? Lol or a wheelchair
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:44 AM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


You guys arguing with Monte, BG and whoever. I'm just sitting back laughing. In what are you faster? Do you even have a car? Lol or a wheelchair


Put your Johnson back in your Pocket. LOL. Its Not about Whos faster, or Whos Daddies Bigger.

Its about Whos Better looking, or maybe Pinion angles. lol
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:52 AM

Originally Posted By Sport440
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


You guys arguing with Monte, BG and whoever. I'm just sitting back laughing. In what are you faster? Do you even have a car? Lol or a wheelchair


Put your Johnson back in your Pocket. LOL. Its Not about Whos faster, or Whos Daddies Bigger.

Its about Whos Better looking, or maybe Pinion angles. lol


Lmao, then quicktree is the big loser here
Posted By: DusterDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 04:25 AM

I'm starting to wonder if Sport440 even knows who Monte is.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 04:38 AM

Originally Posted By CMcAllister
I just now finished scaling and adjusting a stock front clip, backhalved, 9 second stickshift car. 4 link. Dana 60. 3500# full of fuel.

The trans is tail down 1.25 degress with a spacer under the mount to lift it up some. The drivesahft runs up towards the pinion 1.5 degrees. The pinion is 2.7 degrees down for a pinion angle of 1.2 negative. Kind of looks like the bottom drawing. That's how I sent it to the race track, again.

To make the centerlines parallel on this car would require a 3 degree positive pinion angle. And the front u-joint operating angle would likely exceed 4 degrees because rotating the rear around that far would raise the rear of the driveshaft up increasing the difference between the trans and the d-shaft. Everyone has an opinion of what is correct, and that's OK. This is how I did it.
I have no idea how you came up with that work if the tail 1.25 down, 1.25 up would be 0* then you would roll it DOWN to what ever you wanted it.

Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 04:40 AM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


You guys arguing with Monte, BG and whoever. I'm just sitting back laughing. In what are you faster? Do you even have a car? Lol or a wheelchair
ok how much do you want to race for?i'll drag my wheelchair up there and drag that ass boogie

and since it wont let me quote your loser comment. how do you figure that? just look around there are a lot more people here that don't use the drive shaft then those that do.
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 04:40 AM

Anyone who thinks the laws of physics don't apply to a RACE CAR has "no clue how to set up a RACE car".

Regardless of how you define driveline angle, working angle, operating angle or pinion angle, please give me one reason why you don't want the pinion to run directly in line with, or parallel with the transmission when a RACE CAR is UNDER POWER.

Google is also your friend.

Did you even look at the video demonstrations in this thread?
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:25 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
what do you consider fast? I am faster than you shocked


You guys arguing with Monte, BG and whoever. I'm just sitting back laughing. In what are you faster? Do you even have a car? Lol or a wheelchair
ok how much do you want to race for?i'll drag my wheelchair up there and drag that ass boogie

and since it wont let me quote your loser comment. how do you figure that? just look around there are a lot more people here that don't use the drive shaft then those that do.


The loser comment was reffering to how pretty you are. And this thread reminds me of a bunch of broke jokes trying to argue with Jim Cramer on investing.
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:28 AM

Monty, why don't you tell us how to set up the correct pinion angle instead of telling everyone they are wrong? Tell us how YOU set up both scenarios, trans lower than the rear and trans above the rear. Leaf springs too. IMO, unless you provide some examples your posts are nothing more than opinion. Long on opinion and really short on facts.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:43 AM

Originally Posted By DusterDave
I'm starting to wonder if Sport440 even knows who Monte is.


Don't Worry about Who is Who.! Whats your stand on pinion angle from my above post???? You Count too.
Posted By: 383man

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 07:00 AM

One thing to me is how ever you set pinion angle as I have basically done it by the eng/trans and pinion centerlines paralell under power you always have to check the front and rear joint angles. You should want about .5 but no more then 2 degrees for joint angle. On a street car you want some joint angle so the joint works and keeps itself lubed. If any of them are to much even with the eng/trans and pinion lines parelell then you have to make the changes. Most stock body cars will never run into that but of course race cars with built chassis could have either the trans or pinion higher and to much even when you get the parellel centerlines if the joints have to much workable angle it will cause problems. Then you will have to modify it to correct it. To me thats sorta what Monte is saying about the positive angle which the bottom line is the joint wont work good at that angle. Thats one reason I always make a drawing of what I am working on so I know just what I am working with and if the shaft is running uphill or downhill. But I do use the parelell centerline process and I always double check the joint angles when done to be sure they are also in limits.


Whats the deal with how fast you are in this ??? Does it mean you are stupid if not fast enough ?? grin Ron
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 07:46 AM

Originally Posted By justinp61
Monty, why don't you tell us how to set up the correct pinion angle instead of telling everyone they are wrong? Tell us how YOU set up both scenarios, trans lower than the rear and trans above the rear. Leaf springs too. IMO, unless you provide some examples your posts are nothing more than opinion. Long on opinion and really short on facts.
I HAVE........NUMEROUS times, but everybody wants to argue about it, talk about parallel planes, driveline angles and a bunch of other stuff that DON'T matter......PINION ANGLE is simply THAT......PINION ANGLE. And pinion angle is SIMPLY defined as the relationship of the pinion and the driveshaft.....That's it, ALL there is to it....... So if you want 3 degrees of pinion angle, you break out the protractor, measure the pinion flange, the driveshaft angle, set it at 3 degrees difference and you are DONE......period, end of story. Don't matter if the trans points straight, down, up.........it don't freaking matter. So there, I have explained it for about the umpteenth time and shortly the others will be along talking about up and down angles, parallel universes, black holes and all kinds of other stuff that doesn't matter and how uninformed I am..........One more thing, ANY setup that has the pinion pointing UP and also the rear of the driveshaft pointing UP........is flat WRONG. The ONLY time and I repeat ONLY time the pinion could point UP and possibly be right, is if the REAR joint is LOWER than the front joint. In ANY scenario that the FRONT joint is LOWER than rear, the pinion should NEVER....EVER point UP. That's just as plain as I know how to make it.

And my FACTS, come from 35+ years of both building and setting up race cars, from Stockers to Pro-Mods. Not everybody, few in fact, have tube chassis cars, with the motor properly aligned to the rear to make things ideal. So in that scenario, you deal with the hand you are dealt. And ANY reputable chassis builder will tell you that IDEAL, is to have all this stuff in perfectly straight alignment when the car is under power. This fact the others do NOT argue, but this only happens in purpose built cars generally. So in lieu of "ideal" alignment, you do the best you can under given circumstances. THAT entails having it straight IN THE REAR while under power, the only angle being the FRONT joint.....and THAT is why PINION ANGLE is defined as the relationship of pinion flange to driveshaft. And that is why leafs, ladder bars, 4 links etc have different numbers. Some rotate more than others to align the pinion STRAIGHT with the driveshaft, while under power......

But like I said, others will be along shortly with things about equal joint angles, parallel planes and a bunch of other stuff that doesn't apply to RACE cars..........so form your own opinion. So there is NOTHING more I can say, nor can I be any more clear. Also, I won't change their minds and they won't change mine, so it is up to you to figure out who to listen to

Monte
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 07:52 AM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith


And whoever said the driveshaft doesn't even come into play as far as "pinion angle" is concerned is DEAD WRONG. Pinion angle is nothing more than the angle of the pinion TO the driveshaft, so yes, the driveshaft matters VERY much. The rest of this crap about parallel angles is "driveline" angle and does not matter when it comes to pinion angle. All I can say is Google is your friend.



Skicker........the bottom drawing is correct

Monte


As far as Google goes - Google "pinion angle" and you will be led to a variety of opinions, forums, and "tech" articles that pretty much mirror the posts here. Many simply call "pinion angle" the angle of the rear u-joint - many others call it the angle between the centerlines of the engine/trans and the pinion. I could post on a forum that you need a pig in the trunk to set correct pinion angle and it would appear on Google and somebody would believe it and quote it on a forum. So you can quote 10 that agree with you and I can 10 that agree with me and it's still just matters of opinion.

So here's the rub - call it what you want - pinion angle, rear u-joint operating angle, WHATEVER - only setting the rear angle to a spec and not referencing it to the trans is inviting driveline vibrations and reliability issues. Automatically turning the pinion nose down when the trans is also tipped down results in operating angles that are not parallel and results in a weaker driveline and possible vibration issues. I call pinion angle the total package - referencing the pinion to the engine/trans centerline - obviously you do not. To reference to pinion to the trans, the driveshaft does not need to be in.

So looking at the BIG PICTURE, when you consider strength and vibration, if your driveline angles, pinion angles, whatever you want to call them, are like the lower picture UNDER POWER and not parallel THEY ARE WRONG. The pinion doesn't get driven at a constant speed which is crucial to maximum strength and minimal vibration.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 10:26 AM



The loser comment was reffering to how pretty you are. And this thread reminds me of a bunch of broke jokes trying to argue with Jim Cramer on investing. [/quote]lol well we all know im purty laugh2
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 10:29 AM

now that we have this solved again, I see a nice 9" - 8-3/4 thread on the board laugh2
Posted By: Jerry Kathe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 12:13 PM

Monte....I get that your not budging on your opinion...and thats ok....but your wrong....period - get over it.

For those looking for facts and thoses independent from the sheep hearding concept of the urban legends. ...look no further than the professional presentations in this thread for the proper methods.....I believe one video clip was produced from the Dana Spicer corporation. Nothing more needs to be said.
Posted By: skicker

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 01:58 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
now that we have this solved again, I see a nice 9" - 8-3/4 thread on the board laugh2


Nothing like introducing ROUND 2... biggrin
Posted By: dthemi

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:14 PM

RALPH, LIKE I SAID...and Monte who's opinion about pinion should be agreed.

Slap the driveshaft in, check the angle against the diff yoke. Make sure you have at least 3 and go cat go. Bet it works better at 5

As for pinon having no effect in traction/hit with leafs or ladders, that's keyboard cowboy crap. It does help, and that's from actually adding pinion till it bites in SEVERAL cars, not watching engineering videos, and imagining what it must be like to go racing.

Like Monte said chassis cars are another deal entirely. I have an RJ car that only has 1.5 pinion, but the driveline is straight at the pinion. My ladder car has 6.
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:48 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
PINION ANGLE is simply THAT......PINION ANGLE. And pinion angle is SIMPLY defined as the relationship of the pinion and the driveshaft.....That's it, ALL there is to it....... So if you want 3 degrees of pinion angle, you break out the protractor, measure the pinion flange, the driveshaft angle, set it at 3 degrees difference and you are DONEMonte



Thanks, THAT'S is what I was looking for.
Posted By: GomangoCuda

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 02:58 PM

Quote:
I could post on a forum that you need a pig in the trunk to set correct pinion angle

Wait! Wait! I need a pig in the trunk? Does it have to be live? Can't I just go to Wallyworld and buy a couple of hams and put them in a cooler in the trunk? Or does it work better if they are hot? Should I cook them first? Can I make a sandwich when I get hungry? This pinion angle thing has me so confused. shruggy Oh heck i'm just going to measure it Monte's way and then measure it Drdiff's way and split the difference. But the darn ham sandwiches stay in the truck until I get hungry.
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 03:40 PM

Originally Posted By dthemi
RALPH, LIKE I SAID...

As for pinon having no effect in traction/hit with leafs or ladders, that's keyboard cowboy crap. It does help, and that's from actually adding pinion till it bites in SEVERAL cars, not watching engineering videos, and imagining what it must be like to go racing.



The manner in which you change the angle is what changes the traction, not the angle itself. When you adjust the angle on bar cars, you usually ALSO change wheelbase, ride height, chassis preload, etc. On leaf spring cars the shim changes ride height.

Picture what happens in a rear suspension. And mind you, I'm talking about making just minor pinion angle changes, and not correcting u-joints out of operating range. The driveshaft rotates the pinion, forcing the ring gear to rotate down, and the pinion tries to climb the ring gear and rotate the housing up. Changing the pinion angle does not add any additional rotating torque to the pinion - it only changes the place on the ring gear that the pinion applies it's force. It doesn't matter if the pinion is at the 8, 9, or 10 o'clock position - X amount of torque is going to try to rotate the ring gear X amount, and try to twist the axle X amount. PERIOD. It's no different than using a torque wrench - if you apply 100 ft/lbs of torque, does it matter if your handle is at the 3, 6, 9, or 12 o'clock position? OF COURSE NOT, so I don't understand why people claim it matters where the pinion is trying to rotate the ring gear from. Same amount of force - same E.T. I can't explain it any simpler, but I'm sure some people still won't get it. Still waiting for someone to show with some engineering logic that I'm wrong, but nobody from the last 10 times this was debated has stepped up.

This ain't my first rodeo - any chassis and engineering classes I completed were IN ADDITION TO, not instead of racing passes.
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:34 PM

Wow, I can't believe this is still goin strong but understand why and it's quite halarious indeed. Here's one, vacuum secondary carbs suck.......PERIOD!
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:41 PM

Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Wow, I can't believe this is still goin strong but understand why and it's quite halarious indeed. Here's one, vacuum secondary carbs suck.......PERIOD!


Not really - the higher atmospheric pressure actually forces air through the carb, not "vacuum" pulling it through as many blowhards contend (pun intended LOL). But I'm guessin' that wasn't what you were getting at.
Posted By: GomangoCuda

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:41 PM

Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Wow, I can't believe this is still goin strong but understand why and it's quite halarious indeed. Here's one, vacuum secondary carbs suck.......PERIOD!
Did you perhaps intend to post this in the "Old theories die hard" thread?
Posted By: GomangoCuda

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:52 PM

I'm kind of surprised that no one has posted any carnage stories with or without pics that might have been the result of using the wrong pinion angle method. Likewise nobody has reported any anecdotal evidence of E.T. or mph improvements after correcting their pinion angle. Is it possible that either method will get you close enough to not make a significant difference?

"If it is wrong but it works then it is not wrong"
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 05:54 PM

Originally Posted By GomangoCuda
Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Wow, I can't believe this is still goin strong but understand why and it's quite halarious indeed. Here's one, vacuum secondary carbs suck.......PERIOD!
Did you perhaps intend to post this in the "Old theories die hard" thread?


What we really need is an "I'm so gifted that the laws of geometry, physics, hydraulics, etc. don't apply to MEEEEE" thread. smoke Some of these people need to change the bong water before loading up another bowl . . .
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 06:03 PM

Originally Posted By GomangoCuda
I'm kind of surprised that no one has posted any carnage stories with or without pics that might have been the result of using the wrong pinion angle method. Likewise nobody has reported any anecdotal evidence of E.T. or mph improvements after correcting their pinion angle. Is it possible that either method will get you close enough to not make a significant difference?

"If it is wrong but it works then it is not wrong"


Quicktree blew up rears constantly whistling
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 06:04 PM

Originally Posted By GomangoCuda
I'm kind of surprised that no one has posted any carnage stories with or without pics that might have been the result of using the wrong pinion angle method. Likewise nobody has reported any anecdotal evidence of E.T. or mph improvements after correcting their pinion angle. Is it possible that either method will get you close enough to not make a significant difference?

"If it is wrong but it works then it is not wrong"


Incorrect angle will usually cause a vibration before it becomes a breakage issue. The opinion of what is normal vibrations in a race car varies greatly.

As to the anecdotes - while there has been a few - I showed my hand with "mechanical logic" on why pinion angle doesn't effect traction. While I hear "anecdotes" that it can, NOBODY has ever come forward that can explain exactly how it works. I'll take mechanical logic over anecdotes any day - others can form their OPINIONS as they wish. up
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 06:28 PM

My point was the PERIOD in caps which closes off any other options or facts because I said so. As far as vacuum secondary carbs go, I don't know enuff about making them as good as a dp and don't think they are and converted two in the last month with way better results than the vc's.
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 06:43 PM

Originally Posted By Thumperdart
My point was the PERIOD in caps which closes off any other options or facts because I said so. As far as vacuum secondary carbs go, I don't know enuff about making them as good as a dp and don't think they are and converted two in the last month with way better results than the vc's.



"Because I said so" logic only worked for my Mom until I was about 12, so for the last 40+ years I have usually required some meat with my 'taters cool
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 06:47 PM

Life's a game, choose your path and let er rip as far as I'm concerned.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 07:28 PM

Last observation on the subject..........seems the guys who BUILD or RACE cars and who have been doing it a long time, McAllister, Bob George, Darren Tedder, Al Alguire, myself.......seem to do it one way and the keyboard warriors and parts vendors do it another.........hmmm.....Oh yeah, lets not leave out David Wolfe, builds car for a living........he apparently is all wrong as well.

Evil, your wrong and Darren Tedder is right. Suspension angle changes aside, more pinion angle CAN make a leaf car hit the tire harder. You can crunch all the numbers you want and SHOW any amount of proof it can't help........but it does at the track and that is what matters. That's an "old school" trick that was used long ago when tracks and tires were junk, but it DID work.........wouldn't be needed today. Now, you want "engineering" logic as to why, sorry can't help you, even though I have mechanical engineering background myself, just know it works. But it is nothing new for the "numbers" not to make sense. How many millions of new things you think have been engineered that SHOULD have been better, but were not. Race cars in particular are full of things that SHOULD or should NOT work better or worse.........but what SHOULD happen at times don't always work out like that

Oh, and Jerry, YOU are wrong, how about YOU get over it


Monte
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 08:12 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By GomangoCuda
I'm kind of surprised that no one has posted any carnage stories with or without pics that might have been the result of using the wrong pinion angle method. Likewise nobody has reported any anecdotal evidence of E.T. or mph improvements after correcting their pinion angle. Is it possible that either method will get you close enough to not make a significant difference?

"If it is wrong but it works then it is not wrong"


Quicktree blew up rears constantly whistling
I'm going to pretend you didn't say that. I have nothing to do with your rear I dont swing that way musta been your boyfriend
Posted By: B G Racing

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 09:28 PM

Everyone is taking this far beyond the level of commonsence comprehension.Though there are many ways to set the angles it is generally agreed that if your working with a chassis that already has the drive train fixed and mounted then you can only deal within the limits of the adjustments that are the simplest to achieve.Since the engine and trans are located where the manufacture placed them and the only thing you change is the ride height and type of rear suspension you only need to keep the angles as near parallel as possible,both up and down and side to side and with in the working range of u-joints.The only adjustment you need concern yourself with is how much movement occurs under power and what angle you have to set at static to have the ideal aglinment under power.Since your not changing the fixed componants that leaves the observed static angle and amont of rotation and movement that occurs under power.We used GO-Pro cameras under some of of our cars to view this and found that there are many things that can determine the end setting.Most any or all correction can be made at the driveshaft and pinion u-joint and most all aftermarket suspensions give you that adjustibility.When building a chassis car it is much easier,once you set your engine and trans where you want it just point the pinion at the trans output shaft either upward or downward, then adjust the bars for the recommended final angle.Not everything has to be a constant debate,if you disagree that's fine,remember conversation between people should be an exchange of ideas and knowledge,an argument is an exchange of ignorance.Or the best is ones theory,ie: a theory a fact,opinion,pre-supposition or conjecture that can't be proven or disproven.. fan
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 10:47 PM

so what you are saying is this video doesn't mean a thing?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=470937339716400&fref=nf

and it's ok to have the ujoints turn at a different speed? and it's ok to put pressure on the output shaft>
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/08/15 11:13 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
so what you are saying is this video doesn't mean a thing?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=470937339716400&fref=nf

and it's ok to have the ujoints turn at a different speed? and it's ok to put pressure on the output shaft>


That example is around 40 degrees. Not 1 or 2 a car might see. Just because whats his name Dave Morgan had sweet tea at your house does not make him right
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 12:26 AM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
so what you are saying is this video doesn't mean a thing?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=470937339716400&fref=nf

and it's ok to have the ujoints turn at a different speed? and it's ok to put pressure on the output shaft>


That example is around 40 degrees. Not 1 or 2 a car might see. Just because whats his name Dave Morgan had sweet tea at your house does not make him right
really? oh I forgot Dave Morgan doesn't know anything neither does Rossler, Calverts or any other chassis/car people who use this method.I get it they are all stupid laugh2
Posted By: Just-a-dart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 01:47 AM

Thanks guys for a interesting read. drinking can we do it again in 6 months
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 02:26 AM

Originally Posted By Just-a-dart
Thanks guys for a interesting read. drinking can we do it again in 6 months
we are probably good until next year laugh2
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 02:51 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Just-a-dart
Thanks guys for a interesting read. drinking can we do it again in 6 months
we are probably good until next year laugh2


You do make good sweet tea, i would tell you anything you wanted to hear for some right now
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 03:24 AM

Well, I don't believe anyone has been convinced to change their minds about anything they've been doing, but I enjoy a lively conversation. I always end up googling and looking at new things and usually learn something new, even if it's not directly related to the subject at hand.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 04:48 AM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Just-a-dart
Thanks guys for a interesting read. drinking can we do it again in 6 months
we are probably good until next year laugh2


You do make good sweet tea, i would tell you anything you wanted to hear for some right now
i would tell you how to make it but you would stand there and argue about it. laugh2
Posted By: GomangoCuda

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 05:03 AM

Originally Posted By Just-a-dart
Thanks guys for a interesting read. drinking can we do it again in 6 months

It will be much sooner than that.

Quote:
But it is nothing new for the "numbers" not to make sense. How many millions of new things you think have been engineered that SHOULD have been better, but were not. Race cars in particular are full of things that SHOULD or should NOT work better or worse.........but what SHOULD happen at times don't always work out like that

Again - If it's wrong but it works it is not wrong.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 05:35 AM

Funny how these laws of absolute physics and engineering apparently don't apply to 4 wheel drive vehicles. Do they not have driveshafts and u-joints like cars. Do they not NEED to comply with this parallel universe theory to be "right". Because I have three 4 wheel drives sitting around here right now. They all have the engine/trans combo level in the vehicle........yet not ONE of then has neither the front nor the rear pinion shaft parallel with the engine centerline. They don't shake, they don't throw joints out and they came that way from the factory. Well obviously somebody there missed the memo on proper angles..........I better get on the horn and straighten this out asap. My 75 CJ5 Jeep has 350,000 miles on it. Wonder if I can get some warranty service on it, since something was obviously done wrong at the factory...............LOL!!!

Monte
Posted By: dthemi

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 01:37 PM

These conversations remind me of being a young boy, before any of us got laid. We'd all heard about it, read about it, and seen plenty of pictures of naked ladies.

Not ever getting any never stopped us from talking about, and being experts though
Posted By: Jerry Kathe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 01:58 PM

Monte…..your jeep has a CV shaft in it….do you understand what this is or how it works? My guess is no or you wouldn't have used this to push your belief.

Bottom line, OP asked a question on how to set this characteristic, there is only one correct way, then there are the wrong ways and the close enough ways. Since all require the same physical effort to accomplish, why be defiant on the correct way?

Coming from someone who is constantly in search of performance gains, why would you give up free benefits? We could probably agree that the performance loss from counteracting orbits of the drive and driven universal joints (in most cases) are immeasurable, but is it logical to ignore it?

Quick analogy…….did you spend any money on ceramic wheel bearings for your hot rod?.....if you have then revisit the drive line inefficiencies you are leaving on the table.

I apologize if I came off a little strong, but your first reply post with the cap lock emphasized phrasing kind of set me off. Let’s just give the OP facts and not preferences.

Additionally, I don’t get on here a ton, so I wasn’t aware that this subject has the mileage that is does, but it is no surprise that the outcome is as such. Sure makes one apprehensive with assisting others…..

BTW…..my or any other persons credentials are not the determining factor when it comes to credibility…..but FWIW….I have much experience with items like keyboards….and IHRA Pro Stock , NHRA Comp Eliminator, complete construction of tube chassis cars (not u weld it kits), back- half, chassis up grades and set ups…..probably have as many or more sub 8 second passes than anyone on this board – naturally aspirated BTW……all this is a product of over 38 years’ worth of hands on.

Not trying to bust your bubble…..just trying to add positive contribution to this community……so don’t be so quick to judge.
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 03:18 PM

For years this argument just amazes me. The parallel driveline guys set up there leaf spring suspension in their beautiful hemi whatever and argue nonstop about that is the way it needs to be because the ends rotate at different speeds yet never once thinking about how there drivetrain is NOT parallel on the 20 mile trip to the car show. Their drivetrain may never ever see that parellel unless they are at the track and have made a nice clean pass.

I used leaf spring as an example as to how silly this arguement is. There is no way the driveline could ever be parallel under normal driving conditions except at the track. When you get to 3 and 4 link suspensions, the angles get smaller to the point of there may only be 1 degree difference in a car and because the car has a suspension that constantly changes, there is no way you can make the arguement that those of us that set up pinion angle off the driveshaft are wrong.

But for us driveshaft angle guys, we can argue that the parallel guys are wrong if they set up there drivelines with a positive angle at the rear joint. And this is the reason why we say not to use the parallel method.
Posted By: CMcAllister

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 04:02 PM

Bottom line, there are too many variables for any one method to be the absolute correct answer or even possible. Cars are lowered, rears are located at different heights, engine/trans assemblies are all over the place, up, down, angled forward, backward, the distance between u-joints can vary a great deal, etc., etc. Now if you build a car ground up, you can achieve a perfect configuration. Anything else is a "do the best you can with what you got" situation 90% of the time. Keeping the operating angles of the front and rear joints as close to equal as possible is important. The only rule that needs to always be observed in a drag car is that the correct pinion angle has to be maintained and never be allowed to go positive. That's my final answer for the million dollars.
Posted By: KDY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 04:23 PM

Monte tunes/built a full body door car that has run 4 teens at 2700lb. I've seen DTHemi's full body steet car spot dragsters at my local track. Yet people continue to argue with them....

I also haven't seen them beat their chest about what they've accomplished. They just share their knowledge.
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 05:56 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Last observation on the subject..........seems the guys who BUILD or RACE cars and who have been doing it a long time, McAllister, Bob George, Darren Tedder, Al Alguire, myself.......seem to do it one way and the keyboard warriors and parts vendors do it another.........hmmm.....Oh yeah, lets not leave out David Wolfe, builds car for a living........he apparently is all wrong as well.

Evil, your wrong and Darren Tedder is right. Suspension angle changes aside, more pinion angle CAN make a leaf car hit the tire harder. You can crunch all the numbers you want and SHOW any amount of proof it can't help........but it does at the track and that is what matters. That's an "old school" trick that was used long ago when tracks and tires were junk, but it DID work.........wouldn't be needed today. Now, you want "engineering" logic as to why, sorry can't help you, even though I have mechanical engineering background myself, just know it works. But it is nothing new for the "numbers" not to make sense. How many millions of new things you think have been engineered that SHOULD have been better, but were not. Race cars in particular are full of things that SHOULD or should NOT work better or worse.........but what SHOULD happen at times don't always work out like that

Oh, and Jerry, YOU are wrong, how about YOU get over it


Monte


Unless you cut the perches off and re-weld them every time you make a pinion adjustment, you are making other changes that affect traction. Anything that you do that effects ride height changes static/instant centers and CHANGES TRACTION. Using a shim changes rear ride height, which CHANGES TRACTION. Moving the front mount point up or down to adjust pinion angle changes ride height and CHANGES TRACTION. Simply clamping the front segment together, Cal Trac bars, slapper bars, etc. shanges the spring rate which CHANGES TRACTION. Pretty much anything that you do, other that re-welding the perches back in the same location/different angle CHANGES OTHER THINGS WHICH IS WHAT ACTUALLY CHANGES THE TRACTION.

You guys aren't the only ones that ever raced or built cars, chassis, etc. I've welded a few bars and made a few passes myself, starting in the mid 70's at Detroit Dragway, among other places. The fact that I never tried to make a living at racing doesn't mean that I never raced successfully or built cars CORRECTLY.

And as to the guys that have been doing things forever, so it must be right. Over 20 years ago I was having a driveshaft made for a car, and to make a long story short, they hand me a shaft with the u-joint grease zerks lined up. I told them that I didn't want that style joint, and they had them installed wrong, anyways. He very arrogantly informed me that was the correct way and he had been doing it that way for over 20 years. I explained to him that for 20 years he was doing it wrong - under power the joint is stronger when you are compressing the zerk hole, not opening it. I then showed him in the Spicer powertrain book where it explained the same thing. Yeah, it will work that way; most won't know the difference - but in my case I had ordered a performance shaft and it wasn't what I needed. Fast forward 20+ years - a friend manages that shop now. I had them build me a shaft for my Dakota. He hands me a shaft with the u-joints installed with the grease zerks lined up. When I mentioned it to him, his boss comes out of the office and informs me that they have been doing it that way over 40 years. I laughed and left the shaft there and ordered one from AutoZone. It came with the grease fittings correctly staggered LOL.

Morel of the story is you can show some people why they are doing something "wrong" and show them why it is "wrong" but they refuse to accept common sense logic or "textbook explanations". I may be hardheaded, but I try to learn something new every day, and I'm not so blatantly arrogant that I can't accept help from others. I take things at face value, not implied worth - I evaluate the material, instead of simply accepting opinions. I am not a sheep that can be blindly led down a blind path without reason. If that offends people or causes differences in opinion, so be it.

Monty, you are obviously an intelligent person, and believe it or not, I respect your opinion. We simply dis-agree. You may be right - I may be right, or it may be somewhere in the middle. But one area that you are dead wrong is assuming that I have no experience at racing or building cars - far from it. I've spent far more time in the shop or at the track than I have at the keyboard.

It's been FUN up
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 06:23 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
For years this argument just amazes me. The parallel driveline guys set up there leaf spring suspension in their beautiful hemi whatever and argue nonstop about that is the way it needs to be because the ends rotate at different speeds yet never once thinking about how there drivetrain is NOT parallel on the 20 mile trip to the car show. Their drivetrain may never ever see that parellel unless they are at the track and have made a nice clean pass.


But for us driveshaft angle guys, we can argue that the parallel guys are wrong if they set up there drivelines with a positive angle at the rear joint. And this is the reason why we say not to use the parallel method.


For the first part. The drive shaft in cruise mode is lightly loaded and doesn't need the maximum strength that a dragstrip pass requires. And being lightly loaded the extra movement shouldn't cause excessive wear. Also, I am a firm believer that if a leaf spring car rotates the axle more than 3-4* under power, that steps need to be taken to limit that rotation. I believe the x-tra angle in the cruise mode to correct the angle under power is the lesser evil to bandage a poor suspension design. Leaf springs, by nature, are incorrect for the application - a spring is intended to store and release energy, not transmit power. Look at the "bandaids" for them - all fixes either stiffen the front segment or lock it out completely.

As to the second part. If under power you have -3* at the front and +3* in the rear. The driveshaft is parallel. The pinion is driven at a constant speed. How is the rear joint any weaker? 3* operating angle is 3* operating angle, period. The u-joint doesn't know or care - or +. Angle is angle. It has "X" strength at "X" angle - PERIOD. So please show me how the joint can be weaker simply by flipping it over?
Posted By: WHITEDART

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 06:31 PM

the name of this thread should be a opinion angle
Posted By: WHITEDART

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 06:35 PM

A$$ HOLE steering wheels and peanut butter
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 06:36 PM

Originally Posted By WHITEDART
the name of this thread should be a opinion angle


Or typing and debate 101 boogie
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 06:39 PM

Originally Posted By WHITEDART
A$$ HOLE steering wheels and peanut butter


The Technicolor Penguin fears no condiments . . . tsk
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 07:46 PM

Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Monte…..your jeep has a CV shaft in it….do you understand what this is or how it works? My guess is no or you wouldn't have used this to push your belief.

Seriously, you think I don't know what a CV joint is??? And NO, my CJ5 does NOT have CV joints and here is a couple pics to prove it. This is stone stock, factory suspension from AMC. Single flanges and a single trunion joint, both front and rear. Didn't bother to pull skid plate to show joint at transfer case, but it's the same as rear, all single trunion. Nor does my lifted early 80s Power Wagon have CV joints. Maybe it is just my camera angle, but these seem to be pretty damn far from parallel planes..........LOL!!!


I have had this JEEP a LONG time and have never put the first joint in it myself.

You guys are so obsessed with equal angles to keep the shaft from speeding and slowing, that you overlook one other important fact and that is which setup is easier to turn and eats less power. Less angles, eat less power. Now unfortunately, straight at one end and an angle at the other DOES vary joint speed, that I will NOT argue.......BUT obviously it is NOT a big deal as there are millions of vehicles on the road and track, this very same way. So the question is which way transfers more POWER. As with anything else, it is all about leverage. More angles, less leverage.

Monte
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 07:59 PM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Last observation on the subject..........seems the guys who BUILD or RACE cars and who have been doing it a long time, McAllister, Bob George, Darren Tedder, Al Alguire, myself.......seem to do it one way and the keyboard warriors and parts vendors do it another.........hmmm.....Oh yeah, lets not leave out David Wolfe, builds car for a living........he apparently is all wrong as well.

Evil, your wrong and Darren Tedder is right. Suspension angle changes aside, more pinion angle CAN make a leaf car hit the tire harder. You can crunch all the numbers you want and SHOW any amount of proof it can't help........but it does at the track and that is what matters. That's an "old school" trick that was used long ago when tracks and tires were junk, but it DID work.........wouldn't be needed today. Now, you want "engineering" logic as to why, sorry can't help you, even though I have mechanical engineering background myself, just know it works. But it is nothing new for the "numbers" not to make sense. How many millions of new things you think have been engineered that SHOULD have been better, but were not. Race cars in particular are full of things that SHOULD or should NOT work better or worse.........but what SHOULD happen at times don't always work out like that

Oh, and Jerry, YOU are wrong, how about YOU get over it


Monte


Unless you cut the perches off and re-weld them every time you make a pinion adjustment, you are making other changes that affect traction. Anything that you do that effects ride height changes static/instant centers and CHANGES TRACTION. Using a shim changes rear ride height, which CHANGES TRACTION. Moving the front mount point up or down to adjust pinion angle changes ride height and CHANGES TRACTION. Simply clamping the front segment together, Cal Trac bars, slapper bars, etc. shanges the spring rate which CHANGES TRACTION. Pretty much anything that you do, other that re-welding the perches back in the same location/different angle CHANGES OTHER THINGS WHICH IS WHAT ACTUALLY CHANGES THE TRACTION.

You guys aren't the only ones that ever raced or built cars, chassis, etc. I've welded a few bars and made a few passes myself, starting in the mid 70's at Detroit Dragway, among other places. The fact that I never tried to make a living at racing doesn't mean that I never raced successfully or built cars CORRECTLY.

And as to the guys that have been doing things forever, so it must be right. Over 20 years ago I was having a driveshaft made for a car, and to make a long story short, they hand me a shaft with the u-joint grease zerks lined up. I told them that I didn't want that style joint, and they had them installed wrong, anyways. He very arrogantly informed me that was the correct way and he had been doing it that way for over 20 years. I explained to him that for 20 years he was doing it wrong - under power the joint is stronger when you are compressing the zerk hole, not opening it. I then showed him in the Spicer powertrain book where it explained the same thing. Yeah, it will work that way; most won't know the difference - but in my case I had ordered a performance shaft and it wasn't what I needed. Fast forward 20+ years - a friend manages that shop now. I had them build me a shaft for my Dakota. He hands me a shaft with the u-joints installed with the grease zerks lined up. When I mentioned it to him, his boss comes out of the office and informs me that they have been doing it that way over 40 years. I laughed and left the shaft there and ordered one from AutoZone. It came with the grease fittings correctly staggered LOL.

Morel of the story is you can show some people why they are doing something "wrong" and show them why it is "wrong" but they refuse to accept common sense logic or "textbook explanations". I may be hardheaded, but I try to learn something new every day, and I'm not so blatantly arrogant that I can't accept help from others. I take things at face value, not implied worth - I evaluate the material, instead of simply accepting opinions. I am not a sheep that can be blindly led down a blind path without reason. If that offends people or causes differences in opinion, so be it.

Monty, you are obviously an intelligent person, and believe it or not, I respect your opinion. We simply dis-agree. You may be right - I may be right, or it may be somewhere in the middle. But one area that you are dead wrong is assuming that I have no experience at racing or building cars - far from it. I've spent far more time in the shop or at the track than I have at the keyboard.

It's been FUN up

On a leaf car, when you shim the pinion down.......have you changed the spring, have you changed the pickup point, have you changed the leverage point on the chassis, or have you changed the instant center........the answer to all is NO. The amount of ride height change with a 2* shim MIGHT be a 1/4".

On a 4-bar car, you shorten the top, lengthen the bottom and you have put more pinion angle in the car, with the SAME instant center, the SAME ride height, the SAME everything, but it WILL hit the tire harder. Every action or force, has an opposite and equal reaction. Angles DO change that. So the angle that the force hits the pinion can change how the housing initially reacts as the pinion trying to climb the ring gear is what rotates a housing in the first place. All about leverage. Now MORE angle at the pinion WILL eat some power, but it will initially hit the tire harder. So maybe THATS why it will help it hook, who knows, but it will. Like I said though, would never do this today with better tires and tracks.............but we used to. Now days you adjust the suspension to hit the tire and set the joint to eat as little power as possible.

My theory and it is ONLY a theory as to why this works, is that with excessive pinion angle and the way it speeds the joint, is that on initial "hit" with lots of pinion angle, is that the joint tries to "throw" the pinion up, which rotates the housing faster, which will hit the tire harder. Don't know if that is what it does, but is only legitimate reason I can come up with.

On a modern car with a data logger, shock sensors, pressure transducers and other things, it would actually be very EASY to test. But whats the point, I really don't care enough to find out..........Although I will point out something that happened recently that I just thought about. A customer with a new 4-link car that I set up. I set the front/rear percentages, set the 4-link, shocks and everything else. It SHOULD have worked just fine. When it was carried to the track, it was just "crushing" the tire and should not have been. Finally got him to bring it here and sure enough, it was trying to put the rims through the track. So I am jacking the car up to move the 4-link, when I notice it has about 6* of pinion angle. Asked him who changed it. He said the body shop took the rear apart to powder coat the bars(guess he didn't like my rattle can job)........this I did NOT know. Anyway, set the pinion angle back to 1.5* and car acted like it SHOULD have. This is a 2600 car with a 4-link, 738 nitrous motor and a 10.5x 29.5 M/T slick. Last pass that day had a 1.03 sixty foot. Earlier was in the teens, just "crushing" the tire. So, form your own conclusions. I form mine by what happens to me at the track, not by what a formula tells me "should" happen
Posted By: NITROUSN

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:25 PM

Monte on this pic the shaft is out of phase and the red dust by the rear cap indicates a bad joint.

Attached picture Jeep rear_zpsmnmymtgo.jpg
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:30 PM

Here's a video I stumbled on, I'm guessing it's a truck, leaf springs and no traction devices. You can see how much the pinion rotates just under normal driving. It's not a race car but interesting (to me) none the less.


Sorry guys I lost the link and can't find it. down
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:31 PM

Originally Posted By NITROUSN
Monte on this pic the shaft is out of phase and the red dust by the rear cap indicates a bad joint.

So is your suggestion to point the pinion straight ahead, to "equal" the planes? Can you imagine the angle the shaft will be on? Sorry, believe I will PASS on the fix...........And the red you see is not dust, but red colored dust seals on the joint. I have had this thing a LONG time. I believe if it had a bad joint, I would know it........Plus, this is how it came from the factory
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:34 PM

Monte they dang near look parallel now
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:40 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By NITROUSN
Monte on this pic the shaft is out of phase and the red dust by the rear cap indicates a bad joint.

So is your suggestion to point the pinion straight ahead, to "equal" the planes? Can you imagine the angle the shaft will be on? Sorry, believe I will PASS on the fix...........And the red you see is not dust, but red colored dust seals on the joint. I have had this thing a LONG time. I believe if it had a bad joint, I would know it........Plus, this is how it came from the factory


Monte.. he is referring to the location of the U-joint caps
but if I recall that spline section is a one location only so
you cant change it... but normally the caps are square to each
other
wave
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:41 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
Posted By: NITROUSN

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:44 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By NITROUSN
Monte on this pic the shaft is out of phase and the red dust by the rear cap indicates a bad joint.

So is your suggestion to point the pinion straight ahead, to "equal" the planes? Can you imagine the angle the shaft will be on? Sorry, believe I will PASS on the fix...........And the red you see is not dust, but red colored dust seals on the joint. I have had this thing a LONG time. I believe if it had a bad joint, I would know it........Plus, this is how it came from the factory


I am not talking about angles I am talking about the joint phasing. Looks to me like the shaft is one spline out of time. If its red dust boots fine. Just red dust 99 percent of the time indicate rusted grinding up rollers in the cap. I am not stirring a pot I just thought my suggestions would be helpful.

Attached picture jeep 123.JPG
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:46 PM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By NITROUSN
Monte on this pic the shaft is out of phase and the red dust by the rear cap indicates a bad joint.

So is your suggestion to point the pinion straight ahead, to "equal" the planes? Can you imagine the angle the shaft will be on? Sorry, believe I will PASS on the fix...........And the red you see is not dust, but red colored dust seals on the joint. I have had this thing a LONG time. I believe if it had a bad joint, I would know it........Plus, this is how it came from the factory


Monte.. he is referring to the location of the U-joint caps
but if I recall that spline section is a one location only so
you cant change it... but normally the caps are square to each
other
wave
True..........just caught the "phase" comment, assumed he was talking about something else. But you are right, the shaft is out of phase. Don't know if that is a one position slip joint or not. I have NEVER had the shaft out myself, but it doesn't vibrate now, so would hate to fool with it...... Clock it right and it might shake my teeth out........LOL!!!

I bought this thing as a "beater" years ago just to play around with. I don't work on it, I drive it. And today is the first time I have ever even looked at the drive shafts more than passing..........LOL!!!........I do NEED to see if I can clock that cap right though.....good catch
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:48 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.
Posted By: pittsburghracer

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:53 PM

Next weeks topic.


Proper U-joint installation " why and how " LOL.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 08:57 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.


Tony... what happened to the parallel to the trans thing.. that
"pinion angle" is close to zero but about 30* off of the trans angle
wave
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 09:03 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.
You have GOT to be kidding me?...........but I just went and put my digital protractor on it for grins. The motor/trans is on a 2* down in rear angle. The pinion is pointed up 18* and the driveshaft is on a 21* down angle..........sooo, if my math is correct, it has 3* of pinion angle and the driveline angle is 16* AWAY from parallel.............nah, that's not "far off".......LOL!!!

Mr.P.........now that doesn't apply to 4 wheel drive......they're "magic' shafts and angles. I mean that can be the only "real" difference.....right?.........LOL!!!

Monte
Posted By: dthemi

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 09:18 PM

A guy asks a question about pinion angle to put his car together to go racing. What does he get? A load of Poindexter horse crap that does him zero good, and may confuse what he's doing. The physics of angles are no mystery to anyone with high school geometry, and basic trig. Does any of that crap get the guy to the track? In no way does it do anything of benefit. He has what he has to work with, and that's that. We also know what is effected by changing angles. Does the guy working his butt of to go to the track need any of that?
Posted By: sixpackgut

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 09:23 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.


A digital one, because Dave Morgan's book said they are the best. laugh2
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 09:36 PM

Jeep CJs are not noted for their quiet ride. Of course the driveshaft will still spin like that, but it is far from ideal.

BTW, the slip yoke splines are probably so worn it makes your driveshaft out of phase. Wind noise and knobby tires mask the symptoms, however.

Since we are talking about stock vehicles, the transmission and rear pinion is relatively parallel on my 300,000 mile 4-WD '95 Dodge diesel with original U-joints. The inconsistent front pinion angle is covered by a CV joint installed off the transfer case.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 09:45 PM

And HERE it is after pages of meaningless back and forth.........is it IDEAL.....NO......does it work just fine.......YES. So bottom line, in a car with the motor mounted in the stock location, should you be overly concerned about it being "perfect"........NO, because it is simply NOT going to be. Set it within a workable angle at the rear, the front is what it is and go RACE the car.

Monte
Posted By: HotRodDave

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 10:58 PM

In the 4x4 world they have to make all kinds of compromise to get the driveshaft to be acceptable. Turning that pinion down probably will make the angle to extreme for the u joint to handle, I had a jacked up ramcharger in here where they made them parralell but it ate u joints like crazy as the joints were maxing out and hitting themselves, we made the angle "wrong" and the vibration went away and so far no more joints gettin wasted. It is not ideal but just has to be done that way no way around it on a short wheel base jacked up rig. I think he could have gone with a CV shaft but it would have been more money than the truck was worth.

On leaf spring street cars I shoot for parralell or even put the pinion pointing 1 -2 degrees less than the engine/trans center. I don't know if that is ideal but has worked for me to keep vibration away and long u joint life. If it is powerful enough to twist the spring that bad I add a leaf, cal trac, clamp the front segment or even gasp! Pinion snubber.


I confess I do not do much race car stuff, no race tracks around here.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 11:08 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.
You have GOT to be kidding me?...........but I just went and put my digital protractor on it for grins. The motor/trans is on a 2* down in rear angle. The pinion is pointed up 18* and the driveshaft is on a 21* down angle..........sooo, if my math is correct, it has 3* of pinion angle and the driveline angle is 16* AWAY from parallel.............nah, that's not "far off".......LOL!!!

Mr.P.........now that doesn't apply to 4 wheel drive......they're "magic' shafts and angles. I mean that can be the only "real" difference.....right?.........LOL!!!

Monte
the picture is very deceptive looking to me so don't go getting your panties in a bunch
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 11:12 PM

Originally Posted By sixpackgut
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Monte they dang near look parallel now
You're smoking crack. The drive shaft is nearly inline with the pinion shaft and look at the joint on the back of the transfer case.............You think THAT is parallel centerline angles.......no wonder you have a hard time grasping the concept.........LOL!!!
it's not that far off, put an angle finder on it.


A digital one, because Dave Morgan's book said they are the best. laugh2
boy you are really down on Dave Morgan, I am sure you are much smarter than he is.
Posted By: 383man

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 11:22 PM

When you look at the pic Monte posted it makes me realize to a point you are all right. I was taught the trans and pinion to be on paralell lines under power but I also agree like on 4wd trucks when the height of the trans and pinion are alot different you wont be able to use the parelell line setup some times. As I say I was taught to have the trans and pinion basically on the same parelell centerlines but not the same line. But that was also for basically stock body cars. I know if I was setting up a vehicle where the trans is alot higher then the diff you may not be able to make the paralell line setup work at all so you have to use common sense and set the u-joints angles as best that can be for the setup. Many times and this happens alot on race cars where you may have to move away some from the therory that we learnt and just use common sense. And also how ever you set it up if you have a vibration you know you have to change it and make it right. Myself I agree with most of what I have read on here as like Monte said with race cars you have to use what works best. Thats also the reason I always check the height of the trans and diff centerlines and draw a pic just so I can kinda see what I want to setup and if it makes sense on that combo.

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron
Posted By: justinp61

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 11:43 PM

Originally Posted By 383man

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron


The 8 3/4 vs 9" thread is still going strong. catfight
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/09/15 11:48 PM

Originally Posted By justinp61
Originally Posted By 383man

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron


The 8 3/4 vs 9" thread is still going strong. catfight


Not for me any more
wave
Posted By: DoctorDiff

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 01:10 AM

Severe U-joint angles caused by a short wheel base and a lifted suspension can often be remedied by installing a CV joint on the transmisson end of the driveshaft, then pointing the pinion directly at the transmission/transfer case. This is the reason most modern 4 x 4 trucks use a CV joint on the front. A TWO-JOINT driveshaft is not designed to work with this configuration, however.

Most drag or street car suspensions can be adjusted so the pinion becomes parallel with the transmission when the vehicle is under power because these types of cars don't exhibit severe U-joint angles.
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 04:24 AM

This commercial somehow seems to apply to some of the setting methods and results mentioned here. "It doesn't matter, any angle".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKqJjTIZgO8





Posted By: MattW

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 01:31 PM

Month can you make another sketch of what the pinion angle looks like at rest and what it should look like under power?
I've just lost 10 minutes of my life reading this and I'm still no further ahead. Lol
Caltracks A body stock trans Location.
A picture, drawing would be easier to understand than explaining it.
THX. Matt
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 02:22 PM

Originally Posted By MattW
Month can you make another sketch of what the pinion angle looks like at rest and what it should look like under power?
I've just lost 10 minutes of my life reading this and I'm still no further ahead. Lol
Caltracks A body stock trans Location.
A picture, drawing would be easier to understand than explaining it.
THX. Matt
Matt I am not trying to convince you like Monte says, but Calvert (the people you designed and makes Caltracks) say to set the angles parallel. now you can do what you want, just keep that in mind. I know Monte says they don't know what they are doing so you decide.
Posted By: Jerry Kathe

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 02:37 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Monte…..your jeep has a CV shaft in it….do you understand what this is or how it works? My guess is no or you wouldn't have used this to push your belief.

Seriously, you think I don't know what a CV joint is??? And NO, my CJ5 does NOT have CV joints and here is a couple pics to prove it. This is stone stock, factory suspension from AMC. Single flanges and a single trunion joint, both front and rear. Didn't bother to pull skid plate to show joint at transfer case, but it's the same as rear, all single trunion. Nor does my lifted early 80s Power Wagon have CV joints. Maybe it is just my camera angle, but these seem to be pretty damn far from parallel planes..........LOL!!!


I have had this JEEP a LONG time and have never put the first joint in it myself.

You guys are so obsessed with equal angles to keep the shaft from speeding and slowing, that you overlook one other important fact and that is which setup is easier to turn and eats less power. Less angles, eat less power. Now unfortunately, straight at one end and an angle at the other DOES vary joint speed, that I will NOT argue.......BUT obviously it is NOT a big deal as there are millions of vehicles on the road and track, this very same way. So the question is which way transfers more POWER. As with anything else, it is all about leverage. More angles, less leverage.

Monte


Your correct.....it does not have a CV joint shaft. The slip yoke between the joints was considered enough of a relief to handicap the problem, all this did was eat away at the slip yoke and splines - all new engineered vehicles now incorporate the various configurations of CV joints along with the slip joints. Evidently this is a fairly older Jeep. And....yes the slip joint is primarily to absorb the arc travel between the suspension and fixed components, which it does well.

Rethink your comment on the angle and absorption of power.....you make one end straight and use the other end to articulate the entire working angle what did you accomplish with reducing the working angle?....I'll get that one for you; NOTHING.

and finally.....you post this picture of your personal vehicles drive shaft with the joints clearly out of phase....don't recognize it prior to posting and then still don't recognize this when pointed out by another member until in depth explanation is provided. This speaks volume on your technical education with drive line geometry.....Time to tap out on this deal......good luck buddy.
Posted By: MattW

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 03:41 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By MattW
Month can you make another sketch of what the pinion angle looks like at rest and what it should look like under power?
I've just lost 10 minutes of my life reading this and I'm still no further ahead. Lol
Caltracks A body stock trans Location.
A picture, drawing would be easier to understand than explaining it.
THX. Matt
Matt I am not trying to convince you like Monte says, but Calvert (the people you designed and makes Caltracks) say to set the angles parallel. now you can do what you want, just keep that in mind. I know Monte says they don't know what they are doing so you decide.


No I'm just asking for a drawing.
Take one point and you have 360 degrees of possibilities.
Plus 3 degrees, minus 3 degrees, pinion up, pinion down it's all on where you take your measurements from.
Some people have a hard time explain thing in text. Some people have a hard time understanding the text being explained. A nice simple drawing for the simple minded person like myself take all the confusion out of it.
Matt
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 04:22 PM

Originally Posted By justinp61
Originally Posted By 383man

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron


The 8 3/4 vs 9" thread is still going strong. catfight



Yep, just like my 8 3/4 has been.......for YEARS. LOL!
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 04:54 PM

Matt I do my measurements off the pad where the pinion snubber mounted if the rear has one if not some flat on the same angle as the yoke and the same on the tranny. the question is whether you set it of the tranny or the drive shaft.I have done both and both worked, I just choose to parallel them these days. it just makes more sense imo. find zero point if you choose the parallel choice. if the tranny is 3 down the rear needs to be 3 up to find 0 then roll down how ever many degrees you want it set. hope that helps.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 04:59 PM

Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Originally Posted By justinp61
Originally Posted By 383man

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron


The 8 3/4 vs 9" thread is still going strong. catfight



Yep, just like my 8 3/4 has been.......for YEARS. LOL!
yea you and your 3 street passes per year on street tires. it should last forever.
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 05:14 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Originally Posted By justinp61
Originally Posted By 383man

OK no more fighting as we have to find something else to debate about. Ron


The 8 3/4 vs 9" thread is still going strong. catfight



Yep, just like my 8 3/4 has been.......for YEARS. LOL!
yea you and your 3 street passes per year on street tires. it should last forever.




Make that four.........just went on a beer and weed run...........
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 06:37 PM

[/quote]


Yep, just like my 8 3/4 has been.......for YEARS. LOL! [/quote]yea you and your 3 street passes per year on street tires. it should last forever. [/quote]



Make that four.........just went on a beer and weed run........... [/quote]that will definitely help your employment resume laugh2
Posted By: gregsdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 07:52 PM

Some of the carnage when the rear center section broke loose from the axle tubes and twisted up about twenty degrees. It vibrated very bad, and tore the second gear splines out of the planetary as well. That is where all the aluminum came from.
Draw your own conclusions as to why this happened.

Attached picture Dart pics + others 082.jpg
Attached picture Dart pics + others 084.jpg
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/10/15 08:50 PM

so Greg, how do you set your angle now?
Posted By: gregsdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 01:00 AM

With welded tubes up
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 01:05 AM

Originally Posted By Jerry Kathe
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
[quote=Jerry Kathe]Monte…..your jeep has a CV shaft in it….do you understand what this is or how it works? My guess is no or you wouldn't have used this to push your belief.

Seriously, you think I don't know what a CV joint is??? And NO, my CJ5 does NOT have CV joints and here is a couple pics to prove it. This is stone stock, factory suspension from AMC. Single flanges and a single trunion joint, both front and rear. Didn't bother to pull skid plate to show joint at transfer case, but it's the same as rear, all single trunion. Nor does my lifted early 80s Power Wagon have CV joints. Maybe it is just my camera angle, but these seem to be pretty damn far from parallel planes..........LOL!!!


I have had this JEEP a LONG time and have never put the first joint in it myself.

You guys are so obsessed with equal angles to keep the shaft from speeding and slowing, that you overlook one other important fact and that is which setup is easier to turn and eats less power.





Now unfortunately, straight at one end and an angle at the other DOES vary joint speed, that I will NOT argue.......

Sport, Its Great to see you finally understand That. Thumbs UP.






" So the question is which way transfers more POWER. As with anything else, it is all about leverage. More angles, less leverage."
Monte


So This, Is your Total base under standing of Pinion angle, LESS ANGLES.?? That you Base All your answers on. OK


While its True, We want Less angles, Like, you would do if you were to build a race With a Straight driveline. You Don't ever have that in a Production car. You have two different planes typically. In That scenario That 2nd Angle is Needed and Desired because of the way the u-joints work.


You Absolutely in that Case don't just set the pinion Angle up so that it Points directly at the trans thereby eliminating 1 of 2 angles.

If you do, it does Rob More Power and Hurt Parts more. You NEED that Second angle When the Driveline is not Built so it becomes a Straight line Under power.

I see how Your Base understanding of pinion angle has flawed your judgment and led you astray on pinion angle when the drive line isn't built in a straight line.

I hope this makes sense now for you. Sure would be nice to have you on our side of the Pinion angle Argument. LOL

Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 07:03 AM

The Russians have their road rage videos - we have our pinion angle chat group sessions. One is alcohol fueled arguments showcasing poor reasoning and judgment, the other is about car crashes.
Posted By: Monte_Smith

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 07:55 AM

Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
The Russians have their road rage videos - we have our pinion angle chat group sessions. One is alcohol fueled arguments showcasing poor reasoning and judgment, the other is about car crashes.
I don't drink, nor have poor reasoning, so I assume you are referring to yourself. That's OK, you will catch on one of these days. Hang in there.

And Jerry, that's the best you got to prove my "understanding"...........is that I didn't notice the shaft was out of phase..........LOL.....OK, big guy. The next time will make twice I have ever looked at the shaft in the Jeep. I just stuck my camera under there and took a shot. Phase was the last thing I was concerned about, as we were talking about angles..........but whatever makes you feel better. Carry on. We will overlook the fact that you point blank told me, that the Jeep had CV joints. Seems YOU made a mistake as well. How does that rank YOUR understanding

NOT gonna happen Sport.........but tell you what IS gonna happen. Is that I am done with this thread and that I will continue doing it the way I have for 35+ years with good results. And who was saying anything about production cars.........we were talking about RACE CARS and about setting pinion angle, not about making your mush mobile ride down the road smooth as glass and the joints last 100k miles.

You guys are trying your best to spin EVERY word and apply it to ALL situations...........all true signs of "grasping" in an attempt to prove your point...........carry on........

Monte
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 10:06 AM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
Originally Posted By Evil Spirit
The Russians have their road rage videos - we have our pinion angle chat group sessions. One is alcohol fueled arguments showcasing poor reasoning and judgment, the other is about car crashes.
I don't drink, nor have poor reasoning, so I assume you are referring to yourself. That's OK, you will catch on one of these days. Hang in there.

Monte


If you can't grasp the logic behind my arguments, maybe you should start using a mask or filter around the NOS. Quit sniffing the giggle spray and you might catch on.

All jokes aside. Your way works for you. Use it. I feel very comfortable doing it my way, as it has worked well for me. I don't fix what isn't broke - including driveline parts.

cool
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 10:33 AM

we were talking about RACE CARS and about setting pinion angle, not about making your mush mobile ride down the road smooth as glass and the joints last 100k miles.

then how in the heck did we get on Jeeps and 4 wheel drives? Monte it's all in fun don't get excited laugh2 laugh2
Posted By: STEFF

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 01:09 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
And HERE it is after pages of meaningless back and forth.........is it IDEAL.....NO......does it work just fine.......YES. So bottom line, in a car with the motor mounted in the stock location, should you be overly concerned about it being "perfect"........NO, because it is simply NOT going to be. Set it within a workable angle at the rear, the front is what it is and go RACE the car.

Monte


AMEN!
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 03:21 PM

I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 05:10 PM

Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.
is it more powerful than the cars Rossler provides trannies for?
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 06:31 PM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.
is it more powerful than the cars Rossler provides trannies for?


It has a Rossler in it I believe, so yes it is. What's a 4.19@178 in the eighth? That should be in the area of 2400hp.
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 06:37 PM

Now it all makes sense.........sit back Monte, smoke a fattie and chug a beer or three THEN you might be less tense plus you'll stop posting that this is your last post.....lmao.......
Posted By: B G Racing

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 08:27 PM

Originally Posted By STEFF
Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
And HERE it is after pages of meaningless back and forth.........is it IDEAL.....NO......does it work just fine.......YES. So bottom line, in a car with the motor mounted in the stock location, should you be overly concerned about it being "perfect"........NO, because it is simply NOT going to be. Set it within a workable angle at the rear, the front is what it is and go RACE the car.

Monte


AMEN!



Yes,but think off all the lessons in science,physics,math as well as theory and conjecture we would have missed.Thanks all for the entertainment we seen along the way.Some have been totally confused with all the astonishing utterences of information,then some have been able to learn a little.My only suggestion is always use the KISS method and leave all the scientific stuff to those smarter than us. up bow
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 10:10 PM

Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.



I find it funny that, thats all you Got from all of this. And Your even Wrong about that.

He set his up for parallel Too, or at least as close to parallel as you can get while under power. That would be Correct.

Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 10:33 PM

Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.
is it more powerful than the cars Rossler provides trannies for?


It has a Rossler in it I believe, so yes it is. What's a 4.19@178 in the eighth? That should be in the area of 2400hp.
it is definitely bad ass i have seen it in person. but rossler has cars that go 250mph in the 1/8 also
Posted By: Evil Spirit

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 11:10 PM

Originally Posted By Thumperdart
Now it all makes sense.........sit back Monte, smoke a fattie and chug a beer or three THEN you might be less tense plus you'll stop posting that this is your last post.....lmao.......


Yeah, taking your ball and going home doesn't work if you have a football - and everybody else wants to play baseball boogie
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/11/15 11:21 PM

Originally Posted By Monte_Smith
[quote=Evil

NOT gonna happen Sport.........but tell you what IS gonna happen. Is that I am done with this thread and that I will continue doing it the way I have for 35+ years with good results.


And who was saying anything about production cars.........we were talking about RACE CARS and about setting pinion angle, not about making your mush mobile ride down the road smooth as glass and the joints last 100k miles.


Monte


Ok, I thought we Had you, LOL

Mush mobiles, no,no. My Race Car is a 73 Production car, but with a BB 600hp where a SB was mounted 1" higher. A newer rear from a late 70,s car that had the softer cushion mounts on the springs, that were ditched.

Ive got two different planes, No way in ell im just setting it up so the pinion points at the rear of the tranny while under power.

No way in ell, im just slapping a protractor on the pinion and setting it x amount of degrees that I might read from some book. That would be a BLIND Guess of a Whatever Pinion A.


Im not Setting anything unless I know where the front u-joint is at compared to the back.

Just Trying to put out good Correct info here for all of the production based Race cars that have been modified by all of the hobbiest racers out there.


I will lighten up on you in the future, as you have no desire to understand pinion angle on different planes. I will Always jump in on a pinion angle debate as you stated. Thumbs up. But You and Bob G aren't far behind either. LOL

You Stated something like That Sport Fury and Tony guy are the First ones to Jump in these pinion debates. That's Sport 440, by the way. Your Sport Fury was probably intended though, as a Angry implication??? Or maybe Madman. LOL, Either way I like it.

Ill be in the next pinion debate as well. You Carry on as well. Good luck this season.
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 12:03 AM

Originally Posted By Sport440
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.



I find it funny that, thats all you Got from all of this. And Your even Wrong about that.

He set his up for parallel Too, or at least as close to parallel as you can get while under power. That would be Correct.



Do you know what's even funnier sport fury, he has stated he doesn't check the front angle. I got a lot more then that from this dribble, one you don't even have a fast car and want to instruct people on how to build one. Lol now that's funny.
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 12:05 AM

Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
Originally Posted By Quicktree
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.
is it more powerful than the cars Rossler provides trannies for?


It has a Rossler in it I believe, so yes it is. What's a 4.19@178 in the eighth? That should be in the area of 2400hp.
it is definitely bad ass i have seen it in person. but rossler has cars that go 250mph in the 1/8 also


I said on this board. Duh! Momma said you can't fix stupid.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 12:48 AM

[/quote]

It has a Rossler in it I believe, so yes it is. What's a 4.19@178 in the eighth? That should be in the area of 2400hp. [/quote]it is definitely bad ass i have seen it in person. but rossler has cars that go 250mph in the 1/8 also [/quote]

I said on this board. Duh! Momma said you can't fix stupid. [/quote]

absolutely, you just proved it
Posted By: RV2

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:04 AM

Check out the next thread I start lol stirthepot
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:08 AM

Originally Posted By Sport440
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.



I find it funny that, thats all you Got from all of this. And Your even Wrong about that.

He set his up for parallel Too, or at least as close to parallel as you can get while under power. That would be Correct.



I guess the pics of the Jeep drive line are as close to
parallel as they could get.. and damn.. the factory did that
so maybe parallel isnt the only way like you suggest
EDIT
And all those monster trucks better learn also.. being
that they are specially build
wave
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:12 AM

Originally Posted By RV2
Check out the next thread I start lol stirthepot



Did you ever get a measurement from your Pinion to your driveshaft , Like I asked??

We have your other measurements, from the axels un welded position of 11* down. I wanted to see what the pinion driveshaft angle came in at. Come on this Was your thread. But, If you don't respond, well you see what happens. Maybe those were your intentions.

I haven't found your other thread yet. Measurements Please!!!
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:18 AM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Originally Posted By Sport440
Originally Posted By 1967dartgt
I find it funny how you guys talk about you need it parrell for strength, and Monte has the most powerful car here set up "wrong" and doesn't have problems.



I find it funny that, thats all you Got from all of this. And Your even Wrong about that.

He set his up for parallel Too, or at least as close to parallel as you can get while under power. That would be Correct.



I guess the pics of the Jeep drive line are as close to
parallel as they could get.. and damn.. the factory did that
so maybe parallel isnt the only way like you suggest
wave



That old Jeep has a Slip joint that band aids that. Its also Not a race vehicle.

Mike, You do Parallel, Right. You Stated you build the driveline Straight. Add pinion angle from there.

So hopefully its darn near parallel under power, right!!

So from there you can measure directly between the driveshaft and Pinion since everything is straight.

So under Power, I shoot for parallel, so do you, and monte, and so should everyone else,

Shooting for Parallel is Easy on a Straight Single plane. driveline.

Shooting for Parallel isn't as Easy to understand on a Dual Plane driveline for most I take it. Hence the Pinion Angle confusion argument.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:27 AM

Yes I do on stuff I build... on a production car I use
the drive shaft to the pinion
EDIT
And years ago when this came up.. I went to talk with the
people in the suspension lab at work on how they do it...
they use the drive shaft to the pinion
wave
Posted By: Sport440

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:36 AM

Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Yes I do on stuff I build... on a production car I use
the drive shaft to the pinion
wave



Would you use that drive shaft to Pinion on My production car???

73 A body Sport. 440 installed in a SB K frame 1" higher then a normal BB K frame. 76 rear axel with the soft rubber axel mounts removed bolted to stock 73 springs.


What Pinion angle between the two should I be looking for.????
550 HP, If, that matters.

SET, MY Pinion angle Mike!!
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 01:42 AM

Originally Posted By Sport440
Originally Posted By MR_P_BODY
Yes I do on stuff I build... on a production car I use
the drive shaft to the pinion
wave



Would you use that drive shaft to Pinion on My production car???

73 A body Sport. 440 installed in a SB K frame 1" higher then a normal BB K frame. 76 rear axel with the soft rubber axel mounts removed bolted to stock 73 springs.


What Pinion angle between the two should I be looking for.????
550 HP, If, that matters.

SET, MY Pinion angle Mike!!


Yes I would.. assuming you run leafs I would set it at
about 5*-6*
EDIT
Now days its easy to check with a Go-Pro to see if
you need more or less.. but if your getting more than
that I would look for springs... also something that
most dont think of is when you dump off the gas.. that
rear goes nose down a lot so if you have a pile of pinion
angle that goes the other way on decel
wave
Posted By: RV2

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/12/15 03:42 AM

Sport 440 I left the Trans at 4 and brought the pinion up to 2
Posted By: gregsdart

Re: Pinion angle again - 05/13/15 04:20 AM

It seems pretty obvious that the guys running factory drive lines with minor mods will only need to worry about the pinion end. More modified to off the wall combos where the engine/trans angle has changed, or the rear axle height has been changed a lot, then It would be important to look at both ends. A Pro car or well built chassis is for the most part would be set with the trans pointing at the pinion( I would assume?) so just going off the driveshaft to pinion would work well. There is a fairly wide range you can get away with on pinion angle, my guess is 3 to 4 degrees either side of correct at full power. That thought comes from the way SS springs are set, and how far off they are when not under power.
This is my interpretation of why there is so much argument over which way is right.
© 2024 Moparts Forums