|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: savoy64]
#1821003
05/07/15 12:06 PM
05/07/15 12:06 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,699
Newport, Mi
Evil Spirit
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,699
Newport, Mi
|
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.
Free advice and worth every penny...
Factory trained Slinky rewinder.........
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: DusterDave]
#1821008
05/07/15 12:14 PM
05/07/15 12:14 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
Quicktree
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
|
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 
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Evil Spirit]
#1821009
05/07/15 12:15 PM
05/07/15 12:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
Quicktree
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
|
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]  same here
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: RV2]
#1821081
05/07/15 01:46 PM
05/07/15 01:46 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,225
Charleston
sixpackgut
Drag Week Mod Champion
|
Drag Week Mod Champion
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,225
Charleston
|
Looks like the slow guys trying to teach the faster guys a thing or two in this thread. lmao
Gen 3 power 6.22@110, 9.85@135
Follow @g3hemiswap on instagram
performance only racing, CRT, ultimate converter, superior design concepts, ThumperCarbs
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Evil Spirit]
#1821097
05/07/15 02:18 PM
05/07/15 02:18 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
CMcAllister
Mr. Helpful
|
Mr. Helpful
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
|
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=gmV4qwLfOMYhttps://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.
Last edited by CMcAllister; 05/07/15 02:30 PM.
If the results don't match the theory, change the theory.
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: DoctorDiff]
#1821109
05/07/15 02:39 PM
05/07/15 02:39 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
CMcAllister
Mr. Helpful
|
Mr. Helpful
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
|
 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?
Last edited by CMcAllister; 05/07/15 02:56 PM.
If the results don't match the theory, change the theory.
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Quicktree]
#1821125
05/07/15 03:04 PM
05/07/15 03:04 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,845
Tampa
DusterDave
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,845
Tampa
|
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 Show poodles need proper pinion angle, too! 
Gone to the dark side with an LS3 powered '57 Chevy 210
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: DoctorDiff]
#1821136
05/07/15 03:20 PM
05/07/15 03:20 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
CMcAllister
Mr. Helpful
|
Mr. Helpful
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
|
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.
If the results don't match the theory, change the theory.
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: DoctorDiff]
#1821151
05/07/15 03:34 PM
05/07/15 03:34 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 51
1.5 miles west of Jacksonburg ...
Ohio Joe
member
|
member
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 51
1.5 miles west of Jacksonburg ...
|
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!!!
66 Dart GT " Rat Racer"
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Ohio Joe]
#1821156
05/07/15 03:44 PM
05/07/15 03:44 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
CMcAllister
Mr. Helpful
|
Mr. Helpful
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
|
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.
If the results don't match the theory, change the theory.
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: CMcAllister]
#1821175
05/07/15 04:12 PM
05/07/15 04:12 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,141
Western Md.
skicker
"The Champ"
|
"The Champ"
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,141
Western Md.
|
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.
...FAFO...
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Quicktree]
#1821241
05/07/15 06:05 PM
05/07/15 06:05 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
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  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 
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#1821242
05/07/15 06:06 PM
05/07/15 06:06 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
Quicktree
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
|
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 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 same here
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: Quicktree]
#1821342
05/07/15 09:13 PM
05/07/15 09:13 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
CMcAllister
Mr. Helpful
|
Mr. Helpful
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,629
Fulton County, PA
|
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.
If the results don't match the theory, change the theory.
|
|
|
Re: Pinion angle again
[Re: RV2]
#1821343
05/07/15 09:14 PM
05/07/15 09:14 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
Monte_Smith
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
