The ground never comes into play when talking pinion angle

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

what angle was the drive shaft?

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.

[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!!!

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!!!

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!!!

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.

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??????

[i]


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.

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