Those wont seal, return them. It looks like someone took pliers to them.
Printable View
Those wont seal, return them. It looks like someone took pliers to them.
I didn’t know they make a tool for u-joints. For years my usual method involved a hammer and a fat punch or socket and extension. If I had access to a good jack I would use it and the vehicle I was working on as a press.
Replacement u-joints ordered!
I put down a refundable deposit of $150 at my local O'Reilly's. It is nothing more than a C-clamp on steroids. A large end to let the cap pass though and the threaded rod to push on the opposite cap. So much easier than the vice and socket routine, plus lots of YouTube videos showing how to use the tool.
Attachment 8802
You guy's! And here is the retired Spicer guy telling you, common boys get a cheap China Freight press for your shop!
One thing to watch for especially on front fragile half shafts, if the caps are frozen in tight, make sure you fab up something to prevent the yoke ears from getting bent together when you press the caps out. Put something between the ears to support them. A common complaint is I cant get the new U-Joint back in correctly after I pressed the old one out. If they are really stuck, help them out with a little heat, penetrate and some support between the yoke ears. If you bend the yoke ears the shaft is junk.
You have valid points Bob. I don't have a shop or a press (yet). I have to use the resources available to me and be smart with their use. The good news is that the replacement u-joints looked much better and I was able to easily get the left axle done. I don't have the right side removed yet.
Attachment 8819
I understand your position David! I have replaced MANY U-Joints in a vice with sockets. In fact the technique can be hard to beat if the caps aren't frozen in. I still use that method every now and then, even though there is a press sitting right there!
Well, Winter is over and I'm back to working on the CJ again without my hands going numb in fifteen minutes. I have everything striped and clean on the front axle and am ready to order all new seals, bearings, brake hoses, master cyl. and wheel cylinders. And lets not forget about the t-case drive and driven gears.
I called to ask Mike (at KW.com) a question about the driven gear, only to find out that the gear kit is on an infinite back order. So I did a little research and found that the matched mate to my drive gear (SW447537) is SW448856. I am curious if anyone on this site might have one kicking around and would like to sell it to me!?
I am also curious to see if anyone on the forum has any tips or tricks to installing the inner axle seals. Do I really need a special seal driver or does a "x" sized socket work perfect.
Hopefully, I won't find any more backordered items tomorrow when I hit the ORDER button :)
An X sized socket will work. You can make your own tool with 2 sockets and/or washers and a piece of all-thread and two nuts. You need to be sure the seals push in square.
Thanks Bob. Clever, efficient and inexpensive.
FYI, the front axle u-joints went together nicely last year. Thanks for your insight on that too.
Your welcome davide! It sounds like you are making good progress. I cant wait to see it on the road.
In anticipation of getting all of my goodies for the front end, I am trying to understand the test procedure for the kingpin bearing load test. There were shims in both upper bearing caps and I have kept them as they were when I tore it down. And BTW, both side kingpin bearings were shot. Drivers side upper was the worst (I think I posted a pic of one previously).
The Universal Series Service Manual talks about a scale reading of 12 to 16lbs when the knuckle has started its sweep. I understand the sweep of the knuckle, but don't know of a simple way to measure this load. How critical is it to get it spot on? Will a "resistance feel" tell me the same thing?
Fish scale works well. Take the reading when the knuckle starts moving. My guess is too tight might affect steering. Too loose could let the front end shimmy.
Jeff is correct on both points. A fish scale works well. Too tight and the wheel will have difficulty returning to center after a turn. Too loose and you will get shimmying and if it is loose enough, it is the cause of "Death Rattle". An out of control front wheel shake when the looseness starts to resonate. "Death Rattle" can shake the vehicle right off the road. I like to keep the load on the high side. I wouldn't worry if it gets a little too tight. Much better than too loose. You are looking for a good smooth pull around 16lbs or so. Keep the scale at 90deg to the hub as you pull.
" "Death Rattle" can shake the vehicle right off the road."
Been there, had it happen. It didn't shake me of the road, but it did make me have to come to a complete stop in the middle of a busy state highway.
As it turns out, my wife picked up a digital scale to check luggage weight. I razzed her about that and now have to eat some crow as I have borrowed it to use for this.
Bob, I noticed that your picture has the hub fully assembled when performing the test. My axle is fully striped down with only the steering knuckle attached via the kingpin. This seems to be how the Universal Manual describes the procedure. Should I assemble the entire brake/hub assembly when doing the test?
No need to have it assembled all the way. The important thing is to keep the scale 90 deg to the spindle and a fairly smooth pull. That photo is a grab of a different type of vehicle. I think it is a truck. The process is the same however. Just hook the scale into the tie rod hole and pull maintaining that 90. You shouldn't have any seals assembled. Theoretically you don't want to add any drag from the seals.
I got the last of my front end parts a couple days ago and have started getting things back together (almost).
With the tie rod ends off the steering knuckles, I got the passenger side knuckle at 15 lbs after removing two shims. The drivers side, with the original shims back, is at 18 lbs. I haven't added any shims yet to lower the pull weight, but I have two to work with.
As long as I was having to remove the tie rod ends, I wanted to replace the boots on them as a couple were rotted with time and oil. When I got the steering rods out and cleaned up, I saw that 3 of the 4 tie rods ends looked worn and oblong. They were all still fairly tight, but I figure that these need to be replaced too. Here are some pics to show. Also note that I have a steering damper shock bracket on one of the rod tubes. I don't think that this is stock, but am not sure (and yes, there is a steering damper attached).
Attachment 9464 Attachment 9465
The tie rods look pretty beat up. I would replace them. The assembly with the tab welded on is modified. The steering damper is not stock. The tab and the piece of pipe slid over the rod and welded in place, are "fixes". The tie rod was bent and the pipe was added and welded in to try to keep it from bending again. This reinforcement is common in off roading. The tab was probably added to make the stabilizer mount more permanent. I would replace it all and not use the stabilizer. 18# is a good number. A little tight is much better than a little loose. As long as its a fairly smooth pull.
You are doing the right things. Getting it to run is important and that is where a lot of guys put their emphasis, but making sure it stops is just as important.
After those two things get done correctly, making sure it goes in the direction you point it is way up on the list of things that have to go right. If you get little details done, you will be amazed at how well it drives!
Thanks guys, all good things to know. I'll keep the knuckles as is. They pull very smoothly and the pull weight on both is very consistent from start to finish.
The comment about the tie rod tube makes perfect sense. The owner before my Dad was a big Rubicon Trail wheeler. I still don't know if I will discard this set up for now, but is something that I can change easily later.
Now I'm starting to wonder if the steering gear box is a mod too. From the parts diagrams, there is a much different gear box and a bellcrank assembly, which I do not have. Is this something that is common for off roading too? If so, what did it come out of?
Attachment 9469
The steering gear box is a mod as you suspect. If you click on the attachment the picture shows up on my screen.
Well....I'm back at it again. After a dismal Summer of trying to sell our house (and unable to do so), my wife and I are unpacked and I am back to getting the Hot Mess back together.
Over the past couple days, I have managed to get the front axle inner seals in, the knuckles lubed and seals back on and am putting the differential assembly back in. My Universal Manual does not give the torque for the differential bearing cap, but I found another thread that says 50 ft. lbs. for a Dana 27. Does this sound correct? I ask because it took more than what I would consider 50 pounds using a breaker bar to remove them.
I am also concerned that there may be a certain way the caps go back on. They are stamped and I do not know the significance of these markings. It may mean nothing, but I don't want to assume. I went through all my photos hoping to find the original configuration, but it appears I didn't get one of the differential before removing it. Here is a pic. I only have the cap bolts hand tighten.
Attachment 9939
Page 205, paragraph N-11 of the Universal Manual:
"the assembly may be installed by
cocking the bearing cups slightly when the differential
is placed in the carrier. See Fig. 258.
Tap the unit carefully into place, making sure the
ring gear teeth mesh with the pinion teeth. Install
bearing caps, matching their markings with those
on the carrier. Apply sealing compound to the screw
threads. Torque the screws 70 to 90 lb-ft."
The markings are also covered in paragraph N-6. Since they are mentioned in both the disassembly and reassembly procedures, my assumption is that it is fairly critical.
Before anyone points out that Section N is for the rear axle, please note the Section M states the procedure is the same and refers you to Section N.
Thanks Jeff!!
I must have a different version of the Universal Manual. N-6 in my manual is "Lubricating Unit Bearing" and is for the flanged axle. N-12 (page 294 in my book) is for Diff Case Disassembly and does mention to match the cap and housing markings.
That was a huge find! I will pull the diff out in the morning and look for markings inside the housing. Thanks again.
I do believe that I have it figured out. The markings are VERY subtle, but they are there.
If you look at the pic above and look at the left side cap, you will see a horizontal S just below the stamped triangle. Then on the left side of the housing, you can barely make out the corresponding horizontal S directly across. On the right side, which is harder to make out in my pic is a vertical S just below the stamped triangle. And there is a vertical S directly across on the right side housing.
In addition to all this, the wear on the housing and cap align perfectly from the bearing race. So by some small miracle, I have the caps in correctly. Just a little Loctite and torque needed...
Jeff has you on the right track davide. To answer your concern, it is imperative that the caps go back on exactly the way they came off. The caps are installed and machined in place. They are in effect "mated" to their location. If the caps have switched location in reassembly, most of the time the cap will crack in half when it is torqued.
Now that torque spec. This one is a bit of a mess. The manual indeed points you to 70 to 90ft.lbs., which is too much for the little Model 25. I don't know where this went awry but it did. The 70-90ft.lbs. specification is for the Model 44. On the Model 25 through Model 28, the spec is 40-50ft.lbs.. On the Model 30 it is 55-60ft.lbs. and it is 70 -90 ft.lbs. on the Model 44.
The caps can only be replaced by machining new caps in place with a line boring process. Even if the caps don't crack on reinstall at torque up, the unit will probably fail the caps or the bearing or both, in a short period of time if assembled in the wrong possition.
I will take bmorgil's word over the manual in this case. I am glad I posted the quote or I would have torqued mine to the spec in my book. The digital Universal Manual I have is FORM SM-1002-R6. My paper manual is out in the shop. I will have to check it out to see if it is the same. TM9-1804B (M38 manual) lists 38-42 ft pounds for the 25 and 44. I have to say, I really don't care for all of the conflicting information. I thought I had a Dana or Spicer specific manual saved somewhere but can't seem to find it now.
edit: I found the Spicer manual but it's just for the 44.
Jeff I agree the spec is posted all over the internet and in some manuals, with many different numbers. 38-42 ft.lbs is the specification on the original model 25 that appeared in the Military Jeeps. It is the specification in the original Military Manual for the early 25 Model. Anything around 40 to 50ft.Lbs. is going to keep the little 25 model together.
The best way to be sure when you do not have a clear idea of the manufactures specification, is to use the S.A.E. bolt specification. This is what the engineers are referring to when designing. Identify the bolt type and the thread pitch, then apply the S.A.E. specification. The threads are installed dry. Use the dry specification for torque. S.A.E. Bolt torque is a recommendation by the S.A.E..The actual torque can vary based on a lot of things so, it is best to get the right number from the manufacturer. But in a pinch the S.A.E. chart will keep you out of trouble.
https://floorjacked.com/sae-bolt-tor...ade-5-grade-8/
I use general torque specs quite a bit. I figure I have spent around $2,000 over the years buying torque wrenches to cover everything from 10 inch/pounds to 600 foot/pounds that I have to send out for calibration checks from time to time. I like to get my money's worth out of them. Almost all of them read inch/pounds because I am an aircraft mechanic so I have to convert a lot when working on cars. One thing about using calibrated torque wrenches I really like is that I almost never break or strip anything. If I do, I know it wasn't something I did.
The problem with randomly collecting information posted on the internet is that it is rare to know if a source is legitimate. I have been lurking around here long enough to know a little bit about bmorgil's background. He knows his stuff. If I was a newbie to the site I wouldn't be so confident about his information. Even so, I would like to have something in my document collection that confirms the proper torque values for the different models. I am very big on using manuals and when one is wrong I like to have it verified by another published source and I try not to post information that I cannot back up. Even if it is wrong, like the quote from the jeep manual I posted above. Something from Spicer would be ideal. Everything I have found from jeep just repeats the same info in the manuals I already have on hand.
I was just reading a random thread about overhauling a Dana 25 axle. The write-up is very nice with good photos. They torqued the caps to 80 foot pounds because that is what the manual they have says to do and there are no manuals I have found to refute it. They also called for high strength thread locker even though the jeep manual calls for thread sealer. I found the post through a link on another flat fender forum.
I might have a very old service manual around here somewhere. I have the 44 manuals but a genuine Spicer model 25 axle manual would be rare. I only remember engineering notes and notes on the blueprints. The information I have and used in Tech service, came from those notes on the prints. I don't think one was ever officially published for the early stuff, model 25 or 27. Usually the O.E. in those days had the publishing power and the suppliers would provide the technical. By the time I got involved in the publications it was the 80's. I have a lot of 44, 60 and 70 stuff. Any info on the Model 25 and 27 will have to come from original Jeep service manuals. We can see that is where it appears to have run off the tracks.
Here is what it should be:
Early Military Dana 25 Model 38 - 42 Ft.Lbs
Dana 25/27 Jeep Models 45 - 50 Ft.Lbs
Dana 30 Model 55 - 60 Ft.Lbs.
Dana 44 Model 70 - 90 Ft.Lbs.
Bob and Jeff, I have really enjoyed reading your comments and digging into this spec. The cap bearing torque did appear to be ambiguous and now has concrete data for the various axle sizes. Perhaps another entry for this in the Tech Library so others can view it?
Ask and you shall receive davide!
https://willysjeepforum.kaiserwillys...ing-Cap-Torque
On another note, Jeff's point about sealer on the threads. If the carrier bolts in an axle go all the way through the case, they will leak if their isn't sealer on them. Thread locker isn't required, sealer is. High strength thread locker (Red) might prevent the removal of the bolts. It would take a lot of heat to break the bond and the threads are deep in the case. Also if you use anything on bolts that DO NOT go all the way through the case (blind taped holes) the hydraulic effect can cause a few problems from cracked cases to incorrect torque readings. So not only is the torque spec important, whether or not there is sealer or lubricant on the threads is also just as important. Anything on the threads also changes the torque specification. This goes again to Jeff's point of needing a "truthful" complete manual! I will say I haven't found one yet that doesn't have at least one mistake in it. Big books for total perfection!
Thanks a lot for the information. I am making notes in my paper service manuals.
Tech manuals are far from perfect. We used send corrections for tech manuals all the time maintaining the A-10 and U-2. They probably still do.
I see it's been several months since last updating my progress. I'm pretty much done with both axles and brakes. Here is a recap on all that has been done:
Front axle:
- New inner seals
- New sealed axle u-joints (going to a dry hub configuration)
- New king bearings
- New front wheel cylinders
- New front brake hoses and S-tubes
- New master cylinder
- New wheel bearing seals
- New differential cover gasket (LubLocker)
I have a new pinion seal, but don't have that in yet. All wheel bearings were in good condition and they were packed with fresh grease. I noted previously that all the tie rod ends were worn, but I put new boots on them and have regreased all zerks. I do plan on replacing them in the near future.
Rear axle:
- New wheel cylinders
- New brake hose
- New shoes
- New differential cover gasket (LubLocker)
I have tapered axle shafts and they appear in great condition. I removed the backing plate and other covers to gain access to the bearings. They looked to be in good condition and I filled the zerks with enough grease to push out the old and replace with the new. What I did notice was that both front and rear brake spring hardware did not have any self-adjusting pieces. I don't know if this is standard or it was removed prior to my ownership. The Universal Service Manual suggests that it's there.
I'm now off to the engine (Dauntless V6). As this has sat for many, many years, I am taking every bit of advice given by Larrbeard and others on how to proceed (Start-up, Best practices). Most of which I was aware of, but I failed to take into account the cooling, fuel and ignition systems during this process. I am grateful for everyones input to this.
I'll take some pictures later and post them, although there is not too much to see. Mostly because it's not in pieces anymore :)
The Dauntless will make you pull your hair out davide, only because it’s an odd fire motor and not an even fire. Just take your time and do exactly what Larrbeard suggest and if you run into any problems or questions feel free to ask.
Your progressing great davide! Lets see those pictures.
The self adjusters when they first came out on vehicles in the early 60's, weren't well received by the general Mechanic population. Automotive shops were still the place to get your car fixed, and they fixed all brands. Not all dealerships had the ability to service cars yet. The Automotive O.E's didn't have the control over service they have now. The self adjusters were seen as troublesome, and poor service information on how they worked and were repaired, led to their removal. The logic of course was the old way was better. As a young lad I was taught to remove them for two reasons. The vehicle would need to continue to come back for brake adjustments just like before, and there would be no problem with the self adjuster causing a "Come Back". We were wrong! We need gmwillys here to jump in but, I think 1967 was the first year for self adjusters on the CJ. If that is true, it is quite possible it could have been built with the older manual adjust brakes depending on inventory at the Willys plant.
From what I recall, '67-'68 was the first year for self adjusting brakes. My '63 wagon has manual adjusters just like the previous generations. The bread and butter of your local gas service station was oils and maintenance, i.e. valve, clutch and brake adjustments.
Thanks guys for all your feedback!
I have been overthinking which differential fluid to add to the axles. I know it has to be limited slip and I found that Lucas has a Heavy Duty 80W-90 gear oil. The bottle labeling says that it can be used in limited slip differentials and their Technical Data Sheet says that "it exceeds the PG-2 Limited Slip GL Classification". I just don't want to assume that the limited slip additive is combine in the gear oil. I want to know absolute that it is.
Here is why I say this...back in the day, I worked at an AMC, Jeep, Eagle and Renault dealership. I gave our techs countless bottles of the limited slip additive. Perhaps in the early 80's it wasn't incorporated in Penzoil's products we used and now it is. I will probably end up calling Lucas tomorrow.
GM had the same type of Whale guts smelling friction modifier that you had put in with the already ripe conventional gear lube. Products like the synthetic Lucus claim that you do not need the friction modifier, but I would let Dr. Dana chime in to see what he knows as facts.
You are correct davide, back in the day we had to add the "Friction Modifier". When wet clutch type differentials (Posi-Traction) were introduced, gear lubes did not require the friction modifiers. The new clutch type differentials would gall the clutches without the modifier. This caused clutch "Chatter" when turning which could become severe as the clutches became galled. Eventually they would stick together and cause some big problems when turning. The differential would make a banging and popping sound when turning. It sounded like something was definitely broken.
When you drove straight down the highway, the gear lube would sling off the spinning clutch packs drying them out. When you made your first turn, the clutches would temporarily "weld" together then break loose. The sound was amazing. You would swear when it got real bad that the differential gears were in pieces. The car would jump and bang. Some drivers would leave the car for a tow truck, it was that bad. The service stations and dealerships received a ton of complaints. You could not see anything wrong on inspection of the vehicle. Only a complete differential tear down would reveal the galled clutches. It was truly hard to believe the noise this could make. A lot of head scratching when it first happened. As we can see, the effects of that early "Recall" are still felt today.
All Axle Manufactures (Dana Spicer and O.E's) who introduced the option, quickly had to respond with bulletins and small bottles of friction modifier (appropriately named "Skunk Oil", gmwillys is being kind... it stunk much worse than Whale guts) to be added immediately and at lube changes. The Friction Modifier sticks to the plates and prevents the lack of lubrication. Today it is important to read the label. Most GL5 gear lubes will state they are for Posi-Traction or Limited slip Differentials. If it does not say it is for Limited Slip applications you should not use it in a clutch type differential without an additive. Calling the Lube Manufacture for clarification davide, is always a good idea! That's my go to when in doubt. I haven't had to add Skunk Oil for a long time. I still have a bottle laying around from the 70's just to remind me. I would say almost all modern GL5 lubes have the friction modifier in them.