Skip to content
Gold Hills Posse 4×4 Club · Folsom, CA

Various products - New and interesting.

  1. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #269 Mar 2009, 3:19 PM

    I need an applications class 😳



    I know you multiply some things, but I don't know the formula.

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  2. Fred Subscriber
    #279 Mar 2009, 3:37 PM
    "JohnDF" wrote: I need an applications class 😳

    I know you multiply some things, but I don't know the formula.



    Maybe you need a lab session or some outside study time.

  3. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #289 Mar 2009, 3:44 PM

    I come up with about an 88:1 crawl ratio???

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  5. BKGM Jeepers started this President Joined: June 2003
    #309 Mar 2009, 4:58 PM

    I figured that tire size had to come into play somewhere.



    I figured John's ratio with a 37 MT/R and with a 40 MT/R wouldn't be the same performance...

    Kathleen and Brad
  6. Fred Subscriber
    #319 Mar 2009, 5:36 PM

    When I was searching for the calculator I ran across several sites that said the crawl ratio does not take into account the tire size.

  7. Guest former user
    #329 Mar 2009, 5:45 PM

    2:1= 37:1

    4:1= 75:1

    8:1= 146:1



    and yes, tire size play a big role in crawl ratio.

  8. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #339 Mar 2009, 5:51 PM

    Tire size does play a role...this is the calculator I used...



    http://www.4lo.com/calc/gearratio.htm

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  9. Guest former user
    #349 Mar 2009, 6:01 PM
    "uglyjeep" wrote: 2:1= 37:1
    4:1= 75:1
    8:1= 146:1

    and yes, tire size play a big role in crawl ratio.



    Tire size doesn't have any impact on the crawl ratio. Crawl ratio is simply about gearing. Final speed has plenty to do with tires. Gearing in the axles impacts your performance when your tcase is in high (1:1).



    "JohnDF" wrote: Tire size does play a role...this is the calculator I used...



    http://www.4lo.com/calc/gearratio.htm



    From John's page







    PS...I'm at 223:1 in low low. 😎

  10. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #359 Mar 2009, 6:03 PM
    "Bender" wrote:

    PS...I'm at 223:1 in low low. 😎

    I know...I've followed you down the trail before 😈

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  11. Guest former user
    #369 Mar 2009, 6:11 PM
    "JohnDF" wrote: [quote="Bender"]

    PS...I'm at 223:1 in low low. 😎

    I know...I've followed you down the trail before 😈



    According to your site at 1,500 rpm in low-low I'm at about 0.7 mph. 😀

  12. Guest former user
    #3710 Mar 2009, 6:54 PM
    "Bender" wrote: [quote="uglyjeep"]2:1= 37:1
    4:1= 75:1
    8:1= 146:1

    and yes, tire size play a big role in crawl ratio.



    Tire size doesn't have any impact on the crawl ratio. Crawl ratio is simply about gearing. Final speed has plenty to do with tires. Gearing in the axles impacts your performance when your tcase is in high (1:1).

    yeah, that's what i meant 😳

  13. Gregulator Member Joined: February 2012
    #3811 Mar 2009, 1:44 PM

    Sorry to get off topic...



    But I thought the new axles for the rubicon that longfield came out with are pretty interesting.



    We tested a couple stock outers and some popular up graded outers and the CV and it was impressive on how much the CV's can take and the OEM ones cant take.



    OEM tested at 10 deg. of twisting and 2000-2500 FT/LBS of torque before breaking.



    Popular up-grade #1 tested at 40 deg. of twist and 5000 FT/LBS of torque



    Popular up-grade #2 tested at 50 deg. of twist and 4100 FT/LBS of torque



    CV's tested at 75 deg. of twist and 6800 FT/LBS of torque at a FULL TURN!!!!!!!



    Sounds like they need a good hammers test. 😏

    Um...what?
  14. Guest former user
    #3911 Mar 2009, 3:11 PM
    "finder_87" wrote: Sorry to get off topic...



    I don't think you can take a thread like this off topic. No Alex, that's not a challenge. 😂



    If Longfield makes it, I'm sure it's solid. Do you have a link with some pics? Are they basically replacing a u-joint with a birfield type joint?

  15. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #4011 Mar 2009, 3:51 PM
    "Bender" wrote: Are they basically replacing a u-joint with a birfield type joint?

    Say it aint so 😲

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  17. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #4212 Mar 2009, 6:16 AM

    Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo...

    Attached files

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  18. Guest former user
    #4312 Mar 2009, 7:05 AM

    You can't resist the power of the dark side! Join us! I'll sell you my front end!

  19. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #4412 Mar 2009, 7:11 AM

    You're not my Father are you 😲

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  20. Guest former user
    #4512 Mar 2009, 8:14 AM
    "JohnDF" wrote: You're not my Father are you 😲



    I'm trying to do the math on this one, and unless there was some sort of tear in the time space continuum I don't think it's possible, but I'm still checking. 😂 You're the one taking all these weekend classes. You tell me.

  21. JohnDF Member Joined: July 2003
    #4612 Mar 2009, 8:35 AM

    I figure anything was possible when the Sith are involved.

    All hail Darth Keane

    Light saber sawzall >>> :hack:

    I used to wheel a lot. . .
  22. Gregulator Member Joined: February 2012
    #4712 Mar 2009, 1:17 PM

    Ya, I had a toyota before my jeep and I thought birfields = bad. But its impressive that at full lock the longfields are holding to 6800 ft. lbs. torque. And their suppose to not bind like u joints. And for only $850 and lifetime warrenty and don't know what to think. I think I am going to need therapy. 😤 :rasta:

    Um...what?

Sign in to post here.