They are...
...for the Dana 44. Just not the Dana 35.
BTW, crown makes micro axle shafts for bees as well. Not hardened though, therefore only recommend for mason bees, not honey bees.
Broken axle shaft
- Thread starter Lonewolf
- Start date
...for the Dana 44. Just not the Dana 35.
BTW, crown makes micro axle shafts for bees as well. Not hardened though, therefore only recommend for mason bees, not honey bees.
Alright, I'll bite, who is better and who is best?
It is only confusing if you aren't paying any attention and just skimming through shit.
4140, 4340, 1541H are good alloys for any axle with a press on bearing or Dana 44, Ford 9", Dana 60, etc.
1541H and the lesser case hardening alloys like what the OEM axles are made from is good for axle shafts that the bearings ride on, Dana 35, Chrysler 8.25, etc..
Who knows? It depends upon the day of the week, the status of inventory, who got hired and who got fired that month and probably the phases of the moon as well.
I like to find vendors with whom I can establish a relationship and will generally stick with them as long as they treat me well even if some other company can save me a dollar or two by price cutting. If all I cared about was price I could buy from Amazon with no human contact whatsoever.
That's why I do business with you and with Ron Stobach at Carbon Offroad. You guys have never tried to feed me bullshit or sell me something I didn't need. Neither of you have ever heard me quibble about price.
You're implying that the material, design, heat treat, and performance are based on who sits behind the desk and that's a shitty metric.
OP
So I need to put this back together and I want to put upgraded shafts for now. So the consensus is to go with the 1541H shafts from Revolution?
mrblaine said:
No, not at all.
What I'm saying is that with some exceptions the gear and axle vendors all sell essentially the same stuff. Unless one already knows exactly what one wants the person who answers the phone makes a huge difference because he/she is in the position of recommending a particular product, process, material, etc. over another and a purchaser needs to be able to trust those recommendations and that the company will stand behind what it sells. What real value is a recommendation that always coincides with what just happens to be in current inventory or parrots the marketing speak on the company website (as one typically gets from people at Metalcloak)?
One of the reasons I value establishing a long term relationship with a vendor is to be able to candidly discuss the pros and cons of all options on the occasions that I don't already know what I want or need. The very best of them think long-term and will save me from myself when I am making a mistake even if it costs them today's sale
I don't know about a consensus, but the 1541H axle shafts from RG&A are claimed to be 10% stronger than stock, can be shipped out immediately, and are only $95 per side.
If you need axle shafts right now those axles appear to fulfill your needs. I wanted chromoly axles, which were on indeterminate backorder at RG&A at that time, which is how I came to become a customer of Carbon Offroad.
OP
OK thank you, i don't see any options for a Dana 35 shaft at Carbon so I will go with revolution for now while I continue looking for a "reasonable" priced dana 44
Or go with another American made company that offers upgraded shafts. Dutchman Axle is made in the USA and their replacement 35 axles are 1541.
Their shop has a small town hole in the wall feel.
https://dutchmanaxles.com/index.php
Bolt in or completely custom.
Their shop has a small town hole in the wall feel.
https://dutchmanaxles.com/index.php
Bolt in or completely custom.
OP
thank you I like that option as well, im still waiting to hear from quadratec on what they will do about my money back
This may be stupid and I'm sure it's not necessary, but as far as i know the problem with quality 4340 axles does not lead to what we saw here. The 4340 doesn't have enough surface hardness to support bearings. 1541H apparently does. What we saw here is a strength issue, not hardness. Different problem entirely, but still a problem.
Sorry if this is duplicative of something already suggested but with your 35 inch tires have you considered bumping up to 30 spline shafts? It might be a good cost saving alternative to the 44 you’re looking for. Consider getting a quote for an installed S35 as a baseline price to compare to any 44 you might find (factoring in its cost to buy, possibly reconfigure & install) then the decision will be easier. Both the S35 and the Dana 44 will get you where you want to go durability-wise with your tires.
Not stupid, just some ignorance. In their natural state, both 4340 and 1541 are the same hardness. Both suffer the same fate if used as a shaft in that condition in that you will see them do what happened here, just twist off.
Heat treatment is what changes the properties of the material to give it properties we desire or need.
Both can be brought up to be hard enough for a bearing to ride on the surface. The issue is when that is done to 4340, that hardness goes all the way through the material because it is a through hardening alloy. Unless you are a talented heat treater, you won't be able to draw the core back down to be softer to add ductility to the shaft and it will be very brittle. 1541 is a surface hardening alloy so it responds well to bring the surface and a short distance below that up to bearing surface hardness without removing the ductility.
OP
if i do upgrade to the 30 spline shafts and locker do i need it to be setup again? Or can I unbolt the ring gear from the true trac and install it on the new locker and keep the shims in the same spot?
Good thread. I am learning quite a bit about the differences.
I am running RG&A 4340 front and rear.
I am running RG&A 4340 front and rear.
I think @Squatch may have a Dana 44 for sale. He's in WA. I can't remember how many he has!
Keep watching your Craigslist. One finally popped up here for $900. I paid the guy $800. It had a broken pinion tooth which I didn't know about at the time, but I was planning to regear anyway.
Interesting on 4340 vs 1541. @mrblaine, I think a few of us are wondering why 4140 is preferable over 4340 for the Dana 44. In trying to read and comprehend materials engineers on this topic, I came across this quote.
"4340 is typically considered to be tougher than 4140 in the quenched and tempered condition. This result is more from the fact that 4340 has higher hardenability and is more consistent in the heat treat response, particularly in thicker sections, than the differences in chemical compositions. 4340 is also typically produced to higher cleanliness standards than 4140, which is another big contributor to the toughness.
In my experience, however, in sections where heat treatment results in >95% martensite, with comparable levels of cleanliness, and tempered to equal hardness and strength levels, 4140 will have a higher impact strength than 4340. This is contrary to “common wisdom”, but I have test data that supports it. This is mostly a trivial point, however, since in most applications where 4340 is preferred over 4140, the section thickness is such that the 4140 might not fully harden, but the 4340 will."
Is this your understanding? Are our axle shafts treated by quenching and tempering? Is the section thickness of an axle so great that 4140 might not fully harden? Or is it thin enough that it does fully harden and that is why you are making the recommendation of 4140? Greater impact strength. Nothing is mentioned in what I read about ductility, but I am supposing that is maintained in the heat treatment process.
"4340 is typically considered to be tougher than 4140 in the quenched and tempered condition. This result is more from the fact that 4340 has higher hardenability and is more consistent in the heat treat response, particularly in thicker sections, than the differences in chemical compositions. 4340 is also typically produced to higher cleanliness standards than 4140, which is another big contributor to the toughness.
In my experience, however, in sections where heat treatment results in >95% martensite, with comparable levels of cleanliness, and tempered to equal hardness and strength levels, 4140 will have a higher impact strength than 4340. This is contrary to “common wisdom”, but I have test data that supports it. This is mostly a trivial point, however, since in most applications where 4340 is preferred over 4140, the section thickness is such that the 4140 might not fully harden, but the 4340 will."
Is this your understanding? Are our axle shafts treated by quenching and tempering? Is the section thickness of an axle so great that 4140 might not fully harden? Or is it thin enough that it does fully harden and that is why you are making the recommendation of 4140? Greater impact strength. Nothing is mentioned in what I read about ductility, but I am supposing that is maintained in the heat treatment process.
In context, I don't prefer 4140, I will gladly use it since I know if done correctly (and it is in a lot of shafts, you just aren't told it is 4140) it will work for 95% of what we do and the cost is or should be less. If I were making axle shafts, I would pull in competitor shafts in 4340, set up a set bench, twist them until they broke and show that a well made cheaper 4140 shaft is more than equivalent to the bullshit 4340 out there.
I'm believe that our rear shafts for most of what we get are induction hardened. I'm not aware of any that are quenched.
My main point in this is that far too much emphasis is incorrectly placed on certain aspects of something without knowing the why and the whole story. Buzz word marketing is bad for everyone.