2 blk2drs. yeah kinda sounded stupid but what i thought from the above posts was that if you used a rubi tcase then u HAD to use the axles too. i was asking why. scott thanks for clearing it up.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
44's and a241 in a TJ
Collapse
Forum Thread First Post
Collapse
X
-
I upgraded my D30/D35 and NV231 to a Rubicon D44/D44/lockers and NV241 last year. It is pretty much a bolt-in exercise except for the following:
1. If you don't already have a Slip Yoke Eliminator on your rear driveshaft, you will need one (or use the Rubicon driveshaft).
2. The driveshaft U-joints and the D44 pinions are 1330s instead of the 1310s that are on the Dana 30/35 and NV231. If you use the Rubicon driveshafts, they come with the bigger U-joints. If you use your old driveshafts, you can get 1310/1330 conversion u-joints.
3. The 4WD switch on the Rubicon NV241 transfer case is different than the one on the NV231--it has different positions in order to interface with the computer to disable the Rubicon lockers when not in 4Lo or above a certain speed. Here is a discussion thread on JeepForum.com that discusses how to replace the switch with one that will work with a non-Rubicon computer.
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f9/np...vealed-651308/
4. The Rubi NV241 does NOT use speedo gears to adjust for different tires/axle ratios; it is electronic. I am running 33s and 4.10 axles, so I didn't have to make any adjustments. If you run another combination of tires/axle gear ratios, you should look into this:
http://www.superlift.com/accessories/truspeed.asp
I believe that Gerald Lee (provelogear) is using that device on his TJ.
5. I believe that the shifter mechanism on the NV241 t-case is different. Mr. Blaine convinced me that I should upgrade to a Novak linkage and I'm glad that I did:
http://www.novak-adapt.com/catalog/kit_sk2xr.htm
I am very happy with my combination of NV241/4.10 axle ratio/33" tires. It gives me an acceptable crawl ratio on the rocks (78:1), and good highway manners (2300 rpm in top gear at 65 mph). If you plan to go with bigger tires, you might consider a lower axle ratio.Last edited by Russ Chung; 04-09-10, 10:11 PM.If you don't like the way I drive, stay out of the bushes!
KI6MLU
Comment
-
Originally posted by Russ Chung View PostI upgraded my D30/D35 and NV231 to a Rubicon D44/D44/lockers and NV241 last year. It is pretty much a bolt-in exercise except for the following:
1. If you don't already have a Slip Yoke Eliminator on your rear driveshaft, you will need one (or use the Rubicon driveshaft).
2. The driveshaft U-joints and the D44 pinions are 1330s instead of the 1310s that are on the Dana 30/35 and NV231. If you use the Rubicon driveshafts, they come with the bigger U-joints. If you use your old driveshafts, you can get 1310/1330 conversion u-joints.
3. The 4WD switch on the Rubicon NV241 transfer case is different than the one on the NV231--it has different positions in order to interface with the computer to disable the Rubicon lockers when not in 4Lo or above a certain speed. Here is a discussion thread on JeepForum.com that discusses how to replace the switch with one that will work with a non-Rubicon computer.
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f9/np...vealed-651308/
4. The Rubi NV241 does NOT use speedo gears to adjust for different tires/axle ratios; it is electronic. I am running 33s and 4.10 axles, so I didn't have to make any adjustments. If you run another combination of tires/axle gear ratios, you should look into this:
http://www.superlift.com/accessories/truspeed.asp
I believe that Gerald Lee (provelogear) is using that device on his TJ.
5. I believe that the shifter mechanism on the NV241 t-case is different. Mr. Blaine convinced me that I should upgrade to a Novak linkage and I'm glad that I did:
http://www.novak-adapt.com/catalog/kit_sk2xr.htm
I am very happy with my combination of NV241/4.10 axle ratio/33" tires. It gives me an acceptable crawl ratio on the rocks (78:1), and good highway manners (2300 rpm in top gear at 65 mph). If you plan to go with bigger tires, you might consider a lower axle ratio.
Comment
Comment