Long Travel BS Thread

You have any pics on one installed?

 

Since you seen both trusses, Which truss setup do you prefer, dirt designs or ruff stuff?

 

@Y2kbaja dirt designs makes a rear truss for out trucks.

 

Since we are on the topic of the rear axle, does anyone know if someone has ever installed an 07+ tundra axle in a 2nd gen Tacoma? I've been conducting some research because im intrigued about matching the front trackwidth and keeping it toyota; in turn strength of course. I know the obvious differences such as bolt pattern, u-joint for driveshaft (most likely need different length), brakes (possible master cylinder upgrade), track width, weight, etc. Seems more than reasonable to accomplish. I really hate running wheel spacers.

 

I'm running the tundra 10.5 and my buddy is running the 9.5





We got tired of bending housings and blowing gears. We're both running wheel adapters, stock calipers, and stock master cylinders, 1310 to 1350 adapter u-joints, and slid the carrier bearing forward to compensate for added depth.

Running stock 4.30 gears from a 4wd tundra, I plan to swap in 5.29 gears and a LSD when I re-build it.

Comes out to 88" with 37x13.50x17 w/ zero offset wheels.

I want to get custom axles but they're kinda pricey. My buddy has over 1000 miles of baja pre-running on his adapters with no issue so far

 

Here is the relentless fab truss on a 1st gen tundra housing that @DTFtacoma installed for me on my pile

 

Awesome, thanks for the comment!

 

That frickin' beautiful.

For my curiosity, Ya'll have any issues warping the housing doing that much welding on them? Are you building a jig, or is there another secret to it?

 

Use a true bar, go slow or this

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7A5i3YSq_oE

 

They make 5.29 gears for the 9.5 and 10.5 tundra axles???? Best I could find were 4.88s. What lug wheel adapters are you running, how thick are they?

From the research I've found they are still a bit narrow to match the WMS to WMS with a 3.5" kit even a 2" kit they are 1" short. iirc it's 07+ 68" the 1st gen tundra was 67" and the T100 is 66.75" our 2nd gen tacoma is 65". The 10.5 tundra rear has a higher pinion than the 14 bolt or Dana 70 but comparable to them as far as size. Not sure how much trimming you can do like on a 14 bolt to gain some ground clearance back. Also the higher pinion on the ring gear creates a little less gear tooth engagement so on higher HP and harder thrashing it's a little weaker than the 14b or 70. It's also not a full floating rear axle if that matters to you. If I'm wrong on the tundra WMS let me know what you found as that's what I found and it took a lot of digging.

 

It’s all @DTFtacoma work. I believe he did the slow and a little here and little there method.

 

Yeah, I'm not looking for an exact match, but depending on what your ride height is at you're not going to achieve an exact 3.5" on each side based on the angle of the LCA's. You're right about the tundra rear track width being 68"...Toyota states 67.9". How is that 65" figured? According to the Tacoma spec sheet, its states 63.4 which is an additional 2.25" on each side. I guess best thing to do is check the WMS myself. Also, with measuring outside tire to outside tire with 2" spacers, I am at 82" wide in the rear. Front with the Camburg kit, I'm at 83.5" so not too much different. Obviously, that's dependent on the tire, but I would be fine with an additional 2" on each side of the axle. I want to keep it toyota if I can.

 

Here's a link. If you use google for tacoma rear axle width for 05+ it always pops up as 65". I have never found a factory stated WMS to WMS measurement. They may be measuring from axle flange to axle flange excluding the brake drums i don't know. But even with that I haven't found really any factory sources on the widths it's all come from people measuring and publishing. Track width is different than WMS, track width is measured to the center contact patch of the tires from side to side. That could be where your information differs as you're looking at a different measurement than WMS to WMS.
https://www.roundforge.com/articles/toyota-axle-widths/

 

Okay, I appreciate it. Yeah, I think I'll probably just end up measuring it to check.

 

I’ve got a 1st gen tundra axle and a 2nd gen taco axle (besides the one on my truck). They both are 66 ~1/4” wms to wms

with a 2nd gen tundra you’d have to run wheel adapters which would probably add over an inch to two on each side and people poo poo on spacers but it’s the same concept as a two piece wheel which people pay extra to get on their $150k porches and there’s no plague of bearing failures on guys that run spacers. Heck half the guys saying spacers are bad think a hub ring does something other than make it easier to throw a wheel on. High horsepower, low quality studs, sudden traction plus a over torqued set of lug nuts is a problem for sure but that’s not the idea here of course *cough* damn v6.

 

dust shield to dust shield (inside) is 67" on my '17 tundra if that helps any

 

Interesting on the 1st gen tundra vs 2nd gen tacoma?!?!??!??? Hmmmmmmmm.

My personal opinion on spacers, it's a potential 2nd failure point where the wheel mounts, yet I've run them for over almost 3 yrs now with no issues. This may be why racing sactioning bodies outlaw them in their rules, not sure and not all may either. Yes it's kinda like having a 3 piece bolted together wheel I guess that's a pretty good analogy as that is a failure point that could be potentially dangerous. Hub centering rings work because bozos don't know how to tighten up a wheel with a larger hub bore that then becomes lug centric and I agree with you on that for sure. Totally agree on the over torquing for sure especially if you do it over and over and over again torquing to the yield point of the stud and lug. The V6 I was thinking the same thing when jumping up to the yuge rear ends a little overkill and a lot of weight and more rotating mass to spin up for such a puny engine. I'd rather get a custom built ford 9 with the correct bolt pattern, width, and better ground clearance, plus almost unlimited support in the aftermarket.

As far as the spacers and bearings here is my thing it does push the wheel and tire assembly further away from the bearing just like an extremely low BS wheel this does add some more strain to those components. But how long they last compared to the same assembly at a stock or more centered around the bearing that's debateable because no one has really tested that. I mean shoot my wheel and tire combo weigh ~95 lbs compared to stock that's a hell of a difference that to me puts more strain on the bearings regardless of the offset from the bearings compared to stock. I personally think that you'd have to do multiple long term tests with stock weighted and larger assemblies both in stock offset and extremely low and find out the difference in bearing longevity to make a more educated analysis of the actual wear. I will say it does but like you I think it's hyped up more because people have rigs with a lot of miles put heavy ass wheels and tires with spacers or extremely low offsets and that combination puts extra strain on already worn components (that will fail eventually anyways) and boom start having bearing problems and look to the spacer to blame immediately and thus now gets blown up more.

 

Yeah going back as far as TTORA I’ve read the whole 65 vs 67.5 2nd gen Tacoma vs. 1st gen Tundra spec. It was unexpected when I measured the axles and then going to my regular cab and measuring it as well. For anyone with a 2nd gen just throw a tape measure or a wire on your rear axle and confirm for yourself - I’ve got the axles sitting next to each other behind my truck.

Racing plays it pretty conservative on everything. Then again they’re not typically using cast assembly line wheels or Chinesium lug studs. Sanctioned drifters use huge offset wheels stacked with 3-4” wheel spacers.

Furthermore if clamping force was somehow an unacceptable method of holding two components together, our trucks and things in general would be cast as a single unit, 3D printed, or welded together. If someone can’t accurately bolt on two or four more components to their trucks they shouldn’t be working on their own truck.

I’ve seen studs shear much more than I’ve seen wheel spacers disintegrate and this is typically on higher torque vehicles with big tires.

9” is a good replacement - lots of flavors from mild to wild and there’s a 68” Econoline housing I had that wouldn’t cost more than $600 shipped for 6 on 5.5 35 spline axles complete with new bearings from Dutchman - I almost went that route and got a quote from them. Got a ff housing eventually being convinced that the buy once cry once philosophy may be a real thing.

As far as physics is concerned a larger moment is placed on a wheel bearing the further away from it the load is applied to the rotating axis but (and though sampling methods are as good as any other forum research) guys that blow through wheel bearings overload, absolutely beat their rigs, and / or live in high precipitation / corrosive environments from what I’ve seen. Not guys with wheel spacers.

 

Yep this for the spacer and wheel bearing thing. Like the I just add all this extra weight and such and the bearing should last forever. That crowd kills me.

 

The Tundra 9.5" axle is Land Cruiser based, so any gears or differentials designed for the 98 and up Land Cruiser 100 and 200 Series will work with the housing. I am using one for my 2018 Tacoma... the exact direction to take it is still up in the air. A really neat housing comes on the 2008 and up 200 series... a little narrower than the Tundra, but holds more fluid and is stronger design.