You should have used common sense when you made the first .but you wanted to show the world what kind of stupid noise you call your music....we don't care about your stupid garbage u listen to I grade that vid . F

Thanks!

thanks and good luck!

For me, I'm not aware of any apps or graphs that help with ride height. That's really only because I have hand drawings of the chassis (key points on the chassis) and I know where the body lines sit relative to certain aspects on the chassis. The flip side of that is I also know what length shock I want to run, so I always try to get the shock in it's sweet spot around 50% stroke at ride height. So having the shock in it's sweet spot sets a length, and I make "setup" bars which simulate that length. I just use a 1"x1" bar and drill the holes at the appropriate distance. Back to the other side of the equation, I will take a bunch of measurements of how the body is sitting on it's current chassis relative to where it attaches to that chassis (since hopefully that doesn't change on the new chassis). I use the floor as a datum and put tape on the floor to mark certain spots with a plumb bob for horizontal measurements (just know once I start this process the vehicle sits in that spot without moving it for as long as it takes to get the measurements). For example, on my C10 I know that to get the top of the rear wheel opening right around the top of the wheel I need the bottom of the frame at the rear cab mount sitting around 7.5-8". I know the rockers then sit about 3/4" up from the bottom of the frame rail. Knowing all that, with a solid rear axle it's a matter of taking tire size, axle tube size, adding some space for travel at ride height to the frame rail which sets the frame rail height, then attaching the desired length shock. The longer the shock the better ride you'll get. You'll always here the guys that have been doing this awhile say you start with the wheels. You need to know your wheel size and wheelbase/track and the rest will fall out. Hope that helps. Probably not the answer you were looking for but I tend to be old school on some stuff.

Thank you for the great reply. I know that is a HUGE question and a tough one to answer here. I'm trying to help my son set up a 57 Chevy chassis with a LS, Tremec, and 9" Ford. The suspension is pretty much figured out. Wheels and tires are "anticipated" as there is some hesitation to purchase those components this early to avoid damage/deterioration due to the time these DIY projects take. My question involves knowing how much that suspension is going to compress "before" the chassis is complete with the body, interior, engine, etc weight applied. Do you "estimate" the weight and distribution and "simulate" by adding that amount of weight on each end of the chassis with wheels/fakes mounted and on the ground?? Essentially, you are speaking about where you WANT the chassis to sit while I'm asking how do you know where it's ACTUALLY going to sit without having a complete car??

Hey sorry, I missed your question back when you posted it a few months ago. I estimate the weights and distribution the best I can. From there, it's spring rate and preload (assuming you are using a coil over) that will set ride height when it's all together. So if my estimates are close, it's just tweaking the preload to get ride height. Worse case, if I'm way off I make a spring rate change, which would probably be needed anyhow if I was that far off. I've then got a calculator I built in excel for my setup where I plug in the weights, preload and spring rates, along with tire size, and it calculates ride height.

Hey Sho Bud, Thanks for the feedback! I do appreciate it. I do know the audio in this one isn't the best. It was my 2nd video ever posted to KZfaq and I've learned a ton since then and continue to work on improving audio quality. Cheers!

Do a little 70s porno music. That should help!

Thanks Rob!

Hey Speed Freak, there are 2 things that stand out to me with your setup, the first is the angle1 being greater than 3 degrees. The second being the trans and pinion are not parallel. The more concerning one is the not parallel u joints. Depending on your rear axle, you might try to adjust the pinion angle (i.e. angled shims under the axle mounts). Another option would be a spacer under the trans mount to raise the rear of the trans a little to reduce the initial driveline angle. Travis over at Mark Williams (I got my driveshaft from him) put together a good video showing what happens with u-joint angles that aren't parallel. Check it out here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l5l9fZeA2q7Riqs.html

Thanks!

Hey Gary, I'm running way behind and trying to get caught up. You may have already made a decision on this, but if not, I'd recommend Mark Williams Enterprises in CO for the driveshaft. Their tech is awesome and they can help size and spec the right driveshaft for your application. I went with their 3.5" diameter 6061 aluminum driveshaft . The 1350 u-joints are a must if you have a heavier setup and increase the power. Otherwise they will be the weak link in the drivetrain and would be more likely to break on a hard acceleration. Also, the 1350 u-joints Mark Williams used do not have grease zerks so they don't have the grease passages which weakens the u-joint.

Awesome Man Great information and timely, I value all your input. Thanks Again Sir

Is your truck trailing arm rear suspension? If so, the pinion angle changed as you lowered it down. There are aftermarket shims that you can get to help correct that situation. And you could treat the rear shaft as a 1 piece since you didn't touch anything forward of the carrier bearing. That's why I'm thinking your pinion angle is out.

Thanks for the reply. The rear is leaf spring. This morning I went out and measured everying for angle. Starting at the front, it is 5.6 down, 4.8 down, .4 down, and 3.2 down. I put this in Spicers calculator you linked and I get some interesting results. Seems that the 'ugly' is in the 2nd operating angle. In my case that is the carrier bearing universal. I started playing with the angles as if I had shims and the only things that seems to help is to raise the carrier bearing. But I'm only guessing at what change that would induce in angle. Guess a little math here might help. Not my strong point. ~P.

So my trigonometry is nearly non existent, but I can draw. So I took a couple more measurements and booted up Fusion360. I let fusion start giving me projected angles of the driveshafts, when I changed things, specifically the height of the carrier bearing. I looks to me like it will take a combination of moving the carrier bearing up, and using the shim that Belltech provided on the back of the trans to change the output shaft angle by a fraction of a degree. That will get all the operating angles within 1 degree of each other, and all well below 3 degrees (.9,.5,.6). I guess I'm not done cutting on the truck.

Yeah, the 2 piece driveshafts add a layer of confusion to the process. Sounds like you are getting on the right track. It could be the carrier bearing wound up in line or below the pinion when you dropped down, so raising the carrier up a little would make sense. Then yeah, once the carrier goes up, the rear of the trans needs to go up as well to keep the coupling shaft happy. Good luck!

Part ordered. I'll let you know how it goes.

JessieJ if your angles are matching that’s good. The slightly over 2.3 just means you might experience a faster wear on the u-joints. Sounds like you’ve got a lifted truck so I’d say you are in good shape for being lifted. Give it a drive and if no vibrations then I’d run it as is since the tcase output and pinion angles are in sync.

Yes my truck has 2" lifted springs in front and 2" blocks under the springs in the rear. Thank You for replying it helped my decision greatly I will let you know how it goes once I get my truck up and running again ;)

Hey man, so you're right on your understanding of slope but you've also got things a little backwards from what I said in the video. I think your error comes from the statement "Unless I'm reading it wrong, the pinion angle-if pointed below a 90 degree angle..." which you unfortunately are reading it wrong. The thing I used to measure the angle is a digital level, not a digital protractor. So that little arrow indicates which way that end of the digital level needs to goes to be level, which, in my case was pointing up indicating the back (left in the video) of the yolk is lower than the front (right in the video) meaning the pinion is sloping down from front to rear. That little arrow does not indicate slope.

Please see the pinned comment. I made an updated version about a year ago. KZfaq does not allow you to "update" a video after it is published, so I created a 2nd version with improved audio.

The great argument of every pinion angle discussion ... what about suspension windup? It's not 0, throw a camera on your diff and watch what it does under load. It's different for all suspensions and based on the type of bushings used. I accounted for this in my setup. The more HP you put to the backend, the more the pinion will rotate under load. Put it this way, thousands of miles on my setup and not one single issue related to driveline vibration, all the way up to 120 mph. No cage so no need to push it much higher plus drive shaft critical speed limits me to 155 mph.

Seems like you were 3.5 down with motor and 2.7 up with the pinion. Thats less than 1 degree difference. Send it. Nix the music.

Thanks for the feedback. Care to tell me which time frames you think this is the case? This is one of my earlier videos so I'm learning as I go.

Music to loud the whole video. Other then that it was great

yes

Yeah, should work for any rear wheel drive. Just keep in mind that any offset of the pinion left/right from the transmission centerline adds to the equation, but as long as the offset is small you can generally "ignore" the left/right and focus on the vertical measurements I walk through here. Good luck!

@@C10CJ thanks brotha, just trying to make it right, with no problems in the future. Haven't posted any videos on the build yet,i need to post them

@@C10CJ and one more thing. Does the vehicle have to be leave from front to back before you put Angle finder on it??? Or does it note matter??

@@independentwarriorstudiesj6847 yeah, should have the vehicle on a level surface and suspension at ride height.

Thank, and I did. See the pinned comment.

Sorry, haven't lived in SC since just after the great Ozzy/Jones debate ;-) Check out Kyle on the Fab Forums, he's in upstate and might be able to help out. You can also find my page on FB or IG (C10CJ) and shoot me a PM over there with any questions. Cheers!

lol - keep learning and earning and eventually the driveline will show up

@@C10CJ thanks I needed some positivity in my life right now!

Jim Gracey I personally have not but I’ve also not had any issues following this procedure. If something is putting a u-joint out of spec I try to correct that something and get the u-joints back in spec. This truck in the video I’ve run up to 100 mph so far and drivetrain is super smooth.

C10CJ following your procedure after shimming the rearend ended up with 1.8deg (nose down) on the pinion angle. Thanks for the clear information. Using the crank angle simplified everything. FYI, found the horizontal cast ribs on the pumpkin housing were within .1deg of the pinion (1967 Chevy rearend).

I'm Clemson M.E. from way back in the early 2000s! Go Tigers!

@@C10CJ awesome! Glad to see you excelling! Go tigers!

@@ooXxDrUmMeRxXoo Thanks! If you are on FB or IG check me out over there too, both under C10CJ

Just did both! Sorry i disrupted your 420 likes lol cheers!

Thanks for the feedback! I'd throw in some DIO but the rights can get ugly ... I stick to the "safe stuff" from the youtube library. I do appreciate you letting me know where the audio was too loud. I'm learning. I just realized that this vid was made with GoPro studio (not the best at mixing audio, ok with single audio track) and I've also since moved to a different video platform. On the music in there, that is from Ethan Meixsell. Thanks again.

Go check out the updated video I posted a couple weeks ago, link in the description and in the pinned comment at the top

a little off-center is generally ok provided you've got the u-joint angles around 1 deg in the "vertical" sense (the method I show here). The compound angle makes it harder to calculate the actual u-joint angle so trying to minimize the u-joint angles in this method generally gives enough room for the compound angle caused by the off-center pinion. I've not dealt much with off-center pinions so I can't really say what's a good number vs a bad one, but based on what you describe and assuming your driveshaft is longer than say 48" I'd think you'd be ok. Just make sure the driveshaft doesn't contact anything as the suspension moves through it's range since it is a little "crooked".

I made an updated version with no music for all you guys complaining about it, link is in the description and in the top pinned comment.

Similar comment to another, so same reply: The great argument of every pinion angle discussion ... what about suspension windup? It's not 0, throw a camera on your diff and watch what it does under load. It's different for all suspensions and based on the type of bushings used. I accounted for this in my setup. The more HP you put to the backend, the more the pinion will rotate under load. Put it this way, thousands of miles on my setup and not one single issue related to driveline vibration, all the way up to 120 mph. No cage so no need to push it much higher plus drive shaft critical speed limits me to 155 mph.

Thanks for the feedback. Updated version just posted. See link above.

Thanks! On your C10, if you are on Facebook checkout the group C10 addiction if you haven't already and post your truck on there. You'll have to weed through the junk comments but there are over 75,000 people in that group.

Please read the update note in the description and top pinned comment and go watch that version of the video

I think you missed the discussion, try again around the 6:57 mark. My pinion does not point down. I said pinion up, but the spicer tool uses slope so the tool calls that pinion down.

over9000pontiacs yeah, sorry. Filming on an old GoPro Hero 3. The internal mics aren't the best. Finally cleared some hard drive space so I can work on the next one and see if that is any better.

Thanks for the feedback. FWIW, I did make an updated version earlier this year with improved audio called 'Driveline Angles Redux'

Please see the pinned comment. I made an updated video over a year ago addressing this specific request: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eZuRecV028DOiZc.html

There is no "right range" of pinion angle, you run what you need to get the proper u-joint angles.

Guess you missed the link at the beginning of the description, the same link in the top pinned comment and the link in the "card" near the beginning of the video, all pointing to a version I made for people complaining about the music.

Go check out my other video "Driveline Angles Redux" - link in the description.

Read the top pinned comment

Man that crap isn't music...what the fuck is that....

You scrolled right over the pinned comment where I addressed just this complaint to make this complaint. Seriously, not only did you scroll past the pinned comment, but you probably watched enough to even not notice the card in the upper right (at 0:11) where I point to an updated version.

That’s too bad as you COMPLETELY missed the pinned comment and in the description where almost 5 years ago I made a version with fixed audio.

Learn to F’n read. You COMPLETELY missed the pinned comment and in the description where I made a version with fixed audio 5 years ago!

I agree man that pissed me off!!!!!!!!