Best Source For Flat Fender Dana 30 Swap

So I know lots about flat fender Willys but only some about the later year CJ's. I currently have a Dana 44 30 spline flanged narrow track from a 70 1/2 CJ5 in my stock powered CJ-2A. In the future once I have the Jeep on the road for a while I would like to swap into a Dana 30 so I can put an Eaton E-Locker up front like I have in the Rear Dana 44.

So what vehicle should I look to be a source. It would also be nice if I could keep my 11" drums

 

I guess Pre 82 are all Narrow Track.
Jeep Axle: Dana 30

 

That's exactly what I have in my 47. A narrow Dana 44 out of a 70 1/2 cj and a narrow Dana 30 with disc. Rear has a Eaton e-locker and front has a lunch box for now. But my gears are only 427. But I'm pushing it all with 240 HP 4.3 vortec. I'm not sure exactly what year the 30 is. I put in 1 1/2 inch spacers on the 44 and it seems to match the front 30 exactly. Good combo.

 

I don't want to widen the Tread at all so I'll have one narrowed if I have to to match the Dana 44 (which has the same tread as the original 41) My gears are 5.38's push comes from a hopped up 134L (approx 85-90 Bhp) along with a 30% ATV Over drive unit from Herm. 29-30" tall tires.

But I really want to keep the 11" drums as well in front.

 

72 to 75 are the best bolt in option. castor on the spring perches changed a couple degrees from 76 to 82 but are still great options.

 

The last year or two of nt30 they used a chintzy 5 bolt hub as opposed to the previous ( stronger) 6 bolt. Wouldn't get wound up about it with a 4cyl and stockish tires though.

 

I have no problem with the 5 Bolt hubs or much of anything else stock on my 2A if I could get an Eaton E-Locker into my Dana 25 I would go that route.

But I can't so I'll look for a D30 splitting the torque from a 134L to 4 tires makes the axles almost impossible to break. Heck splitting it out to 3 tires with what I have now is.

 

Actually, the problem is finding replacement locking hubs in 5 bolt as apposed to 6 bolt configuration. Its easily fixed with new hubs.

 

If you plan on narrowing it anyway I'd just build a Dana 44 and be done with it. More locker and gear options (from stock and aftermarket applications), stronger u-joint and axles, axles can be had in the aftermarket off the shelf, list goes on. Any narrowed 30 is going to require custom axle shafts. You cannot narrow the stock narrow track 30 shafts to the width you want because if they say they neck down in the area needed for the seal surface.
Been there, done that, have the t-shirt and the weld scars to prove it...

 

No way to notice the difference in track widths from front to back. CJs all had a wider then the rear front axle from 72 to 86. I actually think it makes them much more stable. It is nice to have a front axle with a decent turning radius as apposed to a 51" 25 or 27 front. I have a cut down 44 front that is 55" wide running with a stock 51" centered 44 rear both with e-lockers that work together perfectly.

 

Hey Mark, send me your info on that hopped up F-134. I'm looking to beef mine up a bit. Just curious what you did to get the HP.

 

If you narrowed a D30 you would also negate its ability for smaller turning radius.
In other words you gain absolutely nothing over a D25/D27 concerning the turn radius.
In fact the D25/D27 may turn sharper if your specifically running the 29* Rzeppa axle shafts.
Of course....this latest concern will also depend on tire width and wheel offest.
I have pushed the D25 axle to its turn radius limit via Rezeppa shafts, wheel offset, the tire tread width and diameter.

Daryl, Thats very interesting.
So your stating that a 72-75 requires slightly less angle change ?

I also prefer the 1972-1975 Dana 30 axles because you don't have to cut of that big /stupid travel limiter which is an integral part of the 1976 and later D30 the carrier casting[/quote]

 

I agree with this except for the very last part. If the OP insists on narrowing the front axle anyway it just makes sense to narrow something that is stronger anyway, and more important that parts are going to be available for a very long time. Parts are already becoming harder to find for the CJ 30 and it's not going to get better. Things like good good used axle shafts, Powerlock clutches, certain gear sets are already getting harder to come by. And anything can be broken regardless of engine.

 

Keep in mind I will be pushing this axle with a Hopped up 134L so maybe 90 HP. So worrying about beefer anything is of no concern. Its dang near impossible to break a stock D-41 with the transfer case in low range 2wd (yes I know its not recommended but dad had it that way for parades and we used 2wd low off road a LOT in high school) so once you lock the rear axle in and split the torque then add the front axle 1/3rding the torque and a front locker quartering the torque. Breaking things is just not going to happen.

The reason I do not want to have a wider track in the front is I want the Jeep as narrow as possible. I play in the forest and I like being able to fit between things.

My current Dana 25 has Bendix joints so right in the middle of the 3 options for turning radius.

At this point I am just collecting info. When I get to the point of changing the front axle which will be a ways off. (1. Get Jeep done 2. Get aluminum top made for done jeep 3. Get off road camping trailer set up done 4. think seriously about swapping in a different front axle)

 

You absolutely will not notice the extra 3" of the NT D30 on the trail. I used to subscribe to that argument also but after piloting a JK Unlimited on the same trails as the 3B for 4 years now, it's pretty much a moot point. It will be a very rare case where that will ever make any difference.

 

Uhhh, ok. I used to have customers tell me that ALL the time, then come back a few months later wanting to know about upgrade options. If breakage wasn't gonna happen then why did you upgrade to the flanged offset axle? Maybe thinking to the future?
Why is everyone talking about the engine being the main factor? Shock loads kill more axles far more than engines. Get a front end bouncing climbing a hill or get an axle bound up with the wheels turned and "pop go the u-joints". These situations have nothing to do with engine size.

On top of that it's not all about strength. Read my post above about parts availability. Right now parts availability isn't too bad, but what about 10 years down the road? The newest CJ 30 is 30 years old. Already manufacturers are shifting away from supporting this axle. Lots of parts are available for them simply because they interchange with later 30's from other applications. How long do you think 5.38's for a CJ will be available? Especially since it is only an aftermarket offering? What about axle shafts? Spindles? Bearing hubs? Locking hubs?

In Oregon the extra width will not hurt you on the trails. If anything it will help slightly with stability, especially in off camber or downhill situations. I've wheeled all over Oregon my whole life, was born here, and narrow track 30 width has absolutely never been an issue. It can also have the advantage of keeping the fenders away from obstacles.
But hey, it's your Jeep, you already have your ideas, so it's your right to do whatever you want.

 

Well I'm here to tell you that is a big misconception right there.
I broke two D41 rear axle shafts screwing around on the street in low range 2wd chirping the tires in 2nd and 3rd gear.
5.38s with 11.00 -15 flotation/implement tires on 10" wide wheels.
That was when the F-head was in my Jeep.
Try limping home and explaining that to your dad how that happened (twice).

And the Dana 30 will be noticeably wider...1.5" on both sides. FYI

 

Yes, impact load. No burnouts. "If it starts to hop, it's gonna pop." I've never broken the axle u-joints, but it stands to reason that the vector load on an axle u-joint with the wheels jammed and turned will be huge. Snap.

Note that the extra width of the 30 is needed to give you the smaller turning circle that Jeep wanted whent hey introduced the axle in the CJs. Nearly all cars already have a wider track in the front than the rear. It's done that way for a smaller turning circle and more manuevrability.

 

Points all taken. Not to argue. I was just asking which of the various donor vehicles would be the best source for a D-30 to put under my 48. I see now that they are all wider then my stock Dana 25 or my 70 1/2 D-44 flanged so I will most likely look to my original Idea of having a D-44 from a Wagoneer or a Scout narrowed and setup the way I want.

My only real reason to do this swap is to add a selectable locker to the front axle. As there is no option for the DANA 25