6-wheelers (offroaders and lorries) and transmission wind-up?

Austin Shackles wrote:

> On or around Sat, 1 Apr 2006 07:29:20 +0100, Ian Rawlings
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>On 2006-04-01, Bill Payer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I've got a WW2 GMC 6x6 'Jimmy', the rear 8 wheels are permanent
>>> drive with the the front 2 selectable, 6x4 or 6x6. There are 3 drive
>>> shafts coming out of the transfere box, 1 to the front and 1 each to
>>> each of the 2 axles.
>>
>>Cheers for that. Any idea why they chose that arrangement? It seems
>>odd to run an extra shaft when drive could have been taken from the
>>front-most rear axle. I suppose that making an axle with the
>>pass-through might either be more complicated than I suspect or would
>>have caused problems with spares.
>
> It's less prone to immobilise itself, maybe. If you lose one shaft, the
> you
> lose all the back drive, with a pass-through diff. Also by doing it like
> that you should be able to use a single standard axle type for the back
> end.

I suspect that it is rather difficuot to design a simple pass through
conventional diff unless it is either hypoid, worm or double reduction. I
have had experience with a 1950s Diamond T 6x6 that used a pass through
diff - but it was easy as they were double reduction difs with the crown
wheel and pinion geared to the main diff so that there was no diff centre
or half shaft inside the crownwheel to complicate design. The other 6x6
truck we were using at the time (early sixties) was an International - it
had a "centre diff" combined with the forward rear differential (although
most internal components were identical between the two diffs) providing
drive to the rear rear axle.
JD

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 22:20:04 +0100, Tom Woods
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 21:50:09 +0100, Ian Rawlings
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>The engine is a specially-designed air-cooled straight four 2.5 litre
>>petrol, it uses common carbs (either stromberg or webber, can't
>>remember). The newer machines use a specially-designed diesel,
>>however it was designed by VW so probably looks quite familiar.
>
>and i thought a 101 with a 3.5 v8 felt a bit sluggish!. Isnt a 2.5
>petrol a bit underpowered?
>

The Pinz is smaller and lighter than the 101. And the 101 is sluggish
because the 3.5v8 is considerably detuned in the 101 version. Try it
with a later 3.5 SD1 or EFI lump in it.

Alex

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:02:50 +0100, Alex <[email protected]>
scribbled the following nonsense:

>On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 22:20:04 +0100, Tom Woods
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 21:50:09 +0100, Ian Rawlings
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>The engine is a specially-designed air-cooled straight four 2.5 litre
>>>petrol, it uses common carbs (either stromberg or webber, can't
>>>remember). The newer machines use a specially-designed diesel,
>>>however it was designed by VW so probably looks quite familiar.
>>
>>and i thought a 101 with a 3.5 v8 felt a bit sluggish!. Isnt a 2.5
>>petrol a bit underpowered?
>>
>
>The Pinz is smaller and lighter than the 101. And the 101 is sluggish
>because the 3.5v8 is considerably detuned in the 101 version. Try it
>with a later 3.5 SD1 or EFI lump in it.
>
>Alex

and the 101 has very low gearing.
--

Simon Isaacs

Peterborough 4x4 Club Chairman, Newsletter Editor and Webmaster
Green Lane Association (GLASS) Financial Director
101 Ambi, undergoing camper conversion www.simoni.co.uk
1976 S3 LWT, Fully restored, ready for sale! Make me an offer!
Suzuki SJ410 (Wife's) 3" lift kit fitted, body shell now restored and mounted on chassis, waiting on a windscreen and MOT
Series 3 88" Rolling chassis...what to do next
1993 200 TDi Discovery
1994 200 TDi Discovery body shell, being bobbed and modded.....