2.5 ton
12-20-2010, 07:18 PM
#61
CF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 4,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L
its mainly personal opinion.
but, there are reasons you dont see hardly any rock crawlers running 2.5's. the weight is the biggest problem, not only the weight of the axles, but the added weight of the bracing youll need to support the axles so the unibody doesnt burst into tears, and the weight of the wheel tire combo you will need to run to work with that bolt pattern.
they have no place on an XJ, d60's and ford 9's are more than enough to handle whatever you can throw at an xj.
but, like i said...if you're building some rediculous mud truck, then sure go with 2.5's and giant tires with a big motor.
sure, it will be "different" than most XJ's. but, different is not always a good thing.
im not saying that the 4.0 wont be able to turn them over, just no way they make enough power to turn the tires with any kind of real wheel speed
150lbs is ALOT of extra weight...dont know why you're talking like its not.
can i ask what kind of power and tires you run to warrant the need for 1ton axles?
hell my 8.8 only weighs 170
but, there are reasons you dont see hardly any rock crawlers running 2.5's. the weight is the biggest problem, not only the weight of the axles, but the added weight of the bracing youll need to support the axles so the unibody doesnt burst into tears, and the weight of the wheel tire combo you will need to run to work with that bolt pattern.
they have no place on an XJ, d60's and ford 9's are more than enough to handle whatever you can throw at an xj.
but, like i said...if you're building some rediculous mud truck, then sure go with 2.5's and giant tires with a big motor.
sure, it will be "different" than most XJ's. but, different is not always a good thing.
im not saying that the 4.0 wont be able to turn them over, just no way they make enough power to turn the tires with any kind of real wheel speed
150lbs is ALOT of extra weight...dont know why you're talking like its not.
can i ask what kind of power and tires you run to warrant the need for 1ton axles?
hell my 8.8 only weighs 170
also the 4.0L could turn a 2.5 ton very well. the gear STOCK in a 2.5 ton are 6.72-1. so how couldn't it get wheel speed? your legs (avg 2-4 hp motor's power) can push a 26" tire on a bike with you on it... its all in the gearing. yes they are heavy. are they good for a jeep? most likely not. but anything 44" or bigger then yes. they are a great axle for people who are building a vehicle to beat the **** out of.
the biggest problem with rockwells are the high the vehicle has to be at to make them work and flex well. it makes the COG to high to be worth the sacrifice for strength compared to D50-80... look at a lot of buggies. people run rocks, 44-53" tires and sit just above stock height. it a balance when building a rig. some things work and some don't. its all opinion. we measured my axle height and how high i would have to be to make the rocks fit. 13" of lift and a big bump stop to keep the diff from hitting the motor.
I would agree though that a 2.5 ton axle would be a lot for the uni-body to drag around... but that can be fixed easy if you know how to make the rocks fit already, its just a bit more fabricating.
12-20-2010, 07:25 PM
#62
Old Skewl CF like a Sir
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 4,355
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Year: 1996
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L High Output OBDII
Rockwells are the greatest thing known to man.
They are very possible to fab, F-250 HD coils, and 4 link into the rear of the passanger compartment area for longer travel. Obviously theres alot more then just that, and hydro steering is a must, but the end result (if done right) is beast.
They are very possible to fab, F-250 HD coils, and 4 link into the rear of the passanger compartment area for longer travel. Obviously theres alot more then just that, and hydro steering is a must, but the end result (if done right) is beast.
12-20-2010, 07:40 PM
#63
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: cape cod ma.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 i6
here's my issue: why start with an XJ if you can make the axles go in you are capable of building far more, just start from scratch build a tube buggy drop a jeep 4.0 in it if you really want and have a beast..the XJ is not the best platform for it full size trucks go to it all i know is in my lifetime of loving wheeling 9 times out of 10 a little sami makes a fool outta at least half of the biggest rigs out there
12-20-2010, 07:43 PM
#64
Old Skewl CF like a Sir
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 4,355
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Year: 1996
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L High Output OBDII
here's my issue: why start with an XJ if you can make the axles go in you are capable of building far more, just start from scratch build a tube buggy drop a jeep 4.0 in it if you really want and have a beast..the XJ is not the best platform for it full size trucks go to it all i know is in my lifetime of loving wheeling 9 times out of 10 a little sami makes a fool outta at least half of the biggest rigs out there
Bam, rockwells. They never saw it coming.
12-20-2010, 07:59 PM
#65
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: cape cod ma.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 i6
ok here's the different strokes part of wheeling..you rockwell guys are all in the south...been there done that hated cleaning the truck... lol... try to follow my little lockered 5in lift 32s xj through the woods with 8ft wide axles..then again i was in southern alabama last year with my old 3/4 ton chevy 44/14bolt govloc 454 37s 4:10s and looked tiny and couldn't get anywhere in half the swamps ya'lls play in...so i kinda see it, but i think its too much for the poor lil jeep to turn and try to hold...and to the weight thing i know this two people can pick up and move any 1 ton axle d60,d70,corp. 14bolt (or one really big dude) i have tried to move a rockwell good luck got the forklift..
12-20-2010, 08:01 PM
#66
CF Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 6,685
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Year: 92
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
my Buddie is building 2.5 tons for his Toyota. locked and 2" 47 spline shafts. its pretty awesome. the wheels are steel just like regular ones. how is a steel wheel and a 36" tire on a 2.5 different from a steel wheel and a 36 on a d30? same mass different bolt pattern. (also re-centering H1 wheels are the "thing to do" for 2.5/5 ton axles)
also the 4.0L could turn a 2.5 ton very well. the gear STOCK in a 2.5 ton are 6.72-1. so how couldn't it get wheel speed? your legs (avg 2-4 hp motor's power) can push a 26" tire on a bike with you on it... its all in the gearing. yes they are heavy. are they good for a jeep? most likely not. but anything 44" or bigger then yes. they are a great axle for people who are building a vehicle to beat the **** out of.
the biggest problem with rockwells are the high the vehicle has to be at to make them work and flex well. it makes the COG to high to be worth the sacrifice for strength compared to D50-80... look at a lot of buggies. people run rocks, 44-53" tires and sit just above stock height. it a balance when building a rig. some things work and some don't. its all opinion. we measured my axle height and how high i would have to be to make the rocks fit. 13" of lift and a big bump stop to keep the diff from hitting the motor.
I would agree though that a 2.5 ton axle would be a lot for the uni-body to drag around... but that can be fixed easy if you know how to make the rocks fit already, its just a bit more fabricating.
also the 4.0L could turn a 2.5 ton very well. the gear STOCK in a 2.5 ton are 6.72-1. so how couldn't it get wheel speed? your legs (avg 2-4 hp motor's power) can push a 26" tire on a bike with you on it... its all in the gearing. yes they are heavy. are they good for a jeep? most likely not. but anything 44" or bigger then yes. they are a great axle for people who are building a vehicle to beat the **** out of.
the biggest problem with rockwells are the high the vehicle has to be at to make them work and flex well. it makes the COG to high to be worth the sacrifice for strength compared to D50-80... look at a lot of buggies. people run rocks, 44-53" tires and sit just above stock height. it a balance when building a rig. some things work and some don't. its all opinion. we measured my axle height and how high i would have to be to make the rocks fit. 13" of lift and a big bump stop to keep the diff from hitting the motor.
I would agree though that a 2.5 ton axle would be a lot for the uni-body to drag around... but that can be fixed easy if you know how to make the rocks fit already, its just a bit more fabricating.
i strongly dont believe that a pair of 2.5's in an Xj is worth a damn on the trails or rocks. and i will still to that opinion until proven otherwise.
12-20-2010, 08:09 PM
#67
Seasoned Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1997 2 door
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
I love how these guys spend all the time/money putting rocks under their rigs only to run those garbage cheap michelin military tires..
A xj on 38-40" krawlers (or something similar) and 1 tons will go so much further then a sky high cherokee on 52" pizza cutters.
A xj on 38-40" krawlers (or something similar) and 1 tons will go so much further then a sky high cherokee on 52" pizza cutters.
12-20-2010, 08:10 PM
#68
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: cape cod ma.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 i6
why would you ever choose a 2.5 axle to spin a 36" tire? when a "little" d60 or 9" could do the job. its un-needed weight.
i strongly dont believe that a pair of 2.5's in an Xj is worth a damn on the trails or rocks. and i will still to that opinion until proven otherwise.
i strongly dont believe that a pair of 2.5's in an Xj is worth a damn on the trails or rocks. and i will still to that opinion until proven otherwise.
12-20-2010, 08:25 PM
#69
Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Model: Cherokee
It's been quite a while sense I've posted here, I've been doing other things. I had to sell the Cherokee, so no I haven't finished the project. The engine blew up in my daily driver so I had to do what ever I could to get it back on the road. I still have my rocks, but Im not sure what Im gonna do with them.
I have been working on candy quite a bit though. I re built the rear suspension, and finished my rear bumper. I don't think I posted any pix so here's a couple to give you some ideas.
I had to build the suspension because I broke the rear axle again. I had the 35 in it, and I just got sick of breaking it. I got a 44a out of a WJ, trussed it, built a skid plate for it, and completely re did the suspension. I'll see if I can find my build thread and post more in it if I haven't.
12-20-2010, 08:36 PM
#70
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Mt. Hood, OR
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
I enjoy all this bickering about rockwells! But in all seriousness they are not needed unless you plan on running 44"+ tires! They would be awesome if done right just for the shock and ahh factor! But hell if you wanna do that I got some 10 tons if you wanna do that! Haha
12-20-2010, 08:36 PM
#71
Old Skewl CF like a Sir
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 4,355
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Year: 1996
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L High Output OBDII
Region doesn't play into it, at least in my opnion. I may be in the dirty south, but I'm from just outside Boston, I know what the woods are all about, and prefer trail riding to mudding anyday of the week.
The reason I like 2.5's is because it's just different. I like people who try something new, is it great on the tight trails, course not. But it serves it's purpose elsewhere.
This coming from the guy with 6.5" on 35"s with stock axles.
The reason I like 2.5's is because it's just different. I like people who try something new, is it great on the tight trails, course not. But it serves it's purpose elsewhere.
This coming from the guy with 6.5" on 35"s with stock axles.
12-20-2010, 08:56 PM
#75
Seasoned Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Browns Valley/Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1994
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 98 4.0 swap
You will never see me puttin that much work into redesigning a cherokee to hold the rockwells I built a rock buggy on a rockwell base with a ls1 th350 and a atlas 2. now doing it from scratch was way easy, but puttin all the same work into something that was never designed to hold anything remotely close to that weight/size? I'll stick with my wago axles until some one can truly prove to me i need anything bigger for up to 39.5 inch tires. If i get some free d60 or equivalent size axles i might use those. but probably would just sell them to get money for other parts i actually need.