Martlor13

like you just said, its not the cheapest nor the strongest. So if your not getting either one of those, is it really worth the work over other options? Thats all we are really saying.

derf

The parking brake setup (with factory drums) on the Wagoneer 44 is a direct bolt in with XJ cables. The JK uses a very different parking brake setup that would require customization.

Going to a JK axle gives you disc brakes. If you stick with drums on the Wagoneer axle, you don't have to do anything to your booster/master cylinder.

Finally, the JK axle has a crush sleeve. The Wagoneer axle uses shims to set pinion preload. Way easier to set up the Wagoneer 44 by comparison. And for just a few dollars, you can buy setup bearings that make setting the inboard carrier shims a cake walk (for either axle).

derf

Keep in mind that a JK axle is over 65" wide so it will stick out a bit on an XJ. And it will look goofy if you keep a stock width front.

Swapping in a matched set would look less goofy.

Also, there is a difference in the carrier (as well as spline counts) between the Rubicon and the non-Rubicon. They use the same ring and pinion but the carrier in the Rubicon is bigger, with 32 spline shafts in the rear where the non-Rubicon uses the old generation D44 carrier with 30 spline shafts. And they use different size bearings between the two so you can't swap a Rubicon case into a non-Rubicon housing. I tried on my JK and learned the hard way.

00t444e

You don't really need to buy setup bearings, you can just buy an extra set of carrier bearings and grind them out some so they slide on easier.

derf

That works too.

We did that when we were setting up my JK axles.



I no longer had access to the lathe when I did the Grand Wagoneer axles in my XJ so I just dropped a few bucks on a set.

xjallseasons

Thanks derf for that info on waggy 44's. So it looks like no matter what I choose nothing is a direct swap except for the waggy.

derf

The only thing that is really a "direct swap" is a set of aftermarket axles specifically built for an XJ. Everything else will require modifications on either the front, rear, or both.

I have a pair of waggy axles from a 1988 model under my XJ.

The donor has leaf springs up front so it's not a direct bolt in. I used the TNT Customs truss kit that comes with the brackets for the control arms and drag links up front. The rear needs to have the spring perches and shock mounts moved, which is pretty trivial.

The only reason I swapped out the rear from the 8.25 to the Waggy 44 was for the 6 lug bolt pattern that matched the front, and to be able to exactly match the gears front and rear (they use the exact same parts front and rear). I had the pair of axles and it was just spring perches and shock mounts, with the ability to set my pinion angle exactly right to match my lift so why not?

If you go looking for waggy axles, stick with 1980 and newer. 79 and older has a passenger side drop front and an offset rear (so the drive shaft clears the gas tank, and for the quadratrac that had a passenger side drop rear output like the Spicer 18). In 1980 Jeep ditched the D20 and Quadratrac in favor of New Process transfer cases. They swapped over to drivers drop front and changed the gas tank so a driveshaft to a centered rear would clear. All front axles were Dana 44's. 80-86 uses a rear heavy duty AMC20 (thicker axle tubes than a CJ) which is right in the ballpark with the 8.25/D44/8.8 strength. Late 86 through 91 (last year of the GW) used a D44 in the rear. All 6 lug. All disc front, drum rear.

I can probably dig up some pictures of the swap I did if you're interested.

00t444e

So your front Dana 44 is a low pinion?

derf

It is. And it's driving the coast side of the gears. But that's the way the factory built the Grand Wagoneer.

Being a Dana 44 though, it's still stronger than even a high pinion D30. And it's more than capable of handling the 31's I have on it now and the 33's I will eventually install.

Though if you lift your XJ a lot with this axle, you have to either look into rotating the inner C's to get the pinion angle up or look into doing a double-ended double-cardan front driveshaft.

andrewmp6

You swapped a 44 for 33 inch tires ?

USN_JeepXJ

True story... and its not easy!

Terrible caster with correct pinion angle:


I ground out the factory weld:


Lots of hammering later:


To answer the OP's question. Its a LOT of work. Only the factory upper axle mounts are retained (some people retain the lower control arm mounts but they are at the wrong angle for the XJ... you can force the lower control arms into the JK mounts but you might as well replace them with the correct angle XJ mounts if you're going through all this work anyway).

Front:






Rear:








As mentioned, they are much wider than factory XJ axles... around 5" wider. The JK brakes are more than sufficient for a XJ (just remember to instal a ZJ proportioning valve) and if you still find they are lacking, there are plenty of aftermarket BBK available. I went with Baer:

[/url]

Transpoquick

Early Dana 44's have a 8.5" or 216mm ring gear od.

Later model's, i.e. "JK" have a 8.9"(oh that's gotta hurt you 8.8 guys) or 226mm, 8.9044" ring gear diameter.

And yeah, you could "buy" this at the correct width. I'm pretty sure your getting the 8.9 diameter ring gear with a Pro Rock or the likes.