Casting Aluminium (not aluminum, you yanks just cant spell gooder!!!!)

[Boostinjdm]

something like this with a sprocket sandwiched in the middle instead of the clutch disk.  wouldn't change width much. http://club507.nismosean.com/tech/clutch/clutch-fig6.jpg

[Rick S.]

You could probably thin that up by at least another inch if the cups weren't so deep.
On double a arm set ups the plunge is almost nothing if done right. (not sure what you're using.)
I make my cups less than 6mm deep and have never had a problem. I also set it up so that the cv's run a little outboard on the shaft, allowing maximum angle.
The deep cups are only needed when there's a lot of plunge like on a trailing arm design.
A double a arm design that uses a lot of plunge is poorly designed IMO.

I know I still need to check into the extrusion cost. I'll look into it when I go back to work on the 5th.

[fabr]

This type of thing has been done successfully before.I  wish I had the pics. On a light car and a stock busa used on a track I think there will be NO issues. But IF you up the powere/weight then you will run into issues at some point.My design (which was basically the same as arties ) used the "morse type" chain since it was destined to run much more power thru it. What he is doing is a sound idea and IF he can profitably produce a unit for even 1000-1500 bux US it should be well received. Artie,the eccentric adjustment should be considered seriously tho.  I had to do the positive adjuster thing like you described and it sux.Works,but sux.

[Boostinjdm]

did master just agree with me?

[fabr]

Don't let it go to your head! hehehe

[artie on edge]

This is the bit I like about this site.

Ok, Boost, I think you are indeed correct about the eccentric adjuster thing. I dont have a plan in mind yet, do you? If so Id surely like to hear about it. Anyone else had success in this area? Ideas guys ideas?

[Boostinjdm]

have you made your side covers yet?

[artie on edge]

half made, not yet finished so now is a good time to change my mind...lol

[Boostinjdm]

damn bad connection, let's try again.
Bearing ID,OD,Width?  CV Flange OD?  Are your side covers flat?  How thick?  I got several Ideas.  what's your current outside width from CV flange to CV flange.  Might be able to narrow it up some more.
Are your current bearing carriers mean to be on the inside or outside of the side covers?

[artie on edge]

At work right now, will get details to you later. Basically the bearing carriers are inside the sidecover which are 6mm thick (1/4 inch) and flat.

The housing is 60mm thick giving outside dimensions of 72mm. The cv carriers sit slightly inside the flat sidecovers and the bearings are held in place by the side cover but only by 4mm so they really cant move up or down to adj tension so I am more aligned to using the upper shaft to adjust tension.

Width is now where it needs to be so I dont want to narrow it any further. But if it were required I can see another 15mm or just over half an inch which could be shaved yet.







The taper side is towards the sprocket and ensures adequate chain clearance. The second pic is the carrier in situ but not yet having had the taper machined in. Thats the third pic

As I said Ill supply details when I get access to the drawings and dimensions.

[Boostinjdm]

tensioning the upper shaft is doable, but it does introduce a few more challenges.  I would be hesitant to do it that way because the loads on the lower shaft are centered and confined to the case for the most part.  when you deal with the upper shaft you are also messing with the heavy loads on one end of the shaft from the first chain and you are also messing with the tension of that chain. (also...now I'm starting to sound like that crazy lady from alaska....Except I make sense.)

[Boostinjdm]

So I've been looking at the pics and I think you can make two new bearing carriers and be in business.  It looks like the cv flanges prevent the bearings from moving out, and the carriers keep them from moving in,  so as long as your box stays in one piece there shouldn't be a problem.  You just need to make two new carriers with the counterbore for the bearing offset.  This can be done in a lathe with a four jaw independent chuck.  don't drill your bolt holes in the side covers till your carriers are done.  they will need to be bean shaped.  The carriers also will need a lip to center them in the side cover so they don't depend on the bolts alone to keep them put.
Here drew these up for ya cuz I can't seem to get off my arse and do anything productive.  The counter bore for the bearing is moved an 1/8" off center so in 180 degrees of rotation would give you 1/4" of sprocket movement.  I would put about 6 bolt holes in them instead of four to give you finer adjustment options.  You just got to put bean shaped holes in your side covers for the bolts to go through.  I did forget to do the centering lip.  Oh, well any q's just ask.

[Rick S.]

Hey Artie,
I'm surprised that no one has jumped all over you yet, for not piloting the cvs into the flanges.
I don't do it either, but I was criticized for not on MBN. What's the consensus here?

[Boostinjdm]

after lot's of thinking and about a case of mt dew, I think the minimum flange to flange width is about. 19mm or .75 inches.  doable yes. worth it? depends on how desperate you are.

[artie on edge]

Hey Artie,
I'm surprised that no one has jumped all over you yet, for not piloting the cvs into the flanges.
I don't do it either, but I was criticized for not on MBN. What's the consensus here?

Well I guess if you use sloppy bolt clearances you need to pilot the cv. If you are a little careful, what does it gain?

As you can see, im with you, it wouldnt hurt certainly, is it needed? Not on my buggy... imo...of course...

What do you guys think? I used the recessed flanges on my larger machinery, for no other reason than thats what I could get.....