Your ABS and Floater Solution

[chicane67]

Teaser shots... and this is all you are getting. But, it's done and this is the finalized product. This system is available for the Ford 9"... and at some time to be released... an application for the Chevrolet 8.5" and 12bolt.

Enjoy...

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/IMG_1359-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/IMG_1347-1.jpg

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/IMG_1350-1.jpg

[parsonsj]

I'm digging it! Can you provide any information about axle sizes?

[tazzz25906112]

Interesting,,, keep me in the loop too please...

[andrewb70]

I'm digging it! Can you provide any information about axle sizes?

From the looks of it the axles will be the same size as C6 outer CV stubs, which I believe use a 28 spline axle, but I am not 100% sure.

Neat solution. A nice blend of custom work and OEM parts.

Andrew

[Payton King]

Are you working with Stielow? He did the exact same thing to his red car(Red Devil) before the last Optima Challenge.

[chicane67]

I'm digging it! Can you provide any information about axle sizes?

I'll call ya JP...

[chicane67]

Are you working with Stielow? He did the exact same thing to his red car(Red Devil) before the last Optima Challenge.

No. What Mark actual has, started with a conversation that he and I had at the 2009 (or 2010) Optima Ultimate Street Car gig post SEMA. He went an even more simplified route... but it's also a limiting route to solve his particular issues with the ABS. I was going the same route when I initially started this endeavor... however, there were some other issues with the more simplified design that have been addressed and are now part of the basic product design of the final product. I felt like having a part with limitations, would just be another band-aid.

Both ideas do the job... it's just that one allows options that the other will never have as they are not built into the basic design from it's inception.

[parsonsj]

I'll call ya JP...I've been staring hard at my phone. But it hasn't rung yet...

[CarlC]

Don't make me spend more money.....

[chicane67]

Oops... too late. But I already cleared it with Kristin if that makes you feel any better.

[MrQuick]

Nice job my boy, where are you working now?


Who is doing the axles? In house?

Am I sorry for all the questions? No? heh

[BADDRIDE II]

As you and others may know I am very fond of the floater concept so wanted to add some input, so please take with a grain a salt. The quality of your flange seems to be very nice, but I have to ask…..WHY? As I am not sure what has been solved here. :dunno:

*C5/6 Hubs are VERY heavy (especially the SKF)
*C5/6 Stock Hubs have been known to fail
*C5/6 Hubs are NOT serviceable
*C5/6 Hubs are EXPENSIVE to replace and WILL NEED REPLACING
*C5/6 Hubs are only 28/30 spline and small diameter shaft.
*C5/6 Hubs are of poor design (VERY narrow bearing spread AND are located in-board of WMS)
*ABS can be worked into ANY design cheaply

Serious Off-road has all but done away with this weak style hub unit because of their weaknesses AND the cost to replace them when worn. Chevy/Corvette would do away with them as well but cannot due to the current suspension design (limited distance from steering knuckle face to WMS). So SKF did the best they could and increased flange thickness slightly, spread bearings slightly, and added 3 ball bearings to outer bearing to HELP combat the WMS flange ring from separating AND “ bearing play” from side loading due to poor bearing design.

So it is my thought that if you really run your car hard enough to experience “piston knock-back” and believe you require a “floater”, or run your car at speeds that you think would require additional safety of a “floater”…..somewhat like CORVETTE guys do, you will most certainly need to run the upgraded SKF Hubs to feel any sense of relief/safety. These much needed SKF hubs will run you nearly a $1000 for the pair with ½ -20 studs, installed, and shipped to your door! Not sure what your flange kit will cost…but sure seems like once you get the components needed to make this a marginally worthy performance floater, AND the initial cost of your flange kit….you could have a floater kit that is MUCH stronger AND can be serviced for pennies on the dollar compared to this C5/6 floater. So this idea would appear to the untamed eye to be slightly more affordable initially…….UNTIL its first servicing when the new hub units brake the bank!

I am not saying it will not work for some, but most requiring a floater are not mild cars, i just think that by the time you invest the money to make your kit strong (SKF) and the inevitable servicing cost, money would be better spent in other floater kits that are currently available. Just my $.02 from a consumer’s point of view and is not meant to offend you or others.

[Bryce]

This solves the ABS issue, parking brake issue and adds a floater.

If wheel backspace was chosen for performance rather than looks (think deep dish) then the bearings will see much less load and have much longer life span.

[BonzoHansen]

so with this solution, and afx front spindles, does that make retrofitting say 4th gen camaro or c5/c6 abs into an old camaro w/o being an engineering genius an actual possibility? Is ABS for the ’masses’ the next big thing?

[BADDRIDE II]

This solves the ABS issue, parking brake issue and adds a floater.



If wheel backspace was chosen for performance rather than looks (think deep dish) then the bearings will see much less load and have much longer life span.

I agree is convenient to have ABS/Park Brake integrated (props for design)....but not sure those features trump the priority of the major component itself....the hub unit and its lack of strength. Aside from these "features" that few of us need (but still can incorporate in all other floater kits). All that remains is the weak hub unit and the VERY expensive service/replacement costs.

I do understand what you are suggesting......but if a part (in this case the hub unit) relies on wheel offset to last....it is definately doomed from the start and a weak link. And again, there is NO servicing these hubs and are VERY expensive to keep replacing in stock form or REALLY expensive if upgrading to SKF. Do a simple search on yahoo under "hub unit elimination kits", it is all about getting rid of these type weak hub units, and replacing with the MUCH stronger snout style floater hubs, and has been for many years....our sport is on the "pre" side of this old subject. The ONLY reason Corvettes and others still run these hub units is because it is all that will fit, AND these type hubs are VERY inexpensive to produce and eliminate human error for preload which are both BIG incentives for Manufacturers.

[Bryce]

You always have to make compromises. I am sure the corvette engineers designed around using these hubs for certain reasons. I am sure there are enough people out there that want ABS and will see the hubs as a wear item, maybe its a few seasons of autocrosses or 100K miles of spirited street driving.

[andrewb70]

Let's not get into a pissing match here.

Different people value different attributes. That is what makes the world go round...

This product is clearly aimed at satisfying some very specific requirements.

Andrew

[ace_xp2]

If wheel backspace was chosen for performance rather than looks (think deep dish) then the bearings will see much less load and have much longer life span.

Well, if getting rid of deep dish comes by extending axle length, then you're also looking at a fair amount more axle tube and axle itself, I'd think the weight savings (of deep dish) would be better than non-existent.

[Bryce]

Well, if getting rid of deep dish comes by extending axle length, then you're also looking at a fair amount more axle tube and axle itself, I'd think the weight savings (of deep dish) would be better than non-existent.

I posted this somewhere else too:

How much weight will this save?

Lets say you narrow it by 3" on each side. so a total of 6"

housing: 3" diameter and 1/4" wall thickness has a volume of 12.95 in^3 for both sides
Axle: 1.5" diameter solid has a volume of 10.60 in^3

Density of steel is: .284 lbs/in^3
Total weight is: 6.69 pounds

If we assume the rear housing weighs 250 pounds thats a savings of 2.7%

[SLO_Z28]

As you and others may know I am very fond of the floater concept so wanted to add some input, so please take with a grain a salt. The quality of your flange seems to be very nice, but I have to ask…..WHY? As I am not sure what has been solved here. :dunno:

*C5/6 Hubs are VERY heavy (especially the SKF)
*C5/6 Stock Hubs have been known to fail
*C5/6 Hubs are NOT serviceable
*C5/6 Hubs are EXPENSIVE to replace and WILL NEED REPLACING
*C5/6 Hubs are only 28/30 spline and small diameter shaft.
*C5/6 Hubs are of poor design (VERY narrow bearing spread AND are located in-board of WMS)
*ABS can be worked into ANY design cheaply

Serious Off-road has all but done away with this weak style hub unit because of their weaknesses AND the cost to replace them when worn. Chevy/Corvette would do away with them as well but cannot due to the current suspension design (limited distance from steering knuckle face to WMS). So SKF did the best they could and increased flange thickness slightly, spread bearings slightly, and added 3 ball bearings to outer bearing to HELP combat the WMS flange ring from separating AND “ bearing play” from side loading due to poor bearing design.

So it is my thought that if you really run your car hard enough to experience “piston knock-back” and believe you require a “floater”, or run your car at speeds that you think would require additional safety of a “floater”…..somewhat like CORVETTE guys do, you will most certainly need to run the upgraded SKF Hubs to feel any sense of relief/safety. These much needed SKF hubs will run you nearly a $1000 for the pair with ½ -20 studs, installed, and shipped to your door! Not sure what your flange kit will cost…but sure seems like once you get the components needed to make this a marginally worthy performance floater, AND the initial cost of your flange kit….you could have a floater kit that is MUCH stronger AND can be serviced for pennies on the dollar compared to this C5/6 floater. So this idea would appear to the untamed eye to be slightly more affordable initially…….UNTIL its first servicing when the new hub units brake the bank!

I am not saying it will not work for some, but most requiring a floater are not mild cars, i just think that by the time you invest the money to make your kit strong (SKF) and the inevitable servicing cost, money would be better spent in other floater kits that are currently available. Just my $.02 from a consumer’s point of view and is not meant to offend you or others.

^Dead on. The SKF hubs are a MUST on anything that is pushed hard. Even the C6 pilot cars didn't run production hubs because they KNEW they were going to fail, and quickly.

I wanted to post this but I already stir enough up around here

[CarlC]

I'll bet there's a performance target for the car to reach that will be better suited toward the C6 rolling element compliment than a TRB set.

[chicane67]

To add some other details and add some possible explanation... I'll hit a few points about its unique benefits.

Pricing and availability will be through a singular Dealer / Lateral-G sponsor in the near future... and I will be handling "special applications" on a limited basis.

Material options:
The housing and housing ends are available in standard 1020N (Y/S of 50k psi and a UTS of 63.8K psi) and optional 4140A (Y/S of 60.2K psi and a UTS of 95K psi) and 4130N (Y/S of 63.1K psi and a UTS of 97.2k psi) materials. The availability of the 4140A and 4130N is to allow the end user to weld on all 'like material' component hardware for suspension mounting, etc, and then have it heat treated as an assembly. These optional materials will yield a housing and connecting points far stronger than any "fabricated plate" type or other type housing on the market. Not to mention the weight considerations if your looking to loose a few pounds in certain components... which can only be had by utilizing thinner walled 4140 or 4130 materials with heat treating.

The housing is fixture and TIG welded and has available options for filler and drain bungs, a jack point and fluid cooling ports. Standard is a billet center section mounting flange. You also have the choice for a scalloped rear cover, the most typical used in the Ford 9" industry... or a round cover that can be used to facilitate easier mounting of Watts-Linkage points, etc.

The housing ends are one piece and allow for six different mounting/angle locations for the brake system. They also utilize all stock OEM parking brake system components (no modifications required, with the exception of using aftermarket wheel studs) and will accept all C5/C6 Y-Body OEM and all C5/C6 Y-Body aftermarket brake systems. All you have to provide is your rear rotor diameter at time of purchase/set-up.

Axle shafts:
All axle shafts are one piece, forged blank machined from HY-TUF. The engineered axle-shaft is a true "full floater" design... meaning, that you can pull the axle without removing the wheel assembly. Available options for this component are custom length, gun drilling and modifications for cambered/toe applications. I can do 300M... but in my 25+ years of drive-train development... 300M isn't a real good choice for torsional loading in more than a single direction, not to mention HY-TUF is more than adequate for any power and traction level used for any application used in this FORUM.

Bearing packs:
The bearing packs are OEM GM/SKF/ZR1 units. Available options for the bearing packs are the wheels studs, with the most common being 0.500" by 3.125" Bull nosed ARP fasteners. Other options include Center Lock spindle units and a future option that I'll talk about soon.

This housing is being set up for a Three-link / Watts-link application and a fluid heater and cooler:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/IMG_1352-1.jpg

This housing is being set up for a Four-link application and could be just as easily used for a leaf spring suspension:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/SpeedwayHousing-1.jpg

Billet flange:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2012/01/IMG_1349-1.jpg

[CarlC]

Ohhh, you have me hooked. You used the "billet" word.... ;-)

[TheJDMan]

As you and others may know I am very fond of the floater concept so wanted to add some input, so please take with a grain a salt. The quality of your flange seems to be very nice, but I have to ask…..WHY? As I am not sure what has been solved here. :dunno:

*C5/6 Hubs are VERY heavy (especially the SKF)
*C5/6 Stock Hubs have been known to fail
*C5/6 Hubs are NOT serviceable
*C5/6 Hubs are EXPENSIVE to replace and WILL NEED REPLACING
*C5/6 Hubs are only 28/30 spline and small diameter shaft.
*C5/6 Hubs are of poor design (VERY narrow bearing spread AND are located in-board of WMS)
*ABS can be worked into ANY design cheaply

Serious Off-road has all but done away with this weak style hub unit because of their weaknesses AND the cost to replace them when worn. Chevy/Corvette would do away with them as well but cannot due to the current suspension design (limited distance from steering knuckle face to WMS). So SKF did the best they could and increased flange thickness slightly, spread bearings slightly, and added 3 ball bearings to outer bearing to HELP combat the WMS flange ring from separating AND “ bearing play” from side loading due to poor bearing design.

So it is my thought that if you really run your car hard enough to experience “piston knock-back” and believe you require a “floater”, or run your car at speeds that you think would require additional safety of a “floater”…..somewhat like CORVETTE guys do, you will most certainly need to run the upgraded SKF Hubs to feel any sense of relief/safety. These much needed SKF hubs will run you nearly a $1000 for the pair with ½ -20 studs, installed, and shipped to your door! Not sure what your flange kit will cost…but sure seems like once you get the components needed to make this a marginally worthy performance floater, AND the initial cost of your flange kit….you could have a floater kit that is MUCH stronger AND can be serviced for pennies on the dollar compared to this C5/6 floater. So this idea would appear to the untamed eye to be slightly more affordable initially…….UNTIL its first servicing when the new hub units brake the bank!

I am not saying it will not work for some, but most requiring a floater are not mild cars, i just think that by the time you invest the money to make your kit strong (SKF) and the inevitable servicing cost, money would be better spent in other floater kits that are currently available. Just my $.02 from a consumer’s point of view and is not meant to offend you or others.


I have to agree!

[silver69camaro]

Cool, glad you were finally able to get that going. I've been meaning to get to it but honestly I've been "dealing" with the knockback and haven't machined the parts yet. Sure would make ABS setup much easier! One of these days I'll get to it...

[tyoneal]

Chicane:

The parts look terrific.

I have a 63 Grand Sport I am working on that has the Newman Creations IRS mounted into the chassis.

Is your ABS adaptable to it? Since it is a stronger Dana 44 type rear would I look for some OEM parts mixed with what you have put together?

Thanks,
Ty

BTW: Any rough pricing for
the Camaro Application?

Since many of the 1st gens are running Corvette IFS now would this be a automatic fit up the the C 6 architecture?

[andrewb70]

Chicane:

The parts look terrific.

I have a 63 Grand Sport I am working on that has the Newman Creations IRS mounted into the chassis.

Is your ABS adaptable to it? Since it is a stronger Dana 44 type rear would I look for some OEM parts mixed with what you have put together?

Thanks,
Ty

BTW: Any rough pricing for
the Camaro Application?

Since many of the 1st gens are running Corvette IFS now would this be a automatic fit up the the C 6 architecture?

Ty,

The Newman Creations IRS looks like a C4 Corvette setup. Isn't there a provision for ABS built into the C4 hubs?

Andrew

[tyoneal]

I'm guessing yes, however I'll get out there and verify it one way or the other.

The main issue I was thinking about was getting the computer that would control the ABS that wasn't depend any on a stock C4 CPU.

I was under the impression that one of the big hurtles on ABS was getting a controller that would work independently no matter what car it was installed in.

Is this incorrect?

On another note, the axels for the Camaro's sound like the hot set up.

A floater is what I was wanting in the Camaro anyway.

Thanks,

Ty

[BADDRIDE II]

[QUOTE=chicane67;870537]

These optional materials will yield a housing and connecting points far stronger than any "fabricated plate" type or other type housing on the market.

Curious as to how your stock type housing design is stronger than a "fabricated plate" design rear?



Available options for this component are custom length, gun drilling and modifications for cambered/toe applications.

Wouldnt camber/toe put additional stress to this already marginal bearing unit?



I can do 300M... but in my 25+ years of drive-train development... 300M isn't a real good choice for torsional loading in more than a single direction....

ALL elite offroad trucks/cars (Trophy,Truggy,Class 1,etc.) that endure more torsional loading (from ALL directions) than ANY other sport on the planet choose 300M for its unmatched strength....what do you know that these multi-million dollar teams dont?


These looked to be very nice rears, but a couple of these points you made I feel need a little more explanation. Thanks.

[Bryce]

300M can be heat treated to 300ksi, temper at 600F. ONE advantage is thicker forgings can be heat treated. Since its strength is 3 times that of other chromoly steels it can be gun drilled to a larger diameter and therefore lighter.

I do think that 300M is more brittle than other alloys. It is strong and tough with good impulse loads, I do not know how it will react to accel and decel forces back to back. Just like an aluminum center section is not suggested for street use, 300M axles are reccomended for drag racing by Mark Williams.

[BADDRIDE II]

300M can be heat treated to 300ksi, temper at 600F. ONE advantage is thicker forgings can be heat treated. Since its strength is 3 times that of other chromoly steels it can be gun drilled to a larger diameter and therefore lighter.

Good technical info....

I do think that 300M is more brittle than other alloys. It is strong and tough with good impulse loads, I do not know how it will react to accel and decel forces back to back.

As I mentioned in my previous reply, 300M has been proven in the most extreme of conditions....Trophy trucks! These trucks run serious HP with seriously heavy tires, these trucks are HEAVY! These very high HP trucks are OFF and ON the throttle the ENTIRE race (BAJA 1000,500,etc.), all while throttle/brake steering. These 300M axles are used because they are the strongest available and LAST. They are a NO compromise option. I have NO problem with "HY-TUF" and agree is adequit for most...but statements made in this thread that "300M is not a good choice for torsional loading in more than a single direction" is completely FALSE.

Just like an aluminum center section is not suggested for street use, 300M axles are reccomended for drag racing by Mark Williams.

They recommend it as their "drag" axle because it is their strongest option for serious racers that require elite strength/durability for high HP applications that will be dragging......not because they wont last in day in and day out useage.....but because they are strong enough to "DRAG".

[andrewb70]

Let's keep the pissing mach to a dull roar, shall we?

Andrew

[Bryce]

Trophy trucks break axles even during the race, they carry spares for that reason. So that might not be the best example when comparing to a street car that will see lots of miles.

The more ductile a material is the more fatigue cycles it can go through before breaking, when you increase the stiffness steels become more brittle and usually have a shorter fatigue life.

Andrew,

Sorry for getting off topic, maybe we should split this thread into "ABS and floater..." and "axle tech"?

[andrewb70]

......
Andrew,

Sorry for getting off topic, maybe we should split this thread into "ABS and floater..." and "axle tech"?

Hopefully people have said their peace and we can carry on. If further axle material discussions must be carried out, then another can be started.

Andrew

[SLO_Z28]

Has anyone done the math on how much the increased camber affects the stock C5/6 hub bearing life?

I cant imagine who in thier right mind wouldnt add camber when doing a full floater rear end, thats pretty much the point!

[andrewb70]

Has anyone done the math on how much the increased camber affects the stock C5/6 hub bearing life?

I cant imagine who in thier right mind wouldnt add camber when doing a full floater rear end, thats pretty much the point!

I don't think that this particular solution is designed to be used with cambered rear ends. Cambered rears don't require unique drive plates, but they do use crowned axles. On the typical circle track floater set-up, the driveplates are considered a wear item and are routinely swapped out due to wear. Clearly, you don't want the be replacing the ZR1 hubs on a regular basis.

Besides, there are plenty of reasons to run a floater, besides camber.

First of all, a separate hub is safer in case an axles breaks. With this setup if an axle should snap, the wheel and tire will stay safely attached to the rear end, which can't be said for conventional axle designs. This of course is not an issue with Ford 9" rear ends, but it certainly is a concern for stock GM rear ends.

The second reason is of course the brake pad knock back issue that so many struggle with. This is a problem for GM and the Ford 9" rear ends. This set-up takes care of that.

This set-up is designed to mount Corvette calipers or any brake kit that bolts to a Corvette. That opens up a whole world of standard brake kits without having to resort to making custom brackets, etc...

No set-up is ideal, but all solutions have their own merits that need to be judged on a subjective basis. Each buyer will have to determine what he must have, what he can live with, and what feature he can't live without.

Andrew

[SLO_Z28]

A c-clip eliminator set would solve both of those problems on a chevy rear end, and floating calipers would solve it on the 9 inch. I really dont see the point of a floating rear hub without added camber and toe? Its not like anyone on here is going to actually use ABS.

And no, you dont want to replace ZR1 Hubs, thats why you buy the SKF hubs at about $1000 or so, every C5/6 hub fails, every time. Its not if, but when, and its faster than it should be.

[andrewb70]

A c-clip eliminator set would solve both of those problems on a chevy rear end, and floating calipers would solve it on the 9 inch. I really dont see the point of a floating rear hub without added camber and toe? Its not like anyone on here is going to actually use ABS.

And no, you dont want to replace ZR1 Hubs, thats why you buy the SKF hubs at about $1000 or so, every C5/6 hub fails, every time. Its not if, but when, and its faster than it should be.

You can't say for a fact that nobody will use the ABS. Perhaps the reason that nobody has tried doing ABS up until now is because the supporting hardware, like this product, hasn't been there.

As for c-clip eliminators, everyone knows that they are not designed to handle the lateral loads that are experienced during road racing and auto-crossing. On top of that, they will eventually leak.

There is also the issue of a parking brake, which this product solves rather elegantly.

Again, different people have different preferences, for different features...

Andrew

[BADDRIDE II]

Trophy trucks break axles even during the race, they carry spares for that reason. So that might not be the best example when comparing to a street car that will see lots of miles.

What team broke a 300M axle? Are you really thinking one of our street cars will see stress even remotely close to a Trophy Truck....maybe you are not familiar with what I am speaking about? If you know of a Trophy Truck that broke an axle it was most likely NOT 300M my friend.

The more ductile a material is the more fatigue cycles it can go through before breaking, when you increase the stiffness steels become more brittle and usually have a shorter fatigue life.

Yes, and 300M is an ideal balance of all properties and is why it is a top shelf offering from all REAL axle vendors.
Andrew,

Sorry, but my BS detector was going off :)

[Bryce]

Trophy trucks break axles even during the race, they carry spares for that reason. So that might not be the best example when comparing to a street car that will see lots of miles.

What team broke a 300M axle? Are you really thinking one of our street cars will see stress even remotely close to a Trophy Truck....maybe you are not familiar with what I am speaking about? If you know of a Trophy Truck that broke an axle it was most likely NOT 300M my friend.

The more ductile a material is the more fatigue cycles it can go through before breaking, when you increase the stiffness steels become more brittle and usually have a shorter fatigue life.

Yes, and 300M is an ideal balance of all properties and is why it is a top shelf offering from all REAL axle vendors.
Andrew,

Sorry, but my BS detector was going off :)

I know what a trophy truck is, I helped build one.

[BADDRIDE II]

I don't think that this particular solution is designed to be used with cambered rear ends......Clearly, you don't want the be replacing the ZR1 hubs on a regular basis.

Andrew


Actually, this set-up is being advertised with the option of camber/toe (read below)....not sure why though as it would seem obvious (as you stated) that this would not last at all....wonder why this would be offered when it is obvious it should'nt?


[QUOTE=chicane67;870537]To add some other details and add some possible explanation... I'll hit a few points about its unique benefits.

Axle shafts:
All axle shafts are one piece, forged blank machined from HY-TUF. The engineered axle-shaft is a true "full floater" design... meaning, that you can pull the axle without removing the wheel assembly. Available options for this component are custom length, gun drilling and modifications for cambered/toe applications. I can do 300M... but in my 25+ years of drive-train development... 300M isn't a real good choice for torsional loading in more than a single direction, not to mention HY-TUF is more than adequate for any power and traction level used for any application used in this FORUM.

[ace_xp2]

Of note, Mark Williams uses 300M in their 40 spline axles while Strange engineering uses Hy-Tuf for theirs. Neither company shows any amount failure rate clearly beyond the other, though I must note that Strange gun drills to 7/8" while MW goes out to 1 1/16". (40 spline reference because MW uses funky spline angles on everything but 40 spline, which makes comparison a little more difficult).

Also, it seems that at one time MW did 300M in other axle sizes, and at the time they weren't street recommended due to being to brittle. But it wasn't a torsional direction, which I think was merely an error of parlance on Chicanes part. Rather, the flanges tended to pop off when encountering bumps in the road (loaded in a vertical direction). They don't have a problem with the 40 spline on the street, but if you look at the size of them, it's pretty clear why. (Obviously, losing a flange shouldn't be an issue when there isn't one a la floater)

And as for camber/toe, as has been noted previously (https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?71569-negative-cambered-rear-ends) crowned splines can work quite well with only 24 splines of partial engagement, this system would offer 30?

[Samckitt]

That's cool. What is that, a Vette outer bearing hub assy with a custom adapter to allow it to mount to the axle ends? Interested to see what you have for the 8.5"

[killer69]

Just wanted to come on here and give an update. Chicane67 has come up with a very cool design and Speedtech is very excited about being able to partner and bring this product to market.
Currently we are ready to start production, I have a few being built now for customers as well as one that will be in ResurreXion (my Nova) for RTTC, I will also have a display unit at RTTC.
there are some limits to the ordering of these rearends,
1. NO you can not oreder the parts seperately and install them your self. The housing alignment is to critical.
2. NO you can not retrofit the ends to your existing housing, feel free to sell that one.
3. NO you can not order the housing with out suspension brackets and weld them on yourself. again housing alignment is critical.
4.YES you can get "NEW" suspension brackets from the company who's suspension you are running, supply all the dimensions required to attach them and for an additional labour fee of approx 130.00 they can be installed.
5. The housings are available with out a 3rd member in 31. 35 spline is an option CALL if that is what your interested in.
6. YES you can run any Corvette rear brake kit.
7. Yes there are options for different widths
8. YES We can also supply Very high quality all American made Center sections to complete the packace. ( Trutrack and Aluminum case upgrades if desired.)
9. YES there will be provisions for fluid circulation and cooling if requested.
10. YES for an additional charge you can request ARP wheel studs in 12mm or 1/2
This Floater will ONLY be available for 9" ford rear ends, NO others sorry

Camber and Toe adjustability and or preset is NOT an option at this time, we are working on getting more information on the possibility of being able to do this in the future, I know Chicane has been working on this and can probably give an update soon.

If anyone is interested call me directly, I can even deliver no charge to RTTC if you place an order in the next couple of days. sorry about the short notice.
Blake