Rear driveshaft extension

[t_j]

Sooo, I'm at the stealership getting the clunk diagnosed and asked to take a look around under the truck while it was one the rack. As i'm looking around checking nothing is broken the tech was showing me that I should extend the driveshaft as at full droop there was not much of the shaft left in the t-case output.

Anyone else heard of this with WSI HD springs and Icon 3.0 Zeta's ?

 

[Huck]

I dont have icons or wsi. but that makes complete sense. You are raising the ride high and changing the angle. when it droops the shaft pulls out of the transmission housing.

 

[Deleted member 12951]

Same setup, sub'd to this thread.....

 

[t_j]

FWIW he also noted that I should get longer break lines for both front and back, as they where pretty tight at full droop. On the front so much so that they are starting to cause a little binding at full droop.

 

[Hazzard]

One of the reasons I went with a (ADS) Arizona driveshaft.

 

[Dan06]

So what's the ratio of extra length needed based on droop figures?

 

[Deleted member 12951]

Is this due to ICON's or due to WSI HD and Camburg?

 

[t_j]

Is this due to ICON's or due to WSI HD and Camburg?

On the back I'm guessing the ICON's have more droop than the stock fox shocks, @ICONRep can you confirm/deny this?


On the front it's a combination of camburg/icon changing the geometry.

 

[Hazzard]

Is this due to ICON's or due to WSI HD and Camburg?

Both I would think, any upgrade that brings the height up (and increase droop) and changes the angle of the shaft cause this. Has nothing to do with the Icon or WSI I assume, I have King and Deavers.

 

[Deleted member 12951]

Well that would have meant that practically everyone who has upgraded to rear 3.0's and leafs (Nationals, Deavers, WSI, etc) would have this issue, which I imagine is quite a few. I am surprised this has just now came up, or has it before?