Longer drive shafts

[rob chase]

'Evening,

Does anyone know if there is another car with slightly longer drive shafts which would fit a Clio 172? Ideally I'm after an extra 40mm. I can get some of the way with the standard ones utilizing some of the float and shimming it out behind the wheel bearing but I'm reluctant to start trimming down the nut because it needs to be torqued up quite high and I don't want to strip the threads.

From my research it seems like almost all recent Renaults use the JC5 gearbox and I've got my eye on some from a 2008 Espace 2.2 DCI on Ebay. It makes 230Nm of torque in standard form so they should be strong enough for what we want and the track width suggests it should be in the right ball park although I can't be sure because the wheel offset, engine position etc.

Being a standard(ish) 172 rather than the cup it has the bearing which bolts to the engine which I'd like to keep if possible and there's one on the Espace drive shafts. which is encouraging.

Any help appreciated.

 

[Pritch]

Be interested to see the answer to this...I've always been quite surprised by the lack of 'box swapping in the CS community, seems as if most tracks you'd do well to hit 130mph, yet the Clio is geared to something like 151mph isn't it? (Engine power runs out at ~141mph)

Seems like these cars would do really well to get either a 5 speed ratio'd to 130 for pure track cars or a 6 speed box similarly ratio'd to 5th with an even longer 6th for road/track cars to get better performance lower down but better economy on the road.

What kind of cost are you expecting and what are the advantages of the diesel box? Just that its stronger?

 

[MG cup]

I have done some research on Renault shafts as I need 20mm longer shafts each side to suit cup racer suspension setup. Scenic phase 1 (diesel or 2.0rt are best) was only shafts I could find with the 23 splines inside and outside to suit the clio hubs and jc5 box, they are supposed to be longer by 19mm iirc. I called a scrapyard and asked them to measure up the length of both shafts from a scenic and they turned out to be same size as my 172 cup shafts :S cups have single piece shafts both sides no intermediate bearing FYI

I got bored of looking tbh and would be interested if you could find out more. I decided that I would just get gripper to make new when I need them lifetime waranty but they arent cheap and would be nice to fit renault parts.

 

[Fred@BTM]

172 cup are longer if i remember correctly, sod the mid bearing, its not needed, why do you need them out of interest?

 

[MG cup]

Yeah that's what I have. I think they are the longest 23 spline inside/outside shafts available from the Renault range.

 

[Dan@SJM]

The 2.2 dci uses a 'big block' so the bell housing is different. It's also cable change. Also afaik it's not a JC5, but a PK6 or ND0, can't remember which though. The older mk1 variant of the Laguna uses a jc5 gearbox so you could swap in a 1.9 box from that, I used to run one a few years back. 1-3 are pretty much the same as a petrol, 4th enabled 140mph, and 5th was in the region of 170mph.

 

[MG cup]

I think the op is only wanting the shafts from whatever box to gain length and to fit them to his Clio jc5!

 

[rob chase]

Thanks for all the advice.
Currently we want to stick with the gearbox we have. I'm only looking for drive shafts. Last month we altered the sub frame slightly to lift up the LCA pickup points by 60mm. Being a bit thick we hadn't thought to check that it wasn't going to interfere with anything so when we put it back on we had to be a bit creative with the gearbox and we're not totally happy with the setup we have now.
I've got another sub frame to have another go and the plan is to move the pickups up by 60mm and out by about 40mm. That should mean we miss the gearbox and increase our track about as much as we can get away with without the tyre being visible from above. It's also quite a bit more than we'd be able to do it with wheel spacers. The only thing that's left to do is make up some spacers to extend the steering rack by the same amount and work out how to attach the anti roll bar.

I'm going to have a look under a standard car tomorrow which should help to try and work out exactly what we can do but it's looking more like we'll forget about the increased track for the moment and make some shorter wishbones. I'm not sure it's worth getting a set of cup drive shafts if it's only going to give us 10mm.

 

[Dan@SJM]

Have a look into the older shape Espace's/laguna's (pre 2001 variants)

 

[105e]

I want to do something similiar , purely so the wheels fill out the arch, not a fan of wheel spacers long term. Steering arm extensions are easy and i will extend wishbones by cutting 2 and rewelding a bit longer, but the driveshafts are the awkward maybe expensive bits.

 

[Fred@BTM]

that's a lot of work for a gain i don't see?

 

[105e]

If thats to me it would be easy to see with 2 clios parked side by side.

 

[Fred@BTM]

use different offset wheels?

 

[MartinR]

Can't you just get some made upto the length you need??

http://www.drivelink.com/contact_Drivelink.cfm

http://www.driveshaft.co.uk/

http://www.shaftec.co.uk/

 

[rob chase]

Hi Fred,

If you're an advocate of roll centers it's pretty beneficial.

In simple terms, raising the lower control arm pickups corrects the suspension geometry which was altered when we lowered the car. By doing this we're raising the front roll center and dropping the COM height at the front. By reducing the distance between the center of mass height (where the lateral acceleration acts) and the roll center, I therefore reduce the turning moment which tries to roll the car and in the process transfer weight from one wheel to the other. Increasing the track also helps with this. Unsprung Weight transfer is

Lateral acceleration x mass x COM height
Track width

The bigger the track width and the smaller and lower the mass the less weight transfer there is.

The less weight that's transferred at the front, the more even the loading on the tyres so the more traction you get. Additionally the less heavily loaded the outside tyre is which is good for grip.

All this means I should be able to shave about 3 seconds off my commute time and stay in bed longer.



Martin,
I'd much rather get something there is a ready supply of in case I need another one for whatever reason. One from another Renault at a breakers yard is probably a bit easier on my wallet too. I'll bear it in mind though.

 

[Fred@BTM]

I know, i did all that crap at uni, seems like a hell of an effort why not do it an easier way? a la cup racers

Is this the car i did the last minute brake pads for?

 

[mark123]

Spacers are cheaper. You're only allowed 25mm (regs) but you'll hit the arch with much more than that.

 

[mark123]

I have an old 172 cup os drive shaft I can measure if you want.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Phase 1 are shortest
Phase 2 and Cup are much of a muchness in terms of length but the Phase 2 are two piece on the drivers side which is better for torque steer (although TBH you'll be hard pressed to notice really)
There is already a good 10mm of float available, if anything they are a bit too long, especially when you run camber, and you can space 10mm between the CV and the hub just about without running out of thread.

 

[Andyman]

Hi Fred,

If you're an advocate of roll centers it's pretty beneficial.

In simple terms, raising the lower control arm pickups corrects the suspension geometry which was altered when we lowered the car. By doing this we're raising the front roll center and dropping the COM height at the front. By reducing the distance between the center of mass height (where the lateral acceleration acts) and the roll center, I therefore reduce the turning moment which tries to roll the car and in the process transfer weight from one wheel to the other. Increasing the track also helps with this. Unsprung Weight transfer is

Lateral acceleration x mass x COM height
Track width

The bigger the track width and the smaller and lower the mass the less weight transfer there is.

The less weight that's transferred at the front, the more even the loading on the tyres so the more traction you get. Additionally the less heavily loaded the outside tyre is which is good for grip.

All this means I should be able to shave about 3 seconds off my commute time and stay in bed longer.



Martin,
I'd much rather get something there is a ready supply of in case I need another one for whatever reason. One from another Renault at a breakers yard is probably a bit easier on my wallet too. I'll bear it in mind though.

Hate science in mechanics.

Most of the quickest cars in the country are made by folk who never go near a computer or a university course.

 

[Fred@BTM]

and the quickest F1 cars have the best engineers

 

[MG cup]

I know, i did all that crap at uni, seems like a hell of an effort why not do it an easier way? a la cup racers

This

Easist way possible while using available parts just like cup racers hence why renault done so.

A set of cup racer uniballs/holders, custom pins to fit in normal road hubs (50mm ish adjustment) with pinch bolts and a set of longer cup trackods, all bump steer etc near standard if not better. Just the case of your original problem trying to get longer shafts. 20mm ish per side?

 

[MG cup]

This should give you an idea of what I mean, I think northloopcup is also testing a similar design just now.

Only other needed parts would be cup track rod ends and maybe track rods, im unsure if the track rod's differ throughout the 1*2 range but after fitting this setup to my car it looks like I wont need any bumpsteer adjustment on my 172 cup.

I can give you a measurment of racer pins if needed!

 

[105e]

hmm, very neat

 

[Chip-mk1]

That spacer looks useful for maintaining bottom arm angle when running low.

Fair bit of load on that bolt though I would imagine.

 

[MG cup]

That spacer looks useful for maintaining bottom arm angle when running low.

Fair bit of load on that bolt though I would imagine.

That's what I thought when I first saw them but I have been told you will break the bottom ball joint bolts or bend the wishbone before you will the RCA pin, It is just basically a fancy bottom ball joint and you don't hear of many of them failing when in good condition. The pin is high tensile steel.

 

[Chip-mk1]

I agree, Im sure it will be ok, just saying that it is increasing the loads seen, but I dont think it will be enough to be a problem, especially given the sacrificially designed nature of the arms themselves in the first place.