[ihc] RE: JD's TerrorAll

["Jim Grammer" <jgrammer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:15:28 -0700
>From: Colin MM Rush <salmineo@domain.elided>
>Subject: Re: [ihc] Oregon Backcountry Discovery Trail:  We're Baaack!

>I realized I may have been a little off on the SOA description, after
spending some time under a later model
>T'All this weekend pulling a transfer case.  The spring hangers wereflipped
over in the rear.  I had thought that the rear
>axle was underslung in stock form, but the trucks I have looked at recently
have the springs on top already, so I think I
>may be wrong with the SOA idea.

Non-Scout Light Line trucks with one exception were SOA in stock form. The
exception? '74 - '75 1/2 tons, which had both SOA and SUA perches on the
rear axle. 2WD used the SUA, 4WD SOA. Tidy.

>John kept the closed knuckle setup.  He felt the larger turning radius was
offset by the increased strength of the closed
>knuckle design.  I myself found a D-44HD with disk brakes for $200 complete
last year, and plan on putting that in my truck.  >I feel it is heavy
enough, and would like the smaller turning radius.

'Tis a dilemma to be sure. For me the biggest problem going to open knuckle
is width. I have yet to find a passenger-side-pumpkin open knuckle unit that
doesn't increase track width several inches(excluding custom stuff, I
*really* don't see any of us dropping several large on a Dynatrac, et al).
Some folks are OK with this, but check how nicely what appear to be 33 x
12.50 tires tuck under the front fenders on the Donnelly-mobile. That's the
main reason I disk brake converted the original closed knuckle unit on my
'68. I also like having all the front drive bits hermetically sealed inside
the axle. OTOH, the loss of turning radius can be annoying.
Although.....with an 18' long truck on a 119"WB, you likely are just making
5 point turns instead of 3 point ;).

What the TerrorAll really needs is EFI and a turbo, but John already knows
that :)

Jim