Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

this type of coupling does not need grease or a dust boot. also most unit joints are run without a cover or grease. automotive CV joints need to be packed in grease, and need a boot to keep the grease in and the dust out.

ummmm, dont you guys know that cv's a packed full of grease etc etc?

i wanna see that fancy join full of grease with a rubber cover over it.

i really dont think they are use them in the real world uncovered and unlubed etc.

steve

Its a low friction joint it doesnt need to be packed with grease. Havent u ever looked at the cv joints connection a tractor to a slasher? most of them dont have rubber covers. Theres been alot in my local paper about thompson couplings as they are based in my town. I'm thinking about buying some shares, this company is about to go bigtime. When/If these become available for cars it will mean less drivetrain loss :P

Its a low friction joint it doesnt need to be packed with grease. Havent u ever looked at the cv joints connection a tractor to a slasher? most of them dont have rubber covers. Theres been alot in my local paper about thompson couplings as they are based in my town. I'm thinking about buying some shares, this company is about to go bigtime. When/If these become available for cars it will mean less drivetrain loss :(

i was thinking the same hey, i have alot of money left over from holiday.

I never realised that a Unijoint constantly speeds up and then down with each revolution at an angle. Thats a fairly major improvement on the exisisting technology, shares could skyrocket if it stands the test of time, from what I could see it relies on those pins inside the cage to transfer the energy but I couldnt make out what they drive, I assume it is a set of holes that the pins align in, the pins themselves would be the weak point but with new alloys progressing everyday its quite possible.

Looks like not a bad idea, looks bigger then the equivilent uni tho.

Unless it can provide something sort after, current uni's are cheap enough to replace quite often. I think we picked up a uni for $80 for a Inter S-Line truck the other day. They dont fail that often.

Cheers

Sumo

Looks like not a bad idea, looks bigger then the equivilent uni tho.

Unless it can provide something sort after, current uni's are cheap enough to replace quite often. I think we picked up a uni for $80 for a Inter S-Line truck the other day. They dont fail that often.

Cheers

Sumo

it was made to transfer power more efficently, with that i assume it will come with a price

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...