U-Joint 4x4 Conversion Suggestions

[TomsBeast]

Originally Posted by aarcaris

Here's the Plan As of Right now:

4x4 Kit: U-Joint 6” lift kit

Front End:

Front Axle: Dana 60 Stage 2 w/ Hub Conversion and Brake Upgrade
Front locker: Eaton E-locker
Front Gears: 4:88 (Just in case we decide to go with 37’s)
Front Shocks: Fox Reservoir Shocks

Rear End:

Rear Axle: Stock Semi Float Axle with wheel spacers
Rear Locker: OX locker Cable Driven
Rear Gears: 4:88 (Just in case we decide to go with 37’s)
Rear Shocks: Fox Reservoir Shocks

Transfer Case: NV271 w/ 2 Pc Shifter Upgrade

Sounds like a great, well thought out build! You're going to have fun building and enjoying the finished product.

I'll only comment on the things I have first hand experience with on my UJOR conversion:

6" lift = good
mine is a 4" lift, and I wasn't happy with the ride after 10k miles, the culprit was the kits use of the factory Ford upper shock mounts for the front end conversion. Because mine was 4", it used shorter shocks. The shocks would 'top out' while driving on the highway, and give the van body a mild jolt. Really noticable when towing a bumper pull trailer, particularly mine being an extended wheel base van. I cut off the econoline upper mounts, build my own shock hoop style upper mounts starting with an unwelded ebay hoop shock kit, then using shocks with 4" more travel. No more topping out, ride became very noticably smoother. Maybe it's not a concern with a 6" kit, dunno.

The other thing I would consider mandatory is to go with the 'cross over steering' option. Reducing bump steer for much better road manners, I think Chris includes this in his kits nowadays, but it's worth asking about.

Rear axle: yeah... you're on the right track, ditch the semi-float. If you do it latter, your driveshaft length will change. Get the right springs, arched for the 6" lift, no blocks. Blocks suck, unless you are building an anti-axle/spring wrap bar for it :-)

[Vanimal]

Good choice on OX and that has always been my argument on ARB and electric. More things that can go wrong/bad. If the cable breaks you can manually lock it.

[Lilnuts2]

Originally Posted by MSD

Can someone remind me what an E250 with UJOR requires vs an E350?, as I don't see mention of it here. It's been awhile, but I remember Chris saying in an early video why an E350 (frame, etc) vs E250/150.

The main difference is the profile of the metal is thicker and the channel size increases with each increase in rating.

FRAME SPECIFICATIONS
Model/Series - Wheelbase (in.) - Maximum Side Rail Section (in.) - Section Modulus (in.)
E-150 ------------138 ----------------- 6.05 x 3.18 x 0.161 ------------------ 2.92 -
E-250 ----------- 138 ----------------- 6.16 x 3.18 x 0.181 ------------------ 3.30 -
E-350 ----------- 138 ----------------- 7.69 x 3.18 x 0.212 ------------------ 5.44 -

[mk216v]

Originally Posted by aarcaris

mk216v:
I decided to go with an OX locker for two main reasons. One that it was recommended by Chris and Justin ant U-Joint due to them having numerous problems with ARB air lockers leaking. Secondly, because I had air lockers in my old Land Rover Discovery. They worked great and I loved them until they developed a leak causing it not to engage. So after a little more research, it seemed like the way to go. Also why not an Eaton in the rear is because during that additional research I learned more about how an E-locker works. I wasn't aware before but found out about how when the locker is engaged and the wheels roll backward it came to take up to a half of a wheel revolution to re-engage. So seems like for the money you might as well just go with a solid mechanical locker like an OX locker.

Copy on the possibility of ARB air lockers leaking.

Interesting on the E-locker, I wasn't aware of that. I guess the key then is to just keep moving forward?

Looking forward to the rest of your build. I'll look for you in Central Oregon!

[motovan_mn]

Originally Posted by Lilnuts2

The main difference is the profile of the metal is thicker and the channel size increases with each increase in rating.

FRAME SPECIFICATIONS
Model/Series - Wheelbase (in.) - Maximum Side Rail Section (in.) - Section Modulus (in.)
E-150 ------------138 ----------------- 6.05 x 3.18 x 0.161 ------------------ 2.92 -
E-250 ----------- 138 ----------------- 6.16 x 3.18 x 0.181 ------------------ 3.30 -
E-350 ----------- 138 ----------------- 7.69 x 3.18 x 0.212 ------------------ 5.44 -

Interesting, so the frame rail height and material thickness increases throughout the range, but the frame rail width remains the same. In that case, I wonder why the leaf springs are narrower on the E-150. I figured they would be narrower because the frame rails are narrower, but obviously that is incorrect.

It's also interesting that Ford's volumes were high enough to warrant tooling up 3 different frame variations. I would think the material cost savings would be fairly miniscule. On the Transits I believe the only difference across the different weight ratings is the leaf springs. But being a unibody van that's a whole different ballgame.

[motovan_mn]

Just in case anybody is still interested on the E150/250/350 differences, Chris talks about it a little bit in this video:

https://youtu.be/dthpJKKd5q0?t=681

[aarcaris]

Update: Just to keep anyone who is interested in this up to date. I still haven't placed any orders but did finally get around to weighing the van. Not entirely sure where this stacks up in comparison to other builds, but my total weight with two passengers, a full tank of gas, no water, and not fully loaded for a trip (though the only things missing for a trip were clothes, water, and food) was

Total Weight: 7,100lbs.

Front Axle 3,480lbs
Rear Axle: 3,660lbs.

Given the weight of the van would people who recommended a Sterling 10.5 swap still recommend it as the best path forward?

Quick interest search gave me these specs.

Semi Float Dana 60 GAWR:5,500lbs
Full Float Dana 60 GAWR:6,500lbs
Sterling 10.5 GAWR: 9,750lbs

Looking at all these weight capacities makes me wonder if even after adding all the other accessories (bumpers, full-size spare, cargo box, bike rack, bikes, etc...) I plan on and having it fully loaded if I will be over the GAWR for the SF Dana 60. Obviously, real-world experience is different than on paper number crunching, so now knowing the actual weight of the van would everyone still be suggesting to swap for the sterling? If yes is that mainly for an added insurance of not ever having to worry about it, or because you think it will be necessary?

Just figured it would throw this out there and see what a wider populous thinks.

[motovan_mn]

Originally Posted by aarcaris

Update: Just to keep anyone who is interested in this up to date. I still haven't placed any orders but did finally get around to weighing the van. Not entirely sure where this stacks up in comparison to other builds, but my total weight with two passengers, a full tank of gas, no water, and not fully loaded for a trip (though the only things missing for a trip were clothes, water, and food) was

Total Weight: 7,100lbs.

Front Axle 3,480lbs
Rear Axle: 3,660lbs.

Given the weight of the van would people who recommended a Sterling 10.5 swap still recommend it as the best path forward?

Quick interest search gave me these specs.

Semi Float Dana 60 GAWR:5,500lbs
Full Float Dana 60 GAWR:6,500lbs
Sterling 10.5 GAWR: 9,750lbs

Looking at all these weight capacities makes me wonder if even after adding all the other accessories (bumpers, full-size spare, cargo box, bike rack, bikes, etc...) I plan on and having it fully loaded if I will be over the GAWR for the SF Dana 60. Obviously, real-world experience is different than on paper number crunching, so now knowing the actual weight of the van would everyone still be suggesting to swap for the sterling? If yes is that mainly for an added insurance of not ever having to worry about it, or because you think it will be necessary?

Just figured it would throw this out there and see what a wider populous thinks.

I recently put together a spreadsheet to try to figure out how much our van will weight post conversion (UJOR 4x4, mild interior build, RTT, bumpers, etc). Obviously it's a big wild guess but some of the interesting numbers direct from Chris at UJOR were:

• UJOR 4x4 conversion - 800 lbs
• UJOR roof rack - 80 lbs for RB
• UJOR rear bumper - 180 lbs

Interestingly our stock passenger van (RB) weighs in about the same as your built-out van. Of course that's with all of the OEM bench seats which are incredibly heavy. After all the goodies are added and interior buildout is complete, and we are fully loaded with bikes, passengers, food, gear, etc, my spreadsheet shows us weighing in at 8500 lbs. F/R distribution not taken into account.

I asked Justin about upgrading the axle shafts at bare minimum and he said not to worry about it, so I'm sticking with my semi-float for now.

[loper]

I'll stick with the Sterling swap. I do not regret doing it to my van.

By the numbers you provided, you could base your choice of the three axles on price. All of them are rated higher than your present weight.

The 10.5 will give you better availability of lockers, eliminate the spacers, come with big brakes, and exceed your weight requirements.

Me, I like heavy duty. But this is your money, spend it how you think best.

[aarcaris]

motovan_mn: That is interesting that a stock RB passenger van is coming in similar to our fully built out van! I guess that makes me feel like some of the things I did to save weight must have helped some. I appreciate your inputs and added information about the added weights for 4x4, racks, and bumper. Right after posting this, I got a response from Chris that echoed Justin's response to you. It seems like the stock SF Dana would probably be fine based on my weight. I do have to say though as silly as it sounds for some reason the idea of no wheel spacers and matching axle width does sound nice!

loper: I was pretty much fully down the Sterling 10.5 path up until this morning. Obviously, the cost to do the 4x4 conversion is a lot and I am trying to be cost-conscious without cutting any corners for this entire build. I still might do it the Sterling just because I have a hard time leaving things at good enough and know I would be kicking myself down the road if I ever did have any axle issues.

I guess I'll be doing some more number crunching and research. Then I'll have to make a decision and not look back.