BOOT77

Why don't they make new bar style transaxles for the older vettes?

PeteZO6

Not sure what you mean, but if you do mean a C5/C6 style trans-axle for a C3, there are a couple of reasons that come to mind. For one thing, there isn't any room for it in a C3. The trans-axles are a lot larger than the diff assembly in a C3, so you'd have to modify the rear floor pan and probably move the seats apart into room that doesn't exist. Then you'd have to fit a shortened torque tube between the trans and the engine/clutch. The C3 wheelbase is 98" and the C5 wheelbase is 104.5" - the C6 is even longer. Then you'd have to mod the trans-axle's diff to mate with the C3 halfshafts. How much do you think all that will cost? And how many C3 owners would be willing to step up to spending those bucks? A 5 or 6 speed trans in the normal C3 location is a much more cost effective solution.
I'm sure others will chime in and give their opinions.

BOOT77

Well I didn't say put a c5/c6 transaxle whole dang setup into a c3. I am asking why can't someone make a hub that bolts to the diff with the same joint style and bar as the newer transaxles. Even like the transaxles in front wheel drive cars? Just seems like they can make those things good for 1000hp and it'd be a lot less inertia. I mean you have a bar with a joint on either end, weather it slides into the diff/outerhub or it bolts on. I'm just wondering why no1 has treid this?

PeteZO6

Maybe if you get your terminology right, people wouldn't misunderstand you. I guess what you mean by "bar style transaxles" you really mean the solid axle shafts between the diff and the wheel assembly. If you understood how the C3 rear suspension works and how a C5/C6 axle is constructed, you'd figure out they aren't compatible. You figure it out, I'm outta here.

BOOT77

Np man, thx for the bumps. It's insulting and closed minded people like you that slow progess. Troll onward dude!

Mike Ward

A 'transaxle' is a combined transmission, differential and axle assembly- like a C6. As Pete said you've got some terminology confused.

7t2vette

I don't know why you seem offended, because YOU were the one who used the wrong terminology!

Like Mike already stated, a "transaxel" is a combination transmission & differential. What you are talking about are half shafts with CV joints at each end. BIG difference there buddy!!

I too have wonderedf the same thing, as well as why no one has come up with a kit to put a IRS 9 inch diff in these cars.

BOOT77

My mistake I took this as a car forum, I mean really it takes you all to correct me? I just had a question bout something I thought would be worth exploreing. So what if I had to use the incorrect term to try and explain what I meant.

Well thx for the bumps fellas, you can all get back to your circle jerk now and I'll keep my post too other forums.

69427

We'd appreciate that.

See if they'll teach you how to spell over there, too.

TheSkunkWorks

I'd suggest putting the energy you've expended on insulting the CF membership into better explaining of what you speak would have been the wiser tack, and we might well have had a beneficial exchange. However, you apparently can't hold your own around here without resorting to the above...

Wow, that's two new applicants for my ignore list in one day!

72LS1Vette

I know what you are talking about. Substituting the hollow rear axle for a solid one like you see on all modern cars. I've wondered about that myself. The flanges would have to be custom made but given the number of pics that I've seen of C3 axles twisted up like a piece of pasta it might be worth the effort.


BTW, you are lucky that I happened to understand what you meant. Your spelling as well as your attitude needs a lot of work.



Rick B.

75vetteman

hey man don't take it so harsh. they did the same thing to me for my spelling. once they gave me an explanation (they couldn't translate) i understood why they were coming after me and i changed. we all sometimes use the wrong words, and personally i like when somebody corrects me because i no longer sound like a dork who don't know what he's talking about.
AND I'VE ONLY BEEN A MEMBER FOR A MONTH AND I THINK THIS IS A GREAT FORUM. i've learned a lot from these people. many of them are very knowledgeable people.

7t2vette

This is too easy!

wcsinx

Wow dude, you're gonna get your panties all wadded up because you get called out for your screwed up car terminology on a CORVETTE forum.

I can only guess by "bar" you mean halfshaft.

By "newer joint style" you're referring to constant velocity joints.

By "transaxle" you mean differential.

And I don't know WTF you think a hub is.

If you really think you'll get treated more gently on any other car forum, then I welcome you to jump over onto HondaTech and see how quickly those wolves tear you apart. (trust me, the moderators here are MUCH less tolerant)

Bowerss2

Mike Ward

Ah- If that's what he meant, a CV joint usually cannot accept the type of longitudinal loads that are present in the type of suspension used on C2/C3 where the suspension member is also responsible for transmitting the torque to the wheels.

Even if they could be made to work, what's the advantage?

7t2vette

I am guessing that a solid CV jointed halfshaft would be lighter & stronger, and have less friction and a longer life for the joints compared to a u-jointed halfshaft. I've been wrong before though!

Shark Racer

I'd imagine that they have much less inertia than a half-shaft too - meaning less rotational mass.

It'd be do-able if you created a loaded upper link, probably.

7t2vette

Good point!

Mike Ward

How would a CV joint have less mass/inertia than a u-joint?