Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Has anyone got these in?

Look quite good, they have a number of CW&P choices, drive flanges and axles as well. Nice 4 pinion carrier and some other bits as well.

Can anyone say how they compare with JacMac, MaxiDrive and ARB?

Thanks guys!

I do not know of any KAM agents in OZ. It would probably be difficult for them to sell their products here against the two local maufacturers.
JackMac and Maxidrive.
Bill.

Thanks Bill. I was thinking they might not be unsupported over here for too long and that their delivery prices may well be better than expected.

But what of their performance? Does anyone compete in events where they may be used? Rainforest Challenge, etc?

Cheers,

When I last spoke to Mal Story (Maxi-Drive) he had a few comments about the design of the KAM diff centres and lockers. He said that the diff centre oiling tubes they have wouldn't work, and a few other things about the quality and durability of their products.

Rovacrat in WA is the importer for KAM products into Austrlai, Rangie Spares in Vc. is a distributor.

Jason

When I last spoke to Mal Story (Maxi-Drive) he had a few comments about the design of the KAM diff centres and lockers. He said that the diff centre oiling tubes they have wouldn't work, and a few other things about the quality and durability of their products.

Mal's gonna be slightly biased though? I'd love to know if anyone's got 'em fitted and can comment on their performance. For the simple reason they are somewhat cheaper, even when imported against the Aus peso.

They quote their axles are 35% stronger than standard. How does JacMac and MaxiDrive go on that front?

It's not difficult to make an axle that is 35% stronger than a 10 spline Rover or 24 spline defender axle. They could start by making them out of steel as opposed to the licorice they have been using in recent years.
Hell, a Suzuki LJ50 axle is probably at least 35% stronger than a Defender one.
Bill.

As far as I'm aware, the Maxi axles are 50% stronger and the JacMacs not much behind.

Slunnie wrote:As far as I'm aware, the Maxi axles are 50% stronger and the JacMacs not much behind.

Judging by the material properties of HY-TUFF (what MD axles are made of), their axles would be about 200% stronger than a 10 spline series axle, if not more.

And of course Mal is probably biased (you should hear him talk about the disadvantages of the toyota diff centre conversion), but he still is a very good engineer/machinist, etc.

I have been running GBR set up on my disco. GBR makes the CR&P and is an agent for MD in US and Europe.
I m very happy with the material he uses and after sale service, his stuff is basically guaranteed for most wheeliing we do.
Suggest you talk to Bill www.greatbasinrovers.com or Gbr@aol.com he is coming up with new design of CV using 300 M material and his 4.75 gears are being cryogenically heat treated and reversed.
I have already borken 2 rear stock axles and 2 stock CV's all this was solved with GBR driveterrain.
JAY

ISUZUROVER wrote: (you should hear him talk about the disadvantages of the toyota diff centre conversion)

You mean there are disadvantages to getting rid of the crappy Rover CWP?

TuffRR wrote:

ISUZUROVER wrote: (you should hear him talk about the disadvantages of the toyota diff centre conversion)

You mean there are disadvantages to getting rid of the crappy Rover CWP?

When I last spoke to Mal (a while ago) I mentioned the JM hypoid conversion in passing (not specifically the straight toyota swap). His response was "you don't want the propshaft any closer to the ground than it already is". or words to that effect.

When I last spoke to Mal (a while ago) I mentioned the JM hypoid conversion in passing (not specifically the straight toyota swap). His response was "you don't want the propshaft any closer to the ground than it already is". or words to that effect.[/quote] From Ben.

This is the only neg with the toy conversion.

IMO the positives far out way this.

Michael.

I thought the toy swap raised the propshaft as its a hypoid. I assumed the pinion was offset upwards rather than downwards. Please explain

The FRONT Hi-pinion gets the propshaft higher up by at least a couple of inches...the rear however, drops it down accordingly - nothing a smartly designed bash plate can't cure...either that or you're stuck with 4.1s that WILL break and CVs that WILL shatter and...

stuee wrote:I thought the toy swap raised the propshaft as its a hypoid. I assumed the pinion was offset upwards rather than downwards. Please explain

The JM Hypoid case only comes in low pinion (with special machining on the front to allow radius arm clearance), so if you buy the JM toy setup you have low pinion front and rear. Like Michael said though, this is a small price to pay for the extra strength.

I assume then that you're better off using a Landcruiser 80 series hi pinion front diff then, over the JacMac hypoid case.

It'd be nice to get a gearset that allows the use of hi pinion setups in the rear also.

Slunnie wrote:I assume then that you're better off using a Landcruiser 80 series hi pinion front diff then, over the JacMac hypoid case.

It'd be nice to get a gearset that allows the use of hi pinion setups in the rear also.

No reason you can't use a high pinion rear - it just won't be as strong - probably still stronger than a rover though.

Thought I might drag this things arse back up. Been talking to Kevin Mason, de boss of KAM.
In regard to the oiling problem mentioned by Mal:

KAM Carrier.
Lubrication is not an issue. In fact we worked on improving the supply of oil (8 years ago) to the planet gears by having 16 off 8mm holes around the centre case + having 0.8m flats on the cross shafts. The holes are behind part of the planet gear on all 4 and help drag oil into the planet bearing surface.

Specification of KAM Heavy duty carrier.
Unique three part design.
Made from solid billet EN24T
4 Planet gears 2 sun gears.
Lubrication holes for each planet gear
Adaptable to LSD (18 Clutch plates)
Adaptable to KAM Diff Locker.
12 x 80mm 12.9 clamping bolts.

I actually used KAM front axles in the front of my Discovery about 6 years ago

Turned them into spagetti on their second outing and that was with the pissy disco CVs a gutless 3.5 and 33" tyres

Best part was no warranty at all and they wern't that cheap

Went to maxi and havent had a problem since

Even the Aust distributor of KAM uses maxidrives in his own car

I can't find any pics of the Kam carrier (and maybe they have changed the design) - but from the last pics I saw in one of the LR mags (and what Mal was talking about) - the Kam carrier has (or had) small tubes coming radially out from the carrier, designed to somehow magically feed oil into the gears in the middle (completely against centrifugal force).

I'm sure the Kam product is not too bad, and there are plenty of happy customers in the UK, but in Oz it is hard to go past Maxi-Drive or Jacmac products. Especially since MD's hy-tuff axles should be stronger than the competition.

up2nogood wrote:Thought I might drag this things arse back up. Been talking to Kevin Mason, de boss of KAM.
In regard to the oiling problem mentioned by Mal:

KAM Carrier.
Lubrication is not an issue. In fact we worked on improving the supply of oil (8 years ago) to the planet gears by having 16 off 8mm holes around the centre case + having 0.8m flats on the cross shafts. The holes are behind part of the planet gear on all 4 and help drag oil into the planet bearing surface.

Specification of KAM Heavy duty carrier.
Unique three part design.
Made from solid billet EN24T
4 Planet gears 2 sun gears.
Lubrication holes for each planet gear
Adaptable to LSD (18 Clutch plates)
Adaptable to KAM Diff Locker.
12 x 80mm 12.9 clamping bolts.

FWIW, it's interesting to note that quite a few of the Poms on the LRE board use MD stuff instead of KAM.
MD gear isn't exactly cheap over there either....

mal's axles can't be beat,i run mal's 10spline inners with 24spline outer with arb air lockers,35" simexs and a V8 and can't seem to hurt them.standard axles brake with a gutless 4cylinder.

Best options are JacMac or maxi drive either axle will do what you wnt.


Michael.

[quote="ISUZUROVER"][quote="TuffRR"][quote="ISUZUROVER"CWP? :?[/quote]

When I last spoke to Mal (a while ago) I mentioned the JM hypoid conversion in passing (not specifically the straight toyota swap). His response was "you don't want the propshaft any closer to the ground than it already is". or words to that effect.[/quote]

I have no issues with Mal personally and agree that he is a nice bloke and a great engineer, but the above comment is a bit silly in light of the fact that LandRovers own Salisbury diff is also a low pinion hypoid.
I believe Mal quite rightly got his nose out of joint when KAM started advertising their wares using Maxidrives drawings or photos.This may have colored his opinion of their quality.
KAM stuff may be crap I don't know, but maybe some of the Poms on this board may be able to enlighten us as I may be interested in their CV joints as Maxidrive have as yet been unsuccessful in comissioning any company both here and overseas to make and supply high strength ones.
Maxidrives opinion is that the currently available AEU 2522 CVs {Genuine 110} are crap because they are through hardened and brittle, so you may as well use cheap
($130_$150) aftermarket ones. Having witnessed the stub shaft on a cheap aftermarket one corkscrewing and splitting the hub spindle open I don't necessarily concur with Mal on that one.
Bill.

bill, from my talkings with mal of late, i get the opinion that hes not a great fan of the sals either. yes he agrees its big and strong but i think he feels that a well engineered spiral bevel is better. he originaly fitted an env to his side winder. no, the rover diff is not that great but sometimes i think you have been badly beaten with one. he has no hesitaion in showing the many short comings in any of the rover designs. this keeps him in a job.mal is now trialing/making a ring that is fitted to the outside of the cv and is having very good success with the hardcore guys in europe. its a shame he dosn't have the time to get onto the computer side of things and join in. i greatly respect your opinions, ideas and coments. sometime i think words that are said in haste are taken out of context. cheers,serg

Here they are. I begged and crawled to get a set of these CV's recently. The design was tested with the Boeler Dakkar rally team without failure, though they may be a bit slow to come onto the market due to fitting of the ring.

Mal is having problems procuring a suitable CV, and one of the big problems is actually getting one that is suitable. He did get a batch in, but unfortunately the tolerance in manufacturing of the CV isn't good enough to use as a base unit for his CV's. The press rings are put on at with an interference fit of 0.05mm but then the tolerance at which the CV's are manufactured at are outside of that spec????? Makes it a prob to do good work, or actually any work if the rings wont go on or stay on! Also, CV manufacturers are such a big interest now, that to spec and order CV's, you basically need to get a shelf item or order in the 100's of thousands - OE quantities which Mal just cant do. With the batch he has, each CV now needs to have the ring specifically machined to suit which AFAIK is the resolution, albeit time consuming since CNC production (which had been done initially) cant be used.

Slunnie, Those CV's (photographed) are all well and good for open knuckle TD5 Diso's where there may be room between the CV and knuckle for the ring, but I would have thought the real market for stronger joints was with Defenders and Rangey classics which are the ones more commonly used in competition etc. and The standard Aeu2522 cv is a pretty snug fit already.Is there room for the ring in those?
Would it not make sense and be more economical from a manufacturing viewpoint to make, on CNC equipment all the strengthening rings for a particular model the same size and then grind the diameters of any cvs
that don't fall within those specs to suit ?

Uninformed (Serg) There may be a way of designing a spiral bevel diff that is strong but in my experience with ENV's I dont think they are it. A ring and pinion tooth count of 10 :47 ( for the 4.7 Ratio)is always going to compromise core strength and impact resistance of the teeth. It should have been 8:38 like the stronger aftermarket Rover type R & P's. The pinion bearings are too close together so they wear quickly which stuffs the pinion nose support bearing journal on the pinion head. The EnV was an improvement strengthwise on the Rover type, but they tended to wear out more quickly in applications where outright strength wasn't important.

If Bush 65 (John) would like to chime in here I have a question.
A rover type crownwheel has an outside diameter if 215 mm and an inside diameter of 125mm, yet the gear teeth only cover an area measuring 215 mm and 150mm. My question is, would it not be advantageous for an aftermarket ring and pinion manufacturer to redesign the tooth profile to optimise the length of the teeth by using up this available space?
Bill.

Gday Bill,

Well I think that all tough Rovers are D2's, the hard part is getting the other 99.9% in the know to realise that also.

Is a Longfield smaller than an AEU2522? I thought these fit into Def/RRC etc axles, though I'm ot in the know.

From what I know of Mal, which isn't a great deal, the method he uses which is to match the ring to the CV is probably the way to go for maximum strength ultimately, rather than removing material from the bell to suit.

Hi Slunnie, Do you have problems with the exposed rubber boots on your D2 CV's getting torn to shreds?
The bell of AEU2522's are actually almost 2 mm larger (thicker) in diameter than the Toyota based Longfields. Rover just screwed up with the heat treatment. They will virtuly last forever if you don't overstress them but don't have the impact/ shockloading resistence of the softer Toyota ones.

I was only talking about Mal removing a thou or two from the diameter of the aftermarket CV's to match his rings. I can't beleive that mass produced items in this day and age can vary by more than that amount.
Bill.