Re: CV driveshaft kit conversion-Installation complete

[mjbeanie]

The last thread on this subject went into detail on the CV conversion options. I had posted photos of my Elantrikbits kit just received for my '71 Elan Plus 2, Rotoflex joint replacement. As mentioned here are the photos of the installation. It was very simple. No special tools, or skills needed. The video discussed was spot on for removal of the CV cover cap screws to fit the inboard CV assembly. A 6mm allen wrench with a 3/8 ratchet drive is you need. It was amazingly simple. I installed fresh Spyder wishbones as well. Whole effort didn't take very long.

Here are the photos! For some reason the photo is upside down. Click on it and the garage floor should move to the bottom. Other side will be next. Gotta like the easy ones..
Cheers
MIke

[mjbeanie]

A very nice reliability improvement.

[mjbeanie]

CV showing full droop. No binding whatsoever. (upside down preview)
Wishbones: old and new.

[StressCraxx]

Looks like a really nice install.

Image 3517 shows the old style proper steel inserts. They must be at least 30 years old. The folded sheet steel versions showed up around 1990 or earlier.

[Andy8421]

Nice installation.

In the spirit of armchair mechanics commenting on pictures, that diff torque rod looks a bit suspect. Has the rubber perished where it goes through the lug on the diff, or is something else adrift?

Andy.

[rjaxe]

Interesting looking at the old donuts although they look pretty ratty they do not seem to have become unbonded from the metal inserts, which is the fate of a most. I wonder why.

[512BB]

I do not see any washers under the nylock nuts on the outer bolts of the ali housing, and if they are there, they are to thin, as witnessed by all the leftover threads on the bolts. If the correct length bolts have been used with correct washers, very few excess threads will be evident.

Leslie

[alanr]

As others have commented those Rotoflex doughnuts are the early none steel reinforced variety that were supposed to be suspect and not very good. Seems they have lasted at least 30years!

Alan.

[alan.barker]

I think they were n° 2 design with interleaves bolt holes in solid metal, the best ones.
Alan

[alanr]

Ok...Just trying to weigh up the pros and cons of this conversion versus using say the Kelvedon/Sue Miller kit which would be roughly half the available price in the UK by the time shipping and tax cost from Oz are taken into consideration.
Putting aside though for a moment this huge difference in price, one thing troubles me is the question of easily availability of replacement parts in future years.
The Elantrickbits website says:
'The CV joint units utilized in elantrikbits conversions are proprietary GKN Lobro OEM parts which are available worldwide in the unlikely event that spares will be required'.

That statement I believe is slightly nuanced because they cannot be standard GKN CV's fited otherwise how do they achieve the extra movement in the CV joint to not need droop restricters when fitted to the Elan?
Elantrickbits CV joints must be quite substantially modified from standard GKN joints!
This then comes back to the question of easily of obtainable modified CV's to the same spec here in the UK in the years to come because Elantrickbits aren't going to be around forever are they!

Maybe I am overthinking this but the above exact parts future availability plus the very expensive intial cost here in the UK of the Elantrickbits conversion versus other UK local options gives me quite a lot of food for thought before I would personally dive in with doing this particular conversion.

Maybe I will stick with the safe driveline cushioning effect of my Rotoflex doughtnuts...

Alan.

[512BB]

'those Rotoflex doughnuts are the early none steel reinforced variety that were supposed to be suspect and not very good'

Not so Alan R. They are the early reinforced type and they do have the steel interleaves and solid bosses.

'Interesting looking at the old donuts although they look pretty ratty they do not seem to have become unbonded from the metal inserts, which is the fate of a most. I wonder why'

Because these were the good quality donuts that were made circa 1970 - 1990 and lasted for years. Indeed, I am running them on most of my cars, and one in particular coming up to 50k miles.

Re the ones pictured, if you let them get into that state and continue to run them, you will be in for some chassis repairs in short order, but I suspect they have just been sitting on a car unused for years.

Re the picture of the half shaft with 2 donuts attached, that looks like a +2 shaft to me. Looks to long for an Elan shaft.

Leslie

[alanr]

Leslie,
Re-Doughnut type version I bow to your knowledge and stand corrected!

Alan.

[mjbeanie]

Thank you all for the great commentary and observations! Yes, long CV shafts as the conversion surgery is on a 1971 Plus 2S 130. (early edition).

Yes Andy, You are correct that bushing has been "bruised." I am unhappy with the bushing condition, on the differential torque rod. Ugh! It isn't great but I think the bushing, is generally doing its job.(?) I was wondering if I could change it out without differential removal? I really would like to start to button up this project, instead of adding yet another task..

Leslie, Great catch on the missing washers on the "outward" wishbone bolts to the bearing housing. Wow.
I didn't recall any present upon hardware disassembly-but perhaps I misplaced them. I checked the service parts list and they weren't pictured, but they are listed! I will install some. (I was wondering why those threads came within 1/16" of each other after tightening!)

Should washers be present under the bolthead and nut for the "inboard wishbone bolts" to the chassis?

Again, I appreciate the keen insightful comments!
Cheers
Mike

[rgh0]

Ok...Just trying to weigh up the pros and cons of this conversion versus using say the Kelvedon/Sue Miller kit which would be roughly half the available price in the UK by the time shipping and tax cost from Oz are taken into consideration.
Putting aside though for a moment this huge difference in price, one thing troubles me is the question of easily availability of replacement parts in future years.
The Elantrickbits website says:
'The CV joint units utilized in elantrikbits conversions are proprietary GKN Lobro OEM parts which are available worldwide in the unlikely event that spares will be required'.

That statement I believe is slightly nuanced because they cannot be standard GKN CV's fited otherwise how do they achieve the extra movement in the CV joint to not need droop restricters when fitted to the Elan?
Elantrickbits CV joints must be quite substantially modified from standard GKN joints!
This then comes back to the question of easily of obtainable modified CV's to the same spec here in the UK in the years to come because Elantrickbits aren't going to be around forever are they!

Maybe I am overthinking this but the above exact parts future availability plus the very expensive intial cost here in the UK of the Elantrickbits conversion versus other UK local options gives me quite a lot of food for thought before I would personally dive in with doing this particular conversion.

Maybe I will stick with the safe driveline cushioning effect of my Rotoflex doughtnuts...

Alan.

I dont think the replacement CV's will ever be required. In my Pus 2 and Elan I have not had to replace the used VW CV's I first used in my CV conversions 40 years ago. Wear appears to be minimal. i dont think Col modifies the CVs themselves except to polish the races, Its the type of CV used as some allow more angular deflection than others and also the boot metal cap and how much delfection that allows

cheers
Rohan

[512BB]

'Great catch on the missing washers on the "outward" wishbone bolts to the bearing housing. Wow.
I didn't recall any present upon hardware disassembly-but perhaps I misplaced them. I checked the service parts list and they weren't pictured, but they are listed! I will install some'

That is one of the areas that I check first when I buy an Elan, as they are so very often assembled incorrectly there, with either wrong length bolts, incorrect orientation of bolts, [the Duckworth Elan], missing washers or incorrect height nylocks evident. In engineering terms, you should never have a steel moving part, ie a bolt head, or bush, or nylock in this case, moving against an ali part, ie, the ali housing, cos there is only going to be one winner in terms of wear, and it aint going to be the ali housing.

The other thing to consider if the rear housing assembly is not correct, is this. If you leave out vital washers and everything is torqued up to spec., you will only run the car for a few hundred miles before the torque on the long bolts in that assembly is lost, and then the bushes will not be acting as bushes, but just pivots, and the cars handling will suffer.

'(I was wondering why those threads came within 1/16" of each other after tightening!)

That is not going to change when you fit nice thick washers under the nylocks, and is correct, see my picture. What will change is that you will not have anywhere near so many threads showing.

'Should washers be present under the bolthead and nut for the "inboard wishbone bolts" to the chassis?'

No, the chassis should already have thick captive washers welded in place.

' You are correct that bushing has been "bruised." I am unhappy with the bushing condition, on the differential torque rod. Ugh! It isn't great but I think the bushing, is generally doing its job.(?) I was wondering if I could change it out without differential removal?'

Yes, no problem to change the rubbers on the torque rods without removing the diff.

Your pictures Mike, show the benefit of posting them, so that critical, but objective eyes can be cast apon them.

Leslie