Rockwells who has them or considered them and why?

Kiel

Formerly WJ ZUK
Well after months a months of thinking about axles, for some reason I keep coming back to rockwell axles. Please convince me why not too after these points are made. I just hate the idea of spending 3k on a built dana 60 front not that a rockwell will end up much cheaper, but it would be stronger:handlebars:

Can be hub flipped down to 69 inches wms to wms
6.72 gears or whatever stock
Toploader
1.62 shafts upgradable to 2.0 for the same money to upgrade a 60
Can be found cheaper usually then front 60's, but is getting harder.
ability to run massive tires
easier brake and drive-line setups

downsides the I only see has partial reasons
Weigh more then a 60 about 150-200 more per axle
are wide at 69 inches but I was planning on full width anyway
part availabiltity, but how avail are built 60 parts anyway? Plus we have boyce!

Why don't we see any rockwells here in utah except for a chosen few. California and texas and most the south have huge numbers and they seem to be drifting northen aren't they?
 

Caleb

Well-Known Member
Location
Riverton
another HUGE issue is because they are a top loader you have to really build around your driveline/pinion.
 

Tacoma

Et incurventur ante non
Location
far enough away
You don't really need Rockwell parts. ;) BUT, if you do, UT, SLC area in particular, has a few suppliers: Boyce and Tomlins. And then there are all the internet supply houses. Mostly you need bolts and things like that, and they can be had all over.

I decided on them because I have a huge truck and I was going to run 46" tires. They were way cheaper than comparably strong 60's. They're square and have lots of room for mounting points. I like the driveshaft angles at the height they'll be. If I break one, it won't kill me to get another one. Plus, Jack Tomlin is nearly within sight of my house. That helps hahahhahah

What I don't like is the following:

The center chunk is huge and in the way, on a truck. If I was building a buggy, that would be less of an issue-- but still an issue.
Wheel brakes are really expensive, no matter how you do it. Not so much an issue since this became a trailer queen, but still bugs me putting brake heat into the case like that. On the other hand, the Tellico contingent does not seem to mind. *shrug*
20" beadlocks are faaaawking expensive. And not many people are making them. The rims will comprise the single biggest expense for me. :(
Funky tie rod without a really great solution. It sticks waaaay the hell out there. High steer is an option, but then you must deal w/the chunk. Not insurmountable, but irritating, esp. on rear steer. :( no wait, rear steer= :D

Overall, I think they rock for the price if the issues don't bug you.
 

Kiel

Formerly WJ ZUK
Rear steer was what I was thinking, but you almost need to uipgrade a front axle in the rear. The 2 inch shaft kit and flanges and locker is somewhere around 2k if needed. The other thiing I noticed is that rockwelled rigs tend to be about a foot higher to clear the toploader, but mine is a buggy so, a little easier. But then you always have a little more unsprung weight down there too. So many tough decisions:confused:
 

easy-c

Registered User
rockwell,i love my rockwells i have a front and a rear, they fit good on my buggy but i havent got it finnished yet! but the price was really good,i mean awsome!!!!!! 900 dollars for two axles i wont break!!! i like the idea of the axles being heavy. i think it will keep my buggy on the ground better.but thats just my thought? thanks for the hookup from tacoma!!
 

Herzog

somewhat damaged
Admin
Location
Wyoming
In my (somewhat experienced) opinion - there is an optimum width and weight for each type of rig vs the type of terrain it is primarily going to be on. For me, rockwells go far outside the optimum range in both categories.

To me, anything that is wider than 65" is too wide, but then anything narrower than 60" is too narrow for the type of terrain and vehicles I like to build.

Vehicles built with this in mind seem to out perform the other vehicles on our terrain, hands down. But then again, a lot of it has to do with the drivers too.

To sum it up - Wider is not always better. In fact I believe it to be a hindrance.
 

leorn

reset
Location
Roy
for me the center of gravity thing kills the deal, but if your talking about running ridiculously large tires it may be your solution. I went out with a guy that had them under a yj last year. I couldn't believe how high you have to build a rig to fit the pinion.
 

Greg

Make RME Rockcrawling Again!
Admin
In my (somewhat experienced) opinion - there is an optimum width and weight for each type of rig vs the type of terrain it is primarily going to be on. For me, rockwells go far outside the optimum range in both categories.

To me, anything that is wider than 65" is too wide, but then anything narrower than 60" is too narrow for the type of terrain and vehicles I like to build.

Vehicles built with this in mind seem to out perform the other vehicles on our terrain, hands down. But then again, a lot of it has to do with the drivers too.

To sum it up - Wider is not always better. In fact I believe it to be a hindrance.


Shane nailed it, I was thinking along the same lines but he said it first. They guys running Rockwells are usually running a minumum of 42" tires and their trails are quite different than ours. IMO they're too heavy & wide for most the stuff in this area.

Have you even ran Coyote Canyon? That's a trail that favors a narrower axle'd rig. Upper Helldorado is another. I watched 'the Newt' (Profitt Cruisers FJ45 on Rockwells and 44" tires) struggle as the driver attempted to get it over Breakover Rock. His rig eventually had to go to the right, around the rock and that got pretty ugly. My buddy Chris walked right over the same rock, with 35" tires and 1/2 ton axles.

I'm building my buggy-thing with a 64" wide axle in front & 62" wide in the back. I also believe that's an ideal compromise between stability & narrowness.
 

Verceingetorix

Active Member
rocks

I looked at doing rocks in my zuk that I am buliding but I did not like the overall width, and lift required to clear pinion. The biggest issue was the brake set up I did not want to run a pinion brake. So I went with 424 mogs as they don't need a huge lift to clear the pinion the overall width is 70" and they have factory disk brakes. I think that in the long run you will be happier with the rocks because they are cheaper than 60's and if you don't like the width cut them down to the size you want.
 

easy-c

Registered User
I looked at doing rocks in my zuk that I am buliding but I did not like the overall width, and lift required to clear pinion. The biggest issue was the brake set up I did not want to run a pinion brake. So I went with 424 mogs as they don't need a huge lift to clear the pinion the overall width is 70" and they have factory disk brakes. I think that in the long run you will be happier with the rocks because they are cheaper than 60's and if you don't like the width cut them down to the size you want.
you can go to www.killeraxles.com and check out the unimog axles i think the 4o4 vwas priced ok i think the gear ratio was 7.56 gears and they came stock front and rear with a locker. but thats were the rockwell comes back into the picture cheaper. you can flip the steering so its on the front or back you can put the pumpkin on eatherside pretty easily and its just versatile. 1410 ujoints. so thats a chevy one ton ujoint so thats common, on changing rims to fit the axle i took my old 38" tires on 15 inch rims cut out the centers and put rockwell centers from www.usa6x6.com in it and welded them in. it only ran me 190.00 for 4 centers.and high angle driveline is going to make an adapter for the 1410 ujoint to fit my toyota case. and to put the chromolly shafs in the rear are pretty cheep. cant remember if it was 500.00 or 1000, but it was better priced than the front shafts.
 

easy-c

Registered User
but like i say also. I HAVE NOT RAN THESE YET SO I CANT TELL YOU HOW IT WILL DO. i benn running a 84 toyota pick on moab trails for years,so i am use to a toyota pickup width. my cage is on a 88 toy frame but i extende the axles front and rear, right now the wheelbase is 140" same as my 2006 titan.
 

Kiel

Formerly WJ ZUK
I looked at doing rocks in my zuk that I am buliding but I did not like the overall width, and lift required to clear pinion. The biggest issue was the brake set up I did not want to run a pinion brake. So I went with 424 mogs as they don't need a huge lift to clear the pinion the overall width is 70" and they have factory disk brakes. I think that in the long run you will be happier with the rocks because they are cheaper than 60's and if you don't like the width cut them down to the size you want.

I'm pretty sure killeraxles is defunct for several years now, so no luck there. Portals are a cool idea, but I think 404's are weaker then I would want and most the other axles are just too expensive, but are pretty beefy. I really think the options are between 60's and rocks. But the width is also around the full width of a dana 60 front at 69 1/4 inches with the hub flipped. I was planning to run full width anyway, but rocks are narrowable anyway and you can get the custom 2 inch shafts cut down at no extra cost:greg:
 

gijohn40

too poor to wheel... :(
Location
Layton, Utah
Trucks show...

On trucks they had a build up using some rockwells and they put disc brakes on them and instead of the big steering bar they used a hydralic ram... I think next weeks show is the one showing the build up... its a rerun and they used it on the SGT ROCK truck.... just in case anyone wants to see how they did it...
 

Kiel

Formerly WJ ZUK
I remember that show, it looked sorta cool, or maybe it was just the 50 cal mounted in the bed. If I did rocks I run full hydro and rear steer, plus pinion brakes
 

Crinco

Well-Known Member
Location
Heber
I hate the Idea of pinion brakes! Just the thought of breaking an axle and loosing your brakes scares the h$ll out of me.
Weight is a non-issue. The weight is unspung, so it holds the rig to the ground like water or lead in the tires.
There are a lot more after market parts for them now than ever before. Besides, what spares are you going to carry anyways? Carry some joints like you do now and try to hope for the best.
Wheels, 6x6 has got you covered. Staun beadlock the tires and you have double beadlocks and NO worries.
Top loader, in a Jeep-forget it, too high. In a Buggy, build around it and move forward. I don't see a problem here.
I would only run these axles if you plan to run at least a 40" tire HARD. Otherwise it is just overkill. With these axles you will spend the day enjoying the trail and not worrying about breaking, no matter what you do.
Cost is great. Period.
Rear steer sucks, why would you even concider that???;)
:rofl: :rofl:
Stacey had some good Ideaas about mounting steering (full hydro) on those Rocks, that would be worth watching again.
That's all I got.
CR
 
Last edited:

Tacoma

Et incurventur ante non
Location
far enough away
I will definitely only ever build this one truck with Rockwell's. My friend Tom has his and it's not that high and everything clears.... but it's a BIG vehicle. Next thing will be either a buggified FJ or an actual buggy, just for the sake of size. We'll see how this M715 works out. I know it's huge.


EDIT, re: rear steering: I agree that it's a pain in the arse. I wouldn't do it except that a 126" wb is kind of long. That's ALL.
 

Herzog

somewhat damaged
Admin
Location
Wyoming
The weight is unspung, so it holds the rig to the ground like water or lead in the tires.

I hear this argument a lot. Again, it's a optimization thing. Too much unsprung weight is bad, not enought unsprung weight is bad. For a light buggy to be running rockwells is silly to me, you want your vehicle to work as a whole... :)
 

Bart

Registered User
Location
Arm Utah
Personally, I just don't see the need for that big of an axle. You have to limit your up travel because that pig is soooo big and there's all that weight. You can get reverse cut 60s for $1000 to $1400. Just add gears, steering and lockers and you're done.
 
Top