JKOwners Forum banner

What WMS to WMS distance should I choose for a set of crate axles?

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am currently planning a ton swap for my 2DR JK. While I have considered building up a set of junkyard axles, I believe I will be going the crate axle route. As those of you that have gone the crate route know, everything is customizable do your preference and application.

There are two parameters that I am having trouble addressing on my own: WMS to WMS distance and types of shafts. While I think the shafts I go with will be largely dictated by cost, the WMS to WMS distance is up in the air. I have outboarded rear coilovers, but other than that, there's not much else driving my decision other than pure preference.

What WMS to WMS distance should I go with? Those that have gone the crate route, what distance did you go with and why?

(I will be running 3.5" BS wheels and planning on running 42" tires with my tons.)
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
4,720 Posts
With outboard shocks and 42's I would think around 72" with a 3.5"-4" bs wheel.
I have 68.5" and wish now I had gone 72" running 40x13.5 tires. Right now with 4.5" bs wheels and 1.5" spacers up front I just rub the frame a bit off road.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,693 Posts
I'm pretty sure my front superduty axle is 69.75 WMS. It's plenty wide enough. I'm really not sure what the rear RJ is but its more narrow then the front. I'm running 3.5 BS wheels and I think I can outboard rear Coilovers if I wanted to. Might need to notch frame a little for big down travel.

Here is a pic fully stuffed. Ignore the gap between the bump stops. I took this pic when I was checking clearances and makin new stops.



Here's where I would mount my towers.

 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
4,720 Posts
You need to have the other wheel fully drooped when looking at if you have room, even if you are on the bump stop at stuff the wheel will continue towards the body due to the arc of travel on the axle. The track bar will also pull/push the wheels side to side if you have one. I am pretty sure the rear rock jock axle is 69" wms unless you got a custom width. If you are planning coil over in the rear run that bracket all the way up and tie it into the bottom of the cage with an old control arm. You can run a 16" travel shock in that spot.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Lookin good man! You're right, your front looks just a tad bit tight. But a sweet lookin rig, for sure! The 72" distance is starting to look more appealing to me. I think that'll still keep my track width manageable.

Looks like you did a front stretch ... how far did you push the front forward? I am considering pushing my front forward another 3" to get me about a 108" wheelbase. I saw you were at 110" ... how did you divide it up between the front and the rear?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,693 Posts
Tires are 40/13.5/17 and wheels are allied beadlocks 3.5 bs 9" wide but more like 10"s. My front axle width is more than enough for me. Any wider and I don't think it would fit through the trails.



Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
4,720 Posts
Right now I have about 1.5" stretch up front, I plan to move it about 2" more which will require me to move the steering box and track bar mount to get to the target of 110" I just set the rear tires to be equal with the back bumper which is trimmed off. I was sitting at 108.5" before I started the triangulated 4 link rear.

It is a very different animal now, tougher to park and get thru tight spots on the trails but is so much more stable off road. I rarely feel tippy at all in this thing.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
898 Posts
my rear is 69" with allied 17X9.5 w/3.5 BS and it clears my outbound coils. you can see from the picture below. http://www.jkowners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53616&page=3

my front is 70" and at full lock it rubs the frame. when i redo the control arm, im going to stretch it about another 1" forward to clear.

the down side to having the axles so wide is the state coverage laws, the narrow trails here in the east coast, and the narrow parking pace in the city makes it difficult to park in the DC area.

When I wheeled rubicon trail this past July, the extra width was great!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
my front is 70" and at full lock it rubs the frame. when i redo the control arm, im going to stretch it about another 1" forward to clear.
So I take it your tire rubs on your frame near the back of your front wheel well (near the driver and passenger doors)?

I know what you mean about DC. I can't take my rig there ... it won't fit in parking garages. :koolaid:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,585 Posts
I'm running 69". Of course, my rear COs are frenched inboard and through the tub. I am running the same Iroks you are looking at and have no rubbing. I believe I could have ran the COs outboard if I wanted. Running 3.5" backspacing.

Bottom line though; if I had gone any wider I could not get my Jeep on any of my trailers. My tires hang over the edge as is. My JK also barely fits through many of the trails here in central Cal. Shorter axles are also stronger.

I think you should run the narrowest axles, within reason, that you can get away with. Going extremely wide has many more disadvantages than advantages.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top