::Duralast Ujoint for rear shaft is CRAP!::

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

04-02-2016, 02:27 PM

#16

s346k

CF Veteran

Join Date: Feb 2012

Location: central IN

Posts: 2,282

Likes: 0

Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts

Year: 1997

Engine: 4.0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo X_J

Something is wrong, I don't think it's the u-joint.

I agree with this. junk ujoints break under pressure, they don't melt needle bearings. I've used cheap ujoints for 15 years, they make for a good weak link.

Reply Like

04-03-2016, 09:31 AM

#17

Fred/N0AZZ

CF Veteran

Join Date: Jul 2013

Location: Monett, MO.

Posts: 7,554

Likes: 0

Received 15 Likes on 15 Posts

Year: 1999

Model: Cherokee

Engine: 4.0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big David

I was told by a mechanic that a u joint with the grease fitting was weaker due to the cavity for the grease to travel. I dont mind since I'd rather break a joint than a ring gear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by s346k

I agree with this. junk ujoints break under pressure, they don't melt needle bearings. I've used cheap ujoints for 15 years, they make for a good weak link.

Both excellent points and the same way I feel about axles saving gears/lockers.

Reply Like

04-04-2016, 07:26 AM

#18

Larry's XJ

Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2013

Location: Lapeer, Murder Mitten

Posts: 773

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Year: 2000

Model: Cherokee

Engine: 4.0 I6

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big David

I was told by a mechanic that a u joint with the grease fitting was weaker due to the cavity for the grease to travel. I dont mind since I'd rather break a joint than a ring gear.

Interesting theory, I'd like to see tested. If so how many ft/lbs or percentage difference. Would seem a joint would be easier than an axle to change on the trails.
IMO grease able joints are better for general maintenance, and if you do water you'd be able to expel it.