drive shaft /KAD hub problem
Turbo Mini Forums

Paul,

I'm still not sure....

In the very first photo the groove is deep, the outer lip is narrow and all is bright and looks newly machined.

In my photos and oneyed'd everything is still black from the heat treatment and/or rust....

A measurement from the (flat part of) the back face to the front face might help ???

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

I can see what your saying Rod but that outer lip looks wide to me, Im looking at the bottom of the joint profile against the contrasting colour of the casing, it looks completely standard to me but I do stand to be corrected.
I agree on measurements. A measurement of the full width of the pot is needed

I seriously doubt it!

I see now Paul. It's a bit of an optical illusion.

Get your rulers out chaps!

In the 13's at last!.. Just

59.8mm on my two...

IMO The balls have been running far too close to the outer edge even on a standard setup.

It makes you wonder how little suspension change (ie, negative camber) it takes to move them too far out...

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Yes I think I see what you mean. What about taking a measurement of the pot joint

Craig

my mini van http://www.turbominis.co.uk/forums/index.php?p=vt&tid=448248

Just measured mine but it as the rubber boot on and I get it to about 63mm

Craig

my mini van http://www.turbominis.co.uk/forums/index.php?p=vt&tid=448248

come to a height of 60mm... The blach pot was on the gearbox... the red one for refference...






""did some further searching... noticed the folowing..

a standard upper left arm has the number 21A2691 on it...

mine has the number 21A2693.... Cant find that number anywhere on the net??
don't know if that could cause the problem""""

Height/length is OK then - first photo confused me.

That part number isn't in either Somerford or Moss's catalogue (both of which are very good).

Did think hydrolastic for a minute but that's a completely different part number.

I'm lost...

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

me2.....this problem is getting pretty anoying..

indeed was thinking hydro to , but those are other partnumbers ( but even with a hydro arm it should be ok..... have read that long time ago some racers were using those arms, then again with the normal mini hubs whichhave a normal angle at the top of hub)...

the number i have is nowhere to be found......

Yes, I think the main difference (if it had been a hydro arm) is the knuckle joint position (to give a different leverage ratio) and not the lenght... but worth a guess..

Have you tried assembling it with a standard steel hub - that would answer one way or the other if it is the joint/shaft/arm or the hub that is wrong

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

tried the normal mini hubs.. and then the shaft goes in the pot a little further ( i know that the top angle of the KAD hub is slightly different to a normal hub... but that shouldn't be a problem).

Knowing this it would mean that the top of the hub has to come in further towards the car. So that's why i am questioning those upper arms...

maybe you need the longer METRO drive shafts?

http://www.minifreunde.at

thanks ,but wouldn't appart from being to long for a mini the solution..
mini shafts 374mm / 450mm
metro shafts 410mm/ 485mm

and there are several minis driving the normal shafts wit alloy kad hubs......without this prob

Drop Matt Argent a PM alaskanow0 on here he has these hubs fitted.

1/4 Mile 14.3secs 96Mph Terminal 10psi of boost.


Fibreglass Parts? - http://www.tdkracing.co.uk/
Split Rims? - http://www.force-racing.co.uk/

How much tilt is there on the engine?

Is it an early or late (1992 onwards) subframe?

How low is the car?

How much caster?

How much camber?

any of these will change the seating position of the inner joint, a combination of them could see this sort of problem. The fact that you have fitted standard hubs and it's not been a problem indicates to me that there is something fundamentally different with the KAD hubs. I know they use Metro ball joints, but did they also replicate the Metro hub geometry, which is different from the Mini?

the top of the KAD hub is slightly different to minihub. but not as much as a metro hub...(this is done to make it more driveable when you drasticly lower the car)'' I allready gave KAD a call about this..

i will go and figure out the rest of the things you mentioned.

thanks for all the advice so far you all

If you took the photograph with the car jacked up and the hub at full droop there will be the problem. If you jack up the hub to ride height the bearings will be further in the potjoint.

What made you check this in the first place?

I seriously doubt it!

I was just thinking the same Paul, have you actually drove the car and had any issues yet?

1/4 Mile 14.3secs 96Mph Terminal 10psi of boost.


Fibreglass Parts? - http://www.tdkracing.co.uk/
Split Rims? - http://www.force-racing.co.uk/

the car was not jacked up. but on the ground. The reason i found out was because i needed to fix the rubber with a ziptie on the inner potjoint. They weren't on yet. Then i noticed the rubber boot was to short to fix on the pot.... obiously because the shaft was to far out...

Perhaps we should all crawl under our minis, cut off the zip tie / band and see what ours look like as a comparison (location of inner spider to outer face of pot).

This is certainly a bizarre puzzle. I can't recall another post that left so many of us puzzled as to what can be causing an issue.

What's the other side like?

1/4 Mile 14.3secs 96Mph Terminal 10psi of boost.


Fibreglass Parts? - http://www.tdkracing.co.uk/
Split Rims? - http://www.force-racing.co.uk/

I seriously doubt it!

TBH I dont think Id worry about it (aslong as you can get the gaiter on and aslong as the balls dont come right out at full droop). If the balls are within the pot I cant really see a problem

I seriously doubt it!