Theories why the Rubicon went with D44s vs upgraded Dana 30/35?

[Fouledplugs]

The Wrangler engineers do hang out on internet Jeep forums, I'd be surprised if there aren't several here, now. It's one of the ways that they can collect input from the public unobtrusively. Heck, we are an extension of the MOPAR proving grounds in a way. Same with the MOPAR marketing folks. They also go to Jeep events and actually drive Jeeps. They get to watch and see what works and doesn't work.

You can almost imagine the discussion around the lunch table. "Hey, stock Dana 35's are breaking under some circumstances. What's up with that?" "I dunno, what can we do about it?" "Well, we have Dana 44's on the shelf, let's get a team together and see if that will help." "What's marketing and the bean counters going to say?" "Let's fiddle with it and then call Fred to see what he says." I can see it happening. The result is that the Rubi got versions of the Dana 44 for practical and marketing reasons. Everyone, including us, got a win out of the deal.

I like this theory. It really got me theorizing.

I'll play along, If you think back to around the time the TJ Rubicon came out. It was the same time the TJ somewhat, "redesigned" the interior dash and other small parts. Could have easily been a contract issue or renewal...Theory. However this was the perfect time and excuse for the engineers to come together and offer something to answer peoples concerns like the weak and vulnerable Dana 35.

To keep playing along with your theory, the Jeep engineers came back collectively from the forums, outings, events, and meetups in 2003 and found a common concern among Jeep owners. Wrangler owners wished for a Dana 44 under thier Wranglers from the factory.

I can imagine it now, "just wish Jeep offered a Wrangler with nice strong Dana 44's straight from the factory." Or, " first thing to do is get rid of the crappy Dana 35 and find you an old Dana 44 and swap." It was huge back in the day weather you had a YJ or a TJ; rid the Dana 35 and find a Dana 44.

So the engineers built the Rubicon comeplete with Dana 44's and other great goodies. And it was a homerun.

Hell, this is likely what Ron at Superior may have seen and footed the bill in research and design and produced the famous Super35.

 

[Fouledplugs]

Or just do what the guy did with DeLorean. He bought all the rights to DeLorean and the parts molds and everything. He put DeLorean back into production, and now you can go out and buy yourself a brand new DMC-12!

I wonder what Jeep would charge for all the part molds and machinery for the TJ stuff, haha.

Well Jeep probably doesn't own them. Who owns new venture gear, the maker of the 241? And obviously Dana owns the dana 44 molds and possibly the locker...that would be awesome but so hard to do.

 

[Chris]

Well Jeep probably doesn't own them. Who owns new venture gear, the maker of the 241? And obviously Dana owns the dana 44 molds and possibly the locker...that would be awesome but so hard to do.

Good point! But even just the little trim pieces (that Jeep does own) such as cruise control switches, etc. That would be a start!

 

[Fouledplugs]

Yep, I believe it. I've talked to many a friendly car salesman, and they've all told me that the auto manufacturers are making the big money off trim package upgrades. For instance, in many new Ford's, the "entertainment package" with the GPS navigation and other tech stuff is a whopping $3500+!

Jeep is notorious for the same things. While the JK has remained largely unchanged (except for the new engine in 2012+ models), they keep adding all these silly little trim packages (i.e. Moab, etc.) that they charge more for, but are usually nothing other than decals and color matched seats.

It's a way for them to make money, and I think the Rubicon was the same thing. Not to say the Rubicon isn't worth the extra money (to me it surely is), but you have to imagine that one of the reasons they did it was to make more money.

To be fair, the Rubicon is way more than a trim package like the Sahara. It is way more function over form. IMO it is way more thought out, it includes a large list of actual functinal upgrades (that are actual upgrades)

Dana 44 Front&Rear
Lockers Front&Rear
Heavy duty NVG 241 OR with 4:1
SYE
Bigger Tire package which are actual Mud Terrains
Larger Flares for said Oversized Tires


Am I missing anything functional?

Not really functional and more for looks include rock sliders.

 

[sgtjdgelinas]

Well the rubicon comes with lockers front and rear. Dana 44's front and rear, and a NP241 transfer case with 4:1 with a DCV driveshaft with SYE. Adding a super 35 kit to a non-Rubicon doesn't compare to the whole Rubicon package.

A super35 kit doesnt compare to the Rubicon because you fail to mention the Rubicon's disc brakes rear, c-clip elimination in the rear, or the 4:1 NP 241 on the Rubicon. Not all are singl options (except the Dana 44 rear) when the TJ sold, so buying the parts separately wouldnt be cheap. Finally, Ron, owner of Superior Axle and Gear stated, he never designed and produced the super35 to be compared to the Dana 44. But like I stated in my orginal post. Just theorizing why Jeep ditched the Dana 35 in the Rubicon. Was it mathematical? was it Automotive design theory? Were engineers actually involved?

That's all true, but you could build essentially a rubicon less than what you could buy one. I'll use my TJ as an example. On Craigslist here there's some rubicon's for 11 and 23k. My 97 sport I picked up for 7.5k. It already has the SYE and cv driveshaft, last time I saw a rubicon being parted out they wanted 3500 for the axles, maybe 1000 for the transfer case and 500 for the rims and tires. Couple hundred more for adapters and decals and I'm at what, 12k? A lot less if I do a S35 and lockers and even a 4:1 kit for my np231.
Or I could really save some cash and pick up a $1000 Cherokee and Lincoln lock it then cut the doors off.

 

[Fouledplugs]

That's all true, but you could build essentially a rubicon less than what you could buy one. I'll use my TJ as an example. On Craigslist here there's some rubicon's for 11 and 23k. My 97 sport I picked up for 7.5k. It already has the SYE and cv driveshaft, last time I saw a rubicon being parted out they wanted 3500 for the axles, maybe 1000 for the transfer case and 500 for the rims and tires. Couple hundred more for adapters and decals and I'm at what, 12k? A lot less if I do a S35 and lockers and even a 4:1 kit for my np231.
Or I could really save some cash and pick up a $1000 Cherokee and Lincoln lock it then cut the doors off.

I agree that it is plausible. Not to mention you could offset cost by selling the orginal Sport parts.
I dont think you could find the xcase for 1000. But you like you said 231 4:1 is still an option.

Probably less likely to make the cost comparison back in 2003-2006.

Just theorizing why they ditched the Dana 35 for the 44 in the Rubicon. On this forum we have established that for most users here a S35 will work.

 

[Mike_H]

So, a little off topic, but thought I'd interject. There are some good points being made, and some misunderstandings also, about the auto industry...if anyone want some clarity on how the auto industry designs and builds cars, lemme know and I'll take the time to do a write up. In short the makers (the names you know, like jeep, ford, Chevy, etc) only assemble big pieces of the cars. The parts are 99 percent designed and built by Tier 1 suppliers (Delphi, Magna, Dana, Spicer).

I don't know every thing, but 10+ years as a manufacturing and product engineer has given me a pretty good idea of the whole process. I worked for tier 1 suppliers the whole time.

 

[Chris]

So, a little off topic, but thought I'd interject. There are some good points being made, and some misunderstandings also, about the auto industry...if anyone want some clarity on how the auto industry designs and builds cars, lemme know and I'll take the time to do a write up. In short the makers (the names you know, like jeep, ford, Chevy, etc) only assemble big pieces of the cars. The parts are 99 percent designed and built by Tier 1 suppliers (Delphi, Magna, Dana, Spicer).

I don't know every thing, but 10+ years as a manufacturing and product engineer has given me a pretty good idea of the whole process. I worked for tier 1 suppliers the whole time.

Please do educate me, I would love to hear what you have learned over the years. Post something about this in the off topic forum. I know a lot of us would find it interesting!

 

[Fouledplugs]

So, a little off topic, but thought I'd interject. There are some good points being made, and some misunderstandings also, about the auto industry...if anyone want some clarity on how the auto industry designs and builds cars, lemme know and I'll take the time to do a write up. In short the makers (the names you know, like jeep, ford, Chevy, etc) only assemble big pieces of the cars. The parts are 99 percent designed and built by Tier 1 suppliers (Delphi, Magna, Dana, Spicer).

I don't know every thing, but 10+ years as a manufacturing and product engineer has given me a pretty good idea of the whole process. I worked for tier 1 suppliers the whole time.

Right. So was I on to something when I theorized that the Jeep engineers give Dana engineers their requirements to build a axle application when building something like the Rubicon?

 

[sgtjdgelinas]

I agree that it is plausible. Not to mention you could offset cost by selling the orginal Sport parts.
I dont think you couls find the xcase for 1000. But you like you said 231 4:1 is still an option.

Probably less likely to make the cost comparison back in 2003-2006.

Just theorizing why they ditched the Dana 35 for the 44 in the Rubicon. On this forum we have established that for most users here a S35 will work.

I'd say your right about the cost in 03-06, and to add my theory for why they chose the Dana 44 over the 35, it could have been that there wasn't much support for the 35. Considering they only tried four lockers for the 44 axles, how many could have been available for the 35 and the 30 at that time. I'm sure there were some, but they'd also have to meet the demands of testing and production capacity. My .02

 

[Mike_H]

Right. So was I on to something when I theorized that the Jeep engineers give Dana engineers their requirements to build a axle application when building something like the Rubicon?

Yes...spot on.

 

[UpperMI]

So, a little off topic, but thought I'd interject. There are some good points being made, and some misunderstandings also, about the auto industry...if anyone want some clarity on how the auto industry designs and builds cars, lemme know and I'll take the time to do a write up. In short the makers (the names you know, like jeep, ford, Chevy, etc) only assemble big pieces of the cars. The parts are 99 percent designed and built by Tier 1 suppliers (Delphi, Magna, Dana, Spicer).

I don't know every thing, but 10+ years as a manufacturing and product engineer has given me a pretty good idea of the whole process. I worked for tier 1 suppliers the whole time.

Please do. I'm curious what things have changed and what things have stayed the same since I last lived in Detroit (Farmington actually) in 1999. My roommate at the time (another tech grad) worked on everything from the Dodge Viper to the Abrams tank. He had lots of cool stories on the auto industry back in the day.

 

[billiebob]

That whole bean counter thing has been proven to be able to be convinced latley. Which is a good thing. Just look at the Hellcat and Dodge Demon. Never would I have thought a manufacture would produce somethig like that. We just need those types of engineers for the Wrangler. Hell they got close with the SRT 8 Cherokee, it is a beast.

Wait ten years for the Hellcat, Demon critics to ask "but why didn't they....?"

When the Rubi came out NO ONE asked "But why....?"

The TJR was and still is an exceptional vehicle. I'd compare it to an Acura NSX. The 1956 Corvette. The first generation Ford Taurus.... All ground breaking in their time.

 

[billiebob]

As I recall before the TJR the common upgrade for a Wrangler was full size axles....
At least 44s, often 60s.
And they were all butcher jobs compared to the TJR.

 

[glwood]

To be fair, the Rubicon is way more than a trim package like the Sahara. It is way more function over form. IMO it is way more thought out, it includes a large list of actual functinal upgrades (that are actual upgrades)

Dana 44 Front&Rear
Lockers Front&Rear
Heavy duty NVG 241 OR with 4:1
SYE
Bigger Tire package which are actual Mud Terrains
Larger Flares for said Oversized Tires


Am I missing anything functional?

Not really functional and more for looks include rock sliders.

Shocks were different (not sure about springs, but likely, since the Rubicon has a higher GVWR) and Rubicons have rear disk brakes.

 

[fxrsliberty]

Imho, the 44 was being used in other places, the 35 was not. Simple economics, Dana could economically tube a 44 to fit the TJ and meat or beat all other performance concerns.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[Sancho]

Was the Dana 44 already in production? Tooling up to make something new is expensive... so they probably went with the D44since it met their requirements.

 

[fxrsliberty]

The 44 had been in production since the late 40s I believe.

Was the Dana 44 already in production? Tooling up to make something new is expensive... so they probably went with the D44since it met their requirements.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[Fouledplugs]

The 44 had been in production since the late 40s I believe.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Yes, its been through some changes since then, but yes, you are correct.

 

[Fouledplugs]

Imho, the 44 was being used in other places, the 35 was not. Simple economics, Dana could economically tube a 44 to fit the TJ and meat or beat all other performance concerns.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

But they continued to use Dana 35 tubes and outer parts.

Same for the front Rubicon Dana 44, as it uses 35 tubes and 35 outers.

Doesnt sound so simple. I could agree if it was an outright true Dana 44. But its a fake Dana 44. Its more like a Dana 34.