Military Vehicles, August 1996,: Re: full vs semi floating axles

Re: full vs semi floating axles

Granville Pool (gpool@pacific.net)
Tue, 20 Aug 1996 09:58:54 -0700

Sean MacLennan said:

>I understand that full floating axles have no load on the axle itself
>and semi floating does. It seems there would be no advantage to a semi
>floating axle. So why have semi floating axles become standard?

Full-floating axles are still standard in all Land-Rovers except (to my
disgust) in the new Range Rovers <ptui!>

The advantages or semi-floating are that they're cheaper (obviously not a
consideration on the Range Rover) and that they give lower unsprung weight.
Presumably for that reason as well, the new RR went to open-knuckle swivels
in the front as well <bleah!>. The rationale here has to be that these
measures allow the unsprung weight to be kept to a minimum while still
retaining the wheel-travel and axle-articulation advantages of rigid axles.
Next step, I expect, will be axle cases of titanium or some other unobtainium.

To me, in my off-roading in the back of beyond, a more compelling advantage
of full-floaters is that if (or, in my case, with a 10-spline-axled
Land-Rover, *when*) I break an axle, my wheel won't fall off and I can still
drive home on front-wheel drive.

Cheers,

Granville Pool
Redwood Valley, CA USA