Jk v JL

[Allen0jason]

183/200 compared to old JK d30/35.

Sponsored

 

[aldo98229]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

 

[wv18jl]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

Nailed it

 

[Maverick909]

newer JL axles are thicker than the JK's should hold up a bit better

 

[AlgUSF]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

Can't dispute science.

 

[RockyMtnHigh]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

Solved it:
J=0
L=128
T=0
K=0
C=15
Y=3698

 

[John VonJeep]

183/200 compared to old JK d30/35.

Yes.

 

[Jamrock]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

Too much free time dude. Too much free time.

 

[Allen0jason]

f(JL + JT - JK)^123/456 = TJ x (CJ + YJ)

Your math is faulty because you forgot to account for the Unlimited(U) variable

 

[GrayHawk20]

I keep getting 392 for some reason

 

[Deleted member 59498]

The answer is 42

 

[west tex]

Your math is faulty because you forgot to account for the Unlimited(U) variable

Since unlimited appears on both sides of the JK/JL equation that term cancels out.

 

[J0E]

newer JL axles are thicker than the JK's should hold up a bit better

EDIT: The following is for the Rubicon
Same thickness, larger radius. Thickness increases almost linearly.
Tube strength goes up as the fourth power with diameter , and it is called Moment of Inertia, or Inertial Stiffness. JL vs JK:

3.14159265 × (D4 - d4) ÷ 64
(70^4 - 63.65^4) ÷ (62.5^4 - 56.15^4) × 100% = +43% stiffer (JL axle)

 

[aldo98229]

Same thickness, larger radius. Thickness increases almost linearly.
Tube strength goes up as the fourth power with radius, and it is called Moment of Inertia, or Inertial Stiffness. JL vs JK:

3.14159265 × (D4 - d4) ÷ 64
(70^4 - 63.65^4) ÷ (62.5^4 - 56.15^4) × 100% = +43% stiffer (JL axle)

See? I was close...!

 

[Pig-Pen]

The answer is always miata

Sponsored