Game changer propshaft

[ECrider]

Wouldn't know how to check my caster, or exactly what it is

do you not put it on your Victoria sponges?

 

[Roving.Grenadier]

Wouldn't know how to check my caster, or exactly what it is

Haha, well it's normally measured when you go in for an alignment, and it's on the paper they give you at the end. But the castor angle is best described by just looking at the image below haha.

 

[Tazzieman]

do you not put it on your Victoria sponges?

As long as he spells it correctly, with an 'e', it's all good
As he should also do with the angle.

 

[CRH]

As long as he spells it correctly, with an 'e', it's all good
As he should also do with the angle.

I think it's around 45⁰

 

[Dokatd]

I've had my caster at .7 degrees, so not sure if that help or not. or maybe its -.7, can't remember haha

This almost certainly has had a huge effect on your joints life span. This is not a trivial number at all, many trucks are sitting at 2-3° and Ineos was super inconsistent with this setting as they were not actually aligning many of the trucks if not all trucks that went over seas. That left dealers to do the alignments and they would have targeted higher caster numbers as .7° would be considered out of spec. And with all that the reality is the caster should have been set closer to a full 5° to provide more consistent handling.

So yes, your .7° caster is most certainly your secret sauce so to speak. I would also assume your toe is a bit high to account for the low caster.

 

[ADVAW8S]

This almost certainly has had a huge effect on your joints life span. This is not a trivial number at all, many trucks are sitting at 2-3° and Ineos was super inconsistent with this setting as they were not actually aligning many of the trucks if not all trucks that went over seas. That left dealers to do the alignments and they would have targeted higher caster numbers as .7° would be considered out of spec. And with all that the reality is the caster should have been set closer to a full 5° to provide more consistent handling.

So yes, your .7° caster is most certainly your secret sauce so to speak. I would also assume your toe is a bit high to account for the low caster.

So with a low castor number, his pinion turned up making a straighter drive line.

 

[Dokatd]

So with a low castor number, his pinion turned up making a straighter drive line.

100%. It's just that little edge the T-case side joint needs to keep from pinching constantly. The pinch is super light to begin with. Ineos was just so damn close.

 

[rayanbm]

Hi All, i am late to this thread and not sure if it was mentioned earlier, other than replacing the dshaft and solving those joint issues! I am sure that with the horrible geometry done on the front axle, aftermarket providers will soon come out with front axles if they sense a demand.

Since the axle itself is a heavy duty unit, has anyone ever attempted to cut and turn the C's? This will do 2 things at once, fix the pinion angle and caster.

 

[Roving.Grenadier]

This almost certainly has had a huge effect on your joints life span. This is not a trivial number at all, many trucks are sitting at 2-3° and Ineos was super inconsistent with this setting as they were not actually aligning many of the trucks if not all trucks that went over seas. That left dealers to do the alignments and they would have targeted higher caster numbers as .7° would be considered out of spec. And with all that the reality is the caster should have been set closer to a full 5° to provide more consistent handling.

So yes, your .7° caster is most certainly your secret sauce so to speak. I would also assume your toe is a bit high to account for the low caster.

I am pretty sure I saw the Ineos spec to be 0-2 degrees. I'd need to look it up to confirm.

It's crazy how tenths of a degree affect the CV boots. The boots themselves are truly the weak point, and Ineos changes the boot material later in production to a sturdier material. I wish I knew where it was cut into production.

 

[HeavyFoot]

I am pretty sure I saw the Ineos spec to be 0-2 degrees. I'd need to look it up to confirm.

It's crazy how tenths of a degree affect the CV boots. The boots themselves are truly the weak point, and Ineos changes the boot material later in production to a sturdier material. I wish I knew where it was cut into production.

Where have you seen that the boot material was ever changed? I don’t believe that’s been confirmed by anyone.

 

[Dokatd]

I am pretty sure I saw the Ineos spec to be 0-2 degrees. I'd need to look it up to confirm.

It's crazy how tenths of a degree affect the CV boots. The boots themselves are truly the weak point, and Ineos changes the boot material later in production to a sturdier material. I wish I knew where it was cut into production.

Caster per the book is 1.4°-2.6° with 2° being the ideal setting. 0° is, both per Ineos and axle geometry theory, just wrong.

And they never upgraded the boot material from what we have seen to date. Maybe you have some inside info? Regardless, it wouldn't help the problem as it's not strictly a material problem.

 

[Roving.Grenadier]

Caster per the book is 1.4°-2.6° with 2° being the ideal setting. 0° is, both per Ineos and axle geometry theory, just wrong.

And they never upgraded the boot material from what we have seen to date. Maybe you have some inside info? Regardless, it wouldn't help the problem as it's not strictly a material problem.

Yea, inside info, during early 2025. 100% source accuracy.

 

[Roving.Grenadier]

Where have you seen that the boot material was ever changed? I don’t believe that’s been confirmed by anyone.

A friend of mine at Ineos, and I doubt we’ll ever hear that publicly, because it’s a de facto admission of an issue.

 

[ECrider]

plaster and bullet wound spring to mind

 

[ryanjl]

A friend of mine at Ineos, and I doubt we’ll ever hear that publicly, because it’s a de facto admission of an issue.

In the legal world, those are called "subsequent remedial measures," and they can be used in court to show that a fix was possible, but can't be used to show a fix was necessary.

 

[Krabby]

Have we seen failures of joints with “new” material - parts from the last few months?

 

[Commodore]

It’s not just a material problem. It is a mechanical issue. At full articulation the boot gets squeezed between the driveshaft and the metal collar of the CV. Changing the boot material isn’t going to fix this on a truck that actually gets used off road. It might help on pavement princess.

 

[Dokatd]

It’s not just a material problem. It is a mechanical issue. At full articulation the boot gets squeezed between the driveshaft and the metal collar of the CV. Changing the boot material isn’t going to fix this on a truck that actually gets used off road. It might help on pavement princess.

And Ineos knows that. And because of that I am not buying the material change story. I believe it was a rumor that spread heavily when the DS part number changed. As well, any info that comes straight from a dealer is suspect at best, so if this inside source works at a dealership then it's rumor.

We all heard the same story many months ago and everyone wanted to see under the skirt of a 2026 because it had a new boot. Nobody has found evidence of a new boot including me. I have poked and prodded the DS of a couple 2026 trucks and find there to be no change.

I'm willing to be wrong, but someone is going to have to provide proof similar to what I have brought to the table multiple times regarding the boot issue.