Re: Vibration dampeners for 66-67 cars?

[<mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This things I thought of are Ujoint missalignment and the two piece driveshaft Ford used that had the vibration damper made in it. It sort of looks like a harmonic balancer one tube in another with rubber in between it. A CV/double u-joint configuration may do the trick too.

Mark Price
mpriceAtwestco.net
Morgantown, WV
69 AMC rambler, 4.0L, EFI, 5 speed 
65 Ambassador Conv, 327 AUTO, Basketcase
01 S-10 CREWCRAP 4X4



---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)
Reply-To: mail-From-mprice-westco.net@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date:  Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:23:33 -0400 (EDT)

>" From: farna@xxxxxxx
>" 
>" I won't have my TSMs and other books for quite a while, so maybe
>" someone here can help me out.  At highway speeds I get a "droning"
>" sound in my car.  I've converted from torque tube to an open
>" driveshaft (with a Jag rear axle).  I recall seeing a vibration
>" dampener for either 66 or 67 cars.  I'm thinking 67 since that was
>" the first year of an open driveshaft in the big cars, and I don't
>" recall the problem iwth the torque tube.  I'd like some more info
>" on this.  I don't have a set of tech service bulletins (TSBs), but
>" the problem and soultion could be listed as early as 65.  If
>" someone has any info on this could they send it my way or post
>" here?  I would be interested in a dampener if someone has one.  I
>" seem to recall one mounting under the car alongside the
>" driveshaft tunnel, and maybe one in the trunk?  Of course I have a
>" wagon, so the trunk mounted one might not work -- depends on how
>" it was mounted.
>
>my first thought - driveshaft u-joint misalignment.  didn't the tt
>have 'cv' [double] u-joints?
>________________________________________________________________________
>Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
>internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
>
>adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought
>
>
>
>