bobs1916 Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 My GMC Drive shaft is toast at one end Other end is usable. Can anyone recommend a rebuilder as I want to keep it original. I can get a modern shaft fabricated with new flanges machined but it won't be as it was when new. Prefer Northeast region but will consider east coast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron hausmann Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 Bobs1916, Not familiar with your driveshaft type, but your picture looks identical to my 1916-1924 Kissel driveshafts. See picture. Can you please get us dimensions of the universal end covers and lengths? Maybe they were made by the same sub suppliers. Thank you. Ron Hausmann P.E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edinmass Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 Looks like an early Spicer unit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron hausmann Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 40 minutes ago, edinmass said: Looks like an early Spicer unit. Kissel used Spicer units. Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1912Staver Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 They all seem to be more or less identical in design. But they vary in size to suit the application. My 1918 Packard truck used them as well on the shaft that ran from the trans to the rear end. The shorter shaft from the clutch to the trans used rag joints. I suspect the ones for the GMC are going to be larger than the automotive Kissel ones. I am not sure how many different sizes were made . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edinmass Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 I probably have some 4-5 inch units up north, but they are from 1929-1931. They are off Pierce Arrow cars…….similar to a three ton truck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobs1916 Posted November 5, 2022 Author Share Posted November 5, 2022 2 hours ago, ron hausmann said: Bobs1916, Not familiar with your driveshaft type, but your picture looks identical to my 1916-1924 Kissel driveshafts. See picture. Can you please get us dimensions of the universal end covers and lengths? Maybe they were made by the same sub suppliers. Thank you. Ron Hausmann P.E. Ron Thanks for the reply I have to go pick it up from a shop where I brought it for an evaluation. I will get the dimensions next week The drive shaft is also identical in construction to the one in my 1918 Cadillac bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobs1916 Posted November 5, 2022 Author Share Posted November 5, 2022 (edited) 48 minutes ago, edinmass said: I probably have some 4-5 inch units up north, but they are from 1929-1931. They are off Pierce Arrow cars…….similar to a three ton truck! Thanks for the reply. Do you get back up North or are you situated in Fl permanently? When you say 4-5 in units you are referring to the flange diameter I assume. Is that correct? bob Edited November 5, 2022 by bobs1916 (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne sheldon Posted November 5, 2022 Share Posted November 5, 2022 For whatever it is worth? A mid1920s Studebaker rear end I had years ago had a similar U-joint. Many mid1920s Studebakers did use "rag" joints, so I don't know what model the Spicer one was from. I know several sizes were made, and some trucks did use larger ones. However chain driven trucks sometimes used lighter differentials and therefore maybe U-joints due the chain drive gear reduction gave torque advantage to the mid driveline. That is the primary reason so many really early large automobiles used chain drive. Before materials and production technologies had advanced enough, large heavy automobiles were easier and cheaper to manufacture with solid idler axles and rear wheels driven by chains through gear reduction. Even most high end automobiles used chain drive because not only was it cheaper to manufacture that way? In those days it was much more reliable! And they wanted their cars to be reliable regardless of cost! Give some better photos with a size reference (ruler?) or really good measurements so that we may check any we may have for a proper size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobs1916 Posted November 5, 2022 Author Share Posted November 5, 2022 19 minutes ago, wayne sheldon said: For whatever it is worth? A mid1920s Studebaker rear end I had years ago had a similar U-joint. Many mid1920s Studebakers did use "rag" joints, so I don't know what model the Spicer one was from. I know several sizes were made, and some trucks did use larger ones. However chain driven trucks sometimes used lighter differentials and therefore maybe U-joints due the chain drive gear reduction gave torque advantage to the mid driveline. That is the primary reason so many really early large automobiles used chain drive. Before materials and production technologies had advanced enough, large heavy automobiles were easier and cheaper to manufacture with solid idler axles and rear wheels driven by chains through gear reduction. Even most high end automobiles used chain drive because not only was it cheaper to manufacture that way? In those days it was much more reliable! And they wanted their cars to be reliable regardless of cost! Give some better photos with a size reference (ruler?) or really good measurements so that we may check any we may have for a proper size. Thanks I will do that next week bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobs1916 Posted November 8, 2022 Author Share Posted November 8, 2022 Guys I did measure the flanges They are 5 1/2 inches The length I have to get the shaft back from the shop to measure it Transmission is out so I cannot measure it on the vehicle. Perhaps the U joints are the same on these shafts and If there are any usable U joints out there that would solve my problem thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Schramm Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 Which joint is bad? The one you show, or the other end? I had a place here in the Detroit area completely rebuild the joint/ torque ball for my 1915 Buick truck. They did a nice job. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobs1916 Posted November 9, 2022 Author Share Posted November 9, 2022 the one to the rear end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne sheldon Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 My one from the Studebaker rear end was not as large as 5 1/2 inches. From memory, I would guess about four inches. It is probably still buried in a box in my parts storage (I rarely throw anything away and don't think I ever gave it to anyone?). If I thought it was close, I would try to look for it it after it stops raining (which we very much need!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now