Jump to content

"Mystery" US dually rear axle in some Toyota RVs


Recommended Posts

Years back I was working on a Dophin-Toyota RV for a customer that seemed to have had a USA made Dana dually rear-axle. He told me it was dealer-installed on a recall. I didn't pay much attention at the time since I had no interest in Toyota RVs then. I also saw two new Dana 70 dualliesj (I think) in a wooden crates also set-up for a Toyota RVs. The recall info mentions "custom" axles and also Ford Ranger dual wheels on Toyota brake drums - so I'm wondering if there were hybrid axles custom assembled before the Toyota FF axles became available.

Note that when Ford introduced their first dually pickup in 1981 it was on a full-size 1 ton Ranger. Not the little "Mazda" Rangers that came out later. Any Dana 70 I've seen had 8 lug wheels but I'm now wondering if the first-year duallies on Fords were not 8 lug? I cannot remember. Also, maybe it was assumed these rears were Danas because they had Dana-Ford wheels on them. Like I said, I was not paying close attention at the time. A friend of mine owned a Dolphin. He had heard of a rear axle recall and he contacted Toyota and Dolphin. He got two brand new dually axles in crates given to him. I installed one into the RV and had assumed it was a Dana 70 at the time.

Now I just came across a recall notice for Dolphin motorhomes on Toyota trucks that used what sounds like Ford Ranger Dana 70 dually wheels. Ford only had duallies on full-size 1 ton Rangers.

DOLPHIN RV PRODUCTS INC. Date of recall notification -

November 14th, 1984

Defect Summary:

SOME OF THE DUAL WHEEL ASSEMBLIES WERE PROVIDED WITH FORD WHEEL CENTERS WHICH DO NOT SEAT PROPERLY ON TOYOTA BRAKE DRUMS. THIS IS DUE TO A MACHINE SCREW WHICH PROTRUDES FROM THE DRUM. THE MISMATING OF WHEELS WITH BRAKE DRUMS CAN CAUSE STRESS CRACKING AROUND THE MOUNTING LUGS.

Corrective Summary:

VEHICLES WILL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO OWNER.

Recall Notes:

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MULTIPURPOSE PASSENGER VEHICLES; MOTOR HOMES EQUIPPED WITH CUSTOM AND COMMERICIAL DUAL REAR WHEELS AND BUILT ON TOYOTA CHASSIS.SYSTEM: SUSPENSION; REAR WHEELS.CONSEQUENCES OF DEFECT: IF LEFT UNCORRECTED THIS CONDITION COULD RESULT INWHEEL FAILURE, A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, AND AN ACCIDENT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This recall predates any full floaters on any Toyota motorhomes so I don't think it has anything to do with Dana's. More likely a problem with the wheels they made the fake duallies out of. No full floaters until 1986 and no recall on the bad ones until 1992

Linda S

Oh and all the axles shipped out by National Rv, Dolphin came straight from Toyota. That's why they closed out their 1 ton cab and chassis line. Cost them too much to deal with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen Dana FF rears in Toyota RVs. Where they came from, I have no idea. I always assumed they were custom fabricated. Dolphin also had a rear-axle recall on RVs they put on Chevy S10 trucks. They had axles breaking off just like in the Toyotas in the early 80s. Dophin provided new complete heavier rear axles for the S10 RVs and I have no idea what they were. They would of been the correct size for a Toyota though and they were offered before 1986. Chevy (GM, Dana, Spicer,etc. ) have no narrow FF rear axles that I'm aware of. So it seems they must of had some custom built? That or used some rear I'm not privy too. The S10 came with a 10 bolt GM rear and the only GM slight upgrade for more weight would be a 14 bolt semi-floater. I've never seen any Dolphin RV on an S10, upgraded or not and only read the recall. I'm also wondering now if the Dolphin RVs on S10s broke axles - what about the RVs on Astrovans? They have the same rear axles as S10s.

As to the Ford wheel thing? Dolphin mentions "Ford Ranger dual wheels." This no such thing from Ford except on the 1981 full-size Ford Ranger 1 ton trucks. Mabye they did not mean it as stated. Mabye it's more inline with what you alluded to . . i.e. two 14" Ford "mini" Ranger wheels to make duals for a Toyota. Ford "mini" Rangers and 1/2 ton Toyotas use the same wheel bolt patterns and 14" wheels.

As to my old dead-friend Charlie and his Dolphin RV . . . he absolutely got two brand new rear axle assemblies shipped to his house for the same one RV. One he got by constantly calling and badgering Dolphin and the other by hounding Toyota. I installed one for him and the other sat in his barn for years in the unopened wooden crate. Now - I can't say where Dolphin got the axle or if they just arranged shipment from another supplier. I DO know that records were not being "cross-checked" very well. Old Charlie was quite proud of getting those two axles for free. He had offered me the Dolphin RV (with the new axle in it) and the extra new axle - as an equal trade for my 1966 Chevy Bel Air. I did not take him up on it. At that time I had zero interest in Toyota RVs. What few there were around here had rotten reputations. I did finally trade him the Bel Air for a basket-case 1918 Ford Model T. When he died his estranged family auctioned off his three barns full of stuff. That new Toyota FF rear in the crate sold for $25. Even worse there was a Smith MotorWheel next to the rear that sold for $75 (very rare item). Also a 1902 Oldsmobile. That Olds went for a couple of thousand and is pretty rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

National Rv was the only rv manufacturer that made a serious effort to replace the rear axles. I can imagine it must have been a nightmare for them because they also sold the most toyota rv's. I have seen some 4x4 sunraders upgraded to danas because toyota never made a fix for the 4x4's but never a regular motorhome. Pretty sure it was dana 60's they used

Linda S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

National Rv was the only rv manufacturer that made a serious effort to replace the rear axles. I can imagine it must have been a nightmare for them because they also sold the most toyota rv's. I have seen some 4x4 sunraders upgraded to danas because toyota never made a fix for the 4x4's but never a regular motorhome. Pretty sure it was dana 60's they used

Linda S

Dana 60 is plenty rugged enough if in the FF version. It's almost hard to believe now that many cars came with Dana 60s back in the 1960s. I just junked a 1963 Buick Rivera that had one in the rear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

sorry this topic of toyota duellies is new to me

many of our campers are built on the toyota hilux or it's cab over brother dyna/toyoace platform and the concept i am struggling to understand why the need of duel wheels to carry a ton, as the 2wd "hilux" were and always have been sold as one tonne or 1,000kg metric here and it was a major sales point back in the day of the stout as even on the little 6.50 13" tired version had a metric tonne payload, i realize the US version was only 450kg or half ton.6993jkk_20_zps814cdf1c.jpeg

so looking at some of the ways that how the duel wheels were fitted on some toyota "duelly" in the US scares me and then reading bits on here, i am glad for the strict australian safty standards and such as the early versions in no way would they ever been legal here (gee no spell correcting, just as good i do not know sentance structure or punctuation either).

yes i am a toyota fan and have owned many over the years and i am no fan of duel wheels, i have stout

7788c5d_20_zps238eafe3.jpeg

this is not mine but it is a good image that is part of my collection 1967-78 101 lwb

outside the US these stout were sold with 1, 1.5, 1.75 and 2t metric payloads some up until the 2nd month 2000 in south america https://www.google.com.au/search?q=toyota+stout+2200&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=kTYzUZrZMsn4mAXPkoGQBA&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QsAQ&biw=1024&bih=665, the 2,000kg version had full floating axles and when sales of the stout ended here the dyna/toyoace which were very simular just cab over had 2.5t metric payloads on toyota K series rear axles FF on single 15" tires.

1963 2,000kg payload rk100

p2_zps214f87ec.jpg

but the US did not want these, they wanted lighter suspension "lite stout" and hilux, i have many more photos and i just do not understand why such a dodgy way to go about things such as the early duel wheel set ups were just to carry one ton imperial

T2eC16FHJF0E9nmFQUsDBQ0tzqRL48_20_zps420

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the early duallies were a mess and that's why they were recalled. As far as a payload of a ton these campers including the first one you posted a picture of, weigh so much more than that. I would love to know the gross vehicle weight rating of that truck and how much it actually weighs with the camper section on it. Not just the chassis that had to carry the weight but the tires needed to be able to support the weight of a house on the back of a Toyota truck. It's not uncommon for some of these rigs to weight 7000lbs. I'm sure Americans didn't request lightweight little trucks. We were just looking for better mileage the same as yours get. Measely little trucks is just all Toyota gave us. We would also love to get some of your diesel trucks and many have been asking Toyota for years but still we get nothing. Basically we are stuck with what they are willing to ship or produce here as many Toyota's are made in America now.

Linda S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I guess the problem lies with the coach makers. They bought 1/2 ton pickup rolling chaises from Toyota added frame extensions and then over loaded them with the coach. The only way out for every one involved was to put a full floating rear under the 1/2 ton with duel wheels. To my line of thinking this was only a "half" fix they still did not have the 1 ton spring rate but they did not snap off axles any more. Toyota really was not at fault they sold a 1/2 ton truck, the coach makers overloaded it. I'm not sure whose bright ideal it was to weld two wheels together and call it fixed basically all that did was make it worse. We did get a "stout" for a couple of years but they were few and far between. The Americans like a cushy ride I have a new Tacoma it came with 3 leaf springs, the same truck in Canada has 4 leafs I guess the Canadians actually carry things in their pickup Toyota was good enough to put 4 leaf springs under the trucks of those that used them as trucks (mine included) but I would bet 80% still have 3 leaf springs for the softer ride. The love affaire with trucks in America seems to be with huge trucks that weight 6,000 pounds and go to the garden center for a 75# bag of mulch twice a year go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The context of the term "dully" also include a full floating rear axle.

The Dully solves two issues.

1) The tire - can it support 2,000 plus pounds, most 14 inch passenger tires cannot. A light truck tire, maybe, my MH weights in at 7,000, with about 5000 of that on the rear wheels. Light truck tires were rare to non-existent in the 80's (Light truck tires also have stiffer sidewalls than do car tires) I like to recommend running the vehicle across the scale and getting separate front and rear weights.

2) Floating rear axle - I notice in your images that several of the "heavy vehicles" had floating axles, I could not tell if the Motorhome in the first photo had one or not, but it obviously had a single tire.. The full floater distributes the weight across two sets of bearings.

Several manufactures tried to use a "fake Dully" to solve the tire capacity problem, i.e. two tires and wheels on a 1/2 ton axle shaft. This solved the tire weight but aggravated the problem of using the original 1/2 ton axle shaft. In these cases, there was a risk of the shaft breaking and then the wheels, hub, etc separate from the vehicle. The "Fake Dully were specifically called out in the re-calls as being a contributor to the problem.

Could you get by with running single tires on a 1/2 ton axle? My MH weighs in at 7,000 lbs when fully loaded. About 4800 of this is on the back axle. The Axle is beyond manufactures limits, but I would venture to guess its well into the built in design "Safety Factor".

Summary, If your tires are capable of handling the weight, and you have a full floating rear axle, looks like your OK with single tires on the rear.

JOhn Mc

88 Dolphin 4 Auto


post-4544-0-69943200-1362316552_thumb.jp

post-4544-0-36350800-1362316566_thumb.jp

post-4544-0-21390200-1362316577_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

many of our campers are built on the toyota hilux or it's cab over brother dyna/toyoace platform and the concept i am struggling to understand why the need of duel wheels to carry a ton, as the 2wd "hilux" were and always have been sold as one tonne or 1,000kg metric here and it was a major sales point back in the day of the stout as even on the little 6.50 13" tired version had a metric tonne payload, i realize the US version was only 450kg or half ton.

Dual wheels aren't "needed." But the heavier rear axles are. Since the Toyota RVs are RVs and not open-back trucks for hauling cargo - vehicle height is an issue. Since Toyota trucks were not designed specifically for RV use and it was a sort of after-thought by RV makers - seems the dually with small tires was a good way to get extra load capacity and low vehicle height. As I recall, many Stout trucks had heavier rear axles with a pair of adjustable Timken-style cone-and-cup bearings and bigger OD axles.

It pretty easy to get a 21 foot Toyota RV to weigh 5500-6000 lbs. Climb a steep hill and much of the weight transfer is to the rear and off the front. Pretty easy to see why the original light axles rated at 3300-3600 lbs. were not up to the job.

I can't speak for Australia, but in the USA - the connotation of a "1/2 ton" truck is a reference to many things and not just the rear wheels. Frame thickness, tire capacity, spring package, GVW max rating of the transmission, brake package, engine duty rating, etc. The small Toyota trucks fail on many scores as used with 5000-6000 lbs. RVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi and welcome on here liked your picts the photo here is my 1987 21 foot dolphon full one ton 6 lug front and rear 86 chassis i also owen a 88 4 W D xtra cab the four wheel drive is much heaver built then the standred 2 whell drive 88 year i have 235 15 inch tireson 15 inch rim six lug stock size i have owened 7 toyotas since 1983 three trucks two cars two moterhomes. dont worrey i cant spell ether. the six lug set up is totaly diff erent between the moterhome and the 4wd truck the truck does not have a full floating rear axle but is much heaver built then the 14 inch two whell drive trucks where. my 21 dolphon can easy go 6000 pounds three american tons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no the stout were never four wheel drives, the four wheel drive version of them was the toyota hilux pickup and not actually a four wheel drive version of the hilux pickup.

484949_607444479269790_1547583942_n_zps8

the stout shared much with the 40 series land cruiser, later versions after 1986 shared more with the toyoace/dyna, the end of the stout in australia was the annual on road cost of registration and insurance and the exceeding 1,000kg payload. the hilux in australia had smaller engines 12R 1.6L and the 18R 2.0L and the next generations had Y engines as fuel economy is important when one litre of fuel costs around the same as a gallon in the US. prior to metric conversion mid 70's the stout had a GVW of 6900lb that was changed to 2,970kg as also came in was a 2 ton limit 1,800kg cab chassis classification and hence down rating from 1.75 to 1.5t metric, which late 70's which was changed to one tonne 1,000kg. the one tonne classification that still exists today is about tax and with a GVW and curb weight allow a payload greater than one tonne metric is a commecial vehicle and is not intended for private use and costs twice the price annually in on road and insurance "the death of the stout". so the cab over if not exceeding the 4.5t metric GVW can still be driven on a standard car licence, the cab over also allows a much larger camper/load deck "we have strict modification rules and many things done in the states are not legal here" and if the curb weight is increased to the point that a payload is less than one tonne metric it falls back in the cheap private car class and also avoiding an anual safty check.

thank you for the info, this all started for me as i read a comment that had "dolphin" and when i figured out after a year i saw dolphin and toyota together and thought WTF and then U haul toyota duelly wtf again, any way i will part with this as my cousin is the main man that pulls the trigger and builds the chassis/frame of these https://www.google.com.au/search?q=bush+tracker+caravan&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=bQQ0UafSEcSViQfB-YCYCw&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1024&bih=665

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and

http://www.toyota.com.au/hilux/features/car-performance/payloads

Load capacity is under PU/CC pick up cab chassis classification (ute utility and car class not trucks), so they do not come with a rear load deck factory and so not included in curb weights and need to be subtracted from payload.

In Australia a ute is a car based pickup with car based mechanicals, a truck has has a payload greater than one metric tonne and generally have I beam front axle with leaf springs and full floating rear axles

Edited by unknowing aussie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

very nice what we call tow behinds my son has a small 15 foot jayco swift tows with a 1994 toyota four runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so i naturally always think of the 1969 RU12 toyota dyna i once had the engine is the R the frame were U and had a factory 12 foot bed, or 10, 14, 20 and so on

s2_zps7022398b.png

mine had a 14 foot pantec that also went over the cab "lutton peak"

so some of the lighter versions were called toyoace that were in many styles

here is a version of a toyota dyna 150/toyoace G15

toyota-toyoace-g15-01_zpscd34e7f6.jpeg

these are on 14" tires and have a toyota G series "diff centre" i think you call them 3rd members which are the same as the hilux/pickup have and are rated at 1.25t and 1.5t ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup looks to have the same wheels, axle and rear duallies as our motorhomes do here in the US. Meant to carry more weight and now you know thats why ours are set up that way. Looking at the chart of GVWR for your regular trucks looks like the best load capacity is around 2500lbs. Cutting it pretty darn close if your adding a motorhome to it.

Linda s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so i naturally always think of the 1969 RU12 toyota dyna i once had the engine is the R the frame were U and had a factory 12 foot bed, or 10, 14, 20 and so on

s2_zps7022398b.png

mine had a 14 foot pantec that also went over the cab "lutton peak"

so some of the lighter versions were called toyoace that were in many styles

here is a version of a toyota dyna 150/toyoace G15

toyota-toyoace-g15-01_zpscd34e7f6.jpeg

these are on 14" tires and have a toyota G series "diff centre" i think you call them 3rd members which are the same as the hilux/pickup have and are rated at 1.25t and 1.5t ???

Hey your steering wheel is on the wrong side! I all ways thought the cab over rigs like that would make outstanding MH's nice diesel engine plenty strong now how do we make a coach that would allow you to open the cab over? We have any number of small cab overs in the states but I never have seen one as a camper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toyota have always been amazing engineers and not just do the cab tilt but you also get full acess via the seats, lift them up slip them out and it is all just there, on my 1969 there was even a notch out to slip the rear pushrod out (it is hard to explain) but to be able to remove the head and the rear pushrod without this hole would not come out and toyota had thought about that. Seriously I wish I had a photo, but after doing a piston to be able to put "another" one back in with ease and without frustration in the middle of nowhere, thats when I fell in love with my old toyota

Edited by unknowing aussie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The context of the term "dully" also include a full floating rear axle.

The Dully solves two issues.

1) The tire - can it support 2,000 plus pounds, most 14 inch passenger tires cannot. A light truck tire, maybe, my MH weights in at 7,000, with about 5000 of that on the rear wheels. Light truck tires were rare to non-existent in the 80's (Light truck tires also have stiffer sidewalls than do car tires) I like to recommend running the vehicle across the scale and getting separate front and rear weights.

2) Floating rear axle - I notice in your images that several of the "heavy vehicles" had floating axles, I could not tell if the Motorhome in the first photo had one or not, but it obviously had a single tire.. The full floater distributes the weight across two sets of bearings.

Several manufactures tried to use a "fake Dully" to solve the tire capacity problem, i.e. two tires and wheels on a 1/2 ton axle shaft. This solved the tire weight but aggravated the problem of using the original 1/2 ton axle shaft. In these cases, there was a risk of the shaft breaking and then the wheels, hub, etc separate from the vehicle. The "Fake Dully were specifically called out in the re-calls as being a contributor to the problem.

Could you get by with running single tires on a 1/2 ton axle? My MH weighs in at 7,000 lbs when fully loaded. About 4800 of this is on the back axle. The Axle is beyond manufactures limits, but I would venture to guess its well into the built in design "Safety Factor".

Summary, If your tires are capable of handling the weight, and you have a full floating rear axle, looks like your OK with single tires on the rear.

JOhn Mc

88 Dolphin 4 Auto

in australia we were never allowed to go more than 30% wider than the original rims so 8" wide rims or wider are not legal if the factory rim were only 5.5", to get around such we had the lazy axle and the first image i found was this

imagejpgphp_zpse4882d8d.jpg

the bel air was a rare item here and i had never seen one like this that is currently for sale, it was done mainly on the locally made holden tonner platform and this is just copied and pasted

CHEVROLET BELAIR 1965 MOTORHOME – MT EVELYN, VIC

Australian made, 350 V8 Turbo 350 auto motor home, gas/petrol, front discs, rear drum, electric brakes on lazy axle, air bag suspension, Fiamma 45 awning, double bed and single or bunks, 2 way fridge, registered as camper with 4 seats, no Roadworthy, Registered in Victoria to January 2012. Must sell, prepared to negotiate.

$13,999 ono

and a neat link

http://www.creativeconversions.com.au/photos?page=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in australia we were never allowed to go more than 30% wider than the original rims so 8" wide rims or wider are not legal if the factory rim were only 5.5", to get around such we had the lazy axle and the first image i found was this

imagejpgphp_zpse4882d8d.jpg

the bel air was a rare item here and i had never seen one like this that is currently for sale, it was done mainly on the locally made holden tonner platform and this is just copied and pasted

CHEVROLET BELAIR 1965 MOTORHOME – MT EVELYN, VIC

Australian made, 350 V8 Turbo 350 auto motor home, gas/petrol, front discs, rear drum, electric brakes on lazy axle, air bag suspension, Fiamma 45 awning, double bed and single or bunks, 2 way fridge, registered as camper with 4 seats, no Roadworthy, Registered in Victoria to January 2012. Must sell, prepared to negotiate.

$13,999 ono

and a neat link

http://www.creativeconversions.com.au/photos?page=1

I bet that thing eats some fuel, i.e. "petrol." I've got a 1966 Bel Air with a 283 V8 and a two-speed Powerglide trans. Gets a best of around 13 MPG with no motorhome on the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how I understand is that the US only had the SR suspension "soft ride" in Australia the SR5 18R was classed a luxury version and was subject to higher import tax and so did not sell so well and many SR5 ended up with the heavier standard 12R 18R (4speed column shift ) 1, 000kg hilux rear springs and a flat steel load deck "tray" as a backyard upgrade, been there rolled that... not so good as a rally car!

Edited by unknowing aussie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...