• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

NP 208 transfer case brace

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
They can't be all that they are cracked up to be. See what I did there...
Okay, my Suburban, with a 6.2/400/208, has the rod. The 1008 and 1031 doesn't. The real difference, I think, is that the Suburban doesn't have a skid plate.
So if snagging a rock with the Sub's transfer case, the rod will be under tension (it's only strong direction) and can help keeping the 'case, adapter, or trans from cracking.
With a skid plate, the odds of the 'case getting hung up is much lower, so no need for a rod.
 

Skinny

Well-known member
2,130
488
83
Location
Portsmouth, NH
Might be, both my CUCV's have skids on the crossmember. I do see more of them on civy units, especially the 80's 700r4/208 vintage trucks. I wouldn't necessarily think that there is going to be catastrophic failure under normal use without the rod. Sure if you land the truck on something firm or feed it 500hp its going to break. There are so many other applications that don't have a torque rod I wouldn't sweat it.
 

cucvrus

Well-known member
11,473
10,434
113
Location
Jonestown Pennsylvania
Be that as it may. I dis-assembled/assembled many 73-91 Chevrolet trucks over the years. I agree the CUCV's did not have them. I did see it on a 1985 M1028 and that also had the rear bed fenders braces on it. Something that was not on every CUCV I seen. The torque rod can in no way weaken or effect the design or operation of the vehicle. I do see it as an advantage and a reinforcement to the NP 208/241. All the trucks(K5-K30) I removed them from had skid plates and still had the torque rod. I am not sure what triggered the added parts during assembly.(RPO) I did have a friend that was GM rep that worked at Flint assembly back in the day during the CUCV program. Many of them guys are long gone. But I don't credit or discredit the addition of the torque rod. I am NOT an engineer. But I will be adding it to my off road rig. I will also be checking out the plates that are on the engine. Maybe not next week or next month. But when I get to it. It matters so little to prove or dis prove the effectiveness of the torque rod and the braces. A few members here have shown interest and I obliged them with a bit of my time and insight along with pictures. I also will offer the rods to the interested member once I have completed my fit and finish study. I will use my own Terminus M1009 as the prototype. From what I seen. I need to add a 3/8" bolt that is a 1/2" longer then stock to the right bolt on the bell housing to block. And then tap the transfer case holes just to clean the threads and install the rod. I am 99% sure my Son's M1028A1 has the rod from the bell to the 205. Not 100% but 99%. So to settle this. It is an option that you can do or not do. it is more useful then harming IMHO.
 

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
Sure if you land the truck on something firm or feed it 500hp its going to break.
I don't think that rod can do squat to help in high horsepower applications. But if hitting the 'case on something (going in a forward direction) or if the front drive shaft is too long, then it could be worth its weight in gold. Well, almost.
 

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
Be that as it may. I dis-assembled/assembled many 73-91 Chevrolet trucks over the years. I agree the CUCV's did not have them. I did see it on a 1985 M1028 and that also had the rear bed fenders braces on it. Something that was not on every CUCV I seen. The torque rod can in no way weaken or effect the design or operation of the vehicle. I do see it as an advantage and a reinforcement to the NP 208/241. All the trucks(K5-K30) I removed them from had skid plates and still had the torque rod. I am not sure what triggered the added parts during assembly.(RPO) I did have a friend that was GM rep that worked at Flint assembly back in the day during the CUCV program. Many of them guys are long gone. But I don't credit or discredit the addition of the torque rod. I am NOT an engineer. But I will be adding it to my off road rig. I will also be checking out the plates that are on the engine. Maybe not next week or next month. But when I get to it. It matters so little to prove or dis prove the effectiveness of the torque rod and the braces. A few members here have shown interest and I obliged them with a bit of my time and insight along with pictures. I also will offer the rods to the interested member once I have completed my fit and finish study. I will use my own Terminus M1009 as the prototype. From what I seen. I need to add a 3/8" bolt that is a 1/2" longer then stock to the right bolt on the bell housing to block. And then tap the transfer case holes just to clean the threads and install the rod. I am 99% sure my Son's M1028A1 has the rod from the bell to the 205. Not 100% but 99%. So to settle this. It is an option that you can do or not do. it is more useful then harming IMHO.
I agree. But we probably shouldn't call it a torque rod. It can't help counteract any rotational forces.
 

cucvrus

Well-known member
11,473
10,434
113
Location
Jonestown Pennsylvania
I agree. But we probably shouldn't call it a torque rod. It can't help counteract any rotational forces.

I will not be able to correct the GM manual. The 1984 light truck repair manual calls it a strut rod. The strut rod is shown on the NP 205 and the NP 208 in this edition. I didn't mean for this to become a debate. I was trying to help a member that ask about them. And if it were the only thing that was holding the transfer case in place it would prevent it from turning. unlike if it were not there. I am out of this debate at this point. I want it for rock ability and reinforcement only. And I think that may be what others are thinking also. How did it get this far. Makes me think and question. Why am I even on here in this conversation?
strut
strət/
noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important]


  • 1.
    a rod or bar forming part of a framework and designed to resist compression.




  • 2.
    a stiff, erect, and apparently arrogant or conceited gait.
    [COLOR=#878787 !important]"that old confident strut and swagger has returned"[/COLOR]




verb
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]

  • 1.
    walk with a stiff, erect, and apparently arrogant or conceited gait.
    [COLOR=#878787 !important]"peacocks strut through the grounds"[/COLOR]
    synonyms:swagger, swank, parade, stride, sweep, sashay[COLOR=#878787 !important]"he strutted around his vast office"[/COLOR]







  • 2.
    brace (something) with a strut or struts.
    [COLOR=#878787 !important]"the holes were close-boarded and strutted"[/COLOR]




[/COLOR]​
 

Chaski

Active member
684
56
28
Location
Burney/CA
I run one of these strut rods, along with the lower cover ones, and a skid plate.

I rebuilt my own 700R4 at home. I have to say after handling an empty transmission case and seeing how thin it is in parts I want every bit of added strength possible.

I have personally held a cracked cast iron TH400 to NP208 adapter, seen another one on the forum, along with several destroyed TH400 cases on the forum I figure it is cheap insurance. Especially if I decide to do any "Fall Guy" like jumps, or high center my truck.
 

rustystud

Well-known member
9,280
2,987
113
Location
Woodinville, Washington
Sorry, I didn't invent the laws of physics. But I do live by them.
Well then you would know (living under the laws of physics) that anything added to our trucks to increase it's strength is a "good" thing and not a "bad" thing. So why argue about something "good" ? Unless of course you just like to argue. I will ask you just one question though. Considering how cheap the car manufactures are about every little nut and bolt, why would they even consider let alone add these brace and strut rods to our trucks unless they actually added something to the ability of the truck ? Can you answer me that according to "your" logic ?
 

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
Well then you would know (living under the laws of physics) that anything added to our trucks to increase it's strength is a "good" thing and not a "bad" thing. So why argue about something "good" ? Unless of course you just like to argue. I will ask you just one question though. Considering how cheap the car manufactures are about every little nut and bolt, why would they even consider let alone add these brace and strut rods to our trucks unless they actually added something to the ability of the truck ? Can you answer me that according to "your" logic ?
I have not called either of the rods, side or bell housing, a "bad thing". Especially the lower bell housing rods are a very good thing, I think, as they create a truss that helps take stress out of the system.
And as mentioned earlier, the side rod will most definitely help if the transfer case is hit from the front, or if the drive shaft is too long.

What I have disagreed with is that the side rod can provide any measurable benefit when it comes to torque loads. You may call it "my logic", but I see it as very basic physics.
 

rustystud

Well-known member
9,280
2,987
113
Location
Woodinville, Washington
I have not called either of the rods, side or bell housing, a "bad thing". Especially the lower bell housing rods are a very good thing, I think, as they create a truss that helps take stress out of the system.
And as mentioned earlier, the side rod will most definitely help if the transfer case is hit from the front, or if the drive shaft is too long.

What I have disagreed with is that the side rod can provide any measurable benefit when it comes to torque loads. You may call it "my logic", but I see it as very basic physics.
OK, lets look at an engine under load (or torque) . Which way is the engine turning ? When your looking at the front of an engine the crank is turning clockwise. Or when your sitting in the drivers seat the engine is turning counter-clock-wise. This means when the engine is under heavy load or torque the engine is trying to move to the right side of the vehicle. Can you visualize this ? So when the engine is twisting to the right what is happening to that torque rod ? It is pushing on that transfer-case helping keep it in correct alignment with the transmission under load. Understanding the laws of physics is all fine and good, but your better served here understanding how your truck responds under different conditions.
 
Last edited:

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
OK, lets look at an engine under load (or torque) . Which way is the engine turning ? When your looking at the front of an engine the crank is turning clockwise. Or when your sitting in the drivers seat the engine is turning counter-clock-wise. This means when the engine is under heavy load or torque the engine is trying to move to the right side of the vehicle. Can you visualize this ? So when the engine is twisting to the right what is happening to that torque rod ? It is pushing on that transfer-case helping keep it in correct alignment with the transmission under load. Understanding the laws of physics is all fine and good, but your better served here understanding how your truck responds under different conditions.
I may very well be missing something here, but with that rod being attached to the engine (for all practical purposes) in one end, and to the far right of the transfer case in the other end, it should all move as one unit. And I think it would do so with or without that rod - if all the parts are bolted together correctly.

If looking at the drive train from above, that rod nicely triangulates things in the horizontal plane. But I still fail to understand how that rod can add any meaningful strength in the vertical plane. For that to happen, shouldn't the rod go either up or down from the transfer case, rather the extend horizontally?
 

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
Are you kidding me ?!?!?! StarTrek has been and will always be a tremendous source of inspiration for all mankind !!!!I can tell your NOT a Trekkie.
No, I'm not. Never seen any of it, except for a short part of the video that cucvrus posted. Not only that, I lied. I don't think I've ever watched the Disney Channel, either.
I should've written The Simpsons instead. That show I have seen several episodes of.
 

rustystud

Well-known member
9,280
2,987
113
Location
Woodinville, Washington
I may very well be missing something here, but with that rod being attached to the engine (for all practical purposes) in one end, and to the far right of the transfer case in the other end, it should all move as one unit. And I think it would do so with or without that rod - if all the parts are bolted together correctly.

If looking at the drive train from above, that rod nicely triangulates things in the horizontal plane. But I still fail to understand how that rod can add any meaningful strength in the vertical plane. For that to happen, shouldn't the rod go either up or down from the transfer case, rather the extend horizontally?
Again you fail to look at this as a functioning unit. The "front" of the transfer-case is bolted down to the rear cross-member. Yes there is some give in the rubber mount but not much, so if that whole engine/transmission/transfer-case unit is moving then yes that "rod" adds a tremendous amount of support to that "unsupported weight" of the transfer-case. If you think of the vehicle as a "body" then if your asking why do I need to wear shoes on my feet "how does that effect the rest of my body ? " you will start to see what I'm trying to tell you. Without shoes the body will stumble on rough ground, possibly fall. Now that will cause harm to the rest of the "Body". It's the same with your truck. Without that extra support to the "unsupported" weight of the transfer-case it can and possibly will cause harm to the transmission housing, drivelines, possibly the engine mounts etc. One thing I learned early on is any vehicle should be looked at as whole entity not just individual parts. Everything is "literally" connected !!!!
 

The FLU farm

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,342
1,328
113
Location
The actual midwest, NM.
Again you fail to look at this as a functioning unit. The "front" of the transfer-case is bolted down to the rear cross-member. Yes there is some give in the rubber mount but not much, so if that whole engine/transmission/transfer-case unit is moving then yes that "rod" adds a tremendous amount of support to that "unsupported weight" of the transfer-case. If you think of the vehicle as a "body" then if your asking why do I need to wear shoes on my feet "how does that effect the rest of my body ? " you will start to see what I'm trying to tell you. Without shoes the body will stumble on rough ground, possibly fall. Now that will cause harm to the rest of the "Body". It's the same with your truck. Without that extra support to the "unsupported" weight of the transfer-case it can and possibly will cause harm to the transmission housing, drivelines, possibly the engine mounts etc. One thing I learned early on is any vehicle should be looked at as whole entity not just individual parts. Everything is "literally" connected !!!!
So where we differ is that you say that the rod provides support vertically while I feel that it adds strength in the fore/aft direction. Well, mostly when under tension.
To me, and using your body analogy, that would be like holding a weight with your arm stretched out, versus pulling (or pushing) on that stretched out arm.
Also, the fact that the rod is just that, a rod, used as a strut, makes it strong only under tension. There's obviously some strength in it under compression, but only until it starts bending, which doesn't take much.

It seems to me that it's the wrong material for vertical support, even if the rod would be mounted differently in the engine end. As it is, the single fastener at the engine is basically a hinge. So yes, I am failing to see this the way you do.
Maybe we're just talking past each other somehow, but my take is that the rod prevents the right side of transfer case from moving rearwards, through triangulation.
And if I understand you correctly, you say that the rod supports the transfer case vertically, and helps with rotational forces.
At least it seems like we're talking about the same rod.
 

cucvrus

Well-known member
11,473
10,434
113
Location
Jonestown Pennsylvania
hard stuff.jpgFlex.jpgYou gotta LOVE IT. How my shear mention of adding these torque/strut rods to a CUCV has become an E=mc2 moment.

https://youtu.be/30KfPtHec4s

Anyway I do like the computer animation here.
Thank you Rustystud for understanding fully my end results from this addition of a few steel rods. Now lets just end it and call Myth busters. Or I will test it myself off road and report back. Complete with pictures.
 

Skinny

Well-known member
2,130
488
83
Location
Portsmouth, NH
Just want to point out again that I have yet to see something built in the last 20 years have anything remotely close to a torque rod on the tcase, never seen one on a Japanese import truck, nor anyone adding one aftermarket. I think arguing over the importance of the torque rod is like picking a fight about which tail light bulb works best...
 
Top