That *is* interesting, Crenwelge -- thanks.
Grigg -- No joy yet on the "80" unless it's stylized. There is one casting number or symbol, but it may be the Dana logo down in the lower right of the pumpkin.
I had been to those sites during my search, and I even downloaded the parts manual for the 80. Those sites are pretty good -- IF you're looking for Dana 60 or 44 info (those rock crawler guys are some pretty serious dudes ...). I even checked one site where the guy said, "Wow, Dana makes an 80???" so I moved on as they were obviously not going to be any help.
On the parts manual, it has a pretty good break down of how to read the stamped numbers, etc ... except that my axle does not conform to the format detailed in the manual and does not make any sense if you apply their decoder ring to it. Also, it specified that the serial number stamping was to be on the right axle tube. Mine is on the left axle tube. Yadda yadda yadda.
So I'm hoping that one of the tribal elders (like Crenwlege or somebody) will set my dumbbutt straight on this little mystery. Maybe I could even get to know a little about this axle. I'm guessing it doesn't have a whole lot of wear on the internals as the brake pads hardly seem worn (yeah, they could have been replaced shortly before the vehicle was scrapped...) and the reast of the unit seems relatively unbattered. Someone has been into the differential, though, as the blue RTV job looks about like I did it...
But still ... I rebuilt my SM420, so I'm thinking this can't be as hard as that (and that wasn't all that difficult ... at least it hasn't failed yet -- it has 31 miles on it
).
Should we just assume the calipers need to be rebuilt, or wait and see how they work first? The rotors (Made by Webb) look great (other than the surface rust ...) -- no grooves or ridges that I can tell.
r,
John
