D36 batwing on iron differential case?

69427

69427

The Artist formerly known as Turbo84
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
3,031
Location
Clinging to my guns and religion in KCMO.
Just curious if anyone has already tried this. IIRC, the D36 batwing is about 10 pounds lighter than the C3 batwing I currently have on the '69 (which was 15 pounds lighter than the original C3 iron/steel mounting setup). I made some measurements for a spacer to allow the batwing to clear the C3 ring gear, and it looks like not only will that place the toe rod assembly in the correct (rearward) position (for the C4 suspension in my car), but adapting the differing bolt patterns shouldn't be that difficult.

Just curious if anyone has any thoughts why this can't/shouldn't be done.

thanks,
Mike
 
I don't have any input on why this can't be done but I am surprised that the C4 batwing is half the weight of a C3 batwing.

What is the advantage of moving the toe control rearward?
 
The diagonal bracing in the batwging is lengthwise in the C3 one, the C5 has it perpendicular. The D44 batwing is said to be stronger than the 36. The 44s bolt holes don't match up w/ the earlier D44 cases. Same goes for the 36.

Toe control was moved to the batwing/case mounting flange for strength. mounting it under the case like on the iron unit most likely induced distortion to the case so it was moved to the 2 flanges meeting each other there.

The C4 batwings also don't have the same mounting bushing to flange face distance (and as such moves the diff case and thus the axle centers) The C3 case is less "deep" than the C4 one. in the C3 the ring gear sticks out more. I think I posted pics once showing the differences.
 
Yeah, I got the 2 mixed up, brain fart!!!! Ignore what I posted LOL

The C3 batwing is easily drilled & tapped for a mount for the toe control
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top