I'm getting closer to installing this unit in my '24 Speedster, and am confused about the front universal joint. Photo below is what I have, left to right...

A spare '26 driveshaft measures nominal 0.880 across the flats; Warford output, female (not shown) nominal 0.880 inside; Warford input shaft nominal 0.810 across flats; T46 U-Joint female nominal 8.20 inside, U-Joint input nominal 0.880.



So my U-joint, which appears to be original Ford although I have no other around to compare, has un-equal input and output sizes. This is contrary to what one would expect given the Ford driveshaft is 0.880 across the flats, too big for the hole on this T46.

But if there is a special U-joint for the C.I. Warford, that runs contrary to what Keith Barrier and Richard Eagle claim, and they've had a lot more experience than me...



Close up of the U-joint part # (the lines of white paint along the U-joint faces indicate where we plan to build up with weld (4140 rod or similar) and machine back to a decent fit into the universal...



Question #1: What is with this input shaft and universal joint, and why aren't they the same on each end?

Question #2: as long as we're building up the male to be a good fit into the 0.830-0. U-Joint, what about the ditching the U-Joint and extension housing entirely and building the flats up to 0.880 and bolting the trans directly onto the 4th main?

I'm aware of the concerns over stressing the 4th main with the big lump bolted directly, but plan a sturdy bracket to the rear of the Warford and am also running one of Les Schubert's Fexi-Shafts through the Ford transmission.

Warfords are like Model T Fords, contrary to popular opinion they are not all the same.
An aluminum case Warford was meant to bolt directly up to the Model T engine, thus the input shaft fits the T planitary output shaft.
An iron case used a stock T U-joint between the T engine and the Warford input shaft. Since a stock T u-joint is different sizes on each end ( in addition to being male/female), the input shafts on the 2 Warfords are different sizes.
Just one of several differences in Warford transmissions.

My NOS driveshaft measures .810 on the squared end.
The different sizes end to end on a stock Model T U-joint is a quirk that you will have to take up with the designer Henry Ford.
Not that it makes any difference, 15 million cars went together and ran a loooong way just fine.

Layden, now I'm even more confused upon hearing your NOS driveshaft measures 0.810...

• The spare '26 T rear end I have here measures nominal 0.880 across the flats;

• Lang's catalog lists one U-joint for '09-'27, so the dimensions didn't change over the entire production run;

How can your NOS shaft be 0.070 smaller than my used one??

All model T U joints have different sizes front and rear. The cast iron Warford uses a stock T joint at both ends.

Chris,
Your picture shows measuring the big forward end of a U-joint.
How about a picture of the square of the drive shaft (fits female of the U-joint).

Layden -- well, duh. Right you are. Of course. Jeez.

Sometimes I am so dumb it's a wonder I can find my way the bathroom when I get up in the morning.

Leaving aside the question about whether a guy who can't tell the difference between a u-joint and a driveshaft has any business installing a Warford, I would still like feedback on my Question #2 above about ditching the adaptor. Eric B if you're still reading this I believe you might have a comment or two...

Chris,
Now you know why there are so many of these around. In the old days someone using a Model T engine for a power plant could not just stick a T driveshaft in the back of a T engine. They cut off the torque tube at the end of the front casting so the bearing and U-joint were intact.



Question #2 The shifter unit on an iron case Warford sticks forward of the center of the case (aluminum case Warford has the shifter centered). You will have to decide whether that will work for you or to use an aluminum one instead. Also the support at the rear of the iron case becomes much more problematic as effectively the rigid engine/Warford now has a 4 or 5 point mounting system. An aluminum Warford can get by without that rear support but the iron case, I don't think so.

RE; Question #2: as long as we're building up the male to be a good fit into the 0.830-0. U-Joint, what about the ditching the U-Joint and extension housing entirely and building the flats up to 0.880 and bolting the trans directly onto the 4th main?
I know someone that builds up the input shaft on the cast iron Warford, mills it to size, then it can be bolted to the rear without the intermediate housing and U-joint. You will still want the rear support.

Thank you Mark and Layden. Yes a support bracket will definitely be incorporated, plus there is the Flexi-Shaft for added insurance.

"plus there is the Flexi-Shaft for added insurance" Not sure what you are meaning by flexi-shaft?

Mark, here's a thread that explains Les Schubert's invention, a flexible transmission shaft that reduces bending strain on the crank- and the transmission shafts:
http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/118802/125070.html?1266623997

Ah! Got it. I saw that when Les posted about it. Just did not click when Chris was talking about the Warford.