271 t case.

liv2mx · May 10, 2012

so after a bunch of research and calls sounds like this is a badass case. anybody running them in a buggy? the 2000 and newer ford 271 comes with fixed yokes, you can get 24, 29 or 32 inputs,dodge started putting a 271 in there big trucks in 03 but they dont have a fixed yoke on the rear.(the ford will swap in) the dodge inputs will also swap into the ford case. you can also run up to a 1480 joint on the case. 33 or 34 spline outputs are also stock on these. i called advanced adapters yesterday and they told me this case is stronger then an atlas.tourqe numbers on a 271 are almost 18000.(they rate it better then a 205) the gearing is 2.72 for low. have found the ford cases for 200 bucks at the yards and on car-parts.com. it is a big case but am i missing something?have not seen these in a rig. i found one dirt cheap yesterday and think i will try it in my buggy to see if it will work.if it will fit.
so am i thinking wrong or am i on the right track?

jordan7118 · May 10, 2012

Sounds like a winner to me!

What bolt pattern? Same as an Atlas?

patooyee · May 10, 2012

Cast aluminum case + chain drive = :bomb:

jordan7118 · May 10, 2012

If they're rated for more torque than a 205, and Advance says the case is stronger than an Atlas, why would you say that?

I'm at work, so if you put up a big, fat pic of an exploded 271, I missed it ;D

Anything can break, and a general rule of thumb is that chain drive and cast aluminum bring the suck, but if it's rated to take a beating, it seems it SHOULD hold up better ???

TBItoy · May 10, 2012

Re: Re: 271 t case.

They are beef. Common swap for the 261/3 case in built duramax trucks also. (chevy 260 cases are slip yoke front and rear).

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

patooyee · May 10, 2012

jordan7118 said:
If they're rated for more torque than a 205, and Advance says the case is stronger than an Atlas, why would you say that?

I'm at work, so if you put up a big, fat pic of an exploded 271, I missed it ;D

Anything can break, and a general rule of thumb is that chain drive and cast aluminum bring the suck, but if it's rated to take a beating, it seems it SHOULD hold up better ???

I'm just going by my own observations and experience.

I worked in a Ford service department for 5 years. In that time they were very reliable cases. I think we only ever took one apart, I don't recall why. But I do distinctly recall observing that the chain was only about half the width of an NP203 chain and people with even mild rigs manage to break NP203 chains. (One of the reasons no one runs them.)

The case was also not any more substantial than an NP208 case and NP208 cases break like egg shells out on the trails. There was once a guy at MM who brought a rig with a 208 in it. He carried 2 spare t-cases on his trailer and had swapped them both out by the end of the weekend due to broken aluminum case.

I'm a big fan of engineering but do recognize that the beating we put down on rigs is not what the engineers at Ford / Dodge / GM / New Venture rate their stuff for. The people who determine those ratings are the same ones who thought that an NP208 and NP203 was a suitable replacement for an NP205 and that a D50 with d44 axleshafts was just as good as a d60. I bet if you showed those engineers what we do and said build a t-case that will be OEM / warranty reliable they would build something close to the likes of what we consider a 5-ton t-case.

patooyee · May 10, 2012

Also, they are impossible to twin-stick.

TBItoy · May 11, 2012

I may be completely wrong, but I think the large NVG26x , 27x cases are not just aluminum like a old 208 was. (I may be melding the facts of BW cases that are magnesium/al alloy)

A 203 chain is made a lil different than a 271. Less tooth engagement, wider bars etc.

I think that the 203 chain breaking problem is more of a tooth engagement problem, the chain skips a tooth and stretches, which stresses the pins and then it breaks.

IF I was going to put in in a buggy, I'd damn sure make sure it was protected from getting hit by rocks, or getting hit by the skid plate.

If you put it in a rock bouncer, where it's getting highly shock loaded repeatedly, then the chain may not hold up. Dunno :popcorn:

I guess you could do it and let us know how it turns out. :eat:

ridered3 · May 11, 2012

I'd hate to use one in the buggy, haul it down here for the races just to find out if it goes boom or not! Just my two cents on the matter.

greenlion · May 11, 2012

The ford cases are 31 spline not 32. I don't know anyone using one in a crawler but the diesel drag race/pull guys use them and they hold a LOT of power without giving up. Not apple to apples though, I know. The one in my '02 superduty is 31 spline with 1350 front yoke and 1410 rear, both fixed. it is physically pretty large but prob not heavier than a 205. There is a guy from Tuscaloosa I think with a 7.3 powerstroke buggy on rocks. It would be interesting to know if he is using a 4r100/271 combo. Chris something; not sure if he is on here.

mrdrinksalil · May 11, 2012

I have one in my 06 2500 Ram, cummins with a egde programmer. At about 175K the chain was stretched and luckly I caught is before the chain broke and I didn't explode the case but it did slip under load once and I very quickly pulled the case apart. New chain and sprockets/gears was cheap, but that wouldnt have happened with a 205. IMO it may be "stronger" on paper, but not in our application. Drag or sled pull truck yes, but not rock bouncer. Just my 2cents.

Neal3000 · May 11, 2012

205's are cheap, and bombproof........why experiment with something like this?

liv2mx · May 13, 2012

dont think i am going to try this case now.kinda big for my liking.but maybe down the road do some testing on one. i like to be different and cheap. that is why i was looking into this.