Cartel
Member
Is this the breather for the diff and how can I get the cap off without destroying it?
thanks
8-3/4 breather?
- Thread starter Cartel
- Start date
Is this the breather for the diff and how can I get the cap off without destroying it?
thanks
mikedrini
Well-Known Member
My breather screwed right in to the axle housing. Can you not unscrew the entire breather?
That is also part of rear brakes. It is a essentially a junction box that sends brake fluid to the left and right rear wheels.
Last edited:
The bolt that holds down the brass block is a breather.
these are from 1967-1968 8 3/4 rear axles. This is what the factory uses. The top of the bolt is a loose cap and it vents the axle.
The top is crimped on. If you are careful it looks like it could come off without destroying it.
these are from 1967-1968 8 3/4 rear axles. This is what the factory uses. The top of the bolt is a loose cap and it vents the axle.
The top is crimped on. If you are careful it looks like it could come off without destroying it.
Last edited:
That particular item might be a brake line junction fitting, but there normally is some sort of breather on the rear axle assy. Not obvious, but usually near the top somewhere, above "the water line" of sorts. Yes, most have a top cap which is loose, but attached to, the base fitting. As mentioned, the base fitting would screw into the housing.
On four wheel drive front axles, a hose attached to a fitting on the axle housing and the "vent" hose is attached to a higher point on the body, so moisture from off-roading might not enter. GM used to use one which is a plastic body, then later ones with a directional top.
Considering the amount of heat the gears generate, there would need to be a way for the air inside the axle to expand and not blow the seals out, if it were not there, I suspect. Similarly, for any condensate to evaporate out due to temperature swings in ambient temperatures, over time.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
On four wheel drive front axles, a hose attached to a fitting on the axle housing and the "vent" hose is attached to a higher point on the body, so moisture from off-roading might not enter. GM used to use one which is a plastic body, then later ones with a directional top.
Considering the amount of heat the gears generate, there would need to be a way for the air inside the axle to expand and not blow the seals out, if it were not there, I suspect. Similarly, for any condensate to evaporate out due to temperature swings in ambient temperatures, over time.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
mikedrini
Well-Known Member
The 8 3/4 on my 64 NY came with a breather
Those particular pieces ARE from an 8 3/4 axle 1967-1968 vintage. That’s what they have, the vent is on top of the bolt that retains the brass block to the axle housing.
Just a side question, why do you alyays post how GM builds their products. Does it really matter on a mopar specific board?
1970FuryConv
Old Man with a Hat
Why do you want to remove the cap? Wrench takes off cap and hollow bolt as assembly. Carb cleaner will clean out any clogs.
I learned something new. Love the knowledge on this site.
Mainly as points of reference, no more, no less. In this case, to verify that a bolt with a jiggly top would be some kind of vent, rather than just a flaky bolt.
I just retired after over 45 years in GM parts at a larger dealership. That GM-oriented money funded my Chrysler habit quite nicely. Plus getting me into networks to learn much more than just being a "parts guy" ever would. Many more places than I ever would have if I'd gone to work for the local, small, Chrysler dealer where my family did business. LOTS of learning and a whole lot of great memories. Where I ended up was "the best game in town and in the region", then as now.
Sorry if my "point of reference" comments might offend anyone.
CBODY67
No, nobody here is offended, and there is absolutely "nobody" else on this forum that is as helpful and giving as you are. You'll answer any newbie's silly question with experienced knowledge and compassion for that poor, confused person faced with a magnitude of problems. I often marvel at the time and care you take to help the helpless. You are clearly a gentleman. But....
....@413 makes a point. Discussing what GM or Ford or Fiat or Duesenberg did a hundred years ago is somewhat irrelevant (despite your very correct points of reference). The OP wants an answer to his immediate Mopar problem, not the history of the automobile.
Where am I coming from? You can laugh. Once upon a time, I was in a motorcycle forum where I felt that I needed to answer every question by starting with F=ma and going through every engineering principle to "teach" everyone who would listen. The question was tire air pressure. PV1= PV2. PV = nRT. The variations of rubber compounds vs temperature. I figured everyone would be grateful to learn from my engineering background. But all the OP wanted was real-world opinions on tire pressures for trackday riding using his street Michelins, and here I was delving into tire theory!
Somebody mentioned to me what 413 had the honesty to say to you, and suddenly I got the point. "36 front, 38 rear"!
GregG48203
Active Member
Congrats on your retirement! You made it!
Mentioning how GM did things could be very useful in the search for equivalent parts. The aftermarket suppliers may list next to nothing for old Chryslers, due to their lower production numbers. But find the same part listed for a Chevy, and suddenly the unavailable becomes common and cheap.
Justin Plant
Well-Known Member
A very good friend of mine, who just turned 89 last week, went to "Mechanics School" in 1958 after a stint in the Navy. One of his instructors was a retired Chrysler engineer. He told his class that Walter Chrysler instructed his engineering staff, " make it like GM, only different and better ". In my eyes GM has always been the benchmark. Everyone else seems to have some sort of variant. Look at your LA block, or the fact that Ford's 8.5 inch rear end used the same design even the same bearings as a Chevy 10 bolt rear. I'm sure this will open up some debate. However the reference to GM stands on its own merit.
Cartel
Member
awesome thank you.
I just want to run a wire in there and make sure its clear. Now I know what I'm up against.
I know it was a block for the brakes and the jiggly top I was 99% sure it was the breather but I thought I'd make it 100%
Lots of off topic chatter here kinda creeps me out but thanks
Lots of off topic chatter here kinda creeps me out but thanks
Last edited:
Thanks for the kind words. My goal in being in here is not specifically to impress anybody or similar, but to share knowledge where it might give a better understanding of what is going on with our Chrysler product vehicles. Sometimes, it can get to be a "TMI" situation. My apologies for that in the past and possibly in the future, but mostly, if I did not feel it might be important to give background information, from various sources I found or things i did, to better explain things, I try to condense that information as best I can.
In the early days of GM, it seemed that Billy Durant could sell anything to anybody. His first car was Buick. In about 1919, after the bankers ousted Durant from GM, they hired Charles Nash to run GM. Nash then hired a younger man to run Buick and make it healthy again. That man was Walter P. Chrysler. Chrysler saved Buick and as Buick was the bedrock upon which General Motors was built, and General Motors from failure. Nash then went on to run his own car company. Chrysler did similar. By the time that Chrysler was fully bloomed-out, he had a carline to match what GM had assembled. Plymouth/Chevrolet, Dodge/Pontiac, DeSoto/Oldsmobile, Chrysler/Buick, and Imperial/Cadillac. That's the way it was until DeSoto was deleted on April 15, 1961. So, the relationship of GM to Chrysler is set into history, BTAIM
Chrysler's quest for engineering excellence was there from the start. Any technical innovation which Chrysler produced led to GM having similar things. BUT in their redesign so as not to infringe upon Chrysler's patents, had to engineer around them, wringing out every last 1/20th cent of production cost, making it a bit simpler and sometimes easier to work on, and then putting it in all of their vehicles. One example was the alternator. As GM flooded the market with alternator-equipped vehicles, Chrysler's birthing of that item was forgotten.
My apologies for this thread venturing off into places it might not have gone otherwise.
Just some thoughts,
CBODY67
In the early days of GM, it seemed that Billy Durant could sell anything to anybody. His first car was Buick. In about 1919, after the bankers ousted Durant from GM, they hired Charles Nash to run GM. Nash then hired a younger man to run Buick and make it healthy again. That man was Walter P. Chrysler. Chrysler saved Buick and as Buick was the bedrock upon which General Motors was built, and General Motors from failure. Nash then went on to run his own car company. Chrysler did similar. By the time that Chrysler was fully bloomed-out, he had a carline to match what GM had assembled. Plymouth/Chevrolet, Dodge/Pontiac, DeSoto/Oldsmobile, Chrysler/Buick, and Imperial/Cadillac. That's the way it was until DeSoto was deleted on April 15, 1961. So, the relationship of GM to Chrysler is set into history, BTAIM
Chrysler's quest for engineering excellence was there from the start. Any technical innovation which Chrysler produced led to GM having similar things. BUT in their redesign so as not to infringe upon Chrysler's patents, had to engineer around them, wringing out every last 1/20th cent of production cost, making it a bit simpler and sometimes easier to work on, and then putting it in all of their vehicles. One example was the alternator. As GM flooded the market with alternator-equipped vehicles, Chrysler's birthing of that item was forgotten.
My apologies for this thread venturing off into places it might not have gone otherwise.
Just some thoughts,
CBODY67
I clearly see that it's a vented bolt but is the brass fitting meant to be a splitter for the brake lines?
Yes right and left brake lines and the rubber hose screws into that brass block.
Sometime in the mid 70’s Chrysler products went to a hose with the brass block made onto the end of it. So when you buy a hose you get the block. But the block is shaped different and they don’t directly replace the pictured block From the 60’s.
Last edited:
If you pay attention to the "off topic" stuff, you'll be surprised at what you might learn.
This forum goes like that... I like to say that a good car forum runs like a bunch of guys sitting around, bench racing and talking cars. The conversation eventually goes back to the original topic... or you can easily bring it back. It shouldn't "creep you out" though... It's just us guys.
First, congratulations on retiring. I've said right along it's the best career move I've ever done.
Second, IMHO, cars are cars. There are many things that apply only to Chrysler and many things that apply to GM cars (or Ford etc.). There are many things that are the same though.
Many years ago, I was at work, on lunch, reading Bill Jenkin's SBC book. It's a great book and there's much that can be learned from it... One guy, a died in the wool Chevy guy asked me why I was reading it... After all, I was racing Mopars at the time. Even after I explained that there was much in there that was applicable to my car, he still didn't get it.
Point being, if you can't learn from a different perspective, you are missing a lot.
So, to people that don't like it, I suggest not reading the posts. It's pretty simple. But you will be missing out.
Bill Jenkins is one of a few masterminds of drag racing. Yes watch what he is doing! Also he drove other cars besides GM In the early days. He went with a good sponsor. Smart.
GM has been very cheap and screwing the public for decades, but based on sales the public likes that treatment
who else kept “giving” 2 speed automatics transmissions to the unsuspecting, uneducated public until it was finally shelved for the 1969 model year.
GM has been very cheap and screwing the public for decades, but based on sales the public likes that treatment
who else kept “giving” 2 speed automatics transmissions to the unsuspecting, uneducated public until it was finally shelved for the 1969 model year.
Similar threads
