I have seen these covers installed on stock JK's and there definitely is plenty of room and as a manufacturer making a 'heavy duty' diff cover, I would think that designing around stock applications is the only thing they should have to do. After all, just about every lift manufacturer has a different track bar solution from the next - some with a single bend in it, some with multiple bends in it and some with multiple bends going in different directions. Each track bar will co-exist with this cover differently. And, if you have a lift with adjustable control arms, the position of the axles is determined by the person who installed them. And, depending on where the axle was set can make a big difference as to whether or not the track bar will hit the diff cover. Need I say, there are just too many variables and I have a hard time chastising a company in a situation like this because of them.

 

Do you have any rubbing issues front or rear? You say there's not a ton of room, but does it rub at all? Have you looked at the track bars at full flex and whether they come in contact with the diff covers?

I recently sent an e-mail to ARB addressing this issue for stock JKs, but have not heard back from them. I'll post their response on here once I hear back from them.

 

Well according to CSchaible in a previous post even in a stock configuration there is not much room. Although that's not quantified any engineer worth his salt is going to look at tolerances. Besides anyone buying an ARB cover or other aftermarket differential cover is probably looking at lifting their vehicle. So I wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion that an aftermarket parts manufacturer should only test with a stock vehicle.

Obviously, there are an infinite number of combinations of lifts and suspension components, but that does not let the aftermarket manufacturer off the hook to test in at least a few common configurations. Whether that is done with their own vehicles or test fitting to customer's vehicles. There is absolutely no excuse for a product at this price point to not be test fitted. I would concede my point if the covers cost $50 a piece, but obviously that is not the case with the ARB covers.

 

In stock configuration, without laying down under it to measure I would estimate about 3/4 of an inch betwwen the two. No rubbing is experienced at all in stock configuration, even with the sway bars disconnected. I have to agree with WOL!!!! THere are WAY TO MANY possible configurations on lifts to possibly be able to plan around them all. I beleive I have read that most HD Diff Covers have witnessed this same issue. Most have resolved it by properly setting the track bar, and then a little tweaking here and there. I hope to be doing a lift shortly, and when that happens, I will definitely post my findings.

 

I have to disagree with you and still side with WOL. There absolutely to many possibilities to test for; leaving stock as the best configuration. I have not run into anyone yet, who after lifting their vehicle and following the manufacturer's directions have had issues. Most people who have experienced this are those who have done a BB with no track bar adjustment. While it is perfectly fine to run a BB with no track bar adjustments, in reality it does in fact offset the axles and track bars, just not enough to normally cause issues. SO!!!!!! In reality, if you do a lift, you should do something with your track bars, either replace with adjustable or brackets, to realign the axles properly and I suspect you will not have further issues.

 

But test fitted with what vehicles and what lift kits? Because, if you haven't noticed, Dana 30's and Dana 44's are used on a plethora of vehicles and not just JK's. I should also point out that on all these vehicles, there are a ton of lift kits out there with their own set of tollerances and configurations. Are you suggesting that companies such as ARB should be required to make a product that will work with everything under the sun? Do you really think it is possible? Trust me, I have worked on A LOT of different Jeeps from CJ's, TJ's and XJ's and in my experience, what you are suggesting is simply ridiculous. But hey, that's just me and maybe you know something that I don't.

 

Not to mention the Fords, Chevys and other trucks and SUVs that have these axles with completely different types of suspension setups. Heck, the JK is different than any other Wrangler for that matter......truly mind boggling when you look at how many vehicles use or have used D30s and 44s.

 

the problem is that D44's and 30's come on LOTS of different vehicles, not just JK's. the covers aren't sold as JK covers, they are sold for the axle.
it would be impossible to make sure they fit every axle on every stock application, let alone all the different modified suspensions too

 

Did re centering your axle side to side, or, front to back resolve the contact issue??

If not what part of the cover is contacting the track bar??....can you post pictures??

THANKS!!! BWR

 

It amazes at me at what people accept as a matter of course. My previous message clearly indicates common configurations not everything under the sun as you exclaim. The JK is not just some little player in the market and if companies want that piece of the pie then they should most certainly do some due diligence in testing their products. However, I guess they don't have to, because not enough people hold them to that level of quality -- based on the responses to my original response.