one piece aluminum driveshaft?

What companies are making them for the 2005-07 Mustangs?
Who has the best price? This seems like a very sensible and easy mod. I know the 2 piece shafts on the car are very heavy. Has anyone tried this mod. If so please let me know how it came out and how expensive it was.

Thanks, Fomocoro

Nothing more than a waste of money. The Aluminum driveshaft is wider than the stock piece and even though it is lighter, it will require the same amount of torque to turn since the amount of inertia on the Aluminum piece is much higher. Think of it this way, take two rings, one solid and one hollow and let them roll from a stop at the top of a ramp. Even though the solid one is heavier, it will start to move first and reach the bottom first. Save your cash for Hurst Shifter or subframe connectors.

http://www.drivetrainoutlet.com/Prod...riveshaft.html
http://www.rpmoutlet.com/05gtsuper.htm
[addsig]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2007-02-09 22:24, bassman97 wrote:
Nothing more than a waste of money. The Aluminum driveshaft is wider than the stock piece and even though it is lighter, it will require the same amount of torque to turn since the amount of inertia on the Aluminum piece is much higher.
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

I don't know about the rest of what you said, but the aluminum piece would not have more inertia, it would have less. More mass, more inertia.

Even if it took the same amount of torque to turn, lighter would still be better.

A magazine took two SN197 cars and got them into the 11s with bolt ons.

The one piece aluminum shaft was one of the mods which saved a lot of weight
[addsig]

It isn't that simple. Rotational torque is defined as the radius of the cross section, multiplied by the moment of inertia times the angular acceleration. The moment of inertia is larger on a hollow clynder than it is on a solid, despite the difference in mass. The reason being is that all the mass is concentrated further away from the center on the hollow one requiring more torque to turn. While on the solid one, the mass is concentrated in the center so less torque is required to move it. This is the same reason why larger wheels are harder to get moving/stop. The mass is concentrated further away from the center requiring more torque to stop/move. The Aluminum driveshaft is the same way since it is wider than the stock piece.

I am considering doing it just to eliminate the clunk from the piece shaft.

theres a thread over on themustangsource about an aluminum shaft that departed at 70mph on the highway- the undercarriage is bad...seat adjusters even messed up where it beat the floorpan, busted the tranny casting, etc. if considering, insist on a warranty in writing, as it could become a huge issue, like in that guys case- at least noone was hurt.

I kinda think a lot of the klunk is from the gearbox

thats why you use a SFI 23.1 shaft
[addsig]

BMR fabrication sells a Carbon Fiber Shaft Its only $1,000 [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif[/img]
BMR says,
BMR carbon fiber driveshafts provide a variety of benefits for your '05 Mustang. The overcomplicated factory two-piece shaft weighs an unbelievable 42.3 lbs. as compared to our 20.7lb. one-piece carbon fiber replacement. This rotational weight reduction alone is responsible for gains of 15+ rear wheel horsepower. Additionally the benefits of carbon fiber can be felt and heard in reduced driveline harmonics and vibration. Carbon fiber absorbs these harmonics much more efficiently without the long term fatique associated with steel or aluminum. The factory driveshaft is rated at an estimated 450-500rwhp while we rate our carbon fiber shaft up to 1000+ rwhp.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sideshow on 3/4/07 9:19am ]</font>

That 15hp is all BS. Moment of inertia of a thin walled cylinder (driveshaft): I=mr*r. The Carbon Fiber/Aluminum shafts are both wider than the stock steel piece and as you can see, the radius plays a bigger role than mass in determining inertia. All in all, I bet those shafts are either have the same inertia or more, depending on mass and radius. Thus, it requires more torque to turn (rotational torque=Ia, a=angular acceleration) and the only benefit is a lighter wallet (which really isn't a benefit).