Propellor shaft differences, 97 vs all other years

[salty1]

A while back there was a discussion as to the differences between the 97 propeller shaft (40201-MZ0-000) and the 98-03 shafts (40201-MZ0-A00) because the former is $100.11 and the latter costs $48.01 from HDL. From what I can tell all models use the same pinion joint (41410-MN5-000), oil seal (91261-ME9-005) and yoke joint (40200-MZ0-A00). 

A picture of the two shafts is shown below.


They appear to be identical except for a few things. The end of the 97 shaft splines that mate with the pinion have undulations of steel while the 98 shaft face has more of a milled finish.  I dont think this difference is anything significant. The center points for attachment to a lathe are larger on the 98 shaft. Both years have the same undulations beyond the splines on the shaft side.  Also, the machined surface that the oil seal rubs on is wider by about 1mm on the 97 shaft over that on the 98 shaft. I cant imagine that the shaft on a 97 Valk would float back an forth enough to need a larger machined surface preventing premature failure of the seal.






From my perspective there would be no consequences of using the less expensive 98-03 shafts in a 97 Valk or visa versa if you want to pay more than double the price.

What say you? 

[Chrisj CMA]

One difference you didnt mention is the shaft (especially near the U-joint end) is turned narrower on the 97.  This is the whole stated reason for the two part numbers.  Apparently there is a possibility of the 98 and later drive shaft ribbing on a part of the swing arm if used in the 97.

If I ever buy another drive shaft for my '97 I will be getting the more expemsive one.

[Rio Wil]

One difference you didnt mention is the shaft (especially near the U-joint end) is turned narrower on the 97.  This is the whole stated reason for the two part numbers.  Apparently there is a possibility of the 98 and later drive shaft ribbing on a part of the swing arm if used in the 97.

If I ever buy another drive shaft for my '97 I will be getting the more expemsive one.

I just happened to have used a flashlight to inspect the inner portion of the swing arm and observe  the end of the ujoint. Thinking about the clearance for the drive shaft, there is no possibility of any portion of the drive shaft contacting the swing arm housing....perhaps the 97 swing arm is different?????

[Denny47]

First off, I thank you salty1 for your time to check this out. I just checked the parts listings for OEM parts and guess what, the
part number for the swingarm is the same for the 97 and the 98 so they must be the same. I don't understand the difference myself but this is an interesting subject.

[salty1]

One difference you didnt mention is the shaft (especially near the U-joint end) is turned narrower on the 97.  This is the whole stated reason for the two part numbers.  Apparently there is a possibility of the 98 and later drive shaft ribbing on a part of the swing arm if used in the 97.

If I ever buy another drive shaft for my '97 I will be getting the more expemsive one.

Chris I have measured the diameter of both shafts as well as the end near the yoke joint. The diameters are essentially the same, if anything the 98 shaft is ever so slightly narrower ( less than 0.5 mm). Even if it was the other way around, I wouldnt think this kind of thickness difference would cause a rubbing problem.

[hubcapsc]

Hmmm... my new driveshaft is the undulating 97 kind. The rusty one I just pulled out
is not undulating... I didn't give it much thought, just figured the manufacturing
process had changed somehow...

Thanks for posting the explanation of the difference...

-Mike

[Daniel Meyer]

From my perspective there would be no consequences of using the less expensive 98-03 shafts in a 97 Valk or visa versa if you want to pay more than double the price.

What say you? 

Agreed.

[Chrisj CMA]

One difference you didnt mention is the shaft (especially near the U-joint end) is turned narrower on the 97.  This is the whole stated reason for the two part numbers.  Apparently there is a possibility of the 98 and later drive shaft ribbing on a part of the swing arm if used in the 97.

If I ever buy another drive shaft for my '97 I will be getting the more expemsive one.

Chris I have measured the diameter of both shafts as well as the end near the yoke joint. The diameters are essentially the same, if anything the 98 shaft is ever so slightly narrower ( less than 0.5 mm). Even if it was the other way around, I wouldnt think this kind of thickness difference would cause a rubbing problem.

Im just telling you what the Honda tech told me on the phone.  So if someone uses a cheap one on a '97 and has a problem they cant say the warning wasnt out there.  I tend to agree with you BTW

[pancho]

Hmmm,,, good information guys. There is always the possibility that the manufacturing program/process  for the drive shaft was changed for the 98 model to eliminate some unneeded steps to save money, and the 97 part was never superseded.     What you were told Chris may be the urban legend floating around  Honda USA....  dont know, but a good subject for those with 97s.

[olddog1946]

My neighbor and I put a later model final drive and shaft in his 97 last year and so far has had no problems. We should be taking out bikes apart pretty soon and if I notice anything unusual I'll post it.

[salty1]

My neighbor and I put a later model final drive and shaft in his 97 last year and so far has had no problems. We should be taking out bikes apart pretty soon and if I notice anything unusual I'll post it.

Either way get back to us, please. 

[Dr Bobs Patient]

Hmmm,,, good information guys. There is always the possibility that the manufacturing program/process  for the drive shaft was changed for the 98 model to eliminate some unneeded steps to save money, and the 97 part was never superseded.     What you were told Chris may be the urban legend floating around  Honda USA....  dont know, but a good subject for those with 97s.

A possible change to the shaft may also have been a change in suppliers if Honda had these made by outside vendors.  $50 difference in price would be well worth the change in the vendor.  Just speculating though.

DBP

[Ricky-D]

There's no difference between the shafts.

Believe me.

Just the cost of either.

Some will argue differently

as they revel in their obstinacy.

***

[Chrisj CMA]

There's no difference between the shafts.

Believe me.

Just the cost of either.

Some will argue differently

as they revel in their obstinacy.

***

Id rather Believe the Manufacturer.

[pancho]

There's no difference between the shafts.

Believe me.

Just the cost of either.

Some will argue differently

as they revel in their obstinacy.

***

When are you going to pull your final drive apart and give us a report Ricky-D?

[BF]

I know this is an old thread and is a year old, but have there been any updates to using a newer shaft in a '97 bike or vise versa?

[MAD6Gun]

Ok. Last year I replaced the shaft on my 97. It was still available at over a hundred bucks. Fast forward to yesterday. I tried to get one for my brothers 97. It has been discontinued. So I had no choice but to order a 98. The pinion cup is the same number for 97s and 98s. So there is that. We will see....

[Daniel Meyer]

I have held both in my hands and cannot tell the difference.

[Tfrank59]

Well visible differences are one thing but actual dimensional differences that you can measure with calipers and micrometers is another thing altogether. And apart from dimensional differences there could be metallurgical differences one may be forged one may be made of different material for some reason mother Honda has two part numbers it's probably not just so you can be charged more for one over the other

[gordonv]

Talked about before.

http://www.valkyrieforum.com/bbs/index.php/topic,53918.0.html