For the Volvo aficionado's....:))

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
> >>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> >>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
> >>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
> >>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
> >>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
> >>
> >> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
> >> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>
> >
> > No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> > tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >
> > The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> > Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> > Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
> > case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential, Trucks
> > that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by many, but
> > as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described it becomes
> > confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term Permanent Four
> > wheel drive.
> >
> Hmmmm. How does it account for the rotational differences between front
and
> rear axles with only 2 diffs?

Again, tire slippage, with very short tire life.

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> >
> >>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
> >>>> that it must be a very bad setup.
> >>>
> >>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
> >>> axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
> >>> part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
> >>> mode.
> >>>
> >> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
> >> either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a
> >> permanent 4WD system with 3 diffs.
> >
> > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> > wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> > drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to
> > use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel drive,
> > long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that is the
> > diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
> >
> If you have fulltime 4WD with only 2 diffs, how is the difference in
> distance travelled by the front and rear axles on solid surfaces?


Did you really have to post this exact same question four times?

>
> >>
> >>> I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
> >>> they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
> >>>
> >> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of
> >> 2WD. As long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear will
> >> not increase over 2WD.
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >>
> >>> My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
> >>>> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are
> >>>> very marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some
> >>>> figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear,
> >>>> well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears
> >>>> it out prematurely.
> >>>
> >>> Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires,
> >>> sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same
> >>> tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you are just
> >>> compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large decrease when
> >>> driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners manuals will tell
> >>> you that, not to mention the hit you see when you refuel.
> >>>
> >> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer
> >> than my Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco
> >> handles
> > better -
> >> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or
> >> 4WD the mileage varies by 1mpg at most.
> >
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need
> >>>> it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out
> >>>> of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with
> >>>> some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc,
> >>>> etc.
> >>>
> >>> THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a
> >>> greasy bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need
> >>> four wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's
> >>> solid ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving
> >>> ability. None of the items you listed require four wheel drive,
> >>> sure in some cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by
> >>> any means
> >>>
> >> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights
> >> either. . . . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.
> >
> > Now your being silly, I expected better from you. The road was snow
> > and ice covered this morning here, I had no trouble making it to work
> > in 2 wheel drive. 4 wheel drive is used when there are four foot
> > drifts across the road, not patches of snow here and there.
> >
> I didn't say you couldn't drive in bad weather without 4WD, but it does
make
> it easier, just like night driving with headlights is easier than without.


And if you read my original post I said 4WD makes it easier but is not
required, whereapon you decided to say something silly.


>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
> >>>> dumping it?
> >>>
> >>> Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to
> >>> dumb to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but
> >>> they don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take that
> >>> as a personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know about
> >>> your country but quality is fading fast here because to many people
> >>> base purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when
> >>> I can buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00 bends they gripe
> >>> about it "they don't build things like they used to", then they go
> >>> out and buy another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for people
> >>> like me, I really don't care what you want to drive. You asked for
> >>> reasons, I gave you reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each
> >>> his own.
> >>
> >> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I
> >> get a good view of both.
> >
> > See above, what you and I were calling fulltime are not the same
> > vehicles. Tell me, does your part time have two or three diffs?
> >
> My part-time system has 2 diffs - I can't understand how a permanent 4WD
> system with only 2 instead of 3 diffs could allow for rotational
differences
> between front and rear axles. What vehicles have a permanent 4WD system
with
> 2 diffs?

Examples listed in other post. I do wish you wouldn't ask the same question
four times in four different posts.
The part you don't understand is the part that made me state part time is
better than full time, for the reasons I gave in my very first post. Please,
seriously, reread all the posts, everything you are asking here has already
been explained.


>
> > It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
> >> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
> >> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you
> >> say, cars are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than
> >> here in my experience which is why I thin low-tech is more
> >> acceptable as long as the price is also low.
> >
> > You thin? ;-)
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong by all means - which vehciles in the US come with
> permanent 4WD?

Permanet four wheel drive is the term I used for vehicles with three
diferentials. Full time four wheel drives included the Jeep I listed in the
first post and the others listed there as well. Now, why did you ask this
four times in four different posts all made by you at the same time?

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Heath Raftery" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
>>>>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full
>>>>>>> time four wheel drive,
>>> which
>>>>> only
>>>>>>> has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two
>>>>>>> wheel
>>> drive
>>>>> has
>>>>>>> always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever
>>>>>>> heard
>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when
>>>>>>> someone says fulltime.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>>>>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
>>>>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>>>>
>>>>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
>>>>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
>>>>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the
>>>>> Transfer case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third
>>>>> Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are called
>>>>> Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
>>>>> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
>>>>> borrowed Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
>>>>
>>>> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
>>>> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a
>>>> change of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface,
>>>> without scrubing tyres or breaking axles?
>>>>
>>>> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
>>>>
>>>> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
>>>
>>> No, that is Fulltime four wheel drive, the type that has been
>>> manufactured for the last fifty years. Yes, the tires have to slip,
>>> that is why you get the increased tire wear, binding on sharp turns,
>>> increased wear on the driveline and lower gas milage, and it is why
>>> I said part time was better than fulltime. The Permanent Four wheel
>>> drive has the Third Differential and is NOT the type I was refering
>>> to when I said part time was better. Jesus people, learn to read,
>>> Please.
>>>
>> At the risk of getting shouted at as you seem to be losing your
>> temper here, can you let me know some of the vehicles you describe
>> as having permanent 4WD but only 2 diffs - I can't find any road
>> vehicle that fits this design?
>
> Not with you, I'm only getting agravated with the idiots.
> The 1978 Jeep J-20 pickup with quadratrac was full time four wheel
> drive with only two Differentials, and as I stated you could barely
> make a turn with it, I had to back up three times just to make it
> around the Taco Bell drive through here, and it would eat a set of
> Radials in 10,000 miles. There were also a blue million pickups built
> in that time frame with the same set up, Chevys were very common
> around here,which is why they came out with conversion kits for
> people to make them into part time 4x4. Unfortunately no conversion
> was possible for the quadratrac so I was stuck. Now anytime someone
> says fulltime 4 wheel drive those are the vehicles I think of, and
> why I say part time is better. The new ones would be better called
> all wheel drive, would eliminate alot of confusion from using an
> existing name for a different product. I really have not looked
> recently to see how they are built now, because I only want part
> time, full time is hardly needed or justified for me.

So full-time 4WD is exactly the same as part-time 4WD when in 4WD mode? No
diff to account for different axle rotational speeds? I'm not surprised the
tyres wear out and it eats fuel! What is the point of such a pointless
system? Could your full-time quadratrac system be used in 2WD? If so, why
call it full-time when clearly it is part-time?

I can see why you wouldn't want a 4WD system like you describe above, but a
proper 3 diff permanent 4WD system is clealr superior.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Heath Raftery wrote:
>>> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
>>>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full
>>>>>> time four wheel drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff
>>>>>> setup with no option to use two wheel drive has always been call
>>>>>> Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of the
>>>>>> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when
>>>>>> someone
>>>> says
>>>>>> fulltime.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>>>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
>>>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>>>
>>>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
>>>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
>>>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the
>>>> Transfer case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third
>>>> Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are called
>>>> Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
>>>> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
>>>> borrowed Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
>>>
>>> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
>>> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a
>>> change of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface,
>>> without scrubing tyres or breaking axles?
>>>
>>> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
>>>
>>> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
>>>
>>> motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
>>> |
>>> front diff
>>>
>>> That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
>>> differential or viscous coupling).
>>>
>>> Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:
>>>
>>> __ /
>>> /--\ /__-O/
>>> O----O____O___/
>>>
>>> Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up
>>> the slope, does it:
>>> stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate
>>> at the transfer case; or break?
>>>
>>>> ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
>>>> Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
>>> *______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*
>>
>> Thats exactly what I'm still wondering. . . . . .
>
>
> Why are you still wondering? I told you three days ago they bind and
> eat tires like candy from the scuffing.

No, I'm wondering why anyone would buy a so-called full-time 4WD system that
acts exactly as a part-time system used solely in 4WD with all the
associated wear and fuel consumption. It might be called full0time, but
clearly it isn't.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
>>>>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
>>>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
>>>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
>>>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
>>>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
>>>>
>>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
>>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>>>
>>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
>>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
>>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
>>> case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential,
>>> Trucks that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by
>>> many, but as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described
>>> it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term
>>> Permanent Four wheel drive.
>>>
>> Hmmmm. How does it account for the rotational differences between
>> front and rear axles with only 2 diffs?
>
> Again, tire slippage, with very short tire life.

So what you are saying is, it doesn't account for it - it's really like
part-time 4WD stuck in 4WD?

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres
>>>>>> like that it must be a very bad setup.
>>>>>
>>>>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have
>>>>> an axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even
>>>>> the part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel
>>>>> drive mode.
>>>>>
>>>> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours
>>>> does either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a
>>>> permanent 4WD system with 3 diffs.
>>>
>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
>>> wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
>>>
>> If you have fulltime 4WD with only 2 diffs, how is the difference in
>> distance travelled by the front and rear axles on solid surfaces?
>
>
> Did you really have to post this exact same question four times?
>
It hasn't been answered yet, so yes. . . . . .

>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
>>>>> they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
>>>>>
>>>> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of
>>>> 2WD. As long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear
>>>> will not increase over 2WD.
>>>
>>> See above.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
>>>>>> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are
>>>>>> very marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are
>>>>>> some figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and
>>>>>> tear, well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in
>>>>>> 4WD wears it out prematurely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements.
>>>>> Tires, sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on
>>>>> the same tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you
>>>>> are just compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large
>>>>> decrease when driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners
>>>>> manuals will tell you that, not to mention the hit you see when
>>>>> you refuel.
>>>>>
>>>> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer
>>>> than my Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco
>>>> handles
>>> better -
>>>> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or
>>>> 4WD the mileage varies by 1mpg at most.
>>>
>>>
>>> See above.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you
>>>>>> need it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there,
>>>>>> pulling out of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow
>>>>>> covered road with some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy
>>>>>> loads on road etc, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a
>>>>> greasy bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need
>>>>> four wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's
>>>>> solid ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving
>>>>> ability. None of the items you listed require four wheel drive,
>>>>> sure in some cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by
>>>>> any means
>>>>>
>>>> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights
>>>> either. . . . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.
>>>
>>> Now your being silly, I expected better from you. The road was snow
>>> and ice covered this morning here, I had no trouble making it to
>>> work in 2 wheel drive. 4 wheel drive is used when there are four
>>> foot drifts across the road, not patches of snow here and there.
>>>
>> I didn't say you couldn't drive in bad weather without 4WD, but it
>> does make it easier, just like night driving with headlights is
>> easier than without.
>
>
> And if you read my original post I said 4WD makes it easier but is not
> required, whereapon you decided to say something silly.
>
You said no-one who was a good driver needs 4WD. I simply said the same
applies to headlights.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or
>>>>>> are dumping it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to
>>>>> dumb to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but
>>>>> they don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take
>>>>> that as a personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know
>>>>> about your country but quality is fading fast here because to
>>>>> many people base purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on
>>>>> a wrench when I can buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00
>>>>> bends they gripe about it "they don't build things like they used
>>>>> to", then they go out and buy another $2.00 wrench. Part time is
>>>>> great for people like me, I really don't care what you want to
>>>>> drive. You asked for reasons, I gave you reasons. To and for me
>>>>> they are valid, to each his own.
>>>>
>>>> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I
>>>> get a good view of both.
>>>
>>> See above, what you and I were calling fulltime are not the same
>>> vehicles. Tell me, does your part time have two or three diffs?
>>>
>> My part-time system has 2 diffs - I can't understand how a permanent
>> 4WD system with only 2 instead of 3 diffs could allow for rotational
>> differences between front and rear axles. What vehicles have a
>> permanent 4WD system with 2 diffs?
>
> Examples listed in other post. I do wish you wouldn't ask the same
> question four times in four different posts.
> The part you don't understand is the part that made me state part
> time is better than full time, for the reasons I gave in my very
> first post. Please, seriously, reread all the posts, everything you
> are asking here has already been explained.
>
I have. I can't understand why you call it full-time 4WD when clearly it is
designed not to be used on paved roads as it has no way of allowing for
inter-axle rotational differences. It appears from your description to be
part-time 4WD without the option of 2WD for road use which is amazing.

>
>>
>>> It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
>>>> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
>>>> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you
>>>> say, cars are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than
>>>> here in my experience which is why I thin low-tech is more
>>>> acceptable as long as the price is also low.
>>>
>>> You thin? ;-)
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong by all means - which vehciles in the US come
>> with permanent 4WD?
>
> Permanet four wheel drive is the term I used for vehicles with three
> diferentials. Full time four wheel drives included the Jeep I listed
> in the first post and the others listed there as well. Now, why did
> you ask this four times in four different posts all made by you at
> the same time?

Coz this is the 7th time you've skirted the question. . . . . . ;-)

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > >
> > > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> wheel
> > > drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive, which
> only
> > > has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel drive
> has
> > > always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of
> the
> > > diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
> says
> > > fulltime.
> >
> > That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has a
> > viscous coupling or something similar.
> >
>
> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a tractor
> is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>
> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One Driveshaft
> goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front Differential, a second
> Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer case to the Rear Differential.

You can't drive that on the road so it must be a tractor.

> I used to think people who called you an idiot were wrong, now I know
> better.
>

Whatever, I don't know who the hell you are which shows how much you've
contributed.

--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> At the risk of getting shouted at as you seem to be losing your temper here,
> can you let me know some of the vehicles you describe as having permanent
> 4WD but only 2 diffs - I can't find any road vehicle that fits this design?
>
>

Indeed, I expect a list of John Deer tractors or military vehicles.
--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> Not with you, I'm only getting agravated with the idiots.
> The 1978 Jeep J-20 pickup with quadratrac was full time four wheel drive
> with only two Differentials, and as I stated you could barely make a turn
> with it, I had to back up three times just to make it around the Taco Bell
> drive through here, and it would eat a set of Radials in 10,000 miles. There
> were also a blue million pickups built in that time frame with the same set
> up, Chevys were very common around here,which is why they came out with
> conversion kits for people to make them into part time 4x4. Unfortunately no
> conversion was possible for the quadratrac so I was stuck. Now anytime
> someone says fulltime 4 wheel drive those are the vehicles I think of, and
> why I say part time is better. The new ones would be better called all wheel
> drive, would eliminate alot of confusion from using an existing name for a
> different product.
> I really have not looked recently to see how they are built now, because I
> only want part time, full time is hardly needed or justified for me.
>

Doug, you call me an idiot and yet me, a jeep hater, is going to school
you on the Jeep you owned. If it was automatic, it had Quadra-Trac
full-time 4wd, guess what, that has a form of limited slip center
differential which uses springs. If it was a manual, it had part time
4wd.
--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> >>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres
> >>>>>> like that it must be a very bad setup.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have
> >>>>> an axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even
> >>>>> the part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel
> >>>>> drive mode.
> >>>>>
> >>>> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours
> >>>> does either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a
> >>>> permanent 4WD system with 3 diffs.
> >>>
> >>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> >>> wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> >>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
> >>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
> >>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
> >>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
> >>>
> >> If you have fulltime 4WD with only 2 diffs, how is the difference in
> >> distance travelled by the front and rear axles on solid surfaces?
> >
> >
> > Did you really have to post this exact same question four times?
> >
> It hasn't been answered yet, so yes. . . . . .

Answer, that's not what he had.
--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

Chris Phillipo wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres
>>>>>>>> like that it must be a very bad setup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have
>>>>>>> an axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle.
>>>>>>> Even the part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4
>>>>>>> wheel drive mode.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours
>>>>>> does either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but
>>>>>> not a permanent 4WD system with 3 diffs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
>>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time
>>>>> four wheel drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup
>>>>> with no option to use two wheel drive has always been call Full
>>>>> time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs
>>>>> being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
>>>>> says fulltime.
>>>>>
>>>> If you have fulltime 4WD with only 2 diffs, how is the difference
>>>> in distance travelled by the front and rear axles on solid
>>>> surfaces?
>>>
>>>
>>> Did you really have to post this exact same question four times?
>>>
>> It hasn't been answered yet, so yes. . . . . .
>
> Answer, that's not what he had.

Makes sense now - he had a 3rd diff (of sorts!) that he was unaware of.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:

> >
> > Not with you, I'm only getting agravated with the idiots.
> > The 1978 Jeep J-20 pickup with quadratrac was full time four wheel
> > drive with only two Differentials, and as I stated you could barely
> > make a turn with it, I had to back up three times just to make it
> > around the Taco Bell drive through here, and it would eat a set of
> > Radials in 10,000 miles. There were also a blue million pickups built
> > in that time frame with the same set up, Chevys were very common
> > around here,which is why they came out with conversion kits for
> > people to make them into part time 4x4. Unfortunately no conversion
> > was possible for the quadratrac so I was stuck. Now anytime someone
> > says fulltime 4 wheel drive those are the vehicles I think of, and
> > why I say part time is better. The new ones would be better called
> > all wheel drive, would eliminate alot of confusion from using an
> > existing name for a different product. I really have not looked
> > recently to see how they are built now, because I only want part
> > time, full time is hardly needed or justified for me.
>
> So full-time 4WD is exactly the same as part-time 4WD when in 4WD mode? No
> diff to account for different axle rotational speeds? I'm not surprised
the
> tyres wear out and it eats fuel! What is the point of such a pointless
> system? Could your full-time quadratrac system be used in 2WD? If so, why
> call it full-time when clearly it is part-time?

No, the Quadratrac was fulltime four wheel drive with no 2WD option, and
impossible, according to the repair shops, to convert to part time. It was
indeed just like a part time in four wheel drive all the time.

>
> I can see why you wouldn't want a 4WD system like you describe above, but
a
> proper 3 diff permanent 4WD system is clealr superior.

Yes, the mixup was my fault, I always remember that damn Jeep whenever
someone says Fulltime.

"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> says...
> > Not with you, I'm only getting agravated with the idiots.
> > The 1978 Jeep J-20 pickup with quadratrac was full time four wheel drive
> > with only two Differentials, and as I stated you could barely make a
turn
> > with it, I had to back up three times just to make it around the Taco
Bell
> > drive through here, and it would eat a set of Radials in 10,000 miles.
There
> > were also a blue million pickups built in that time frame with the same
set
> > up, Chevys were very common around here,which is why they came out with
> > conversion kits for people to make them into part time 4x4.
Unfortunately no
> > conversion was possible for the quadratrac so I was stuck. Now anytime
> > someone says fulltime 4 wheel drive those are the vehicles I think of,
and
> > why I say part time is better. The new ones would be better called all
wheel
> > drive, would eliminate alot of confusion from using an existing name for
a
> > different product.
> > I really have not looked recently to see how they are built now, because
I
> > only want part time, full time is hardly needed or justified for me.
> >
>
> Doug, you call me an idiot and yet me, a jeep hater, is going to school
> you on the Jeep you owned. If it was automatic, it had Quadra-Trac
> full-time 4wd, guess what, that has a form of limited slip center
> differential which uses springs. If it was a manual, it had part time
> 4wd.

It was an automatic, and there was no third differential. If the transfer
case was intended to function as a differential as well, it failed, as the
Jeep would not turn sharp and ate the front tires in 10,000 miles. I won't
call you an idiot anymore if you stop making insulting posts without a
reason either, the choice is yours.

> --
> ____________________
> Remove "X" from email address to reply.

> > tyres wear out and it eats fuel! What is the point of such a pointless
> > system? Could your full-time quadratrac system be used in 2WD? If so, why
> > call it full-time when clearly it is part-time?
>
> No, the Quadratrac was fulltime four wheel drive with no 2WD option, and
> impossible, according to the repair shops, to convert to part time. It was
> indeed just like a part time in four wheel drive all the time.

Ironically if it had been locked together front and rear and not a
limited slip system, a part time conversion would be quite simple.
--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Heath Raftery wrote:
> >>> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
> >>>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full
> >>>>>> time four wheel drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff
> >>>>>> setup with no option to use two wheel drive has always been call
> >>>>>> Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of the
> >>>>>> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when
> >>>>>> someone
> >>>> says
> >>>>>> fulltime.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
> >>>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> >>>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >>>
> >>>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> >>>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> >>>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the
> >>>> Transfer case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third
> >>>> Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are called
> >>>> Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
> >>>> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
> >>>> borrowed Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
> >>>
> >>> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
> >>> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a
> >>> change of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface,
> >>> without scrubing tyres or breaking axles?
> >>>
> >>> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
> >>>
> >>> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
> >>>
> >>> motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
> >>> |
> >>> front diff
> >>>
> >>> That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
> >>> differential or viscous coupling).
> >>>
> >>> Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:
> >>>
> >>> __ /
> >>> /--\ /__-O/
> >>> O----O____O___/
> >>>
> >>> Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up
> >>> the slope, does it:
> >>> stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate
> >>> at the transfer case; or break?
> >>>
> >>>> ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
> >>>> Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
> >>> *______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*
> >>
> >> Thats exactly what I'm still wondering. . . . . .
> >
> >
> > Why are you still wondering? I told you three days ago they bind and
> > eat tires like candy from the scuffing.
>
> No, I'm wondering why anyone would buy a so-called full-time 4WD system
that
> acts exactly as a part-time system used solely in 4WD with all the
> associated wear and fuel consumption. It might be called full0time, but
> clearly it isn't.
>

Once was enough for me, I've bought part time 4x4's ever since. As I
mentioned as well many people who bought them converted them to part time
because of the poor handling, those conversion kits were big sellers back in
my heyday.

> >
> > Doug, you call me an idiot and yet me, a jeep hater, is going to school
> > you on the Jeep you owned. If it was automatic, it had Quadra-Trac
> > full-time 4wd, guess what, that has a form of limited slip center
> > differential which uses springs. If it was a manual, it had part time
> > 4wd.
>
> It was an automatic, and there was no third differential. If the transfer
> case was intended to function as a differential as well, it failed, as the
> Jeep would not turn sharp and ate the front tires in 10,000 miles. I won't
> call you an idiot anymore if you stop making insulting posts without a
> reason either, the choice is yours.
>

If it was eating tires as you say perhaps it had a locker installed in
the front and/or rear differential. Or maybe it just needed an
alignment.

--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> >>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
> >>>>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> >>>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
> >>>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
> >>>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
> >>>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
> >>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> >>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >>>
> >>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> >>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> >>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
> >>> case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential,
> >>> Trucks that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by
> >>> many, but as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described
> >>> it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term
> >>> Permanent Four wheel drive.
> >>>
> >> Hmmmm. How does it account for the rotational differences between
> >> front and rear axles with only 2 diffs?
> >
> > Again, tire slippage, with very short tire life.
>
> So what you are saying is, it doesn't account for it - it's really like
> part-time 4WD stuck in 4WD?

Yes, that is what I'm saying. I also said I am a few years out of touch, I'm
not aware if there are still any being built that way, but those are the
ones I always think of.

"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> says...
> >
> > "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> > wheel
> > > > drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive,
which
> > only
> > > > has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel
drive
> > has
> > > > always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever
heard of
> > the
> > > > diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
> > says
> > > > fulltime.
> > >
> > > That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has
a
> > > viscous coupling or something similar.
> > >
> >
> > No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
tractor
> > is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >
> > The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
Driveshaft
> > goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front Differential, a
second
> > Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer case to the Rear
Differential.
>
> You can't drive that on the road so it must be a tractor.

See, there you go with the stupid statements again. You can indeed drive
them on the road, that J-10 Jeep had 100,000 miles on it when I sold it,
most were highway miles.

>
> > I used to think people who called you an idiot were wrong, now I know
> > better.
> >
>
> Whatever, I don't know who the hell you are which shows how much you've
> contributed.

I've posted here for at least four years now and I have had many
conversations with you in the past. 99.9% of your posts are one line insults
that have nothing to do with the topic. I have always been courteous to you,
one of the few posters here who have been, and I've defended you before when
others have insulted you. That you don't remember any of it shows how
shallow and self centered you are. My contributions to this group have
dwarfed your's, so take that attitude and shove it, it holds no water with
me.

"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> > >
> > > Doug, you call me an idiot and yet me, a jeep hater, is going to
school
> > > you on the Jeep you owned. If it was automatic, it had Quadra-Trac
> > > full-time 4wd, guess what, that has a form of limited slip center
> > > differential which uses springs. If it was a manual, it had part time
> > > 4wd.
> >
> > It was an automatic, and there was no third differential. If the
transfer
> > case was intended to function as a differential as well, it failed, as
the
> > Jeep would not turn sharp and ate the front tires in 10,000 miles. I
won't
> > call you an idiot anymore if you stop making insulting posts without a
> > reason either, the choice is yours.
> >
>
> If it was eating tires as you say perhaps it had a locker installed in
> the front and/or rear differential. Or maybe it just needed an
> alignment.

It had no lockers, and I had it aligned with no change. With it eating a set
of radials every 10,000 miles I assure I explored every option to decrease
tire wear and improve the steering. The only option that would work was to
remove the front driveshaft completely.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> You can't drive that on the road so it must be a tractor.
>
> See, there you go with the stupid statements again. You can indeed drive
> them on the road, that J-10 Jeep had 100,000 miles on it when I sold it,
> most were highway miles.
>

As I've already explained, the Jeep J-10 does not have this solid like
between front and rear axles that you speak of.

> >
> > > I used to think people who called you an idiot were wrong, now I know
> > > better.
> > >
> >
> > Whatever, I don't know who the hell you are which shows how much you've
> > contributed.
>
> I've posted here for at least four years now and I have had many
> conversations with you in the past. 99.9% of your posts are one line insults
> that have nothing to do with the topic. I have always been courteous to you,

Whatever you say Doug. Cite some examples.
--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.