 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / October 20052003 Ram DC front drive shafts to save gas?
Since the front axles are always turning, is there any reason you couldn't disconnect the front drive shafts and axles to save gas? I never use 4x4 any more. What was Dodge thinking when they decided to get rid of locking hubs?? > Since the front axles are always turning, is there any reason you > couldn't disconnect the front drive shafts and axles to save gas? I > never use 4x4 any more. > > What was Dodge thinking when they decided to get rid of locking hubs?? You could remove the front drive shaft but axles shafts would still turn and so would ring gear. Dodge did it his way to save money and to make engaging 4wd a no brainer because the front axle is always turning so it is easier to sync it with Tcase output. Dodge scraped hubs in the 70's and broguht them back in the 80's then scrapped them again several years ago. VERY poor judgement indeed. ------------------ www.thesnoman.com I was planning on removing the axles too. I'm not sure if the front differential will leak oil at the output shafts once the yokes are removed. Is it safe to say the yoke will not stay in without the axles in place? > I was planning on removing the axles too. I'm not sure if the front > differential will leak oil at the output shafts once the yokes are > removed. Is it safe to say the yoke will not stay in without the axles > in place? The wheel yoke will stay in place but the diff would leak oil like a sieve whithout axles in place. If you are serious, you should look for a tube axle used in some models or Dodge Pickups with 2wd (3500 models in the 90's) as it would be eaier to mod and de mod the truck that way if you got a complete front tube axle. ----------------- www.thesnoman.com >I was planning on removing the axles too. I'm not sure if the front > differential will leak oil at the output shafts once the yokes are > removed. Is it safe to say the yoke will not stay in without the axles > in place? Why did you get a 4x4 in the first place then? If you're serious about this, the you need to remove the axles, remove the U-joints, then re-install the outer stub shafts, because they hold the wheel bearings together. You'll also want to remove the differential from the case, drain the fluid, and make some kind of rubber plugs for the axle tubes, so you don't load them up with road crud (assuming that at some point you'll want to put this all back together). If you save 2MPG, I'll be impressed. > >I was planning on removing the axles too. I'm not sure if the front > > differential will leak oil at the output shafts once the yokes are [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > If you save 2MPG, I'll be impressed. People did all this stuff years ago, a friend butchered his 78 Power Wagon's front end for a whopping 1.2 or so MPG. Insane at 3 bucks a gallon, even at 5 bucks, it's still crazy. BDK >>>I was planning on removing the axles too. I'm not sure if the front >>>differential will leak oil at the output shafts once the yokes are [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > BDK The "insane" part was Dodge building the truck without lockout hubs to save a few busk and costs. There is NO excuse for a new 4x4 truck to ne sold with no front axle disconnects. YOu do aslo gain smoother and quieter operation because you will no longer have a front axle spinning up in the truck and the MPG gain will be a lot higher in winter when front axle lube is thick from cold.  Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com > up in the truck and the MPG gain will be a lot higher in winter when front > axle lube is thick from cold. Isn't winter when you want the 4x4 more than any other time? I believe Dynatrac now offers a manual hub conversion kit for these trucks. If you're concerned about MPG, that would be the way to go, rather than disassemble the front end (because, presumably, you bought the 4WD because you felt you'd need it at some point). I just moved from the northeast to the southeast desert where it hasn't snowed since the ice age. You make 2 MPG sound petty, but that's another 70 miles per tank of range. At $3/gallon and 20,000 miles per year, that's a significant amount of savings every year. >I just moved from the northeast to the southeast desert where it hasn't > snowed since the ice age. You make 2 MPG sound petty, but that's > another 70 miles per tank of range. At $3/gallon and 20,000 miles per > year, that's a significant amount of savings every year. Assuming 18MPG before, and 20MPG after, 20K per year, and $3/gal, you'll save $330 a year, or less than a dollar per day. I was assuming you wanted to remove the front axles for a while, then put them back in when you thought you'd need them, then take them out again, etc. If you want to do a semi-permanent 2WD conversion, then it starts making a little more sense. I still don't think you're going to get a solid 2MPG increase, especially since you won't experience any of the cold-weather operation that thickens up the gear oil. By the way - where's the desert in the south-east? :) Ooops, sorry, I meant the Southwest, In Arizona. >>I just moved from the northeast to the southeast desert where it hasn't >>snowed since the ice age. You make 2 MPG sound petty, but that's [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > By the way - where's the desert in the south-east? :) I am a "old timer" so to speak and I can rememebr when trucks had lockout hubs optional and when I drove my 4x4s back then I could tell if I forgot to unlock the front hubs because you could feel it and see it in the fuel range. It can make a lot more difference than you think at times. There is not excuse to make a 4x truck without the abilty to completely diengage the front axle when in 2wd. How many 1000's or barrels of fuel a day is wasted across the country from "dragging" the front axle around in 2wd on a lot of the 4x4's out there. Also remember that the ujoints in a solid front axle are not constant velocity in a turn so when ever you turn the are straining to speed up and slow down the axle shafts as they go thru each 360 degree revolution and the sharper you turn, the more they strain, even without drive applied to the axle (it is worse with drive applied) ----------------- www.thesnoman.com I totally agree. It makes absolutely no sense to spin a bunch of gears, bearing, shafts, u-joints, and seals that should be at rest. Besides the loss of mileage, how about wear and tear? Is this another thing you have to give up to have a truck that is less expensive than a Ford or GM product? Or do they also have full-time locked hubs. At the very least, why not offer it as an option? I remember my 80 F-150 had locking hubs. If they were engaged, you could feel it in the steering wheel. It made a bit more noise. It also needed a little more force on the brake pedal to stop it. Unlocked gave you a noticeable difference in gas mileage as well as a smoother ride. Dynatrac does offer a kit, but at $1500, it's not cost effective. At $330 savings per year, payback in five years isn't worth it. > I totally agree. It makes absolutely no sense to spin a bunch of gears, > bearing, shafts, u-joints, and seals that should be at rest. Besides [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Dynatrac does offer a kit, but at $1500, it's not cost effective. At > $330 savings per year, payback in five years isn't worth it. Ford offers lockout hubs on some SD models and GM disconnects the right front axle shaft so the other side spins off in spider gears and ring and pinion does not move (not perfect but a lot better than taking every thing along) Dodge missed a perfect opertunity to "fix" this problem in 03 when they started using a new front axle in 2500 and 3500 4x4 trucks built for them by AAM (the one that made the tried and trued 10.5 inch 14 bolt for GM for years and the then new 11.5 that GM uses in 2500 and 3500 trucks and GM's IFS front drive axles) It uses the same 9.25 ring and pinion as used in GM IFS in 2500 and 3500 trucks but Dodge spec'd it to have no disconnect or ablity to support lockout hubs. It is a shame because it is a very stout axle but has no support to disconnect the axles in 2wd with a redesign. ----------------- www.thesnoman.com >> I totally agree. It makes absolutely no sense to spin a bunch of gears, >> bearing, shafts, u-joints, and seals that should be at rest. Besides [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > ----------------- Any hub conversions for the AAM front axle? Al >Any hub conversions for the AAM front axle? > >Al Been trying to find one, few leads but nothing concrete >>Any hub conversions for the AAM front axle? >> > Been trying to find one, few leads but nothing concrete Dynatrac now has a kit available. Some guys over on the TDR worked with them to get this developed, and several have already purchased and installed kits. You can read all about it here: http://www.turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96948 Or just call Dynatrac at 714-596-4461 and get the info. straight from them. Be forewarned - I hear it's an $1,800 (retail) kit. >>>Any hub conversions for the AAM front axle? >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Or just call Dynatrac at 714-596-4461 and get the info. straight from them. > Be forewarned - I hear it's an $1,800 (retail) kit. I have Emailed them for more info on it a few days ago but no responce yet. Kinda strange. ----------------- www.thesnoman.com > I have Emailed them for more info on it a few days ago but no responce > yet. Kinda strange. Lots of companies like that are slow to respond to e-mails... give 'em a call - you'll get the info. much quicker If you look through that thread on TDR (the last 3 pages or so), you'll come across a person's name and direct phone number at Dynatrac that was taking the orders for this kit. >> I have Emailed them for more info on it a few days ago but no responce >> yet. Kinda strange. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > come across a person's name and direct phone number at Dynatrac that was > taking the orders for this kit. Called them this afternoon. They are sending me the info. Any idea where I can find some illustrations of the stock setup? Al 2004 CTD Don't forget to factor in the $$$ lost that you paid originally for 4x4 that will be a complete loss when you go to trade it in or sell it ... unless of course you are planning to put it back together. In that case, factor in time and frustration to undo then redo. Craig C. > What was Dodge thinking when they decided to get rid of locking hubs?? Have you ever had to go knee deep in mud to find the f@#!! hubs to engage 4 wheel drive? Personally I prefer to have slightly increased consumption in order to have (almost) instant 4x4 availability than to have the added complication of the locking hubs. Again, that's me... (And by the way, in Greece we 're paying about 4,5$ per gallon for some YEARS now... Oil will NOT be cheap for some time so get used to the idea...) The idea of locking hubs is having the ability to drive on paved roads and highway, where most people to 99% of their driving, with the front differential disconnected from the wheels. If mud is even remotely possible, you leave them locked. But the rest of the time you drive, you leave them unlocked. I know when I'll be off road in advance. Besides, there isn't much mud in the desert. When I lived in the NorthEast, I only needed the hubs locked on a regular basis during the snow season, December, January, and February. The the other nine months of dry weather, I still had to have the front differential working for no reason. Speaking of Greece, I have a house in Greece, just outside of Athens (Byronas). I have a tiny car there with a tiny engine. There is a tax when you buy a car with an engine bigger than 1.8 L. This car gets goog enough mileage with a 1.4 L engine that I dont have to worry about the price of fuel. With Greece's lack of super-highways (besides the one that goes to the airport) and constant traffic, small engines are fine there. Besides, Athens has a mass transit system almost as extensive as NYC. The busses and trains cover the city well. Where I live, in Arizona, there is no mass transit. Highways cover the area well. Due to how spread out everything is here, everything is far away. I drive 500 miles per week, so at $3 per gallon, I have to go for every mile per gallon I can. I can stand the inconvenience of locking and unlocking my hubs once or twice a month when I do go off road. Saving wear and tear is nice too. By the way, fuel prices in Greece proove that national politics have little to do the price of fuel. Greece has always had a pro-Arab stance in the world political theatre. Yet, they have always paid a lot more for fuel than we do. >>What was Dodge thinking when they decided to get rid of locking hubs?? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > per gallon for some YEARS now... Oil will NOT be cheap for some time so > get used to the idea...) What is so darn hard about getting out and locking the hubs BEFORE you drive through a mud hole? Be driving 4x4 for about 35 years now and Dodge wants to make as much of a no brainer to use as possible to try to sell more of them and how many 1000's of barrels a fuel a day is wasted because Dodge is to cheap to put them on?. Then there is all the needless wear and tear on the front drive axle that is not even needed 99% of the time. Yeah really great idea not to have them on a truck and instead have that bastard hub the is a pill to work on if bearings or ujoints need service! We cussed at those things in the 70's when Dodge came out with them too. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com Ditto what Sno said! Years ago I was the only one of my friends that had a Ford. It had locking hubs and their GMs didn't. They made fun of me when I would pull over and lock my hubs when the snow started or to go off road. They were convinced their full time hubs were better. Till I pointed out to them that my 200,000 mile F150 was still on its original front differential seals, bearings, gears, ujoints, AND oil. > I pointed out to them that my 200,000 mile F150 was still on its > original front differential seals, bearings, gears, ujoints, AND oil. And it's 3rd engine, 2nd transmission, 4th T-case... :) >>I pointed out to them that my 200,000 mile F150 was still on its >>original front differential seals, bearings, gears, ujoints, AND oil. > > And it's 3rd engine, 2nd transmission, 4th T-case... :) My 89 4x4 burb is still all factory issue after 175k and still going strong. You are doing something wrong big time. I can get 200k plus out of a engine and trans regularly and have on other vehicles too. This one has been cross country and across the rockies more than a dozen times too. ----------------- www.thesnoman.com > strong. You are doing something wrong big time. Nope, I'm doing something right. I've never (intentionally) owned a Ford :) You really need to stop taking everything so seriously. >>strong. You are doing something wrong big time. > > Nope, I'm doing something right. I've never (intentionally) owned a Ford > :) > > You really need to stop taking everything so seriously. So I should post BS answers then? ----------------- www.thesnoman.com Sorry to disappoint you but that 1980 Ford F-150 was on its original engine (4.9L 6 cyl), transmission, and tranfer case. The only major repair I made was replacing the rear tranny seal and the clutch replaced twice. I also had a 1990 Ford Bronco. 180,000 miles with zero problems. Luckily, my 2003 Dodge is also trouble free after 43,000 miles on it. I agree with the Snow guy, if you're using up engines, trannies, and tranfer cases that fast, look for your problem with the driver, not the drive. With today's lemon laws, no manufacturer is going to sell a product they may have to buy back. In my opinion, Ford is usually a better product than Dodge. But this time the reputation of the Cummins sold me. The softer ride of the 2500 vs the F250 also sold me. And, by the very nature of this thread, less cylinders = less moving parts, is a good thing. > And, by the very nature of this thread, less cylinders = less moving > parts, is a good thing. In theory, two internal combustion engines of same displacement but different number of cylinders, the one with less cylinders will be more fuel efficent because of less surface are for heat loss from expanding gasses ----------------- www.thesnoman.com > What is so darn hard about getting out and locking the hubs BEFORE you > drive through a mud hole? Simple case in point: about two weeks after purchasing my '03 3500, I was driving to a friend's house. Coming down the road was a tractor pulling a BIG trailer full of hay bales. It was pretty wide, and the road was narrow. I decided to pull over and give him room. Unknown to me, that wasn't all grass alongside the road - there was a ditch dug in there, covered with grass. The right side of the truck dropped about two feet - enough that the skid plate was doing it's job. (Incidentally, the tractor passed by with only about 10" to spare). Without 4WD, I never would have been able to drive out, and if I had manual hubs, probably couldn't even get to the passenger side to lock it. Instead, I just flipped the knob, and eased it out and back onto the road (then spent about 40 minutes hosing all the mud off of my brand-new truck :) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.