No, in full time 4WD there is indeed a selctor for it. Those systems let
you shift into 4WD PT and 4WD FT. The 4WD FT lets you drive around town in
any kind of traction without screwing up your system. I thought the same as
you and that is why I did'nt order my truck with Full Time 4WD.
Do you guys think Dodge could install the full time transfer case in a
truck with part time?
Jason
>I think that one or both of us is going to be mail-bombed or expelled from
>this list soon for this, but, what the hell...
>
>My truck is a part-time 4x4, so the selector console looks like this:
>
>2H
>4H -- N
>
>4L
>
>In a true full-time 4x4 (current Jeeps?), I dont think that there is a
>selector level at all, because it is always in 4wd. All-wheel-drive
>vehicles also lack selectors. I gather you have a part-time system like
>mine?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: fawcett@uism.bu.edu <fawcett@uism.bu.edu>
>To: DAKOTA-TRUCK@buffnet.net <DAKOTA-TRUCK@buffnet.net>
>Date: Thursday, September 24, 1998 5:31 PM
>Subject: Re[2]: DML: Re: Re: re:4 wheel drive
>
>
>>
>>______________________________ Forward Header
>__________________________________
>>
>> A-HA! Now I think I really got it! My brain cramp is over! The
>> full-time option just gives me another position on the selector (you
>> know, the lever on the floor). So my trucks not in full-time 4wd all
>> the time... only when I shift it into it. My selector lever looks
>> like this:
>> 2 WD HI
>> 4 WD Part-Time
>> 4 WD Full-Time
>> N
>> 4 WD Low
>>
>> So, until I shift into 4WD, I'm in 2 WD just like on your truck.
>>
>> Now to really muddy the water, there is a bit of a debate that
because
>> the drive shaft to the front axle is always spinning (even though
it's
>> not getting power from the T-Case until you shift into 4WD) it
doesn't
>> really matter from a fuel efficiency standpoint whether or not your
in
>> 4WD or not. How's that for confusing! I'll have to check this out
>> this winter but not now... I couldn't live with the knowledge that
my
>> gas mileage could possibly get any lower!!!
>>
>> T.
>>
>>
>>______________________________ Reply Separator
>_________________________________
>>Subject: Re: DML: Re: Re: re:4 wheel drive
>>Author: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net> at smtpout
>>Date: 9/24/98 3:42 PM
>>
>>
>>I dont get it. Let me try again.
>>
>>A truck that is powering two axles consumes more fuel than a similar truck
>>powering one, right?
>>
>>So, a 4x4 with a part-time system allows the driver to switch to 2wd
(power
>>to one axle) and burn less fuel, right?
>>
>>If the two assertions above are true (dont know if they are), then it
would
>>seem that part-time 4wd is more efficient than full-time 4wd, not
>>necessarily while it is engaged, but precisely because it can be
>disengaged.
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: fawcett@uism.bu.edu <fawcett@uism.bu.edu>
>>To: DAKOTA-TRUCK@buffnet.net <DAKOTA-TRUCK@buffnet.net>
>>Date: Thursday, September 24, 1998 2:43 PM
>>Subject: Re: DML: Re: Re: re:4 wheel drive
>>
>>
>>>______________________________ Forward Header
>>__________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I get it now... The easy answer is no. The 4WD systems in newer
>Daks
>>> ('93 & up, I think) have all of the parts spinning all the time. So
>>> there is no net difference between full-time and part-time 4WD when
>>> your running in 2Hi. To say it another way, 2wd on your Dak
operates
>>> precisely the same way as 2wd on my Dak... Clear as mud?
>>>
>>> T.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <<What I meant was, doesnt a 4x4 consume slightly less fuel in
>>> part-time 2wd mode than a 4x4 running in full-time 4wd mode?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:10:00 EDT