Re: 4x4 242HD conversion

From: David Rand Kirtland (drk16@cornell.edu)
Date: Fri Jul 09 1999 - 19:39:13 EDT


full time four wheel drive has about 400 different meanings and every
manufacturer uses it differently. some manufacturers uses it differently
depending on which of their products they are refering two. a lot of
people including myself think of it as power going to the front and rear
drive shafts all the time with torque going to the axle with more traction.
like the subaru line about the wheel that grips.
        there are 4x on demand, which is most trucks have. there is slippage then
it engages like a part time unit with a 50/50 split.
        then there are the all-whell drive types. power is sent along both shafts
all the time. the case is a viscous coupling. and power is sent to the
shaft with more power. this unit type is found in subaru's and non-off road
4wd drive units (syclone). the only problem is most of these can not be
locked like part time 4x.
        now there are all types of transfer cases some like the above examples
some unlike, some are a combination.
        the 242 is somewhat different from the above it is more like a part time
unit that is set up to allow slippage when in the full time mode. my
experience is this. the 242 is a great transfer case 2wd high, 4 high, 4
low, and the full time mode works well, but never anywhere as well as when
it is part time. It is most noticeable when you are giving lots of power
in very slick situations(ice, deep snow, mud). basicaly trying to spin
yourself out. but, in rain, light snow, dirt at safe speeds it works great.
 My experience is in a Jeep with a 242 and the 4.0. which has less power
and better weight distribution than a dakota.

 but hey the 242 has both full and part time. and for 400 more when buying
new its a steal. but at the same time the 242 is not like the transfer
cases used in the full time 4x/all wheel drive street performance cars, so
it will perform differently.

note
  -when in part time on slick surfaces if you lock one wheel all of the
others that are connected
     lock up as well (through drive train) I learned the hard way that abs
is very good.
  -the 231 part time unit is rugged, your not going break it very easily.
short straight drives on hard pavement and extended drives on packed
earth/gravel will not damage it.

At 08:23 AM 7/9/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Norah,
>
>To answer your question, the factory option was $395 list and $336 invoice
USD.
>
>While I agree with David that it would probably be cost prohibitive to
retrofit
>a NV 242, I don't understand his statement, "under power it (the NV242)
doesn't
>perform as a true all-wheel drive/full-time xfer case".
>
>David, can you let us know what your experience was or explain your
statement a
>little more thoroughly??
>
>Thanks.
>
>Tom
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>Subject: DML: 4x4 242HD conversion
>Author: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net> at smtpout
>Date: 7/9/99 2:32 AM
>
>
>you could change it, but it would cost alot. a new or used a nv242HD is
>expensive, plus you would probably need new drive shafts and some other
>misc parts. i've driven vehicles with NV231 (part time only), NV242, and
>NV249(full time 4x4, on demand) for the money the 231 is the best. the 249
>takes a split second to engage and to use it properly in bad situations you
>have to anticipate and induce spin. the 242's full time setting is alright,
>but under power it doesn't perform as a true all-wheel/full-time drive xfer
>case. the 231 is cheaper and lighter, and if you really need 4x4 then you
>only need part time. but hey thats my opinion.
>
>
>At 01:02 AM 7/9/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>I'm jealous :( I wish I would have ordered this option right from the
>>beginning. Do you know what the cost was for the option. I'm very curious
>>as to what is involved, or even if it's possible to have it put on now.
Any
>>ideas?
>>
>
> David Rand Kirtland
> drk16@cornell.edu
>
>
>
          David Rand Kirtland
          drk16@cornell.edu



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:54 EDT