Locker vs Open
- Thread starter Storz
- Start date
TeriAnn
Explorer
jh504 said:
I'll have to agree that calling someone here crazy is likely not going to be well received. Though my personal goal is to be thought of as eccentric
There are people here of many different experience levels for many different vehicles & types of travel And all of us like to think we have a clue as to what we are about. We should try to respect one another even though we may think that other person hasn't a clue.
Personally, if I had 2 ARBs one would be in my rear Salisbury and the other would be on the shelf as a spare. If I had a single ARB, the front diff would be the last place I would put it (I have a TruTrac up front). I've driven my Land Rover for 30 years now and like to think I know how to get my own rig from point A to point B. A front mounted locker with open or limited slip rear would be of very limited use to my Land Rover driving style.
But hey, its just a leafer driver and us leafer people are always a tad odd.
jh504
Explorer
TeriAnn said:I'll have to agree that calling someone here crazy is likely not going to be well received. Though my personal goal is to be thought of as eccentric
There are people here of many different experience levels for many different vehicles & types of travel And all of us like to think we have a clue as to what we are about. We should try to respect one another even though we may think that other person hasn't a clue.
Personally, if I had 2 ARBs one would be in my rear Salisbury and the other would be on the shelf as a spare. If I had a single ARB, the front diff would be the last place I would put it (I have a TruTrac up front). I've driven my Land Rover for 30 years now and like to think I know how to get my own rig from point A to point B. A front mounted locker with open or limited slip rear would be of very limited use to my Land Rover driving style.
But hey, its just a leafer driver and us leafer people are always a tad odd.
No worries TeriAnn, with 30 yrs you definitely know your rig. I should be more specific about terrain, uses, and rig setup, before making a seemingly blanket statement.
ntsqd
Heretic Car Camper
Both of my current 4WD's have rear Detroits. One has a Lock-Rite in front, the other is open. I spend a lot of time in 2wd and only rarely engage 4 when I'm about to do damage to the truck or the trail.
I had an object lesson in how good a rear locker can be. There is a trail in the Calico Mtns in the Mojave Desert that goes a place that I like to show people. Prior to the Suburban getting it's rear Detroit it was open on both ends. Trying to go up a certain part of that road with open diffs required 3 tries. I'd never had to pay any attention to a particular line in that spot with the other truck (or with the 1 wheel drive dune buggy!), so this was a bit frustrating. Fast forward a year and I'm there again in the Sub now with it's rear (only) locker and I was once again able to simply drive up that spot.
The thing that is important to take away from this is not that a locker is good, but that the wheel base of the Sub easily spanned the obstacle. The front tires were not the problem. It was the rear tire(s) that gave up first and the fronts could not drag the truck over the spot by themselves.
I've often wondered where the buggy could have gone with a locker, but there are none available for the 002 transaxle and it's exclusive 5.38 gears.
I'll vote for the rear first.
I had an object lesson in how good a rear locker can be. There is a trail in the Calico Mtns in the Mojave Desert that goes a place that I like to show people. Prior to the Suburban getting it's rear Detroit it was open on both ends. Trying to go up a certain part of that road with open diffs required 3 tries. I'd never had to pay any attention to a particular line in that spot with the other truck (or with the 1 wheel drive dune buggy!), so this was a bit frustrating. Fast forward a year and I'm there again in the Sub now with it's rear (only) locker and I was once again able to simply drive up that spot.
The thing that is important to take away from this is not that a locker is good, but that the wheel base of the Sub easily spanned the obstacle. The front tires were not the problem. It was the rear tire(s) that gave up first and the fronts could not drag the truck over the spot by themselves.
I've often wondered where the buggy could have gone with a locker, but there are none available for the 002 transaxle and it's exclusive 5.38 gears.
I'll vote for the rear first.
Last edited:
michaels
Explorer
i think y'all are too worried about hurting eachother's feelings. just have a discussion and don't worry about apologizing for your own opinion.
and to offer my two cents. i can bump the front of my truck up onto a log or ledge just fine, but EVERYtime my rear wheels end up spinning first when trying to get ther rest of the way over/on the obstable. i'll take a selectable rear any day. with the type of wheeling i do, i'll most likely put a truetrack up front AFTER a rear locker.
and to offer my two cents. i can bump the front of my truck up onto a log or ledge just fine, but EVERYtime my rear wheels end up spinning first when trying to get ther rest of the way over/on the obstable. i'll take a selectable rear any day. with the type of wheeling i do, i'll most likely put a truetrack up front AFTER a rear locker.
I Leak Oil
Expedition Leader
Rovernut said:
What can I say? I like potatoes....:chowtime:
Jason T.
H
Hank
Guest
jh504 said:
I can post plenty more examples. It's just easier to understand when you're looking at pics like the ones I posted.
If you ever have a chance, drive a truck with an Atlas transfer-case. With the Atlas, you can select front-wheel-drive only, and leave the rear axle totally independent. With only the front wheels spinning, go wheeling. The end result will be like driving a FWD Crystler LeBarron up a snow covered hill. This is a very good example of how the front axle unloads minimizing traction.
Rovernut said:
Alaska Mike
ExPo Moderator/Eye Candy
A locker's effect on steering is my main concern, not the drag/push debate. I've seen plenty of obstacles that could go either way. There is a reason the differential was invented, which is more pronounced in the front of the vehicle. Otherwise we would have spools. If you'd ever driven a vehicle with a spooled diff- especially on marginal traction, you'd understand. Even a mild limited slip will cause issues here.
I find rear lockers (selectable or not) more predictable, and therefore more useful.
I find rear lockers (selectable or not) more predictable, and therefore more useful.
jh504
Explorer
Hank said:With only the front wheels spinning, go wheeling. The end result will be like driving a FWD Crystler LeBarron up a snow covered hill. This is a very good example of how the front axle unloads minimizing traction.
I understand your point but that is a different situation. With weight sitting over the rear your not going to have as many issues with the rear breaking loose as you will the front, where the engine weight will still help out. So with an open rear its not going to make that much difference, you will still have traction. With the front locked, which is where you will loose traction, it will make more of a difference. Instead of having 2 locked rears pushing you and one front spinning, you will have one rear pushed onto the ground and two fronts pulling. There are many different situations that can prove either point, but for my driving its what I want.
Nice snake by the way.
I understand the innability to steer well when locked, that is why a selectable up front is a must.
H
Hank
Guest
I understand your theory, jh504, but it stops there - it's only theory.
....that snake. I walked off the trail to take a leak a stepped right over this snake without seeing him. He was laying in the sun, but it was a little chilly, so I guess his reflexes were slowed. I think it was Rovernut who said "look out for that snake" when I was on my way back to the trail. I just about stepped on him, or over him, again. Would not have been good, either. I was wearing shorts and flip-flops, and I'm pretty sure that's a Copperhead.
....that snake. I walked off the trail to take a leak a stepped right over this snake without seeing him. He was laying in the sun, but it was a little chilly, so I guess his reflexes were slowed. I think it was Rovernut who said "look out for that snake" when I was on my way back to the trail. I just about stepped on him, or over him, again. Would not have been good, either. I was wearing shorts and flip-flops, and I'm pretty sure that's a Copperhead.
TeriAnn
Explorer
michaels said:
Probably. But I've had my feelings hurt a few times by a couple guys on this list and in return I've been trying to play nicer myself. Play nice by example.
michaels said:
That's exactly what I did. An ARB went into the Salisbury in 1996 followed by a Quaife in the front August 1998. No question the Quaife made travel through slippery sticky mud a lot easier. During the Summer of 2007 I converted the front axles to 24 spline replacing the 10 spline Quaife with a 24 spline Trutrac.
The combination works for me, but my rig is set up for moderate lots of different terrains and extreme for no terrain. A versatile generalist with no extreme attitudes, unlike the woman who drives it.
Scott Brady
Founder
There is no advantage to having a front locker over a rear locker in any situation except straight line travel on level ground. And this only remains true if the front of the vehicle is heavier than the rear and/or has less articulation than the rear.
In all other technical trail situations, a rear locking differential (preferably selectable) has a clear advantage.
Turning: Front axle components are most weak when they are turning, and this is even compounded on an IFS when a side is at full droop. Turning and extension travel both reduce the strength of CV axles. Turning reduces the strength of birfields and u-joint axles.
And most importantly, the main job of the front axle is to provide accurate steering effect, which is greatly reduced once a front locker is engaged. Engaging a front locker (or running with a full-time locker) creates understeer, lengthening your turning circle, causing the tires to slide off of rocks, etc.
Climbing: For each degree of incline, that degree is a percentage of weight transfered to the rear axle. So, on a 25 degree slope, 25% of the weight on the front tires has shifted to the rear. In climbing, it is absolutely essential to have a rear over a front locker, as on a 45 degree slope, the rear axle could be bearing 75% or more of the vehicles weight. A front locker will have little effect (only 25%) on the success of the climb.
General Theory:
The rear axle is stronger than the front. In most cases, this is true, as the rear axle is designed to carry most of the load, and is not compromised by the components necessary for turning.
Result:
Rear (First):
When purchasing a locking differential, install a rear locking differential first. It will provide 80% of the benefits of having a locking differential in the vehicle. The locking differential should also be selectable by the driver. The reasons can be discussed at length in another thread if desired. However, a mechanical locking differential is an option, though one I would not choose for anything but a trail-only machine driven in desert (dry) conditions. The least desirable option for technical terrain is a limited slip differential, and last is traction control. This does not mean that a limited slip (torsen style for example) should not be your first choice, if your expected terrain conditions warrant it.
Front (Second):
Install a locking differential in the front axle second, as it only contributes to 20% in the gain of tractive performance overall. The front should ONLY be fitted with a selectable locking differential. An open front differential would be a better choice than a mechanical locker or LSD for overland travel. The only people that will disagree with me are the drivers that use their vehicles exclusively in the deserts (and associated rocks). Once you start driving on snow, ice, mud, loose/cambered slopes, anything but a selectable front locking differential is not appropriate IMO. The one possible exception is the helical-style front LSDs, but they still create significant understeer on ice and snow, and some understeer in mud.
These comments are specific to overland travel on remote, rugged tracks, and even most trail riding, not extreme rock crawling...
In all other technical trail situations, a rear locking differential (preferably selectable) has a clear advantage.
Turning: Front axle components are most weak when they are turning, and this is even compounded on an IFS when a side is at full droop. Turning and extension travel both reduce the strength of CV axles. Turning reduces the strength of birfields and u-joint axles.
And most importantly, the main job of the front axle is to provide accurate steering effect, which is greatly reduced once a front locker is engaged. Engaging a front locker (or running with a full-time locker) creates understeer, lengthening your turning circle, causing the tires to slide off of rocks, etc.
Climbing: For each degree of incline, that degree is a percentage of weight transfered to the rear axle. So, on a 25 degree slope, 25% of the weight on the front tires has shifted to the rear. In climbing, it is absolutely essential to have a rear over a front locker, as on a 45 degree slope, the rear axle could be bearing 75% or more of the vehicles weight. A front locker will have little effect (only 25%) on the success of the climb.
General Theory:
The rear axle is stronger than the front. In most cases, this is true, as the rear axle is designed to carry most of the load, and is not compromised by the components necessary for turning.
Result:
Rear (First):
When purchasing a locking differential, install a rear locking differential first. It will provide 80% of the benefits of having a locking differential in the vehicle. The locking differential should also be selectable by the driver. The reasons can be discussed at length in another thread if desired. However, a mechanical locking differential is an option, though one I would not choose for anything but a trail-only machine driven in desert (dry) conditions. The least desirable option for technical terrain is a limited slip differential, and last is traction control. This does not mean that a limited slip (torsen style for example) should not be your first choice, if your expected terrain conditions warrant it.
Front (Second):
Install a locking differential in the front axle second, as it only contributes to 20% in the gain of tractive performance overall. The front should ONLY be fitted with a selectable locking differential. An open front differential would be a better choice than a mechanical locker or LSD for overland travel. The only people that will disagree with me are the drivers that use their vehicles exclusively in the deserts (and associated rocks). Once you start driving on snow, ice, mud, loose/cambered slopes, anything but a selectable front locking differential is not appropriate IMO. The one possible exception is the helical-style front LSDs, but they still create significant understeer on ice and snow, and some understeer in mud.
These comments are specific to overland travel on remote, rugged tracks, and even most trail riding, not extreme rock crawling...
Last edited:
jh504
Explorer
expeditionswest said:
And this accounts for for virtually all of the light pick-ups being used out there.
expeditionswest said:
When weight is shifted like this over an open diff it only helps the open diff gain traction. When weight is being shifted off of an open diff it causes it to loose traction. I want the front that is going to be loosing traction to spin both tires before I want the back which is gaining traction to spin both tires.