3'rd gen front axle diconect

[juicedcummins]

Has anybody found a set-up to diconnect the front axle like the older 2'nd gens yet? We are experiencing -30c and some-40c and the front end is very stiff. This truck feels like a D-6 with 1/2 a bladefull all the time. The drives are even having trouble getting rolling in 2wd. Did DC put synthetic in the front axel?

 

[Cattletrkr]

3rd gens are more or less full time 4wd. The only way to disconnect the front end is to remove the front driveshaft.



The oil should be synth. 'cause the rear comes factory with synth.

 

[CSilkowski]

Dynatrak is working on a lockable/unlockable hub set-up. Should be out soon. Check related group buy thread for status.

 

[Torque King Jay]

IF Dynatrac does come out with a way to unlock the hubs and let the front drivetrain sit idle what kind of fuel mileage increase can you expect to see.



I'm not sure if these are set up the same way the 2nd gen trucks are but I'd like to hear from some of the people who did this to their 2nd gen trucks.



How much better was fuel mileage?



Was it really worth the investment?



Jay

 

[SVenable]

IF Dynatrac does come out with a way to unlock the hubs and let the front drivetrain sit idle what kind of fuel mileage increase can you expect to see.



I'm not sure if these are set up the same way the 2nd gen trucks are but I'd like to hear from some of the people who did this to their 2nd gen trucks.



How much better was fuel mileage?



Was it really worth the investment?



Jay

I am new to the forum but bought my truck to tow my Jeep(s). The new unit hubs that are used, allowing the front end to turn all the time, do not have a noticable HP drag. This design has been used for 10+ years on Jeeps and none of the kits to install locking hubs affect fuel economy. The locking hub kits are used to allow driving the Jeep after you break the axle, and to upgrade the axles to Chrom-moly axles. On our trucks it would be interesting if there was a noticable fuel difference, but I am sleptical that there is. I actually bought my 04. 5 truck because the front axle is a unit hub design, fewer problems, no maintance except to change the diff oil and grease the ball joints.



Steve

 

[nkiewel]

I actually bought my 04. 5 truck because the front axle is a unit hub design, fewer problems, no maintance except to change the diff oil and grease the ball joints.

Which would work great if there were grease fittings on our ball joints. On a positive note, that means that there is one less thing to worry about while you are crawling under the truck...

 

[DPelletier]

I am new to the forum but bought my truck to tow my Jeep(s). The new unit hubs that are used, allowing the front end to turn all the time, do not have a noticable HP drag. This design has been used for 10+ years on Jeeps and none of the kits to install locking hubs affect fuel economy. The locking hub kits are used to allow driving the Jeep after you break the axle, and to upgrade the axles to Chrom-moly axles. On our trucks it would be interesting if there was a noticable fuel difference, but I am sleptical that there is. I actually bought my 04. 5 truck because the front axle is a unit hub design, fewer problems, no maintance except to change the diff oil and grease the ball joints.



Steve

I tend to agree. There should be no noticable drag (and little mpg difference) with the new setup. I suspect that juicedcummins may have another problem. Using the e-brake in those temps?



Dave

 

[TBrennan]

I like the new front axle setup and believe it to be less problematic than having a disconnecting axle to worry about. As stated above this system has been used for a long time and I think offers the best strength and longevity of any system. Grease fittings might be nice (for us maintenance concious minority) but even that little hole reduces the torque capacity of the hub by some small amount.



I certainly don't think you'd be able to measure any mpg increase to make it worth the trouble, expense, and increased maintenance.

 

[opjohnny]

2wd low would be real nice. It is hard to creep with a manual without riding the clutch a lot. Not sure about the autos.

 

[TBrennan]

That's really a limitation of the transfer case and not the front axle. I dont have a boat or anything so I don't fully appreciate why I see people wanting 2 wheel low, can't you just use 4 wheel low? I would think either most surfaces are wet / slick enough on a boat ramp to be ok or your backing a straight line which wouldn't hurt to have in 4 wheel drive.

 

[juicedcummins]

I tend to agree. There should be no noticable drag (and little mpg difference) with the new setup. I suspect that juicedcummins may have another problem. Using the e-brake in those temps?



Dave

No the e brake has never been used once since new. A good friends 04 is just as bad. It is pretty obviose that some have never had the new setup in the temps that some of us see. The mpg issue is real with these front ends. Last week put on 50 mile @ 80mph drove straight into a shop and up on a hoist. The minute the front end cleared the ground I tried to give both front wheels a spin and was not impressed. I am used to seeing a little pre-load on the bearings but this frond end takes just about all I have to even move it.

 

[DPelletier]

I have only driven mine in -27, but I still think it is unlikely that there is a huge difference in rolling resistance and mpg. After a long drive, the outdoor air temperature is irrelevant as the lube will be up to temp anyway. Keep in mind that the last of the 2nd gen trucks (2002's) also don't have a CAD and I sure don't recall hearing about all the '02 owner's getting worse mileage than the '01 guys. Keep in mind that if you think that cold gear lube is responsible that there is alot more oil in the rear end and transmission than there is in the front axle.

I dunno.



Dave

 

[opjohnny]

Twin stick transfercase would be cool. 4 low with manual hubs unlocked would give me my "2wd low". With the idle control on the stick as soon as you engage the clutch she is going, reverse is "taller" then first on the nv5600. Most of my backing up is on pavement and not in a straight line.

 

[JStieger]

Twin stick transfercase would be cool.

How about this to adapt to the CTD?



http://www.offroaddesign.com/catalog/doubler.htm

 

[nickleinonen]

reverse is "taller" then first on the nv5600

from factory service manual:



GEAR RATIOS



FIRST 5. 63:1

SECOND 3. 38:1

THIRD 2. 04:1

FOURTH 1. 39:1

FIFTH 1. 00:1

SIXTH 0. 73:1

REVERSE 5. 63:1

 

[opjohnny]

oops, glad you caught me on that Nick. Hate to be spreading wrong info. It was the 4500 I show with a taller reverse then first.

 

[Ol'TrailDog]

No the e brake has never been used once since new

Am I missing something here? Or are you missing all the joys of having an ebrake? Use mine very very much.

 

[DPelletier]

OTD,

When he said e brake, he meant the emergency brake, not an exhaust brake.







Dave

 

[juicedcummins]

Am I missing something here? Or are you missing all the joys of having an ebrake? Use mine very very much.

Had to think a minute when the e-brake was first mentioned. It could have went 2 ways and I took it as if he was talking about the emergency brake. The emegency brakes can stick if used but this is an auto and have not been in a situation where it was required yet.



An exhaust brake is definitely in this trucks future once DC approves it. They will have programming to sort out first including giving us back the o/d lock out feature. In my case 22k idling down a hill with the exhaust brake on @ 1800 rpm is is joke. Should be one gear less around 2700rpm to do any good.