Outer Limits 4x4 Board

dumbdunce wrote:

RaginRover wrote:
Have you priced double lockers fitted ? at the $2.5K for all 4 fitted I believe it is nearly half the price of fitted front and rear - I got the impression that air lockers were around $2k each for front and rear ?

Tom

drive in-drive out 'victim' price for air locker installation on a landcruiser or hilux (about the easiest airlocker installations there are) is around $1700 - $1800 (possibly cheaper) for the first one inclduing wiring and ARB compressor, around $1300 - $1400 for the second one. If you negotiate a decent price for the lockers they can be had for around $1000 each, installations can be arranged for around $150, and they're certainly not beyond being installed by a 3 - 4 banana shade tree mechanic. The cheapest nastiest $20 k-mart compressor is sufficient to run them, with a handful of air fittings and a pressure switch, so it is possible to be twin air locked for slightly less than $2500, but you have to haggle hard and/or know some people.

Thanks for the FYI

Tom

dumbdunce wrote:

RaginRover wrote:
Have you priced double lockers fitted ? at the $2.5K for all 4 fitted I believe it is nearly half the price of fitted front and rear - I got the impression that air lockers were around $2k each for front and rear ?

Tom

drive in-drive out 'victim' price for air locker installation on a landcruiser or hilux (about the easiest airlocker installations there are) is around $1700 - $1800 (possibly cheaper) for the first one inclduing wiring and ARB compressor, around $1300 - $1400 for the second one. If you negotiate a decent price for the lockers they can be had for around $1000 each, installations can be arranged for around $150, and they're certainly not beyond being installed by a 3 - 4 banana shade tree mechanic. The cheapest nastiest $20 k-mart compressor is sufficient to run them, with a handful of air fittings and a pressure switch, so it is possible to be twin air locked for slightly less than $2500, but you have to haggle hard and/or know some people.

When we start selling the traction control setup we arnt going to be trying to compete with the ARB setups on price. Ours is basically going to be priced similarly to the ARBs and we will try to sell it on its performance alone.

Now we may start the pricing a few hundred dollars cheaper than a pair of ARBs to get people looking at the product but I really dont think anybody should buy this just because you are going to save a few hundred bucks. Our traction control has benefits that ARBs carnt offer and it is these features that we will sell it on.

Just as a thought - if our traction control worked identically to a set of ARBs in every situation there wouldnt be any contest because our setup is just so much easier on axles and is so much easier to use. So basically our traction control trades a little bit of top end performance for alot more reliability and strength and ease of use.

So what does this mean in terms of which is better at different levels of wheeling. Heres what i think:

On the mild stuff the performance will be identical - the advantage of the ETC is that you can leave it on all the time and it doesnt effect your turning ability.

As the obstacles get harder there will become a point where you will notice that the full lockers start to work better. This wont necessarily mean that something with traction control wont drive an obstacle that a fully locked rig will but the traction controlled rig will definately have more wheelspin. On an abstacle that can be totally crawled with zero momentum the results would be almost identical in all situations. The lockers may have an advantage in certain situations where you want absolutely no wheelspin where the traction control will let a wheel spin a bit and this will push you off line (and you will fall off a rock and diff out for example) And the traction control will have an advantage in situations where the lockers bind the wheels up and they fight each other (like stuff where you need articulation or really sharp or undercut ledges) With the ETC the drive train will load up less (cause there isnt any binding loads) and the rig will crawl more easily.

As the obstacles get harder again the advantage definately swings back to the traction control simply because its just so much easier on axle components. This lets you drive harder without breaking. When we talk about this sort of wheeling the major application of the traction control is in the front axle because the rear axle will generally be able to handle a locker. That being said the Lockless doesent have any lockers at all and there are only a very small number of situations where a rear locker would make it better - and again there isnt an obstacle anywhere that the Lockless hant been able to drive that a fully locked rig has. This strength issue is the reason why Adrian (POS) runs the traction control on his front axle and not a locker. We have talked about it many times whether or not he would be better off with a locker in the front and he has never done it simply because he knows that his front axle just wouldnt be able to handle it. Basically his rig is more capable without a front locker - and if he can sort out a way to keep his rear end from breaking he would be unstoppable (he has now broken both rear toyota 60 series axles - so I think thats 2 front CVs and 2 rear axles he has broken since it was built which really demonstrates how strong his front combo really is). The other example is the climb that the Lockless has driven Tony has broken twice on and has yet to drive it. For me the climb isnt really all that hard (Im not sure if this is how I should describe it cause it took me about 10 goes to get it and I did roll completely over at one point although I was being fairly stupid on that attempt). Its got a tough ledge at the bottom and it is steep and a bit loose and off camber as you go up. For me its just a matter picking a line and holding the throttle flat. For Tony he just basically has trouble breaking the front end becuse its locked -its happned twice now. Im sure he will be able to drive the climb but each time he tries he is really risking breaking his front end. It wouldnt supprise that i would be able to drive up there 10 times without breaking and Tony would probably break 5 times - I dont know he may not ever be able to drive it without breaking. If he had the same front setup as me I dont think he would have any trouble. Now as our tracks become harder and harder this is going to become a greater concern to Tony - trying to drive stuff and trying to keep the front from breaking. For me and Adrian we dont worry about the strength of the front axle - we do break stuff eventually but it happens over a period of time that we can live with. For Tony if he is not carefull he could break a brand new CV every time he goes out.


So who do I think should buy traction control instead of lockers?

- somebody who isnt into the hard core stuff that wants something that is easy to use and gentle on drive train components.

- somebody that carnt get ARBs for their vehicle.

- somebody that has independent front suspension and doesent want to break it.

- somebody that is really into the hardcore stuff and is having strength issues (espesially the front end)

And who do I think should stay with the lockers?

- somebody that doesent run big tyres that doesent really drive that hard.

- somebody that doesent mind fixing broken CVs.


Sam

Sam, thanks for all you info and I look forward to see the release of this product.

One last thing, I imagine the cost for the first installation is higher than for both axles, like the ARB, so can you give me a rough idea for that? I am thinking the rear LSD in the GQ would be enough for the rear and run ETC in the front only (if recommended)

Do you have any idea when your product will be available?

thanks,

Any idea when all the details will be available - eg models of truck it fits, where to get it installed, how much etc

Begbie wrote:Any idea when all the details will be available - eg models of truck it fits, where to get it installed, how much etc

all of that info is in this thread already

Since this system works on the brake system. Would it have similar results to some of the manufactures on sand. Where when they brake the wheel, they have a tandancy to bog the vehicle also???

turps wrote:Since this system works on the brake system. Would it have similar results to some of the manufactures on sand. Where when they brake the wheel, they have a tandancy to bog the vehicle also???

It seems that it can be turned off. So maybe it might need to be turned off in this case?

turps wrote:Since this system works on the brake system. Would it have similar results to some of the manufactures on sand. Where when they brake the wheel, they have a tandancy to bog the vehicle also???

Not really - you don't tend to get crossed up in sand, if both wheels are spinning then the diff is working - it works pretty well in the sand, anywhere that is hard enough to get crossed up it will drive you out of.

Of course in sand there are variables, tyres, vehicle weight blah blah blah

It is not like factory traction control - read the thread and understand why.

Tom

RaginRover wrote:

turps wrote:Since this system works on the brake system. Would it have similar results to some of the manufactures on sand. Where when they brake the wheel, they have a tandancy to bog the vehicle also???

Not really - you don't tend to get crossed up in sand, if both wheels are spinning then the diff is working - it works pretty well in the sand, anywhere that is hard enough to get crossed up it will drive you out of.

Of course in sand there are variables, tyres, vehicle weight blah blah blah

It is not like factory traction control - read the thread and understand why.

Tom

Just thought it may have need a car with a bit of HP to drive thru the system. As I was thinking along the lines of fitting this system to a GQ LWB, that I would be using mainly as a camping/touring vehicle. And it wouldnt have much more HP than what the factory gave it.

And since the way I understood how it worked was by applying a small amount of brake pressure. This might be bad, for my purpose. Wheres the vehicle that are listed as having it fitted, (to the best of my knowledge) are fairly light and have decent motors in them (or at least good gearing to make up for it).

I have read all the above posts and have no further questions.

Tell me who to make the cheque out to and I'll stand in line.

turps wrote:

RaginRover wrote:

turps wrote:Since this system works on the brake system. Would it have similar results to some of the manufactures on sand. Where when they brake the wheel, they have a tandancy to bog the vehicle also???

Not really - you don't tend to get crossed up in sand, if both wheels are spinning then the diff is working - it works pretty well in the sand, anywhere that is hard enough to get crossed up it will drive you out of.

Of course in sand there are variables, tyres, vehicle weight blah blah blah

It is not like factory traction control - read the thread and understand why.

Tom

Just thought it may have need a car with a bit of HP to drive thru the system. As I was thinking along the lines of fitting this system to a GQ LWB, that I would be using mainly as a camping/touring vehicle. And it wouldnt have much more HP than what the factory gave it.

And since the way I understood how it worked was by applying a small amount of brake pressure. This might be bad, for my purpose. Wheres the vehicle that are listed as having it fitted, (to the best of my knowledge) are fairly light and have decent motors in them (or at least good gearing to make up for it).

Good thoughts there - I am unsure of the exact brake force exerted however it is hardly noticable on mine ('91 3.9V8 rangie - 130Kw 3.54 diffs and MTRs) and it wasn't noticable on my old ranige ('76 3.5V8 80Kw ish 3.54 diffs and MTRs)

It is not as harsh as you would think - it can be set up for really harsh response and be backed right down for a gentle response. I am sure strangerover will give you his thoughts.

It is running on a 3.9 tubro isuzu however it is hardly stock and while it doesn't produce massive kw(s) it does produce a stack of torque.

TOm

RaginRover wrote:It is running on a 3.9 tubro isuzu however it is hardly stock and while it doesn't produce massive kw(s) it does produce a stack of torque.

And said Isuzu Rangie has 120-130bhp and probably weighs 3 tonnes with all crap on it. I doubt having adequate power/torque would be a problem in most vehicles.

turps wrote:Just thought it may have need a car with a bit of HP to drive thru the system. As I was thinking along the lines of fitting this system to a GQ LWB, that I would be using mainly as a camping/touring vehicle. And it wouldnt have much more HP than what the factory gave it.

And since the way I understood how it worked was by applying a small amount of brake pressure. This might be bad, for my purpose. Wheres the vehicle that are listed as having it fitted, (to the best of my knowledge) are fairly light and have decent motors in them (or at least good gearing to make up for it).

In regards to needing HP, remember i had this on the old Red POS with a pissy little 3Y engine turning 38 Claws. It worked like a champ. In fact i believe it was the main factor in allowing me in the old POS to try and keep up to the Mogrover. If i had lockers on the old POS (which i did have before HETC) then i would have been busting CV's and Axles all the time (which i was prior to HETC) , meaning i would have been left behind when it came to proving new tracks and obstacles!

POS wrote:

turps wrote:Just thought it may have need a car with a bit of HP to drive thru the system. As I was thinking along the lines of fitting this system to a GQ LWB, that I would be using mainly as a camping/touring vehicle. And it wouldnt have much more HP than what the factory gave it.

And since the way I understood how it worked was by applying a small amount of brake pressure. This might be bad, for my purpose. Wheres the vehicle that are listed as having it fitted, (to the best of my knowledge) are fairly light and have decent motors in them (or at least good gearing to make up for it).

In regards to needing HP, remember i had this on the old Red POS with a pissy little 3Y engine turning 38 Claws. It worked like a champ. In fact i believe it was the main factor in allowing me in the old POS to try and keep up to the Mogrover. If i had lockers on the old POS (which i did have before HETC) then i would have been busting CV's and Axles all the time (which i was prior to HETC) , meaning i would have been left behind when it came to proving new tracks and obstacles!

Thinks for the extra info. Was just thinking this would be a good option for my camping vehicle I would like to get in a couple of years time. As a LWB GQ with turbo diesel, is what I am after for that task. But for this set up it does sound like a good option, especially with the Nissan LSD in the back. That sounds like it would make a good combo.

Since it uses the factory brake setup to slow a spinning wheel (I am guessing - correct me if I am wrong) do you find it chews through brake pads pretty fast ?

Most of the igs are not daily drivers so pad wear is pretty low priority.

It would obviously increase pad wear some, but the wheel & tyre speeds we're talking about are all really low (like 5kph or less) so the actual wear would be minimal compared to a couple of 60kph stops.

so theoretically this ETC can work on a 2WD?

dennis72 wrote:so theoretically this ETC can work on a 2WD?

Yes

As per the thread above can be bought just for 2 wheels so dont see any reason why not....

Theoretically speaking, other than the costs involved and the reduncancy, is there any reason somebody couldn't fit both Lockers and Traction Control? Use the TC for most situations, and the Lockers where the TC allows too much wheelspin?

On a slightly different note, I presume the controller has a threshold, a certain level of difference between wheel speeds before it kicks in. What determines this threshold, and is there any benefit in having selectable thresholds for different terrain? This whole "no decisions" concept sounds too easy.

Cheers,

Scott

something like this?

Or this

NJ SWB wrote:Theoretically speaking, other than the costs involved and the reduncancy, is there any reason somebody couldn't fit both Lockers and Traction Control? Use the TC for most situations, and the Lockers where the TC allows too much wheelspin?

On a slightly different note, I presume the controller has a threshold, a certain level of difference between wheel speeds before it kicks in. What determines this threshold, and is there any benefit in having selectable thresholds for different terrain? This whole "no decisions" concept sounds too easy.

Cheers,

Scott

i believe the moon buggy is running lockers and Traction control.. but no reason why you couldn't, although apparently it works better with an LSD than an open center, so you'd lose that advantage, because you'd be open

Well.... lockers still are 100% locked which LSD + traction control still cant give you.

I'd have no issues with the principle of having both if you had the money, then turning the locker on when needed.

Beastmavster wrote:I'd have no issues with the principle of having both if you had the money, then turning the locker on when needed.

sorry if this question has already been asked, just kinda glimsed over this thread but...

are u saying that u could run an air locker as well as traction control in the same diff?

yep, but obviously if the brakes were applied by the traction control when the diff lock was locked, drive wouldn't be transmitted to the other wheel more of a do i choose traction control or lockers for this obstical

Aza wrote:

Beastmavster wrote:I'd have no issues with the principle of having both if you had the money, then turning the locker on when needed.

sorry if this question has already been asked, just kinda glimsed over this thread but...

are u saying that u could run an air locker as well as traction control in the same diff?

Yes you can.
A diff lock (ARB Airlocker) goes in the diff center (or replaces) and locks the two axles together.
ETC, measures wheel speed. Computer works out there is a difference and applys brake pressure to the faster spinning wheel. Which transfers more powerto the slower spinning(higher traction) wheel.

When locker is turned on there will be no difference in wheel speed so computer will do nothing.

bad_religion_au wrote:yep, but obviously if the brakes were applied by the traction control when the diff lock was locked, drive wouldn't be transmitted to the other wheel more of a do i choose traction control or lockers for this obstical

if both axles are locked together, ETC cannot possibly detect any rotational difference between them, so will not activate. this of course assumes that the ETC works across an axle, and not along a side or across corners (which is probably not that useful off-road anyway). so in effect turning on the locker would turn the ETC off, without having to touch the ETC controls at all.

adam.s wrote:Since it uses the factory brake setup to slow a spinning wheel (I am guessing - correct me if I am wrong) do you find it chews through brake pads pretty fast ?

No - not at all it is on my DD

Tom

dumbdunce wrote:

bad_religion_au wrote:yep, but obviously if the brakes were applied by the traction control when the diff lock was locked, drive wouldn't be transmitted to the other wheel more of a do i choose traction control or lockers for this obstical

if both axles are locked together, ETC cannot possibly detect any rotational difference between them, so will not activate. this of course assumes that the ETC works across an axle, and not along a side or across corners (which is probably not that useful off-road anyway). so in effect turning on the locker would turn the ETC off, without having to touch the ETC controls at all.

that's what i meant to say