Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Any thoughts on full time vs part time 4wd? In particular 100 series landcruiser version.

in what sense. factory standard part time, or aftermarket ifs part time(factory full time with kit).

it is my view that toyota would have made all their vehicles part time if it was possible (design strength suitability) with their ifs componenty. full time roughly halves the load on driveline components whilst sacraficing ease of steering, increased torque steer, increased fuel consumption, increased driveline noise, increased vibration, increased servicing, need for centre diff lock in transfercase etc..etc...however it improves wet/ limited traction driving /safety too. they would not opt for this unless it was necessary for reduced warrenty claims.

cheers bru.

simply put, part time costs the manufacturer less. Part time 4wd offers better fuel consumption as there are less mechanical losses in the drive train.

Full time 4wd possibly has added safety benefits for less than ideal driving conditions.

A lot of people opt to fit free wheeling hubs to these more modern vehicles. Both have their pro's and cons.

bru21 wrote:in what sense. factory standard part time, or aftermarket ifs part time(factory full time with kit).

it is my view that toyota would have made all their vehicles part time if it was possible (design strength suitability) with their ifs componenty. full time roughly halves the load on driveline components whilst sacraficing ease of steering, increased torque steer, increased fuel consumption, increased driveline noise, increased vibration, increased servicing, need for centre diff lock in transfercase etc..etc...however it improves wet/ limited traction driving /safety too. they would not opt for this unless it was necessary for reduced warrenty claims.

cheers bru.

I disagree bru.

The 80 series came out with full-time 4WD and there was no IFS. Rangies have always been FT4WD, and they have never been IFS. If reduced warranty claims was the reason, why wouldn't the cheap IFS 4Bs (Vitara, for example) come with FT4WD - after all, their main competitors (RAV, CRV, etc.) are all fulltime AWD.

A GXL 80 series (FT4WD) is more comfortable to drive than a DX (PT4WD) - no question on that (although I will admit that I have only driven a DX for a very small amount of time, while have spent hundreds of hours driving a GXL).

Finally, I would think that fulltime would increase pressure on driveline, not decrease.

I reckon carts has got it right. Part-time is the cheaper option. If you're shelling out the dollars for a 100 series, keep the FT - on a wet/dirt road, the difference is definitely noticeable.

I wouldnt buy a full time coz it's boreing. the Do-nuts suck and drifting is not as as easy to do. Ya gota love work cars

fightara wrote:I reckon carts has got it right. Part-time is the cheaper option. If you're shelling out the dollars for a 100 series, keep the FT - on a wet/dirt road, the difference is definitely noticeable.

maybe the safety thing is part of the reason they keep it full time The average soccer mum is less likely to lose it and sue toyota

Just a thought

Full time .... my 30 year old range rover didn't have any problems with
it over its life, all original tcase and diffs ??

you said fuel consumption ?? comeon the difference would be bugger all wouldn't it ? all the bigger engined 4x4s user the about the same amount of fuel anyway 80series petrol vs patrol petrol vs discovery/rangie.

Tom

fightara wrote:

bru21 wrote:in what sense. factory standard part time, or aftermarket ifs part time(factory full time with kit).

it is my view that toyota would have made all their vehicles part time if it was possible (design strength suitability) with their ifs componenty. full time roughly halves the load on driveline components whilst sacraficing ease of steering, increased torque steer, increased fuel consumption, increased driveline noise, increased vibration, increased servicing, need for centre diff lock in transfercase etc..etc...however it improves wet/ limited traction driving /safety too. they would not opt for this unless it was necessary for reduced warrenty claims.

cheers bru.

I disagree bru.

The 80 series came out with full-time 4WD and there was no IFS. Rangies have always been FT4WD, and they have never been IFS. If reduced warranty claims was the reason, why wouldn't the cheap IFS 4Bs (Vitara, for example) come with FT4WD - after all, their main competitors (RAV, CRV, etc.) are all fulltime AWD.

A GXL 80 series (FT4WD) is more comfortable to drive than a DX (PT4WD) - no question on that (although I will admit that I have only driven a DX for a very small amount of time, while have spent hundreds of hours driving a GXL).

Finally, I would think that fulltime would increase pressure on driveline, not decrease.

I reckon carts has got it right. Part-time is the cheaper option. If you're shelling out the dollars for a 100 series, keep the FT - on a wet/dirt road, the difference is definitely noticeable.

firstly my old man has a 100 gxl v8 - ifs

i ment ifs as the model not the fact that it is ifs. the ifs model has a weaker centre etc...

the 80 series has a smaller front diff too compared to the rear.

look at the size of rangie diffs and the fact that they break so commonly. do you think they would last longer if they were part time with such a small diff moving the entire weight of the car.

vitaras etc dont have full time because of cost hence the fultime ravs are in a higher price bracket.

dx have splitties and different spring rates, as well as interior that is firmer hence a gxl would be more comfortable.

full time decreases the load on the rear drive shaft diff etc.... of course it would increase steering loads etc

i mentioned everything carts said

therefore i disagree

cheers bru