D
Douglas A. Shrader
Guest
"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
surfaces?
> >
> >
> > Did you really have to post this exact same question four times?
> >
> It hasn't been answered yet, so yes. . . . . .
I answered it every time, as soon as I read it. Asking four times in a row
without waiting for a response is silly, and beneath you.
>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
> >>>>> they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of
> >>>> 2WD. As long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear
> >>>> will not increase over 2WD.
> >>>
> >>> See above.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
> >>>>>> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are
> >>>>>> very marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are
> >>>>>> some figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and
> >>>>>> tear, well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in
> >>>>>> 4WD wears it out prematurely.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements.
> >>>>> Tires, sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on
> >>>>> the same tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you
> >>>>> are just compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large
> >>>>> decrease when driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners
> >>>>> manuals will tell you that, not to mention the hit you see when
> >>>>> you refuel.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer
> >>>> than my Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco
> >>>> handles
> >>> better -
> >>>> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or
> >>>> 4WD the mileage varies by 1mpg at most.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> See above.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you
> >>>>>> need it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there,
> >>>>>> pulling out of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow
> >>>>>> covered road with some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy
> >>>>>> loads on road etc, etc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a
> >>>>> greasy bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need
> >>>>> four wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's
> >>>>> solid ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving
> >>>>> ability. None of the items you listed require four wheel drive,
> >>>>> sure in some cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by
> >>>>> any means
> >>>>>
> >>>> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights
> >>>> either. . . . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.
> >>>
> >>> Now your being silly, I expected better from you. The road was snow
> >>> and ice covered this morning here, I had no trouble making it to
> >>> work in 2 wheel drive. 4 wheel drive is used when there are four
> >>> foot drifts across the road, not patches of snow here and there.
> >>>
> >> I didn't say you couldn't drive in bad weather without 4WD, but it
> >> does make it easier, just like night driving with headlights is
> >> easier than without.
> >
> >
> > And if you read my original post I said 4WD makes it easier but is not
> > required, whereapon you decided to say something silly.
> >
> You said no-one who was a good driver needs 4WD. I simply said the same
> applies to headlights.
No, you don't need a 4x4 to handle patches of snow on an otherwise clear
road, or a spot of grease on the road, or water at an intersection, and I
think you know that. You were trying to dream up scenarious to justify a
fulltime 4x4 system but failed to list a single good reason. Why not be
honest and admit it's something you want, instead of trying to deceive me?
I'll understand.
> >
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or
> >>>>>> are dumping it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to
> >>>>> dumb to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but
> >>>>> they don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take
> >>>>> that as a personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know
> >>>>> about your country but quality is fading fast here because to
> >>>>> many people base purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on
> >>>>> a wrench when I can buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00
> >>>>> bends they gripe about it "they don't build things like they used
> >>>>> to", then they go out and buy another $2.00 wrench. Part time is
> >>>>> great for people like me, I really don't care what you want to
> >>>>> drive. You asked for reasons, I gave you reasons. To and for me
> >>>>> they are valid, to each his own.
> >>>>
> >>>> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I
> >>>> get a good view of both.
> >>>
> >>> See above, what you and I were calling fulltime are not the same
> >>> vehicles. Tell me, does your part time have two or three diffs?
> >>>
> >> My part-time system has 2 diffs - I can't understand how a permanent
> >> 4WD system with only 2 instead of 3 diffs could allow for rotational
> >> differences between front and rear axles. What vehicles have a
> >> permanent 4WD system with 2 diffs?
> >
> > Examples listed in other post. I do wish you wouldn't ask the same
> > question four times in four different posts.
> > The part you don't understand is the part that made me state part
> > time is better than full time, for the reasons I gave in my very
> > first post. Please, seriously, reread all the posts, everything you
> > are asking here has already been explained.
> >
> I have. I can't understand why you call it full-time 4WD when clearly it
is
> designed not to be used on paved roads as it has no way of allowing for
> inter-axle rotational differences.
I call it fulltime because the manufacturers called it fulltime, and they
marketed it for use in all weather and road conditions, including dry
pavement.
It appears from your description to be
> part-time 4WD without the option of 2WD for road use which is amazing.
Millions were built and sold here, and many of the buyers loved them. I did
not.
>
> >
> >>
> >>> It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
> >>>> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
> >>>> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you
> >>>> say, cars are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than
> >>>> here in my experience which is why I thin low-tech is more
> >>>> acceptable as long as the price is also low.
> >>>
> >>> You thin? ;-)
> >>
> >> Correct me if I'm wrong by all means - which vehciles in the US come
> >> with permanent 4WD?
> >
> > Permanet four wheel drive is the term I used for vehicles with three
> > diferentials. Full time four wheel drives included the Jeep I listed
> > in the first post and the others listed there as well. Now, why did
> > you ask this four times in four different posts all made by you at
> > the same time?
>
> Coz this is the 7th time you've skirted the question. . . . . . ;-)
I have not skirted it even once, you simply repeated four times in a row
without waiting for a response. I think you understand now, if not I doubt I
can explain it any better, so take care and goodbye, I hope ;-)
Jeep owners have told me that the Borg Warner Quadra-trac is