Why Full-Time to Part-Time 4WD conversion is POINTLESS | 4xOverland

[@DestDroid]

Andrew it's hard to do donuts and burnouts in 4wd.

[@chrishall848]

put a turbo on, then it's easy hehe

[@brkbtjunkie]

Unless you were lucky enough to have the 1998 5.9L Jeep Grand Cherokee

[@petrbenda3406]

You forgot to mention one rather important benefit of RWD over permanent 4WD - donuts. Donuts and burnouts. Both of them are utterly useless and sometimes even downright dangerous, but the childish fun is priceless.

[@robkay9227]

Hi Andrew I developed the first part time kit in 1992 for 80 series We did it for because we were have maintenance issues with front drive flanges cv splines and inner axle seals Toyota upgraded these with and update in late 1994 and the problem mostly disappeared after that but the kit continued to sale .Marks 4wd copied the idea in about 1999 . Yes did a lot of dyno tests and discovered that the front half of the drive used 8 kilo watts of power so that may have given a very small fuel saving and the reason the Pajero didn’t is because the front drive train was still spinning . As a side note Toyota threatened to sue me for modifying their vehicle but backed of because the maintenance issues that the kit was developed for were true I hope this enlightens you .now sit down ,take a deep breath and have a scotch

[@Tanner731]

even dyno tested the mod to prove it worked thats great!

[@alexmaguire2596]

Oh man, this bloke needs to calm down!!

[@robkay9227]

I think possibly he regrets buying a vehicle without having it checkout first and needed to pick on something To his credit he has show us the build in full even if it make him look a bit silly for not getting checked out Great showcase for Terrain Tamer which is a good Australia business I have dealt with for many years

[@olcock6007]

@@robkay9227 Even that is no guarantee, mine was check out by the same people and cost me allot. Problems after problems. $$$$$$$$

[@peterbarber7613]

Rob Kay.the 80 series came out with a part time 4wd

[@brianmorse8811]

I don't like hearing anyone rant about anything except when it's you, because we share the same opinions! These are my rants too...

[@84shortyota]

I like my part time conversion on my 80 series. I didn't do it for increased fuel mileage. I did the conversion so i could run an automatic locker in the front axle. It was cheaper to buy the conversion kit and BOTH lockers than it was to buy one ARB locker, let alone the compressor. I like knowing that my lockers will ALWAYS work. I don't have to worry about air lines leaking or anything like that. I see no strange tire wear and the steering is a little lighter which isn't necessarily a bad thing. There's less wear and tear on front end components.I also like driving on the trails in 2wd until 4wd is needed. All i do is hit that center diff lock button and i'm ready to rock! Its just more fun!! I have had absolutely zero ill effects of doing this "mod". Each to their own!

[@fastnet4x4]

When recovering a vehicle, the part time system allows you to use different combinations. Sometimes we do not want traction on the front wheels or sometimes we just want to place the reduction gear without activating the front transmission, for example in areas with very tight turns. Part time its most versatile.

[@GRcorolla-bt3mn]

Can you give any example of one such particular scenerios where you don't wanna send power to to the front wheels?

[@TrumpAndKamila]

It would not make a difference

[@EnkeiTenjin]

@@GRcorolla-bt3mn when I’m off-road and I break a front axle, then I get put it into 2wd and drive it home. Also, will save a small portion of fuel by only driving 2 wheels. Also, the vehicle becomes easier to steer when the front axle is not being torqued. This muppet has no clue.

[@GRcorolla-bt3mn]

@@EnkeiTenjin hmmm makes sense

[@hongmihnhahn7081]

Sometimes we do want all traction of tire but not 1:1 traction!. AWD is also needed

[@randycarpenter2914]

Love to listen to your information. I live in the states and owned a 1978 4x4 with the np203 full time transfer case. It was my dream truck and I loved how it would go on mud or snow and ice covered roads. I seldom locked it into 4 wheel lock because it seldom needed it unless I was in a rough place where I wanted to just creep along slowly. It finely wore out after 30 plus years. I was the second owner and replaced the motor once and had the transfer case chain and gears replaced due wear over many thousands of miles. I now have a 1994 ford f150 4x4 with rear wheel drive only unless you lock it in. It is the most helpless truck I have ever seen. I was so used to just being able to drive not worry if it was a little mud or snow or even wet grass and on wet roads it hydroplanes in the rear so you have to drive slower and always worry. I agree I have not seen the difference in fuel mileage difference, but the difference in how it handles is very evident and I think all 4x4 trucks and suvs should be full time transfer case for safety. Thank you and loved the video. Its only my opinion for what that is worth.

[@stevjosco.adventures]

Thanks Andrew, I was seriously considering installing a part-time kit in my 105 in the hope it would improve fuel economy. You have convinced me that I would save more money by leaving it as it is... a big, heavy, full-time 4WD. If I really want better fuel economy I should get a Jimny and camp with my hiking gear, like I did in my 20's in my 1978 Suzuki :D

[@hiteck007]

I disagreed with him, read my explanation above. I had both constant & part time 4WD & kept the parts to convert it back if it was no good. I never converted my rig back because most of my driving is highway use & only need 4 WD on occasions. Not having a 2nd diff running Improved my overtaking capability out of sight, it's night & day difference & yes I drive a notable 50 km farther on (roughly depending on driving style) a tank on highway use but in the bush 4 WD or 2 WD fuel use is near on the same, that's the real story from my 1HD-FT Auto.

[@jailbreakoverlander]

Lets be accurate you dont build them, you watch them build it, second I just finished making my 97 FZJ80 from AWD to part time with aisin hubs and 300 m inserts mated to RCV 300M axles and a marks adaptors spool. the part time allows better mileage MUCH less wear and tear on all moving parts up front. and a birf goes unlock and roll. So your wrong homie.

[@craigice9635]

Your better mileage saving will be a fraction of the cost of the conversion. I know with the FZJ you'll be looking for every bit of fuel saving, but you'd be better off with a diesel. I did enjoy the power though, but paid severely at the pump.

[@bamacruiser]

Yep, AWD sucks. Converted my 100 series and never looked back. I also have a 4x4 sequoia with normal 4wd. Don’t know why the hell they didn’t make it like the sequoia with coilovers.

[@bamacruiser]

Craig Ice kit was around $600, more power and lighter steering. Well worth it.

[@jeep6242]

"Much better mileage". Please share with class what much better mileage means with 37" tires, a huge lift, and an RTT? I love your rig and am starting to enjoy exploring your channel. But c'mon, the aero load alone on your rig is like 500X whatever infinitesimal gain in consumption would be from not spinning the front drivetrain stuff. It's just not credible.

[@dominicevans7430]

Dontwant to run the rcvs with full time it will wear them out really fast.cant wait to get some for mine

[@DriveOnLeft]

As an Automotive engineer in the industry, part time does save on fuel. Not in the litres/per hundred however, more so in the 0.1 litres per hundred. You have to understand with new Euro emissions, saving 0.2 litres per hundred is massive.

[@EnkeiTenjin]

100 series V8 literally saves over 1L/100km. Since the conversion, I get 40-60km extra per tank.

[@walterashby1816]

I do agree. I have fitted a lot of these part time kits into the 80 and 100 series land cruises for one reason only. The repair costs to the drive train when towing large heavy loads. The landcruiser is a fantastic vehicle but the full time 4x4 is week in everyday towing and the repair costs are heavy replacing CV joints outer drive flanges,the repairs to the front diff head and transfer case on a on going basis. So a lot of customers either traded for a 70 series landcruiser or a Nissan patrol or we fitted the part time kit which made them comfortable to drive and eliminate the maintenance costs

[@JFK786]

Agree. This point was not covered in the video.

[@ajphillipsracing]

Walter Ashby the ability to engage low range on a boat ramp without braking anything is a great advantage as well. Just generally more options!

[@schrinky90]

@@ajphillipsracing or backing trailers and vans up driveways

[@davidcoy8348]

It's nice to see a video from someone who is NOT at SEMA.

[@ihavenottheslightestclue]

What about if you break something in your front axle? A massive advantage of a part-time kit is the fact that you can unlock your hubs and stop the front internals from spinning and causing further damage while you limp your way home.

[@robertclark2714]

That is a $500.00 luxury that you probably will never use.

[@don0612]

I’ve wished I had it twice. Would’ve saved me thousands

[@corhendriks1755]

What if you break something in your rear axle, or gearbox, or have a heart attack, or if your wife dumps you?

[@redneckwithajeep5001]

That's a good point however you can generally still disengage the front. Take the drive shaft out and depending on setup the CV shafts can come out. Now on a solid axle vehicle that's another story but most modern vehicles don't have a solid axle. If you need to you can generally limp something off a trail to a tow truck

[@brianwalker1933]

Well said Andrew!! I’ve been driving all sorts of 4WD’s since 1978 and l drive them just as you do. I leave the “free wheeling hubs” in the locked position and when l leave the “dry” bitumen, l select 4Hi or 4Lo as required. Safety is “paramount” to me, at all times. Keep up the good work mate...you’re the man.😊👍🇦🇺🦘

[@jeffh7021]

Every time I hit dirt rd I just pop it into 4 wheel automatically. It always feels like the passenger disagrees. Thinking...already? You've put it in 4 wheel? We dont need it. I eventually explain what you just ranted about. Love the work Andrew. Keep it up!

[@keithhaycraft3765]

Dirt roads are what 4wd high is for, it says so in your manual & earlier Toyotas had it on a sticker either inside or outside the glovebox lid.

[@krover01]

That's the beauty of full time awd with locking center diff. I can hit the dirt road and be fine in awd. Things get tough I just lock the diff.

[@scod3908]

Exactly, put the part time 4wd in 4H as soon as you're off the tarmac and all his rants about handling differences become moot...

@@scod3908 well if it's wet, 4H (AWD with open center diff) is an advantage even on tarmac, isn't it?

[@scod3908]

I'd rather drive carefully in the rain like every other RWD vehicle on the road and know that I can get out of trouble when I'm in a remote area which is what a 4wd is supposed to be for.

[@zeMasterRuseman]

I did the part time conversion on my 80. The steering is lighter, and there's less backlash due to less parts spinning. Plus touring in Australia means 1000's of ks on bone dry bitumen where you don't need AWD at all. Overall though I could take it or leave it. If I had to do it again I'd probably leave it alone.

[@jimtekkit]

I get the opposite. My ute has backlash in 2WD and has none at all in 4WD. It all depends on where the backlash is coming from.

[@nirfz]

May i ask something? (i am not that familiar with such conversions) When you say "part time conversion" does this mean it then works basically like the 4wd system of a Jeep Wrangler? ->you eliminate the center diff, and put a form of coupling in that you can close to swithc to 4wd? So that there is a strict connection between the two axles. (like a locked center diff) but when you open it, no power goes to the front wheels?. Because if that is the case, the same parts are turning if you switch to 2wd. They just don't get direct power by the engine, they get turned by moving the car. (so you get loss from the power having to go through the wheels over the gound to the front wheels.

[@stevep8773]

@@nirfz It's been many years since I had a Jeep, but they used to have Command Trac (4WD) and Select Trac (AWD, IIRC). One was 4WD and one was AWD. Your basic 4X4 has 4WD but it only works well on loose surfaces since there is no centre differential - only a transfer case. If you drive one of these basic "part time" systems on tar, you get windup (axles storing energy from travelling at different speeds) and tyre scrub as the energy is released on turns, etc. Accelerated wear and weird tight steering result. On AWD or "full time" 4WD systems like LR Defenders, there is a centre diff that is normally "open" so the F&R axles can travel at different speeds but still get drive (also you have the regular axle diffs that allow L&R wheels to differ so you can go around corners). This can result in more settled handling and less tyre wear. But you could still get stuck with only one wheel losing traction as all the other diffs are open. Hence the need to lock the centre diff (and on LC's you can lock the axle diffs as well). A locked centre diff means you have to lose traction on both axles (at least one wheel) to be stuck and locked axle diffs mean any one wheel can deliver power (whether that's enough to unstick you is another matter). And then you have the traction control computers (selective wheel braking) and so on. As fas as fuel consumption, none of this matters much (as ASPW discusses above) when you look at the mass of these vehicles, their load and especially the effects of wind

[@gw5436]

Impossible mate. The internet experts disagree!

[@nirfz]

@@stevep8773 I am familiar with the theory of how that works, i wrote that i am not familiar with the conversions. So i wanted to know what his conversion inlcuded. As for the Jeeps, as far as i know the Wrangler never got an awd system with center diff. It to this day has a part time 4wd without center diff. That's why i chose it for the comparisson.

[@mondo_stunts27]

I did the part time conversion on my 2000 LC v8. It really helped the car feel better on dry pavement. I only have 33’s and it handles so much better. Tighter turning circle, transmission seemed to shift smoother, steering feels a littler lighter. The down side is I do have to pull over half way up the canyon to lock the hubs if it’s snowing bad. The other is with open diffs and no limited slip, in it’s basically 1 wheel drive on ice in 2x4. Another upside is it should wear out my ifs cvs a lot slower.

[@CACressida]

I had a 2002 Toyota 4Runner with what Toyota called multimode 4wd which allowed you to drive in 2wd, AWD or part time 4x4. I drove it a month in AWD and noticed 0 difference in fuel economy. Driving improved greatly on twisty roads and acceleration from a dead stop when turning onto other roads was obviously improved. Because of fulltime awd there was far far less intrusion from the Vehicle Stability Control which was notorious for cutting engine power in 2wd because of a little bit of wheel spin. I wish I had that system in my FJ Cruiser because I found it extremely useful.

[@waronwoke]

This guy talks from vast experience and not trying to sell you anything, a refreshing change.

[@debrown4093]

MY company every 3 years would replace MY f 250 4x4 or f 350 4x4 part time. I would alway lock the front hubs for the first 2,000 miles to ware in the grears and bearings. Then run unlocked on pavement, then lock them when running for miles off pavement. I noticed on measurable differences in fuel milage.

[@ewingfox6459]

We grew up with the same trucks and also saw a pretty significant fuel savings when in free spool as well with the f-series trucks. plus, it meant that the kid who got the window seat also had to jump out in the snow and flip the hubs where the kid that got stuck riding in the middle (who we get whacked in the knee every time his old man shifted into 2nd and 4th gear) at least had dry boots when we got to school! ;)

[@lanceroark6386]

Andrew, I’m a truck driver here in the states, so that’s where I get my experience. Fuel consumption comes from weight first (almost entirely actually), and aerodynamics waaaaay behind. The only reason that a 4wd truck gets “worse” consumption is because of the added weight. I put worse in quotations because it’s only worse when one is ignoring capability and safety. Given the increase in capability and safety, the cost of increased fuel consumption is more than acceptable.

[@slateslavens]

And the other benefit of running with the front drive parts engaged is that they stay properly lubricated - the CV/U-joints at the steering knuckles, the front propshaft joints, and ring & pinion bearings, etc. I've heard arguments about this causing "premature wear" on the above-listed parts, but they aren't going to wear any faster than the rear parts. That said, a common problem with Land Rover Discovery IIs is that the low-range lever seizes up. This is because it's so rarely used. The same goes for the entire front drive train. If you want it to work when you need it, it needs to be exercised. A system that doesn't get used until it's needed is far more likely to fail under pressure than one that is always in use. Andrew, I'm with you. /rant off

[@MrApple187]

Lies my bmw x drive has been rwd for 5 years no problem

[@slateslavens]

@@MrApple187 yep. and your front CV boots are probably dry-rotted. They'll fail soon after using them again and if you don't catch it, the CV joints themselves follow shortly after. And what happened that you've never needed four wheel drive in five years? Dude, get out on the tracks and have some fun!

[@MrApple187]

@@slateslavens I need a little lift first going to be doing x5 front end swap but I guess not the whole 5 year I use the awd once in a while like just a couple months ago I got it stuck in sand and was struggling to push it lol till I remembered and I plugged my transfer case actuator lol and hot it out but i use it once in a while but on the street it runs rwd

[@slateslavens]

@@MrApple187 cool! Shoot some video while you're doing the swap and post it up!

[@markholtan5696]

That was a fantastic video and made clear one of the things I rant on about to other people about my 1994 80 series Toyota . It’s not worth the money for the conversation and you get nothing in return except a less capable vehicle.

[@tommiller5759]

Hi, I want to start off and say that this just video just saved me a lot of money by convincing me to not do the conversion. THANK YOU!!!! I also wanted to share that a mid 80's Chev Blazer with the hubs locked but the transfer case in 2wd will use about 3 more mpg then when they are unlocked and you can feel the wheels fighting the steering wheel while going around corners.

[@garthhayward9581]

As I understand it Part time 4wd like the old jeeps combined with manual locking and unlocking wheel hubs will save on wear and tear on the front axles and diff internals as they wont be spinning. So when it's disconnected in 2H the entire setup isn't spinning and therefore an argument could be held on that point. However it is important every now and again to engage these parts to ensure they are getting lubrication and that bearings aren't consistently riding on a static position.

[@MegaMr28]

it also stops the classic landcruiser driveline cluck

[@hanrahi9030]

Actually, this argument is logically invalid. The difference in wear & tear savings over a span of 100K miles is negligible. But more importantly, why do you think saving a few negligible miles of wear and tear in the front drivetrain is more important than the REAR drivetrain???? The rear is spinning all its life, so if it can survive that then surely the front can handle it too.

[@ZuluGoatHerder]

@@hanrahi9030 I’d much rather just run on the rear diff and repair rear diff than all the extra work in constant maintenance in swivel hubs and CV joints - ever done that work yourself?

[@hanrahi9030]

@@ZuluGoatHerder - Well, you are arguing for 2wd on a 4wd page. Whether I do the repairs myself or pay someone to do it is besides the point. A rear diff typically doesn't break down even after 200k miles. If my front diff lasts for 180k miles, that is still a good deal.

[@georgiofortuni2802]

I was about to buy a full time 4wd Land Rover defender, but after watching this video I am researching to buy a part time 4wd Land Rover series 3.. Thanks Andrew!

[@emodremov9788]

Hi Andrew I have a 94 jeep ZJ witch was a all wheel drive, but it did't t have a locking central dif . So i i changed the trasfer case and now i can locked it. You are right abought the gas millaege - only 25 - 30 miles per tank. But now i can lock my trasfer case in low and hi gear. Witch was worthed for me. Thank You for You videos

[@henkstols9326]

I have a Triton with super select and have never liked 2H, I tried driving a couple of days in the 2H mode and vehicle did not feel as stable on the the road. Fuel wise I would rather have a more stable vehicle than save on 1lt per 100km.

[@tbillington]

Can't drift around a wet roundabout with constant 4wd though ☹️

[@leskobrandon538]

4 wheel drift?

[@danielperdikis5598]

Yes you can!

[@G55STEYR]

You just don't have the power then

[@ElisPalace]

@@FlatlanderGear what 4x4 these days come with free wheeling hubs besides 70series

[@kleinbiker1]

Sure you can, you just need more power.

[@Auribus]

As others have said; the point of fitting part time 4x4 is that it gives you the ability to isolate the front drive train if it gets damaged on the trail. Unlock hubs and transfer in 2wd makes the front prop, diff and CV's stop spinnig when driving. That way you can limp home and repair. Broken CV or front diff on permanent 4xd means you are up shit creek and have to repair in situ or drive on damaged components risking further damage and/or steering lock up from your CV's exploding. Removing the front propshaft and locking the center diff does not help, CV's and diff are stil spinning on a car without free wheel hubs.

[@willactually7509]

Exactly! This is what Andrew and the majority of those commenting here do not understand. Plus, the rotating mass of differential gears and side shafts rob power, and will cost you in fuel consumption.

[@ewingfox6459]

I love the feel of AWD (vintage Audi guy) BUT in my Jeep - I broke a rear driveshaft and was able to lock my front hubs, disengage my RWD (twin stick transfer case) and got home driving the only front wheel drive 454ci Jeep :)

[@willtricks9432]

Series 3 Land rover, half shaft snapped in traffic, popped into 4WD and away on black top, No free wheeling hubs so did it from my seat. Cheers

[@Taun1000]

You can do this in a permanent 4wd as well, by locking the center diff, and removing either the front or rear propshaft

[@Auribus]

@@Taun1000 Removing the front propshaft and locking the center diff does not help, CV's and diff are stil spinning, driven by the wheels, on a car without free wheel hubs.

[@scotttate7012]

Thanks Andrew! This is encouraging! As the owner of a full-time 4WD 100 series land cruiser (US spec) I think I will spend my money on other modifications instead of a 4WD to 2WD conversion.

[@jeffdoak8444]

every 4x4 i have owned except for my old power wagon have had part time 4x4 and can say that the steering gets heaver in 4x4 on most of them. add locking front diffs and the locking hubs make a huge difference on road

[@robertclark2714]

I have an F250 4x4 and a Lexus LX450 all wheel drive with triple lock differentials. My F250 is a beast and I have NO complaints. I understand its engineering and its limitations. The 80 series is an extreme rock crawling reptile when it is locked. Both of these monsters are fuel hogs. I have a 4Runner 4X4 and another 4Runner 2x4. They all have their limitations depending on what you are demanding from them.

[@nirfz]

Absolutely agree, but there are few things to be mentioned: First: 2wd means two tires have to transfer all your torque to the ground while 4wd means 4 tires transfer all the torque. -> 2wd: 1 tire 50% of the torque, 4wd 1 tire 25 % of the torque. And in slippy conditions that means slip will occur "later" (or you could say you will come further). Second: Audi when comming up with the first quattro prototypes found out that it increased fuel consumption way less than calculated. They tried to figure out that a wheel that gets powered has less rolling resistance than an unpowered wheel. And lastely to the safety part: engaged part time 4wd or a locked center diff can be dangerous when braking hard on slippery gound: The front wheel brakes usually have around 70% of braking force. That means they lock up when the rear ones would still turn and be able to transfer braking force. But with both axles locked together, if the front axle locks up, it locks the rear one over the 4wd system too. Thats why people who drive on snow in the alps usually put part time 4wd cars in 2wd when going downhill on snow.

[@sampaulus2001]

Andrew, I'm not the kind a guy who comments often on videos in general. this time though I completely agree with your "little rant". Thanks for being so honest and passionate in your videos.

[@duncnz3129]

WW2 Jeeps has a disconcerting habit when in 2wd , of not always going around corners and turning the steering wheel suddenly at speed could make the vehicle turn over .The US Army got an engineer named Warn to find out why and fix the problem , he discovered inertia of the extra rotating mass of the drive shaft , axles etc , in some circumstances, caused the Jeep to become reluctant to respond to steering wheel inputs and want to go straight ahead . He came up with free wheel hubs , which were turned in or out by a spanner , after WW2 he left the Army , he came up with hubs that could put in or out by turning a leaver on the hub . I have an Aussie mate who had a Land cruiser 100 series , he had the full time 4wd changed to selectable 2-4 , he said in black cotton soil areas of Australia at some times of the year it was illegal to use 4wd on the dirt roads , True or not ?

[@sweethome7374]

Thank you Andrew. Was considering this for my ‘97 80. Appreciate the content and Happy New Year!

[@thedirtlifesupreame]

I've driven a Land Rover with just Rear Wheel Drive. It just doesn't feel right. They drive so much better with full time four wheel drive.

[@matthewmckinney2709]

I have the rare full time 4WD with 4 Lo option on my 2005 Chevy Tahoe. It is amazing in the snow. It’s the Borg Warner 4482 transfer case. It has full time 4WD (60:40 split) and the 4 Lo button that allows the center diff to lock it to 50:50 torque split. But it has no 2WD option. Sometimes I wish I had the standard transfer case. But, it’s a very unique setup for sure. It’s a similar transfer case to the Borg Warner in the Hummers (BW4484) but mine lacks the 4 Hi (locked center diff) option and the Super Low option some Hummers have (3 speed transfer case).

[@4WHEELSHOP4X4]

Hi Friend we have find that there are less vibration and more confort in highways with the hubs in Free Position. for slippery roads and high velocity in off road is much more secure to use Lock position and H4 and the vehicle handles so better you can feel the grip and performance in each curve. Thanks for the video so interesting. for Highways in summer we recommend Free Position Hubs and H2 the vehicle handles so better

[@robertchestnut3331]

I am glad you posted this video. I own a 1991 fj80 and was thinking about this mod but was on the fence about it. now I am going to save money for something else. thanks!

[@JeremyPetho]

There are other good reasons to do the mod apart from fuel consumption

[@mazevx2451]

Woke up this morning and saw the notification of this video and watched it. It's refreshing. Thank you Andrew for being the way you are! Besides the fact that you are completely right on this.

[@dunk4373]

That’s why I love my 2017 triton. Best of all worlds. Can drive in 2wd you can have it drive like an AWD - then you can lock the centre diff for 4WD with hi and low range.

[@mark2073]

When in 2wd does the front diff spin always, driven by the front wheels? That's what I dont want.

[@Bradthetruckie]

same system as the pajero and alot of other late model ifs vehicles, theres a vacuum solenoid on the diff to actuate unlockable hubs inside the housing. yes the axles them selves still turn yes but not the diff. its also a good way of keeping the cv boots soft.

[@randomoldbloke]

This is one of the few times that I agree 100% with Andrew! Most of the comments for converting to part time are so easily counted with fact not just opinion

[@joashtunison351]

Muchas gracias, Andrew! My 79 jeep wagoneer shall remain full time quadra trac, a decision I already made but which you have nicely backed up.

[@philipjooste9075]

While I agree that one would probably never recoup the cost of a full-time to pert-time conversion through savings in fuel consumption, it is a well-established fact that disconnecting the front axle by means of free wheeling hubs or any other means WILL improve fuel consumption. Case in point: Jeep's new Wrangler JL (2018) is fitted with a front axle disconnect system (FAD) for that very purpose (squeezing out a few more mpg).

[@4xoverland]

YES. 2WD WILL improve fuel consumption, and only on dry tarmac and by 0.001%. A minuscule saving for the cost of safety and increased tire wear. Driving 2WD is a net loss!

[@jimbotheassclown]

It's physics more drag = more power needed = more fuel . I don't care what story you tell Physics don't change because you disagree with them .

[@insipidpostule]

@@jimbotheassclown He's suggesting, quite rightly, that the amount of power needed to overcome that drag is so minuscule as to make no difference. You can rotate these components in their housing by hand, a 4.2l diesel will not even notice the tiny increase in demand.

[@Revnge7Fold]

@@4xoverland correct me if im wrong andrew but is the net tire ware not more with awd? Less tire ware front more in the back with 2wd? My point is less overall tire ware in 2wd?

[@philipjooste9075]

@@4xoverland Respectfully, your findings expressed w.r.t your Zambian friend's Pajero is anecdotal and does not take into account that the vehicle was not fitted with free wheeling hubs - the front driveshaft, differential and side shafts therefore, were still spinning in unison with the associated drag/friction/power sapping rotational mass; resulting in the minuscule saving in fuel consumption you describe. I'd like to suggest a collaboration with Bill the engineer (Defender Mods & Travels) who will happily (I think!) crunch the numbers and provide the data to settle this matter once and for all. If you're watching, Bill - how about it?

[@shawndavenport2236]

Thank you for giving your experience and observations! You couldn't be more correct. I drive daily on snow, ice, sand, and asphalt (tarmac) and wonder every day why my truck has a part time system. I constantly have to switch from 4wd to 2wd because of changing road conditions. I wish I had a full time conversion. Keep up the good work! Cheers from the USA!

[@johannvanschalkwyk2141]

Andrew, I agree 1000% with you. We also owned quite a few 4x4’s, what I cannot understand is why someone will do that, and not fixing it when back at a proper workshop….

[@TOYOTA.Overland]

It depends on the surface. On dry tarmac 4WD is sufficient, off tarmac AWD is always more even and ready for action. I see the problem rather in the fact that the Land Cruiser cannot engage reduction/low speed without closing the inter-axle differential. For example, on a rocky surface it's a pitty, the wheels should roll more freely. For example, the Pajero/Shogun 4th generation has a clever drive solution. You can choose like you need, it's not just classic 4WD-AWD.

[@robertclark2714]

I was considering installing part time to my All Wheel Drive 1996 Lexus LX450 for better fuel economy because the vehicle is a fuel hog. Arguably the vehicle is under powered but it weighs 5000 pounds. Your video probably saved me a lot of money and a lot of headache. THANK YOU. I have always said that if you want a specific vehicle then buy it already engineered and manufactured instead of buying something, then modifying it. This proves the point. There are a million vehicles that get great fuel economy. I choose to drive my Lexus another 500,000 miles even if it is a pig!!!!

[@blitzer25blitz62]

was thinking to do the same on my fulltime 4WD, all time 4H 2005 Fortuner for improving FC. now im leaving it as it is. superior road grip noticable at rainy tarmac.

[@jasonwooler801]

Also don't forget you get better fuel economy by going north to south in the southern hemisphere. Why? You're going downhill............

[@willactually7509]

Yeah, but more tyre wear on the left because of the Coriolis effect!

[@JohnDoe-hy2op]

When I was a yougin I thought the globe was just convenience, because its obviously not a globe, only if you look at the TV or go to school it is a globe, in the real world, it's flat, and we need to go back to the drawing board when talking about part time 4x4 conversions, wear, and consumption. 😆😂🤣

[@ElisPalace]

The earth's constantly spinning sometimes we on top sometimes we on bottom

[@JohnDoe-hy2op]

@@ElisPalace that's what everyone says but to me it looks still, and it's all the lights up in the dark are moving or what's called the sun in daytime.

[@catchawakeup6411]

Not true! The earth is flat

[@khadijagwen]

I had a 1916 Subaru Forester All Wheel Drive and loved it. I could be quite sassy with it. One time I did get stuck when the whole vehicle fell through ice on top of snow and bottomed out on the frame, leaving all the wheels spinning. I think the weakness of my vehicle is that it had a whole plethora of electronic, fiddly bits, and if they malfunctioned... Still it was quite a lovely car.

[@gregatkinson5929]

Interesting Subject , I have a 91 VX 80 Ltd ,owned it for 10 years . It was a Triple Locker + Factory Winch nice truck . My friend whom I purchased it from got it stock & did an 80mm lift & Part Time 4wd kit & free wheel hubs . It handles bad at speed on motorway etc . My feeling was no Adjustable Panhards miss aligned diffs was the main problem , but seeing your discussion on AWD better handling it's made me think again about the problems . I have just bought another 90 VX Triple Locker & Factory Winch all original so will be interesting to compare .

[@v26224]

the only benefit I can think of for a part time kit is reduced wear on the front driveline components when the front drive is not engaged. both a stock fulltime and a stock part time vehicle are essentially only going to give drive to one wheel until you lock the centre either by engaging the centre diff lock or going into 4wd. because of this the delivery of the drive isn't really much different

[@mghutton]

I have a Jeep Grand Cherokee here in the states and it has 2 high, 4 high and 4 full-time and I always keep my transfer case in 4 full-time because I get better handling, and on accelerating, the rear wheels have a tendency to break traction especially when accelerating from a stop and making a turn. When in 4 full time, the Jeep just goes. I totally agree with you!

[@Digital_Dairy]

A little late but I wanted to say why I have considered it: I have a beat up 100 series, ifs. Any slop in the mounts of the front diff is felt on slowing and downshifting, pulling the rig slightly off line. Next the 100 supposedly has a weak front diff, some have broken from a quick slip reversing out of a parking space to sold traction. So the 2wd conversion eliminates that possibility. And as mentioned, those of us who like to go sideways around corners like the rear wheel drive. Now to counter my own thought process here: I've gotten used to the shifting of the rig during downshifting and slowing. The weak diff? I don't know. Just going to find out for myself. And the money I would spend on a conversion (even welding the center diff myself) would cost more than new diff bushes. And finally my first drive in the 100 was over the cascades here in oregon with strong winds and heavy rain. I felt very confident and comfortable even in the standing water on the roadways. So I won't be doing it.

[@7thpostvideos449]

Most SUVs hardly need the use of 4wd in real life. For example, my pajero goes off road about 10 days a year. In this regard, my experience is that the part time 4wd (2H) makes the front parts of the drivetrain (ujoints, front diff, CV joints, CV boots ect) wear less. In my pajero, haven’t touched them since I got it 10 years ago. Another experience I have is, in a Hilux (2002) with IFS, the CV boot was torn and the vehicle has run in part time 4wd with manual locks open for a very long time. But this has not damaged the CV joint as it was not rotating. A bit of cleaning and a new CV boot did the job. I could be wrong but don’t you think 2H make sense for vehicles that hardly go off road?

[@pauls4708]

Be careful there afaik the pajero uses a disconnecting front diff which means all the front stuff is spinning all the time

[@tomkarlsborn2384]

Hi. I have a Pajero also with Superselect system ie 2H, 4H, 4H Lc, 4L Lc. (Lc=Locked centre diff). Using 2H the front driveshaft is not powered but will be driven by the front wheels rotating UNLESS you have either Auto Locking Hubs or unlocked freewheeling hubs. In this mode you may see a slight improvement in fuel consumption. The trap in this mode is that stupid owners leave it in 2H forever and the parts will deteriorate unless turning. Rust in diff, seals sticking, CV joints drying etc. Use 4H now and again to avoid this. My preference is 4H 100% until offroad when 4H Lc/4L Lc is the go. I feel the car handles better in AWD (4H). Cheers

[@loganholmberg2295]

I think I have to agree. My 2014 GMC Sierra has AWD and full time 4WD. I drive in 2wd in the summer and AWD drive in the winter for daily driving. I see a 1 to 2 L/100km loss in AWD vs 2wd and that lost most likely comes from the winter driving over summer driving. I will say though that in my truck the turning radius in 2wd vs AWD does still appear to be smaller.

[@johnossendorf9979]

I agree 100% ! My 2010 6 speed manual TRD Off Road Tacoma is a great truck! That being said, I wish it had the fulltime transfer case from the 2007 6 speed manual Fj Cruiser I traded in for the Tacoma. For an off road oriented SUV it handled like it was on rails and would out run the Tacoma and many other vehicles on any surface especially the moment it was wet, muddy or covered with snow.

[@ranjithpowell6791]

Brilliant. I am going to go with full time 4WD Toyota hiace now, whereas before I was concerned not to have 2wd option. Thank you!

[@Nick-im3sm]

Interestingly, I've done this very same test, in 4 different 4wd trucks I've owned. My second ever 4wd was a 1996 Jeep Cherokee 4.0L country. It had a multi select transfer case like Mitsubishi has where you can go 2wd, open diff 4wd, locked diff 4wd HI, neutral, Locked 4wd Low. I drove that thing for almost a year on normal roads in 2wd before one day thinking "Hmm.. I should try out the full time 4wd" (this truck had a limited slip center diff, so it was a good 50/50 system) I had been measuring my average fuel consumption over the prior year at roughly 15.5mpg (I still have the records on it and every truck I've owned) So I tried full time 4wd. There was basically no difference. Roughly 15.5mpg is what that truck was destined to get no matter what the lever was set at over the course of a month. So I left it! Why not? It's was more sure footed in crappy conditions, and locking the center diff just required one click up on the lever vs 2. Later on, I'd have a 1981 Toyota HiLux (22R, 5 speed transmission, part time 4wd with lockout hubs) As soon as I bought the truck, I decided to test it to see if the hubs being locked vs unlocked made a difference, and it made zero. The only thing on that truck, was if in 2wd, you could feel extra vibration while driving with the hubs locked, which I attributed to something being perhaps worn out, but I was never able to track it down. Further down the road, I had 2 different Chevrolet Suburbans, one from 1989, the other from 1991 (2nd was a 3/4 ton, so solid front axle, lockable hubs) Both trucks, tested and found the hubs being locked made absolutely no difference in fuel mileage at all. That 91 suburban was my final part time 4wd vehicle after that, as I find the full time 4wd is just a safer all around option in wet weather/snowy weather. My 1996 Land Cruiser 80 was effortless in all weather, and my current 2008 Land Rover Discovery 3 is perhaps even more so, because of clever electrics (which I know you kind of loathe, but I've conquered that fear via programming) Great video, and great discussion!

[@willactually7509]

Have you considered that your '96 XJ, whether in 2wd, 4wd part time or 4wd full time, the front drive shaft, differential and side shafts still spin together, and for that reason you will not notice a difference in fuel consumption? Fitting free wheeling hubs and select 2wd will get you up to the high teens.

[@Nick-im3sm]

Will Actually I have considered. But I’ve also had vehicles with freewheeling hubs and it’s made zero difference.

[@scottcampbell2836]

As long as low range is there i can make either system work

[@CodeFoxAus]

My 2014 diesel Nissan Navara got 7.4 L/100km with the hubs unlocked .. vs .. 15.2 L/100km with them locked. I used to do this occasionally to keep up the lube and seal condition. Same load, same roads, same driving manner, double the fuel consumption. (both in 2H). I agree whole-heartedly with the tyrewear, especially on gravel. With the slip on dirt roads, the rear tyres chew out really quickly.

[@johnhorler8330]

Hiu Andrew My 2 cents worth is not about fuel consumption or wear and tear but about towing and in particular maneuvering a boat. I use a 4wd vehicle as I often launch and retrieve from sandy, muddy or rocky unformed locations (not a boat ramp). But moving from a vehicle with FWH's to locked hubs I find that I miss having the ability to use 2WD low range. Particularly when maneuvering (backing) into tight spots at home (concrete and bitumen). I also appreciated low range on difficult boat ramps, not needing FWD but the ability to crawl into position. Maybe its a symptom of my clutch control but I found that I didn't need to ride the clutch to obtain the slow speeds sometime necessary. Just a different perspective on the argument.

[@duncanwallace7760]

good to hear this, I leave my delica in 4x4 all the time because of safety and tires. I decided that the 'extra' fuel was worth it, but if its not using more fuel, then its definitely worth it!

[@44Dell]

Andrew you are 100% correct. I have both. 2002 GM 3500 pick up DRW part time, and 2005 Hummer H2 fulltime four wheel drive. the Hummer H2 drives and handles better both on and off road than the 500 LBS. heavier 3500 and both get the same MPG.

[@BittnerBuddenbrock]

I have been driving off road and in all sorts of weather conditions on 4 continents for 50+ years and I agree 100% with Andrew's points of view and explainations!

[@julietdelta13]

Can’t comment as an expert. But I will say that as someone who spent 20 years driving old Landcruisers mostly cross country for a living I developed a loathing of freewheeling hubs. Always seemed to me that by the time I realized I need them engaged I was already in trouble and all momentum was lost during the engagement process. Secondly it usually involved bending down in knee deep mud to accomplish. I decided that the inconvenience outweighed the extra fuel and like you realized it wasn’t measurable. Good vid mate.

[@elliottg5987]

Our daily is a full-time 4x4 but I got a part time FJ73 because skids. It also has unlocking front hubs which I think might come in handy some day for reversing a trailer into a bad spot but it would hardly be worth putting them on a vehicle that already has perfectly good full-time hubs.

[@KhanTigre]

only gain you can possibly get is an AVM front diff disengage, with which you literally separate mechanically the front wheels from the front differential, so they spin as if in a rear wheel drive car. This way the front diff gets completely disengaged and is not "forced to spin" generating drag. any other situation, full time AWD is better.

[@BigRedtheGinger]

I have a 1979 Dodge W150 Power Wagon, and it has the NP203 transfer case(4x4 only, High Low, High Lock, Low Lock), and I've seen guys on forums talk about converting to a NP205 or doing a 203 part time conversion, and quoting fuel savings as the main reason for doing so. I don't understand that concept because most of these trucks have either a 5.2L or 5.9L(in my truck), so fuel economy is trash to begin with. Seeing as how my truck also has a 4 barrel carb(800cfm Thermoquad from the factory) and a 4 speed manual (NP435, 6.68 first, no overdrive), fuel economy should never be a consideration for mods, unless you're looking to add overdrive.

[@swidahooverlanding2867]

I had a '94 Jeep Cherokee with a full time transfer case that went bad. i converted it to a transfer case that was capable of 2wd. Full time 4 wheel drive and part time 4 wheel drive. I mostly drove around with it in 2wd mode after the swap. I noticed no difference in fell consumption. Thanks for the rant. George.

[@philipjooste9075]

Sure thing George, but you didn't fit free wheeling hubs after you've converted, or have you? Btw, nice SJ!

[@swidahooverlanding2867]

@@philipjooste9075 True that. Rotational parasitic power loss is minimal since if you lifted the front wheels off the ground you could easily by hand turn the driveshaft. This effort would be even lighter if theoretically the rear wheels were pushing the vehicle at the same speed you were hand rotating the front axle. Front disconnect is more on saving wear and tear on front components than savings fuel. Locking hubs went away, in general, when shift on the fly was made popular. If moving front components really were fuel consuming as some think I don't think this option would have been made populaly because manufactures try to keep there vehicles above the CAFE laws at the time. Glad you like the SJ. Check out the channel if you want to see it's adventures if you haven't already. George.

[@mountainconstructions]

They are a great idea on the HDJ100 as it saves the CV's But like anything, there are Pro and Cons... The only Pro is when you are on the Black top Its shit to have the front disengaged off road or on gravel roads. If anything, it may negate understeering on a bitumen road when really pushing it For a 105, i cant really see the point, 100 yes for saving the CV's The downside is you can get a heavy vehicle that will oversteer on wet corners with high throttle applications... Sometimes when unwanted.

[@johnpeake-livingretired]

I driven the Audi A5 4 wheel drive and then the A5 2 wheel drive , wow I’ve now going after 4 wheel drive , save money on fuel and tyre wear , soon both my cars and 4x4 will have all be 4 wheel drive , never going back, love them all !

[@RCExploits]

I have to agree with you. I drive a 2004 Toyota Sequoia Limited with the 4.7 v8 here in the USA. I can drive it in 2wd or 4wd high (center diff unlocked) and i get .2 mpg more in 2wd . With it in 4wd High it feels more planted and stable on the road.

[@huckcast7175]

Just bought a HJZ105R GXL all time 4WD, thanks for the great video

[@jacks86australia]

Old man yells at clouds

[@JSJensen]

OMG that's so original!

[@dalejohnson9342]

Driving a 78 Suburban I mostly concur with your findings. I will say that I have never had to rotate my tires on the vehicle with the straight axles and I see many people with the IRS system who drive in 2wd rotating their tires. When I look at their tire wear I notice that it is significantly heavier wear than my vehicle and I have also noticed a much higher maintenance requirement with the IRS than the straight axle that I have. I there fore think that the extra costs that you are referring to are mostly in the newer systems and not the older systems like the old "Square Body" Suburbans.

[@BCooke7788]

Fully agree, that is why I love your channel, always the TRUTH based on facts and experience, analytical and clinical. An opinion you can trust.

[@crookedridge8178]

Well said. I have a 1975 chevy suburban with np203 transfer case and would never consider a part time conversion

[@Nagudin]

Just couple days ago change part-time tc to full-time with VCD on my 80 series, and now I'm absolutely happy.

[@rogerbull4607]

Hi Andrew, I am with you, would only buy a full time 4X4. Two points to add. With full time 4X4, the torque is split over the 2 axels, so less likely to break a half shaft (that's why the original Range Rover had full time; in development, the part time model kept breaking half shafts, due to torque from that V8! ) 2nd point, when Audi developped the Quatro, their engineers found that a wheel/tire absorbed less energy if it was turned by the shaft, than if it was turned by moving over the road! But some will not be convinced. It's a bit like talking o long distance sailers, and asking which is best, a mono hull or a catamaran! Seen a few bun fights over that one. Thanks

[@leonardpadin869]

Completely agree with you Andrew. Just got your Four-Wheel drive book. Guess I get to reading this beautiful Friday afternoon. Cheers from Las Vegas!

[@fawndog]

There is a reason. For guys running chromoly axle shafts, reduced wear when driving on pavement. Also the center diff is a potential failure point.

[@m-at-the-w142]

Completely agree. I have been wanting a pickup, but none of them come in AWD in the US that i'm aware of

[@alyahary]

You are absolutely right until... you break a front cv or a front diff in a permenant 4wd and usually in the worst possible places.. I know that buying a 70 series part time 4wd is the best solution but until then I will keep enjoying the rock steps and mud slides in a permanent 100 series converted 4wd and a spare greased cv ready 👍🏼

[@Mack74]

How often have you broken a front diff ? It's pretty rare.

[@alyahary]

It depends on how often i go rock crawling.. which is quite often for me and when it breaks, that pointless conversion is the thing that would always bring me back home and let me drive to work the next day no problem.

[@ThisIsDavesGarage]

Agreed completely. The internet is inundated with people providing false information, especially those that own capable 4wd vehicles but rarely, if ever, venture off-road.

[@peterclaessens2005]

Agree with all you are saying. Have had several Pajeros and never saw significant difference between 2H and 4H. I always put it in 4H as soon as I came off bitumen or the roads were wet, for safety reasons. By the way I saw you at the Perth 4WD show yesterday and wanted to tell you how much I am enjoying watching the rebuild series but you looked to be on a mission so I didn't hassle you.

[@jpsjg]

This is why traction systems like Jeep Selec-Trac or Mitsubishi Super-Select are some of the best systems in the world, because you have all the options to choose (2WD - 4WD Part time - 4WD Full time - Neutral - 4WD Low Range). I have a Jeep KJ with factory Command-Trac system (Part time) and I always missed being able to use 4WD in wet pavement or even in some off road situations like, when turning sharp where you can feel your trans binding even in the dirt. A couple of years ago I made the convertion to a NV242 Selec-Trac systems (basically changing the transfer case, the lever and reprogramming the body control module) and it's one of the best mods I have made to my car. Incredibly this is a rare modification because people usually tend to think that Jeep NV242 transfer cases are weaker than NV231 ones. It is totally false. Humvees came from factory with NV242 and Jeep now offer it as an option in the Wrangler. Something never seen before.

[@chrisgreenwood271]

On this occasion I agree with your statement, having owned numerous. 4x4's myself and within my family over many years, these include two classic Range Rovers, two series Land Rovers, a Defender, Discovery 2, Mitsubishi Pajero, and currently a Range Rover P38. I remember my Dad removing the front prop shaft on our light weight Land Rover, I think he even tried this on our classic Range Rover, all in hope of fuel savings (these vehicles were used on our milk rounds back in the early 80's) it made no bloody difference, it was more hassle than anything having to refit prop shafts when we inevitably got stuck in the snow. This was all based on a myth of large fuel savings to get folk into buying free wheeling hubs etc for non off road journeys, waste of time and money IMO, but I'm sure folk will have there own opinions on this matter.

[@Tanner731]

If it were a myth why do the engineers at auto manufacturers still use a c.a.d system/locking hubs + 2wd to make full size trucks meet mpg requirements? I think the government testing is going to be a lot more accurate than the average joes mpg calculations plus no manufacturer would bother with putting locking hubs and 2wd on a truck if they could just leave the truck full time 4x4 and get the same mpg

[@Robert-cu9bm]

That's because your dad's 4x4 didn't have freewheeling hubs. It was still spinning the diff.

[@nothingtoseaheardammit]

A lot of people convert our Hummer H1's into selectable 2wd. Many of those people have removed those transfer cases subsequently.

[@sylvainlandreville3425]

I tried this with my 2000 Subaru Legacy. It can be turned into a front wheel drive only by inserting a fuse in a particular spot in the fuse box in the engine bay. The handling suffered greatly. I did not attempt to measure fuel consumption but since you still carry the weight of the AWD components and as friction from the pavement with the rear tyres keeps all those bearings and gears spinning, it is logical that you end up with the same friction within the system. So I totally agree!

[@Tanner731]

should have pulled the front cvs and welded the center diff ;)

[@thorstenwanoth6774]

Ja, I guess you have a point there! And a proper one too. Been driving LR Def 90 pickup, 1976 MB 230 petrol (I wanna forget about that car!) , Suzuki Swift GLS 1500 and Subaru 2.5i Outback. I feel like that sometimes too - like being in the ______ out - back. That car is for another rainy day story though. As you guessed its raining here now. Agree that permanent 4X shared between axled with lockable centre diff is a gift for humanity. My personal way is for 2 wheelers. A XR650L to travel is more what I do. You are never too old to start riding bikes...

[@jasonharris7909]

I did the conversion on a 1hdt 80 series.. definitly used less fuel, had much tighter driveline (less clunking) much lighter on the steering... that said it was frightening to drive on wet roads and would spin the back wheels all the time. I would not do it again but in my first hand experience some of your points are just wrong.

[@shelleyknight-y7i]

I love your honest review😉👍🏾👍🏾! What you said does make sense 👌🏾!

[@luisguerreiro1806]

Agree with all points from Andrew, apart from one, wear on front axle, my 1994 patrol has no wear on the front half shaft, my 1996 80 series has a considerable groove on the half shaft as its permanently spinning, now that's expensive to replace!

[@michaelbansagi3779]

$50 speedy sleeves or $100 for new shafts. Done both options on my 2 80s. Bearing wholesalers for those prices.

[@jamesrobert3114]

Michael Bansagi or when putting in the new inner axle oil seal into the housing just don’t tap it in so far say 2-3mm out and then it’ll wear on the new surface not the grove. Good for another 500,000kms. The 80’s however seemed to wear more on the brass spindle which they fixed in the 105 to small roller bearings.

[@Raevenswood]

No man landcruisers are full time 4wd the only thing center lock does is give a 50/50 split normally it’s 60/40 rear to front. The reason people change to part time is so the front diff and axle aren’t spinning all the time wearing things out sooner than a part time system. On my 1986 surf with part time and free wheel hubs my CV’s lasted 34 years before needing replacing ... on 90’s surf with auto locking hubs the cv axles wear out way faster because they are constantly spinning even when you aren’t in 4wd. Your diff and axles will work more and wear out sooner with full time. You are probably right about the fuel consumption argument but I don’t agree with the rest.

[@Juanitux]

Probably the myth began with a subaru AWD cars. Those cars consuming more fuel then the front weel drive cars like toyota's. But i think the problem in that case is the boxer engine design is less eficient then in line four cars. I like your chanel very much. Salute from Chile.

[@ewingfox6459]

Interesting idea although as a Subaru guy I could tell you that pulling out the 10A fuse on older Subarus (called the towing fuse) which effectively turned the vehicle into a front-wheel drive - gave me a 4 to 5 mile per gallon improvement in fuel consumption and a significant improvement in off the line pick up. I modified my fuse box so I could flip a switch on my dash switch trigger relay and completed the circuit so I had front wheel drive and full-time all-wheel drive when I needed it. Best part about that car was that the mod didn't require any real changes to the vehicle! I did have some tire wear issues however - but that was just because of all the front-wheel-drive burnouts I was doing - hey, I was young!!!

[@brodienunn8638]

Was the best mod I ever did. Didnt do it to save fuel, did it for the comfort of my 105, removed 99% of torque steer, no gearing backlash smooth gear changes. You say no positivity in fuel consumption i say wrong, 0.3l/100km better is still a positive difference. My on road pick up 0-100km is also better. I didnt do free wheeling hubs or any of that just the transfer case spindle and honestly i have never been happier best thing i have ever done.

[@767dag]

I think your right , People just like the ability to choose and have options when they want . It’s a sense of freedom. And most people like me dive on dry Tarmac. That occasionally has adverse conditions such as deep snow and then occasionally drive off road

[@gtd360]

I think the Economy thing would thing would be the biggest factor. Other factors that could be put into that equation is the power distribution between the front and the back wheels (Is it 100% front, 50/50 front and back, 20% to the front and 80% in the back). Then you can have a trans axle with a center diff. Then average speed and what you are driving on. High speed on tarmac 2 wheel should save you money. Then there's horsepower cost as having to spin more wheels means more weight to spin which at lower speeds is not that much of a problem. Then there's gearing. So, I think it just depends on what you are doing. There's so many configurations in vehicles now and days to each his own.