That is due to the gearing...not the drag of the 4x4. If you could put it in 2wd-lowrange and do the same thing you would have nearly identical results.
Thoughts on 4WD vehicles and winter weather...
- Thread starter Tractorman
- Start date
That is due to the gearing...not the drag of the 4x4. If you could put it in 2wd-lowrange and do the same thing you would have nearly identical results.
My 02 Ranger has a live front axle. So all the components are turning all the time.
As said before, 4 Low gets more engine braking due to the gearing.
i used to put my 04 yota pickup in essentially 2wd low (4 wheel low on the t case without locking the front hubs). it would LUNGE forward when you dump the clutch lol
Is the OP serious?
Lets just say your arguement about braking is valid.. It wouldnt make up for the fact that you might not make it out of your own driveway in a few inches of snow, while if you had 4wd.. You could go through a foot of snow with no issues... And if you're sliding on ice, 4wd or 2wd wont make a difference because you're already ****ed.
I just got home from a trip to the adirondacks this weekend, and I've come to the conclusion that I will NEVER own a RWD (2 wheel) EVER. It was the worst decision I've ever been a part of to bring the ****ing 2wd 03 blazer a friend has to the adirondacks over my 4wd wrangler. We got stuck twice. Once on the bottom of a hill, and the other one he slid off the road at about 25mph and went 30ft into a open field. Both times, we had to get pulled out by a 04 Sierra 3/4 ton duramax, which had 4WD. He was able to pull the blazer (which was burried!) in 3.5ft of snow out fairly easily with 3-4 inches of snow on the ground on top of freezing rain. We were very fortunate nothing bad came out of it. If it would have been another 100ft up, there was a 20ft ditch into woods..
Wish I would have had a picture, but it was terrable. The 4wd Sierra did just fine, TOWING our 2wd blazer back to camp because it was all over the road sliding everywhere. Luckily this was late at night and in a very low populated town and the road isnt busy...
So I will end this by saying, 2wd vehicles blow and obviously OP doesnt have any logic with his post. Theres no way I'd ever even consider taking a 2wd vehicle over a 4wd one in the winter.
Lets just say your arguement about braking is valid.. It wouldnt make up for the fact that you might not make it out of your own driveway in a few inches of snow, while if you had 4wd.. You could go through a foot of snow with no issues... And if you're sliding on ice, 4wd or 2wd wont make a difference because you're already ****ed.
I just got home from a trip to the adirondacks this weekend, and I've come to the conclusion that I will NEVER own a RWD (2 wheel) EVER. It was the worst decision I've ever been a part of to bring the ****ing 2wd 03 blazer a friend has to the adirondacks over my 4wd wrangler. We got stuck twice. Once on the bottom of a hill, and the other one he slid off the road at about 25mph and went 30ft into a open field. Both times, we had to get pulled out by a 04 Sierra 3/4 ton duramax, which had 4WD. He was able to pull the blazer (which was burried!) in 3.5ft of snow out fairly easily with 3-4 inches of snow on the ground on top of freezing rain. We were very fortunate nothing bad came out of it. If it would have been another 100ft up, there was a 20ft ditch into woods..
Wish I would have had a picture, but it was terrable. The 4wd Sierra did just fine, TOWING our 2wd blazer back to camp because it was all over the road sliding everywhere. Luckily this was late at night and in a very low populated town and the road isnt busy...
So I will end this by saying, 2wd vehicles blow and obviously OP doesnt have any logic with his post. Theres no way I'd ever even consider taking a 2wd vehicle over a 4wd one in the winter.
Last edited:
i have a 2wd truck (v8 doesnt help with snow btw). i use about 300 lbs of sand and it seems to help. i have a LOCKER in the rear (g80 for those with chevy knowledge) and it still wont go in places that my dads open diff 4x4 goes. he does have better tires then me but its no comparison.
front wheel drive or rear wheel drive sucks in the winter.
but maybe the op lives in florida or something. we just had a blizzard pass and got dumped with crazy amounts of snow. i would like to see anybody live in this stuff and really think that rr is better then 4x4.
but maybe the op lives in florida or something. we just had a blizzard pass and got dumped with crazy amounts of snow. i would like to see anybody live in this stuff and really think that rr is better then 4x4.
Exactly. :beer:
All I know is my Scout owned all during the winter - thing would never get stuck........until I lifted it, built the motor and put a full Detroit up front and a spool in the rear w/4.88s.
After that it was not very fun to drive in slick conditions
After that it was not very fun to drive in slick conditions
I understand what you're trying to explain, but all of the parts being limited to the same speed does not equal an even brake balance. The front brakes are still working harder to stop the vehicle, but now the rear brakes are being forced to slow down by the locked center diff/transfer case. That's not brake bias, it's mechanical braking, similar to engine braking.
And again, ABS will NEVER affect stopping distance in a positive manner, whether the 4WD is locked or not. ABS was never designed to increase braking capacity or control. It was designed to increase steering control while braking. It was put in place because the majority of the public is too ignorant to pulse their brakes, or brake just enough to avoid lockup.
If you are travelling on ice and lock up the brakes in order to make the ABS kick in, you will stop in a longer distance than if you were able to modulate the brakes enough to keep from sliding but still keep traction. Try testing braking distances between full brake force with ABS intervention vs enough brake force without traction loss.
I think I see where you are going with this. You are saying that in a 4x4, if you lock the front tires with the brakes the rear tire will lockup too because you can't stop the front driveshaft unless you stop the rear driveshaft?
The same idea goes with engine braking. Instead of using the brakes in a 4x4, you can go from 3rd to 2nd(or 1st depending on speed) and use the engine to slow you down. And because you are in 4x4, the resistance will be similar at all 4 wheels. On a 2wd, you only get resistance to two wheels(the one's powered by the motor).
If I am still way off base on what you are talking about, then I'm done here. As said, 4x4 kicks 2wd's ass an any condition except stopping(for the most part).
The same idea goes with engine braking. Instead of using the brakes in a 4x4, you can go from 3rd to 2nd(or 1st depending on speed) and use the engine to slow you down. And because you are in 4x4, the resistance will be similar at all 4 wheels. On a 2wd, you only get resistance to two wheels(the one's powered by the motor).
If I am still way off base on what you are talking about, then I'm done here. As said, 4x4 kicks 2wd's ass an any condition except stopping(for the most part).
There are more 4 wheel drive vehicles off the road up here during the winter compared to other vehicles because of people over driving the conditions. 4 wheel drive does not equal invincible. Stop and go in bad weather, no question that the 4X4 is easier to get around in. Otherwise good studded snow tires and your good to go with whatever you are driving.
Having said that, nothing more fun than getting out after a snow storm to play in a 4X4.
Mike
Having said that, nothing more fun than getting out after a snow storm to play in a 4X4.
Mike
:dw:
No. Because 2L only affects the rear. :bash:
Both you and the op seem to have difficulty acknowledging that improved engine braking occurs in 4WD due to the front axle being tied to the rest of the drivetrain.
Go down a very steep offroad hill in 4L (without braking, just using engine braking) and you'll see the benefits of the increased engine braking applied to the front axle of the vehicle.
Now do the same thing in 2L and see how well the rear axle alone keeps you from sliding down out of control.
I'm done here. I thought a lot of this shit was common sense. :bored:
Agreed! some people are starting to scare me with their logic.
Are you saying it provides better results due to the low gearing causing the rear to slide when in 2wd and low traction? If so, then that makes sense, and being in 4wd will keep the rear of the vehicle from sliding while engine braking on a slick surface(ice).
If not, and you are talking about a high-traction surface, then you are wrong. The added drag of the front end will not give you a noticeable increase in engine-braking. Do you think big-rigs lock their power-splitter when they are engine braking down long hills? NO.
No, i absolutely understand how a 4wd system works. every vehicle ive ever owned has been 4wd and i have a very good understanding of how they work. I see where you are coming from, but Im pretty sure that braking force does not transfer through the driveline from the front wheels to the rear. I dont have the physics to back up my position but im pretty confident in it
Last edited:
Yea, we never get any snow in Green Bay, WI.
And in my first post I said that 4wd is better in snow. Way to go for reading, guys.
But all this "well I got stuck and blah blah 2wd sucks." My little Cavalier I had in highschool would eat snow like a mofo, and wasn't limited by traction, but ground clearance. My wife was driving her Altima with just good all season tires just fine today as trucks were having a tough time in intersections.
Some people are tracking what I'm saying at least.
I know ABS isn't good for stopping distance as threshold braking. That's why I said that you'll notice you can do a lot more stopping before the ABS kicks in when in 4wd. In 2wd, the brake bias is mainly affecting the front wheels, which means the rear axle isn't providing a lot of braking force.
In slick conditions, braking bias should be closer to 50/50, as there will be less weight transfer.
When its locked into 4wd, front braking power is getting shared by both front and rear axles. So YES, the front pads are providing the stopping force, but it is being spread to both axles as the transfer case is locked in. If acceleration is split 50/50, why wouldn't braking power?
So, getting to my main point that braking bias should be closer to 50/50 under slick conditions, having it in 4wd equilizes the braking to 50/50. Which means better stopping.
And in my first post I said that 4wd is better in snow. Way to go for reading, guys.
But all this "well I got stuck and blah blah 2wd sucks." My little Cavalier I had in highschool would eat snow like a mofo, and wasn't limited by traction, but ground clearance. My wife was driving her Altima with just good all season tires just fine today as trucks were having a tough time in intersections.
Some people are tracking what I'm saying at least.
I know ABS isn't good for stopping distance as threshold braking. That's why I said that you'll notice you can do a lot more stopping before the ABS kicks in when in 4wd. In 2wd, the brake bias is mainly affecting the front wheels, which means the rear axle isn't providing a lot of braking force.
In slick conditions, braking bias should be closer to 50/50, as there will be less weight transfer.
When its locked into 4wd, front braking power is getting shared by both front and rear axles. So YES, the front pads are providing the stopping force, but it is being spread to both axles as the transfer case is locked in. If acceleration is split 50/50, why wouldn't braking power?
So, getting to my main point that braking bias should be closer to 50/50 under slick conditions, having it in 4wd equilizes the braking to 50/50. Which means better stopping.
WHO CARES! This thread is pointless.. 4WD > 2WD.
Last edited:
Did you watch the video I posted? it demonstrates how locking up the rear brakes while 4wd is engaged will lock all four tires.
winner!
Correct, you did, but for the wrong reasons.
There is no less weight transfer on ice than there is on dry road. If you are decelerating from 50 mph to 25 mph at the rate of 5 mph per second, there will the exact same amount of weight transfer on ice/snow as there will be on asphalt because the rate of deceleration is the same. Weight transfer is only affected when traction is affected.
First off, not all 4WD systems split the acceleration forces 50/50. Nissan Skylines, R33 and R34 (if I'm not mistaken) are primarily RWD until the center diff decides the rear tires are spinning too much and the front tires need to step in.
Audi's Quattro system is constantly scanning the wheel speeds and deciding what amount of power can go to what axle, but will NEVER send more than 30% of the power to the front tires. This means they will NEVER experience a 50/50 torque split.
However, in both of these examples, braking force stays at a constant (besides computer intervention in high performance driving situations). If a Skyline driver is accelerating and the center diff decides on a 40/60 torque split, and the driver decides to use all the braking power possible, the brakes will still be doing their normal 70/30 or 65/35 or whatever their braking force is set to. The front tires will not be doing 40% of the braking simply because the center diff wanted them to do 40% of the braking.
The reason for this, and the answer to your question in bold is because they are completely separate systems.
The situation is the same in older trucks with open diffs and solid locked transfer cases. If someone is travelling along in a 1975 3/4 ton Chevrolet and needs to brake, all four tires may be forced to do the same speed, but it is still the front brakes are still doing 80% of the braking.
In an earlier post, you state this:
This is 100% correct, but the rear wheels are NOT locking up because of even braking power. They are locking up because of mechanical drag/lockup. If the rear brakes are completely disabled and 4WD is locked in, the front/rear braking bias is 100%/0%. You are implying that because the drive system is forcing the rear tires to stay at the same speed as the front tires, the brakes are sharing the work. In your scenario, how can the rear brakes be doing the same amount of work as the front brakes if they are not even operational?
If the normal amount of pressure for the front brakes is 600 lbs per square inch, and the normal pressure for the rear brakes is 400 lbs per square inch, then the total pressure is 1000 lbs per square inch. When the brakes are applied at full power, in 2wd or 4wd, the front brakes are still pushing at 600 lbs, and the rear brakes are still pushing at 400 lbs.
If you cut off all fluid going to the rear brakes and try it again, the front brakes are still pushing at 600 lbs, where as the rear brakes are now pushing at 0 lbs. However, it's not braking force that's keeping the rear tire speed in check with the front tire speed, it's the gears inside the transfer case, transmission, and differential doing the work.
Everyone here gets what you are getting at, but you are simply thinking of it all wrong. Brake bias is just that, the bias by which the brakes are working. Brake bias is decided by a proportioning valve, brake fluid, and your foot, not the power of the engine or where the center diff/transfer case sends that power. Total stopping power WILL be affected by all of this, but total stopping power is NOT brake bias.
Users who are viewing this thread
