2006 LX470 Locker Questions (1 Viewer)

[BadReligion]

I looked at the pros and cons of both and ended up going the front for a number of reasons;

• The IFS doesn't allow a lot of flex up front (in comparison to the rear) so you're more likely to lift a front wheel.
• The front dif is weaker than the rear, so additional momentum + lifted spinning wheel before re-grabbing traction is more likely to equal a BANG.
• Rear is equipped with a (s***e) LSD already
• I've got a full time mechanical locker (due to price) and didn't want to run that in the rear due to on road manners, however it doesn't matter in the front as I've got a part time 4x4 conversion.

In reality, I'm sure a rear would have been a huge step up too, but the front just made sense for me. I will be going a Harrop E-Locker for the rear when funds allow.



Or, get a front locker and wire up a disable TC switch like I have done. The LX is so much more capable now. Some people might like TC systems, but they're not for me.

I'm not claiming to be an expert on how/when/what to use for lockers, but I've run enough trails that require frequent use of both lockers to get a good idea of how they work, and what happens when you do not use them correctly. I dont know a single person who is front locked only. You agree that the front diff is weaker than the rear, so why would you want to lock that first?? If possible, you want the weakest axle to be able to spin (and release energy) before it breaks. Thats why when navigating an obstacle, you lock the rear first. The rear is obviously stronger so if a single rear wheel is able to give you forward momentum, the rear locker did its job. Not to mention with most situations where a locker is needed, you are traveling uphill and the majority of the vehicles weight is on the rear axle. This is where your best traction is.

I agree with you that wheel lift can be an issue on IFS, so why would you want all drivetrain stress on a single wheel on the weakest axle on the vehicle? I'm just trying to understand your thought process here. With a LSD or open rear, and CDL engaged, if the rear has no traction and the front is locked, guess where all of the power is going?

I also dont understand why you would run a full time locker up front. Even with a part time conversion, ANYTIME you are in 4wd, the front is locked. I guarantee the lifespan of your front axle can be measured in hours or even minutes on just a moderately difficult trail....unless it is in a perfectly straight line.

 

[Torquen]

I'm not claiming to be an expert on how/when/what to use for lockers, but I've run enough trails that require frequent use of both lockers to get a good idea of how they work, and what happens when you do not use them correctly. I dont know a single person who is front locked only. You agree that the front diff is weaker than the rear, so why would you want to lock that first?? If possible, you want the weakest axle to be able to spin (and release energy) before it breaks. Thats why when navigating an obstacle, you lock the rear first. The rear is obviously stronger so if a single rear wheel is able to give you forward momentum, the rear locker did its job. Not to mention with most situations where a locker is needed, you are traveling uphill and the majority of the vehicles weight is on the rear axle. This is where your best traction is.

I agree with you that wheel lift can be an issue on IFS, so why would you want all drivetrain stress on a single wheel on the weakest axle on the vehicle? I'm just trying to understand your thought process here. With a LSD or open rear, and CDL engaged, if the rear has no traction and the front is locked, guess where all of the power is going?

I also dont understand why you would run a full time locker up front. Even with a part time conversion, ANYTIME you are in 4wd, the front is locked. I guarantee the lifespan of your front axle can be measured in hours or even minutes on just a moderately difficult trail....unless it is in a perfectly straight line.

Plenty of people are front locked only, maybe not so much in the cruiser community but more so in the part time 4x4 ute market... At least here in Aus. I can't speak for the US.

What I want to avoid in the front, is the raised wheel spinning faster and faster (due to being open) and then grab traction. By having the front locked, the wheels will have power distributed evenly and reduce that risk. Having the CD locked doesn't give 100% of power forward if the rear is slipping... CDL just ensures front and back is given 50% of the power each. Your exact point is what I'm trying to avoid, all my front power going to one wheel. It will always go to two with a lokker.

You don't understand how a lokker works if you're worried about my front axles life span. It should be called an un-lokka, as that's what it does most of the time. Have a look at how they work, it's not the same as a E-Locker or air locker. If you ran them constantly, then yes, I'd agree with your that you'd experience significant wear.

 

[dividedan]

I also dont understand why you would run a full time locker up front.

To be fair the LOKKA is an auto locker not a spindle locker that is always locked. Still seems sketchy and unpredictable, but watching the 4WDAction videos and other similar Aussie 4x4 shows they are quite common in the front of IFS trucks. In fact there’s a whole episode with Shauno explaining why he would put a front locker in an IFS truck first. Maybe the CVs are stronger in straya?

 

[BadReligion]

Your exact point is what I'm trying to avoid, all my front power going to one wheel. It will always go to two with a lokker.

You don't understand how a lokker works if you're worried about my front axles life span. It should be called an un-lokka, as that's what it does most of the time. Have a look at how they work, it's not the same as a E-Locker or air locker. If you ran them constantly, then yes, I'd agree with your that you'd experience significant wear.

No. If the front is locked and a wheel is off the ground, both wheels will rotate at equal rates, but the stress of all of the rotational force or torque (post differential) will be directed to the single wheel with traction. If you happen to have the wheel turned and the CV is at an angle, that greatly increases the likelihood of breakage at the CV....which is far weaker than a straight rear axle shaft and takes longer to replace trailside. Even if in a straight line, you still put a lot of force on the differential itself which again is not at strong at the rear.

I cant think of a single situation where you would want the front locked over the rear. If a locked rear can keep you moving, there is no need to lock the front. If your throttle control is smooth, a front wheel suddenly gaining traction will not cause any issues.

I understand how the CDL works. If the rear is locked and you have traction there, then the front may spin but not any faster than the rear wheel with the most traction.

I saw "full time mechanical locker", not Lokka in one of your posts. I agree, the Lokka is different as it is an automatic locker, which can work ok in a part time 4wd front. I'd still lock the rear first.

 

[Torquen]

No. If the front is locked and a wheel is off the ground, both wheels will rotate at equal rates, but the stress of all of the rotational force or torque (post differential) will be directed to the single wheel with traction. If you happen to have the wheel turned and the CV is at an angle, that greatly increases the likelihood of breakage at the CV....which is far weaker than a straight rear axle shaft and takes longer to replace trailside. Even if in a straight line, you still put a lot of force on the differential itself which again is not at strong at the rear.

I cant think of a single situation where you would want the front locked over the rear. If a locked rear can keep you moving, there is no need to lock the front. If your throttle control is smooth, a front wheel suddenly gaining traction will not cause any issues.

I understand how the CDL works. If the rear is locked and you have traction there, then the front may spin but not any faster than the rear wheel with the most traction.

I saw "full time mechanical locker", not Lokka in one of your posts. I agree, the Lokka is different as it is an automatic locker, which can work ok in a part time 4wd front. I'd still lock the rear first.

The last part goes back to why I suggested going front Lokka coupled with your stock LSD as a first point of call. From a cost perspective, it's good bang for your buck upgrade.

Agree that if money is no issue, then you'd probably do an E-locker or Air-locker rear first (as rear locked is more versatile in its use) but if money is no issues... Then you'd just dual lock from the get go. Dual E or Air, it's the best solution in the end.

I still disagree that a front lokka makes my rig any more prone to a CV / did issue than a stock open dif. As with any IFS rig, it's all about right foot control. That doesn't change locked or not locked.

Anyway, we're well off track now from the OP.

 

[Joe Bob]

Here is a nice read that addresse most of what is being discussed on this thread: The Debate Rages On: Air Lockers or E-lockers?

 

[Joe Bob]

Ping! I haven't got my lockers yet and I've had to dig snow more than I cared to this winter. I'm gonna lock soon, so anymore comments and/or votes would be great, cheers!