chains on front axle
- Thread starter lt403
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
There is nothing wrong with chains on the front axle; except for possible over stress on the differential.
...
...
You're from Miami and asking about chains?? Dang that global warming!!
For the casual user, chains on the fronts are dangerous because you hit the brakes and the fronts grip while the rears come around. On a trail this setup may have advantages on certain conditions but the owner's manual is not attuned to this type of need/application.
DougM
For the casual user, chains on the fronts are dangerous because you hit the brakes and the fronts grip while the rears come around. On a trail this setup may have advantages on certain conditions but the owner's manual is not attuned to this type of need/application.
DougM
Dicks tire center told me to chain up the front, goes to show i have looked in the manual, good thing the cruiser is a tank and i havent had to chain it up yet!
There is only one rule of thumb here: four tires = four chains. Any other configuration has its hazards, and no, if they are the right size, nothing wrong with chains on the front axle. OTOH, do not use chains on any axle if you have stuffed the largest tire possible into the wheel wells without the matching lift cause you will stuff the chain into something when wheeling. HTH. 
supercarrera
Club Esprit de Four
I think chains are more effective on the front axle. The front axle controls steering and the majority of breaking so, to me, it makes more sense to put them there.
I tried mine out yesterday actually. I was staying at a house in Tahoe with my friends and several inches of new snow had fallen the previous night. The snowplows hadn't made it to the neighborhood and a lot of SUVs and other cars were sliding around and getting stuck in the street.
I pulled out of the driveway to see how bad it was and somehow got a little stuck, even fully locked. so I put the chains on, loaded up the Cruiser with four other friends and our gear and headed to Squaw Valley. Made it out of the neighborhood without any problem. I even had to plow a fresh track around another SUV stuck in the middle of the street.
My other friends couldn't get out. They had an all wheel drive BMW and Subaru Outback and were afraid to go out into the street. I called them from Squaw and they were bummed.
I tried mine out yesterday actually. I was staying at a house in Tahoe with my friends and several inches of new snow had fallen the previous night. The snowplows hadn't made it to the neighborhood and a lot of SUVs and other cars were sliding around and getting stuck in the street.
I pulled out of the driveway to see how bad it was and somehow got a little stuck, even fully locked. so I put the chains on, loaded up the Cruiser with four other friends and our gear and headed to Squaw Valley. Made it out of the neighborhood without any problem. I even had to plow a fresh track around another SUV stuck in the middle of the street.
My other friends couldn't get out. They had an all wheel drive BMW and Subaru Outback and were afraid to go out into the street. I called them from Squaw and they were bummed.
Ditto, turbocruiser. Four drive wheels need four chains. I don't see how chains add stress to the differential seeing that the whole purpose of the differential is to account for motion imbalance between the wheels.
If you are staying on level ground with even traction (liked deep snow on the road) no biggy. But if you are flexing out the suspension, and have intermittent/uneven traction, and are turning the wheels to full stop, think of the added stress on the front axle parts. A tire will spin down from high speed at no traction to a proper speed when it gets traction. With the chains on, they can grab pretty much instantly, immediately synching with the vehicle speed. In my mind, this means rapid changes in the torsional stress on the axle (and birfs). I should have said driveline before, rather than diff.
I have chains for all 4 corners of my truck, and would use them all if I needed (staying smooth on the throttle), but so far I have only put a pair on the back.
I'm guessing the no chains up front rule is from loose fitting chains, if they are loose and you turn, they can get into some parts that shouldn't be bashed with chains - just conjecture
I think chains are more effective on the front axle. The front axle controls steering and the majority of breaking so, to me, it makes more sense to put them there.
I tried mine out yesterday actually. I was staying at a house in Tahoe with my friends and several inches of new snow had fallen the previous night. The snowplows hadn't made it to the neighborhood and a lot of SUVs and other cars were sliding around and getting stuck in the street.
I pulled out of the driveway to see how bad it was and somehow got a little stuck, even fully locked. so I put the chains on, loaded up the Cruiser with four other friends and our gear and headed to Squaw Valley. Made it out of the neighborhood without any problem. I even had to plow a fresh track around another SUV stuck in the middle of the street.
My other friends couldn't get out. They had an all wheel drive BMW and Subaru Outback and were afraid to go out into the street. I called them from Squaw and they were bummed.
I can see why you would think this from the few miles you have had on your chains but trust me that there truly is only one rule with this which is four tires = four chains. If you only put chains on the front it is very likely with downhilling and sidehilling for the rear to get totally loose. I'm sure you saw much more traction than the other trucks that were driving within the neighborhood but this is totally limited experience. You dont want chains on only the front tires for many more reasons. Trust me that four tires = four chains.
Ten times out of ten the chains will snap before anything else ever snaps. In fact my chains which are super strong actually have a safety snap that is designed to break before anything else does. Keep in mind that by definition you are in an extremely low traction environment in the first place and that although the chains are allowing forward movement, its not like hot asphalt with hot tires. The main thing to watch out for is hidden hazards like large tree roots or rocks. With any amount of common sense yer not gonna break much simply by setting your chains up and in a life or death winter weather situation where yer stuck, yer gonna take that chance regardless. HTH.
In my best Ed McMahon, "You are correct sir." With most car companies it is simply a matter of mindful risk management on the part of people who are well paid to worry things out. Plus lots of cars offer little to no wheel well clearance and that compounds the problem. Plus with lots of cars the main limiting factor for winter mobility is clearance from the frame to ground so its not like our rigs, where given good traction, it takes 24+ inches of snow to stop the things.
If you have the CDL locked, for normal snow conditions, the fronts work best (In my experience, YMMV). All four is better, but the way it works out is if you lose control of one of your axles, you want it to be the one you aren't steering with. For downhill descents the rear will want to slide around, but that's much easier to control than losing your steering as the front starts to slide to the ditch with the chains on the rear. For going up hills, the fronts are much better, as you will force the rear to follow. For normal snow up to a foot, though, I've never had to chain the 80. Only in wet ice. Best bet? Go slow. Also the axle lockers are verboten in the snow and ice, unless you want to make friends with the local tow company.
Having driven with various configurations (and in a helluva lot of snow), IMHO IF you only have one set of chains, chain the front. You're better off pulling than pushing, and steering the front wheels versus a locked rear.
I'll agree with turbocruiser on the point that 4 is better (WAY BETTER) than 2. Chains can be expensive, but as I've learned, there's no reason to bite half the bullet only to have to bite the second half later...
I'll agree with turbocruiser on the point that 4 is better (WAY BETTER) than 2. Chains can be expensive, but as I've learned, there's no reason to bite half the bullet only to have to bite the second half later...
My tire chain education comes from my dad.
He owned a 1960 Dodge Town Wagon Power Wagon and that was the 4WD vehicle I grew up in (literally).
That truck went in more places than any sane person would take it and it was a true monster.
His chaining procedure was he would chain the front first and then chain the rear if he was not able to proceed. The only time he would chain the rear-only was in a steep descent.
His explanaton was that steering control was paramont and rear traction was secondary, execpt in the case of a downhill descent.
He owned a 1960 Dodge Town Wagon Power Wagon and that was the 4WD vehicle I grew up in (literally).
That truck went in more places than any sane person would take it and it was a true monster.
His chaining procedure was he would chain the front first and then chain the rear if he was not able to proceed. The only time he would chain the rear-only was in a steep descent.
His explanaton was that steering control was paramont and rear traction was secondary, execpt in the case of a downhill descent.
My dad taught me in a 54 Willys Wagon. Not the beast a Power Wagon is, but it sounds like your dad and mine were on the same page regarding the chains. Ours had 7.00 x 15 retread snows (the kind with walnut shells in the rubber) and if you could keep the windshield wipers going (they ran on vacuum), you could drive it anywhere you could point it. In high school I used to make some serious coin during our infrequent snowstorms pulling the recent california tranplants out of the local ditches. Alas, I went off to college, and it was sold without my permission. I almost cried.
(funny since I am a kanuk, I guess it's cold I know, not massive dumps of the white stuff).
