Disable All Wheel Drive on 100?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

DuckLN

DuckLN

10 Year 15 Year
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Threads
95
Messages
1,145
Location
Flooded timber of Arkansas
Anybody tried this?

Is it possible?

If so can i expect a MPG gain?


Great car if they would have left off the AWD part. At least thats my god fearing opinion of my observation.:beer:
 
Or the cheap way, remove hub flanges, reinstall milled out flanges, remove front DS and engage CDL. All set for hours of RWD fun.
 
2000UZJ said:
Couldn't you just swap out the hub flanges and lock the CDL?
Click to expand...

^^^ Yeah what he said. :flipoff2:I forgot when I did It I had a broken CV.

The AWD for daily driving is one of my favorite parts of the vehicle. It drives great IMO, is not intrusive and give peace of mind.
 
Last edited:
DuckLN said:
Great car if they would have left off the AWD part.
Click to expand...

A lot of people here, myself included, will strongly disagree with this statement. But an opinion is an opinion and I respect that.:flipoff2:
 
Only one issue: if you make it prt time 4WD, you will loose the ABS function as this is linked to the front axles as well. Which are no longer turning with this kit.
 
Should not affect ABS or ATRAC unless you inadvertently remove/damage the sensor or reluctor ring (unlikely). Not sure how *effective* ATRAC would be but it will still operate.
 
I don't think you'll much of an improvement, you're still pushing around "three tons of fun".
 
Wilsil said:
Only one issue: if you make it prt time 4WD, you will loose the ABS function as this is linked to the front axles as well. Which are no longer turning with this kit.
Click to expand...

ABS sensor is on front hub which is not affected and keeps turning on the US IFS spec.

Part time the hard way as a trail fix or dyno run day is great.

The part time kit with hubs etc is too expensive for the benefits gained IMO.
 
lhommec13 said:
A lot of people here, myself included, will strongly disagree with this statement. But an opinion is an opinion and I respect that.************
Click to expand...

I guess my point is that a vehicle doesnt need all wheel drive for pavement driving (I get on some rocks regularly too) and nowadays fuel costs far outweigh other problems when we're gettin 14/17 MPGs at BEST.

If I could snap my fingerz and be able to disengage the AWD I would certainly do so for cruisin interstates round here.
 
The awd is one of the best parts of the LC. You can drive it hard and not worry. The fun part is taking on and off ramps more quickly than you should and the truck just sticks. You get really funny looks from people that think they are going fast in the corners. Also launching hard from red lights in the rain/snow is fun.
 
I drove a Sequoia for about 6 mos. before i bought the cruiser. The difference in MPG was minimal. It had a bit more pep around town, but didn't tackle the hills of Northwest Arkansas as well as the cruiser.
 
DuckLN said:
I guess my point is that a vehicle doesnt need all wheel drive for pavement driving (I get on some rocks regularly too) and nowadays fuel costs far outweigh other problems when we're gettin 14/17 MPGs at BEST.

If I could snap my fingerz and be able to disengage the AWD I would certainly do so for cruisin interstates round here.
Click to expand...
The kit alone is $800.
How comfortable are you about tearing your t-case apart?
I'm thinking shop cost to modify the t-case would run another $1K min, plus the "while we're at it" stuff you would want to do as long as the t-case was out anyway.

$1800.00 buys a lot of gas, even at >$4.00/Gal. I'd want to know what the real world MPG savings is and put a pencil to it to figure out how many miles you would need to drive to recoup your cost.

My guess is you could just drive a little slower or buy a used Corolla for a DD and it would be more cost effective.
 
Traditionally with the part time 4WD kits that people install on the 80 series (myself included), MPG gains were negligible to non existent. Not worth the time/money IMHO:meh:

Sent from my iPhone using IH8MUD
 
Last edited:
If you're lucky you'd get 1 mpg difference. At $4 a gallon and an average of 15k miles. The 1 mpg difference will save you $221 a year.

If you spent $1800 on the conversion it would take you 8 years before you are break even.

If you have a long commute, a 100 series is not a very good choice on the wallet.
 
Regarding the expected fuel mileage on a hunnert with a 4.7 V8, can we assume similar expectations to a tundra with the same motor and same rear end gears? If so, does anybody know what those figures are?

Based on the "Finley Theorem", if there was a 2 mpg gain (not one as he stated) the $1,800 conversion estimate would be recouped in 4 years. Furthermore, If we could get the $1,800 lower you could maybe recoup in a couple 2 or 3 years and I would quit complaining about pump prices (at least temporarily).
 
DuckLN said:
Regarding the expected fuel mileage on a hunnert with a 4.7 V8, can we assume similar expectations to a tundra with the same motor and same rear end gears? If so, does anybody know what those figures are?
Click to expand...

A quick online search had the 2000 Tundra V8 got 14/17 with a combined 15 MPG. Not too far off from what I get on my 2000 LC with 33s and 800-1000 lbs of armor:meh: IIRC the 2000 LC was 13/16 with 14 combined.

Edit: plus the heaviest Tundra (access cab 4x4) has a curb weight of ~4600# and the LC is ~5100#. So a small weight difference.

Sent from my iPhone using IH8MUD
 
Last edited:
Friend has a 2wd first generation Tundra, he averages about 16 MPG around town. Another friend has a lifted 04 Tundra running 33/11.50's and gets about 13 mpg around town, just for some life comparison
 
When I had my Toyota Surf, I changed the hubs to manual free wheeling hubs. The difference was massive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom