440 sbc spin off drive train loss in 4x4

[drocks?]

Okay all of this Tech information really has me intrigued about parasitic lost in drive trains and what's the best way to minimize it my wants and concerns are probably a little smaller than most of y'all's so I'm going to set it up as a two-part question say you have a Jeep 4 liter little work done to it 200 horsepower at the crank just for a good round number gole tire size on the vehicle 33s what drivetrain can be attached to that to minimize as much lost as possible and be as sturdy as possible given the circumstances(milder wheeling but not afraid to get stuck trying) part 2 applicable to 90% of this form LS motor making 350 400 horsepower some sort of one ton axle and finding enough gearing for 43 inch tires. Thanks for all input and all the knowledge y'all have to offer. I hope this can be more of a discussion because there's nothing specific I'm building at the time that I plan on making major changes to. Plz excuse my bad grammar failed English 101 3 times

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[muddinmetal]

Jeep 4.0 Rig : Ford 8.8 or factory 44 rear (87 Cherokee or Comanche with a towing package) and a High pinion 30 with the larger ujoints (95 YJ on the shafts) Most aftermarket shafts will accommodate the larger joint. Also running the lightest tire/wheel possible will really help with longevity and power. Think aluminum and narrow.

LS Rig: What Tcase? If you go with a 205 you minimum gear in the axles is 5.13 or even more if it fits your combo. We also need to know what side drop you are planning as well

 

[drocks?]

Alright i like the sound of that light weight is always a plus in my book can't say I would want the skinny tires though is that a manual or an automatic transmission? With things like lightweight flywheels help I prefer manual btw

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[muddinmetal]

Alright i like the sound of that light weight is always a plus in my book can't say I would want the skinny tires though is that a manual or an automatic transmission? With things like lightweight flywheels help I prefer manual btw

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Manual transmission only work efficiently offroad if you have a TON of gearing. Think a 100to1 crawl ratio or better before you start think about a stick

Actually a lightweight flywheel kills torque so that would be a backwards move for offroad use

 

[drocks?]

I have heard that argument before. And Also peple arguing against it.... not claiming any sources lol just curious if there are any Dyno numbers showing the parasitic loss in different Drive trains

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[muddinmetal]

I have heard that argument before. And Also peple arguing against it.... not claiming any sources lol just curious if there are any Dyno numbers showing the parasitic loss in different Drive trains

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

To me there is not reason to run a manual offroad unless you already have one or an auto wont bolt up.

 

[BUG-E J]

To me there is not reason to run a manual offroad unless you already have one or an auto wont bolt up.

Ive had both. I swore by a manual to i had an auto. Auto all the way

 

[drocks?]

I currently have a manual and yes it has its downsides but I enjoy it (95 yj 2in lift ish 33s locker in d35 and cromolys) and my last rig a Cherokee had an automatic and it was fun cuz you could just Beat It haha

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[TBItoy]

I think durability is more important than parasitic loss concerns


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BUG-E J]

I think durability is more important than parasitic loss concerns


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I run a stock th350. The guts have been in 3 different cases that broke and i drove it with no fluid. I couldnt keep a clutch or 3rd gear in a yota.

 

[onepieceatatime]

The idea that a manual transmission is more reliable in a dedicated off-road rig is #fakenews.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[TBItoy]

The idea that a manual transmission is more reliable in a dedicated off-road rig is #fakenews.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

X2

Keep fluid in an auto, keep it decently cool, gear appropriately and it makes everything in the drivetrain happier.

The whole idea of "manuals are more reliable" came from ol granny low 4 speeds vs stock auto trans w/ stock axle gears pulling big tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eddyj]

X2


The whole idea of "manuals are more reliable" came from ol granny low 4 speeds vs stock auto trans w/ stock axle gears pulling big tires.

Manuals are more reliable, cheaper, sexier....

I've seen manuals drive home with a hole in the side, I've pulled guys off the mountain who are a quart low on fluid with autos.

 

[d_daffron]

I think the drivetrain loss through some setups may be a little exagerated alot of the "loss" has to do with inertia. Not changing any settings on the dyno but swapping to smaller tires will likely show a bigger HP number due to the engine not having to accelerate all the rotating mass of 43" tires. I would imagine slowing the acceleration rate in the Dyno's settings would show the same gains by allowing the engine more time to overcome the inertia of the tires and drivetrain.

It'd be interesting to see a back to back dyno test just changing tires from something like a 30" tall street tire to a set of 40+" offroad tires.

 

[onepieceatatime]

Re: Re: 440 sbc spin off drive train loss in 4x4

Manuals are more reliable, cheaper, sexier....

I€™ve seen manuals drive home with a hole in the side, I€™ve pulled guys off the mountain who are a quart low on fluid with autos.

Why didn't they a quart of extra ATF for the transmission or some backup for power steering? Seems like that's a very easy readily available fluid that could easily be found on the trail or in camp to avoid having to be drug back. I've ran autos that need more than a quart and they may have acted weird but never not worked being only a quart low. I've also seen exponentially more manual transmissions break a lot more drivetrain parts and needed drug off the mountain because working 3 pedals in hardcore terrain is a lot more difficult with only 2 feet than having a foot per pedal. Not to mention the strategic advantage of an automatic in technical situations vs a manual.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[Eddyj]

I will defend manual transmissions with lies and falsehoods until I switch to an auto. Until then manuals are for men, autos are only good if you want to let your girlfriend/daughter/grandmother drive...

But for real they are more reliable, and don't blame drivtrain breakage on a clutch... just because someone cheaped out on axles or can't work the "man pedal" is not the fault of the tranny

 

[drocks?]

Re: Re: 440 sbc spin off drive train loss in 4x4

I think the drivetrain loss through some setups may be a little exagerated alot of the "loss" has to do with inertia. Not changing any settings on the dyno but swapping to smaller tires will likely show a bigger HP number due to the engine not having to accelerate all the rotating mass of 43" tires. I would imagine slowing the acceleration rate in the Dyno's settings would show the same gains by allowing the engine more time to overcome the inertia of the tires and drivetrain.

It'd be interesting to see a back to back dyno test just changing tires from something like a 30" tall street tire to a set of 40+" offroad tires.

That's more the idea of the discussion. Now how much more parasitic loss do you think you get from doing like a transfer case Doubler instead of having all the gears in one and low gears in the axles

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Eddyj]

That would be a cool comparison. Who has a dyno laying around we can abuse?

 

[muddinmetal]

That would be a cool comparison. Who has a dyno laying around we can abuse?

I hardly think 180 hp is abuse....

 

[1tfrot]

I think the drivetrain loss through some setups may be a little exagerated alot of the "loss" has to do with inertia. Not changing any settings on the dyno but swapping to smaller tires will likely show a bigger HP number due to the engine not having to accelerate all the rotating mass of 43" tires. I would imagine slowing the acceleration rate in the Dyno's settings would show the same gains by allowing the engine more time to overcome the inertia of the tires and drivetrain.

It'd be interesting to see a back to back dyno test just changing tires from something like a 30" tall street tire to a set of 40+" offroad tires.

if this helps.....

1st tuner (2 years ago)- 367 on 35s (aluminum wheels)
2nd tuner (just last week)- 310 on 37s (aluminum wheels) and 292 on 43" stickies (H1s)

my 43" run is in the other thread.