Part time 4wd

[alliston]

Excuse my ignorance. I was just watch a video on someone fitting a part-time 4wd kit in a 80 series. Cut a short story all he does is take out the spider gears between front and rear spool and changes the rear spool and rebuilds it simple but the kit costs alot. My question is why couldn't u just take out the spider gear and put it back together

 

[alliston]

https://youtu.be/DSJvYn_zxLE

 

[Julian T]

Personally I would not want to convert a 80 to part time 4x4.
I don't think it's suspension geometry was designed to be 2wd and I have heard they don't handle that well as rwd only.
Just personal opinion but I think some things are better left the way they were designed.

 

[frank rabbets]

The drive to the rear is originally taken off the gearwheel that came off with the original spool. This drive spins in the spool so if you have no spiders gears there would be no drive. The second spool has the drive as pert of the spool so it is the spool itself that drives the rear prop.

 

[jamesfickackerly]

I saw the same video. I would love to have it.

 

[Julian T]

Update, I have had my front prop shaft off my 80 series in an attempt to locate a noise/vibration and have been driving with the center diff locked so the rear axle is the only driven axle, what I can tell you is that in my opinion having 100% of the power going to the rear axle is not a nice drive, my 80 under steers badly and tramlines like a bitch, fuel economy is worse by about 3 miles to the gallon.
I can not drive as enthusiastically as I can when both axles are driven, in the wet I have to be cautious accelerating out of corners as the back wants to step out, before the car would grip and go and feel stable.
Now she feels unstable when changing direction and the surge of power felt as a all wheel drive has become a bonnet rise.

Based on my experience I can not recommend fitting a part time kit, for me it would be a step backwards and result in a more dangerous car not a safer one.

 

[Chris]

+ 1 for me too Julian. Had several months with no prop and a completely empty front axle housing. MPG was worse and it drove like you described. Keep telling people but again and again the question of converting keeps coming up.

 

[Towpack]

Converting a vehicle, designed and built as permanent 4wd, to PT 4wd is bound to have adverse side effects IMO. It's not the same as fitting FW hubs to a part time 4wd transmission vehicle where a slight increase in fuel economy increase can be expected by completely isolating and leaving idle the front half of the transmission. The permanent 4wd setup of (most) 80 series will always make a difference to road manners, particularly the later versions with the VC in the centre diff. There were factory built PT 4WD versions of the 80 for certain markets however. I don't know much about these but are we to assume that they had other differences in addition to the transmission. Suspension setup/geometry maybe?

 

[StarCruiser]

I'm finding this an interesting read having driven several Shoguns with part time 4wd. I've always marvelled at how well the 80 handled for a big ol' bus. I can sit at the lights with a fairly tight left turn and floor it on left lock as they go green. It just goes around like its on rails. Why oh why would anyone want to give that up!! It's part of what puts that cruiser grin on your face. [emoji3]
It's twice as nimble in the bends as the Shoguns and I've never been able to step the back out on the road…ever!

 

[Dave2000]

Before Christmas last year after fitting a recondition gear/transfer boxes, the front prop was left off, the new bolts I had purchased were in a 'safe' place. This meant running around in RWD for a couple of days. Around town I completely forgot about the lack of AWD, but when I got out on the coastal bypass, with some nice bends you can push the car through, I found the 80 running wide, trying to hustle a 3 ton house brick around bends in RWD only, was clearly nowhere as easy as AWD, and I would argue long and hard for AWD every time.

Now to the comments about poor fuel consumption. To have no real measurable change in consumption I would agree, and if there was anything to gain by going PT, it would IMO take many many miles to recover the cost of the conversion. To get 'worse' fuel consumption from an engine that, has been stripped of the effort required to turn a differential/shafts/CV's et all, I have trouble seeing it. Is it possible with your new found RWD, you were tempted to 'get the tail out'? , You know guys, having a little fun 'testing'? If not then satisfy my curiosity how you lost mileage?

regards

Dave

 

[Towpack]

Better MPG is the main reason for fitting FW hubs on a PT 4wd so I can only assume this is why coverting a 80 series appeals to some. The experience of 2 members in this thread indicates that economy is worse however! I guess we're all interested in getting the best MPG out of our 80's but if you're prepared to go to those sort of lengths you've bought the wrong vehicle IMO.

 

[Dave2000]

I agree TP, I suppose if you are getting 15 MPG then another 2 is going to seem like a big saving? But we still need to see how you can get worse MPG in RWD?

regards

Dave

 

[Shayne]

If i made my shorty rwd only it would hurt fuel consumption badly because my driving style would have to change if i couldn't trust the nose to drag herself around .

 

[Julian T]

I still have everything in front axle and the wheels are driving the differential so perhaps the additional resistance is what has adversely affected the fuel consumption, and I think I can feel additional rolling resistance, like I have a soft tyre. I do drive enthusiastically, one way of putting it, but with the way she is handling now I am being far more cautiously so that should be better fuel economy, but it has not, I check how far I have gone every time I refuel.
I think that buying a car for fuel economy is probably the wrong reason to buy a car, you should buy a car you like or enjoy. And if you buy a Land Cruiser, fuel economy is not one of the options or on any true 4x4 come to think of it.

 

[frank rabbets]

I too had the misfortune to buy a Shogun SC. It's the only car I've lost control of twice without knowing why and not be able to recover the situation predictably. Twice on bends. All of a sudden without warning it sort of leant over at an alarming angle. I was amazed to see one do the same on telly on "driven". Very fortunately for me someone stole it an by coincidence shortly after I heard an 80 idling so that was it.

 

[StarCruiser]

My Shoguns were Mk1s and I loved the diesel one I had and used longest. It was totally predictable, and I even managed to steer it through a patch of black ice that sent the scirocco in front of me into the fence. Also at about 60 had a time when a guy overtook a long line of traffic and I had to pull partly onto the softish verge to avoid a head on. It behaved impeccably.

 

[alliston]

I agree with all the above. Im in now way changing mine onto part time it was just one of them nights on the laptop having a gander on YouTube and slee off road looking on what I could burn a hole in my wallet and was just curious on it.