AWD Front driveshaft removal.

[93 blue explorer]

I am wondering if I can take my front driveshaft out of my 95 explorer 4x4. Will it be safe and not roll away. I need it off due to a bad u joint that I dont have the time and money to take care of right now.

 

[techieman33]

I am wondering if I can take my front driveshaft out of my 95 explorer 4x4. Will it be safe and not roll away. I need it off due to a bad u joint that I dont have the time and money to take care of right now.

Yes you can, your v6 transfer case will not let it roll like the awd case in the v8 explorers.

 

[timn8er]

Ok Good thread, 2 things I need to clearmy head, perhaps I have information over load at the moment. But I have a 95 and a 96 Eddie V6 4x4. Im not sure what the vacome tubes do on the front diff. But I just replaced my transfer case. my questions is.,

1. If im stuck/mud snow and the rear wheel spin and the fronts are binding/stuck. Will this cause my clutch in the TC to burn up. I would think this is the same case as a brake torque but with out the use of the brake.

2. It was explained that the front Diff set up was changed after 96. whats the differance between the old and new design. my 95 and 96 look the same so I asume 97 was the new change.,

 

[gijoecam]

Ok Good thread, 2 things I need to clearmy head, perhaps I have information over load at the moment. But I have a 95 and a 96 Eddie V6 4x4. Im not sure what the vacome tubes do on the front diff. But I just replaced my transfer case. my questions is.,

They actuate the center axle disconnect... essentially it uses the vacuum motor controlled by a pair of solenoids to break the passenger side axle shaft when in 2wd.

1. If im stuck/mud snow and the rear wheel spin and the fronts are binding/stuck. Will this cause my clutch in the TC to burn up. I would think this is the same case as a brake torque but with out the use of the brake.

Not on a 95 or 96. Your front driveshaft can rotate relatively free, so it won't place any significant extra loads on the t-case. However, your front diff may or may not like the experience.

2. It was explained that the front Diff set up was changed after 96. whats the differance between the old and new design. my 95 and 96 look the same so I asume 97 was the new change.,

In 97 they did away with the CAD on the front axle, and the 2wd selection in favor of a 4auto/4high/4low arrangement.

 

[timn8er]

Frasher Ford Oshawa sucks the bag

gijoecam, thanks for the responce, I guess i will not worry about my clutches getting fried in a snow bank,

i find it odd that i never used my new 4x4 when a local dealership "frasher ford" installed it.After many months I needed to use the 4x4 because i was stuck in some sand when I baked the truck. i engauged 4 wheel and the rear spun, I put it in four low and it still spun, so I had another truck pull me out. I spent 1400,00 on it and the jerks told me i burnt the clutch out of it.. Frig I never used it until that day. . prior i took it back because it leaked fluid over my new driveway. they replaced the seal and i still never tested it.. Goes to show how a Dealer Ship Like Fraser Ford in Oshawa will bend a customer over their counter to clean it... I got a new setup from alocal yard and hope i dont have any more problem..

Thanks again,

Tim

 

[explorerguy89]

yea never ever remover front (or rear) driveshaft =p figured id second it

 

[timn8er]

yea never ever remover front (or rear) driveshaft =p figured id second it

I would not even think of it, the fuel saving would be minimal at best and the cost to replace damged parts would out your wallet in the red,

 

[rollinstone]

Can anyone here direct me to step-by-step instructions (and hopefully pics) of a '97 AWD front driveshaft removal? I need to replace the dust boot on the transfer case end of the front drive shaft.

I don't think it requires immediate replacement as everyone in this thread seems to agree that the truck can be driven just fine w/o the FDS (exposing the UJ attachment point).

Tks, rs

 

[Kiliona]

Gotta throw in my opinion on two of your guys earlier discussions.

The idea that was given about putting a disconnect on the axles, that everyone acted like was ludicrous? a CJ-5 we had at uni, a project vehicle, (Don't know much about jeeps) had a hand operated lever in the passenger compartment. The lever actuated a cable which moved a sleeve onto and off of the axles (built into the axle tube). Now this system was incredibly simple, and allowed the axle to be connected / disconnected to give four wheel drive. Similar to a manual hub, but a manual axle. It's the same idea your transmission uses to decide which parts of the input shaft to spin in order to select gears and such (external splined on the two shafts, shafts sit end to end, internally splined sleeve that couples the two). It would take a ton of fabricating, but why couldn't a similar setup be incorporated on an explorer to disconnect the front axles? Just saying, his idea doesn't seem absurd to me. Hell if you want a solid front axle swap AND this 4wd (versus awd) mod, just put a jeep front axle in it, boom done. (blasphemy I know)

Second, about the AWD's center dif. I don't know the AWD systems on these cars well, but im assuming it's like any other viscous center differential awd system. The AWD is decided by slippage. Slippage causes friction causing heat. As the fluid heats up, it expands and loses viscosity, this causes a coupling action creating a different bias in the AWD system... Now if the explorer is anything like this, than when you pull the front driveshaft you would be allowing the center dif to be fully hot ALL the time. Not only would this cause the fluid to become very thick (causing a HUGE parasitic power drain), it would burnup and destroy the center dif eventually. But my most important point here is that turning that dif that is super heated and working 100 percent duty cycle nearly 100 percent of the time will absolutely cause a loss of power and thus fuel economy, not to mention ruining parts and causing wear.

Correct me if this is not how the awd works, never owned a v8 sploder.

 

[cwol97401]

NEVER, NEVER (did I mention NEVER) leave the front driveshaft out of an AWD 2nd gen explorer. It will roll away, even if it's in park. You said you've done tons of searching and reading on here. Apparently not enough. There are a bunch of posts about this issue, and warning against it.

I don't like being an antagonist but isn't that what the parking brake is designed for???

 

[cwol97401]

I understand what you're saying... The key is in how the VC works internally... It's set up to allow limited slippage between the front and rear when cornering, but not unlimited slippage...

The closest analogy I can come up with is the clutches in a limted slip diff. If you round a corner, the clutches slip, allowing one tire to roll farther than the other. No harm done. However, if you unload the rear axle, hold one tire stationary, ten minute apply power and let the other one spin, yes, there is some resistance, but you can cook the clutches quite easily.

The VC is not designed to allow that much relative motion between the front and rear. It uses some sort of fluid (hence the term viscous) to limit the speed differential between the front and rear outputs. Not limiting the amount of slippage (i.e. when driving straight ahead, there is no front/rear speed differential) causes the fluid to get hot, as well as damages the internals. There have been several people on here over the years that have tried it without the shaft for a while, then discovered when they reinstalled the front shaft that at some point in time, the VC had locked-up. If it was fine before removing the shaft, then not fine after driving it like that for some time, what's the logical cause?

So, I understand what you're saying about there being a lack of resistance on the front shaft... But it's not the resistance (or lack thereof) that causes the wear. Make more sense?

Clear as mud now, yes?

I don't understand. What I see you saying is that with the front DL removed there is no resistance on the front side of the VC, correct? If so, then the VC is constantly engaged as opposed to having the resistance of the front end in a corner slip the coupler. If there is no resistance for the coupler to slip against, how can it be damaged? There would be zero slippage occurring to create the damage. What you seem to be describing IMO is if you somehow cinch the front output so that it cannot move at all and then the VC will be constantly fighting to rotate a non-moveable part. Yes that will burn it up but not if the part is in freewheel and coupling with every torque moment at about 1foot pound. Maybe I am missing something. Your analogy if a limited slip diff is correct but you are not preventing the free wheel from moving, they are still both moving but one is in freewheel so to peak. No damage can occur.

 

[masospaghetti]

Here's how to understand what's going on inside the AWD transfer case. Pretend the VC doesn't exist for a moment.

Think of the AWD transfer case like an open differential with no VC. Like any open differential, all of the engine torque will be directed to the axle with the least resistance. In this case, if you remove the front driveshaft, ALL of the engine torque will be applied to the front output flange (since its no longer connected to the front axle with no driveshaft). The truck will not move at all. There is a lot of relative motion between the front output (which is driven at engine speed) and the rear output, which has no motion at all.

Now, the VC is there to limit this slippage. When the relative motion between the input and output gets too great, it will begin to heat up and solidify. This essentially connects the front and rear outputs together. Now, even with the front shaft removed, power is being applied to the rear axle. Hence, with the front shaft removed, it appears the VC will be working at 100% duty cycle.

THAT BEING SAID: I inadvertently drove my AWD Explorer a couple thousand miles with no front shaft when I first bought it, and there's no telling how long it was removed before I bought it. Given the level of neglect, I bet it was gone for a long time. Since then, I've installed a front shaft and all is well.

How could this be?

1. Either the VC is extremely robust (unlikely), or
2. The amount of torque the VC transfers even when cold is enough that in steady state cruising or casual driving, its essentially "off" and not being worked

I bet the latter. There's definitely some resistance in the VC at all times, if you try and spin the outputs by hand, you'll notice that they feel locked together, even when everything is cold and the VC is supposed to be "open".

Also, the fact that the truck will "creep" in park and not completely roll away means the VC is providing a great deal of resistance to motion.

FWIW, I did email Borg Warner. They just said that driving with no front axle is not recommended without giving details.

 

[SoNic67]

It cannot be that low of torque... you need to move a 2 ton hunk of steel from zero to 55mph. That takes energy and all that energy will be transferred trough the VC only.
VC stays heated and less-viscous all that time.

Manufacturer advises against running with two different tire sizes because that will induce a difference in rotational speeds.
The maximum difference is when the front want to spin free (like missing the shaft) and the rear is not moving.

masso - it's just luck that VC silicon that you heated up that long didn't completely dry up or leak inside your TC.

 

[masospaghetti]

It cannot be that low of torque... you need to move a 2 ton hunk of steel from zero to 55mph. That takes energy and all that energy will be transferred trough the VC only.
VC stays heated and less-viscous all that time.

Probably, but what about at steady state cruise? I bet the VC cools down when there's not heavy acceleration.

The assumption that the VC will have a 100% duty cycle with no front shaft, I believe, is not correct.

Manufacturer advises against running with two different tire sizes because that will induce a difference in rotational speeds.
The maximum difference is when the front want to spin free (like missing the shaft) and the rear is not moving.

With different size tires, you are forcing the two to spin at different speeds. That's a different scenario. Even at steady state cruise, with different size tires, the VC will be forced to slip.

masso - it's just luck that VC silicon that you heated up that long didn't completely dry up or leak inside your TC.

That's your assumption but there's plenty of other AWD Explorers on this forum that have experienced the same thing. It's not just me.

If your assumptions really are correct, I think the VC's would be failing much more rapidly than service experience shows.

 

[SoNic67]

I also heard about other AWD's that had the front shaft put back in and binded.
I guess is about where and how long you drive like that, probably on highway is less stressful, and a little luck.

Still, all the engine the torque needed to move the truck will go 100% trough that VC. The fact that your didn't break, even if manufacturer told you that you should not do that, shows that Borg Wagner build was extra good

I didn't do it on mine, because, besides the time required to remove the shaft, I spend just 1-1-1/2 extra hours to replace both the CV and U-Joint on that shaft.