-Deathrow Update Log-

[Fix4Dirt]

Of course it won't affect mileage much, how come these 5.0s with the 4406 swap get better mileage then but I can't do the exact same just with a 4405 lol

And how difficult would the CAD swap be to do? First time I've actually heard of that being a thing; and no, don't think 4wd has ever engaged on the road, plenty of times on the trails I've engaged it, can't recall noticing it do it itself though. Burnouts would be fun, but not a necessity! Not to mention not sure I can with the 32s lol

per the BWM thread "The '97-'01 model years lack a true 2 wheel drive option. With a live front axle, there are no significant mileage gains to be had by driving the rear wheels alone. That being said, some of us simply prefer to determine when the front wheels should drive and when they shouldn't, instead of relying on a computer to make that decision for us."

the reason why 4406 v8s get better mileage is because the AWD 4404 tcases take alot of energy and lsoe lots of power to always run. as such, 4406 v8s get no better mileage than out 4405 v6s, just better than with the awd. as such, if you compare a 4406 to a 4405 v6, it shall be no different (well mayeb 1 mpg difference due to the v8 having 2 extra cylinders, but no more or less mileage loss due to treansfer case)

now the CAD can get you more mileage, as there is no more power/mileage lost in the front axle, as it is fully disconnected. you will, however, lose some reliability, as you are relying ont he vacuum globe thing to work all the tome.

and the 4A always running is a misconception imo, as all 4a does is keep it in 2wd, and when wheel slippage is detected, it puts it into 4H until the slip is gone. so what 4a always does it monitor for slippage, but until there is slip it is always in 2wd. no power split like the v8 4404 tcase.

all the 1354 will do is get rid of the paper based (according to wikipedia) transfer case clutch (iirc) in favor for the more robust chain drive system. there are no mileage gains to be had with the 1354 swap, only simplicity and relibility

someone correct me if something is wrong

TLDR: why v8s get better mileage due to 4406 is due to the AWD being inefficient, not the same situation with our 4A, which is in 2wd 99% of the time.

edit: quote from another thread "4WD Auto/Control-Trac = 2WD unless truck detects slippage between front and rear wheels. When slippage is detected, truck starts engaging 4WD clutch in transfer case on and off quickly to send power to the front wheels as well. Clutch is cycled instead of just engaged continuously to allow for front wheels to travel further in turns on dry pavement without binding up the driveline, due to a lack of center differential. Duty cycle (time clutch engaged vs time clutch disengaged) varies - with lots of slippage between front/rear wheels, clutch spends more time engaged. As traction improves, clutch spends more time disengaged."

all it does is throw it in 4h when there is loss of traction, then take it out of 4wd when traction is regained. afaik (and i might be wrong) the clutch does not have partial engagement, like a manual tranny, its either in 4h or 2h or 4lo... perhaps someone can confirm or refute this!

 

[DemonMudder]

Okay, so maybe I'll just say screw it and avoid the whole thing entirely for a while. Sounds like it ain't really worth the battle, stick to the exhaust and cai for now. I could probably use a new transfer case motor though, since mine is rusting. Appreciate all of the input on the transfer case stuff, I may swap it for either the 4405 or the 1354 eventually, but I guess il stick with what I've got since it doesn't seem worth too much more than being a bit more reliable lol

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Okay, so maybe I'll just say screw it and avoid the whole thing entirely for a while. Sounds like it ain't really worth the battle, stick to the exhaust and cai for now. I could probably use a new transfer case motor though, since mine is rusting. Appreciate all of the input on the transfer case stuff, I may swap it for either the 4405 or the 1354 eventually, but I guess il stick with what I've got since it doesn't seem worth too much more than being a bit more reliable lol

this is just my understanding of the system, but perhaps someone can confirm or refute the info i have. for all i know i may be misinformed!

 

[DemonMudder]

this is just my understanding of the system, but perhaps someone can confirm or refute the info i have. for all i know i may be misinformed!

All opinions matter either way, all goes into consideration, especially since I'm just thinking/planning rather than acting on it! Rather be 100% on what I'm doing before I do it!

 

[Fix4Dirt]

All opinions matter either way, all goes into consideration, especially since I'm just thinking/planning rather than acting on it! Rather be 100% on what I'm doing before I do it!

i spend too much time planning, not enough time wrenching! hope to change that someday

and sorry if i came across as harsh, i wasnt thinking about the tone, was just typing out what came to mind forgot my usual smilies.. just know im not upset in the slightest, and dont want to come across as anything negativeloving this thread and all the info/solutions within!

 

[DemonMudder]

i spend too much time planning, not enough time wrenching! hope to change that someday

and sorry if i came across as harsh, i wasnt thinking about the tone, was just typing out what came to mind forgot my usual smilies.. just know im not upset in the slightest, and dont want to come across as anything negativeloving this thread and all the info/solutions within!

Didn't come out that way at all to me! Just sounded informative, text can be so misinterpreted if you're not careful so I do understand that though!

I agree, do way too much planning and not enough working! Like those grille lights and my fog lights sitting in my room for a year before being done! Already started putting off the overhead console swap, now that the truck seems to be running okay (other than the passenger tensioner leaking RIGHT ONTO the exhaust pipe, causing a constant oil smell when running and smoking a nice bit from that), I hope to get back to it. Yes, the smoke seems to be only from that, literally took a light to it yesterday night out of fear and saw it straight off it, from no where else that I could find; exactly why I'm trying to find a new washer/seal to put there. I do have the part number for the original seal that I'm looking for now

 

[joney]

per the BWM thread "The '97-'01 model years lack a true 2 wheel drive option. With a live front axle, there are no significant mileage gains to be had by driving the rear wheels alone. That being said, some of us simply prefer to determine when the front wheels should drive and when they shouldn't, instead of relying on a computer to make that decision for us."

the reason why 4406 v8s get better mileage is because the AWD 4404 tcases take alot of energy and lsoe lots of power to always run. as such, 4406 v8s get no better mileage than out 4405 v6s, just better than with the awd. as such, if you compare a 4406 to a 4405 v6, it shall be no different (well mayeb 1 mpg difference due to the v8 having 2 extra cylinders, but no more or less mileage loss due to treansfer case)

now the CAD can get you more mileage, as there is no more power/mileage lost in the front axle, as it is fully disconnected. you will, however, lose some reliability, as you are relying ont he vacuum globe thing to work all the tome.

and the 4A always running is a misconception imo, as all 4a does is keep it in 2wd, and when wheel slippage is detected, it puts it into 4H until the slip is gone. so what 4a always does it monitor for slippage, but until there is slip it is always in 2wd. no power split like the v8 4404 tcase.

all the 1354 will do is get rid of the paper based (according to wikipedia) transfer case clutch (iirc) in favor for the more robust chain drive system. there are no mileage gains to be had with the 1354 swap, only simplicity and relibility

someone correct me if something is wrong

TLDR: why v8s get better mileage due to 4406 is due to the AWD being inefficient, not the same situation with our 4A, which is in 2wd 99% of the time.

edit: quote from another thread "4WD Auto/Control-Trac = 2WD unless truck detects slippage between front and rear wheels. When slippage is detected, truck starts engaging 4WD clutch in transfer case on and off quickly to send power to the front wheels as well. Clutch is cycled instead of just engaged continuously to allow for front wheels to travel further in turns on dry pavement without binding up the driveline, due to a lack of center differential. Duty cycle (time clutch engaged vs time clutch disengaged) varies - with lots of slippage between front/rear wheels, clutch spends more time engaged. As traction improves, clutch spends more time disengaged."

all it does is throw it in 4h when there is loss of traction, then take it out of 4wd when traction is regained. afaik (and i might be wrong) the clutch does not have partial engagement, like a manual tranny, its either in 4h or 2h or 4lo... perhaps someone can confirm or refute this!

So if my stock 98 XLT doesn't have Control-Trac, I'm in RWD unless the Auto 4wd (which is always selected unless heavy snow) detects slipping? Or is 4A sending a little power to the front if no Control-Trac? (not sure which stock trans I have)

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Didn't come out that way at all to me! Just sounded informative, text can be so misinterpreted if you're not careful so I do understand that though!

I agree, do way too much planning and not enough working! Like those grille lights and my fog lights sitting in my room for a year before being done! Already started putting off the overhead console swap, now that the truck seems to be running okay (other than the passenger tensioner leaking RIGHT ONTO the exhaust pipe, causing a constant oil smell when running and smoking a nice bit from that), I hope to get back to it. Yes, the smoke seems to be only from that, literally took a light to it yesterday night out of fear and saw it straight off it, from no where else that I could find; exactly why I'm trying to find a new washer/seal to put there. I do have the part number for the original seal that I'm looking for now

alrighty!!! yep, no facial expressions on the forum (except for smilies) so i try to stay lighthearted and good luck with the seal!!!still have a bunch of stuff sitting on the table...bumper support tabs, some lighting, etc etc!! and planning some engine swap work, etc! i;d say 95% planning, 5% wrenching

 

[DemonMudder]

alrighty!!! yep, no facial expressions on the forum (except for smilies) so i try to stay lighthearted and good luck with the seal!!!still have a bunch of stuff sitting on the table...bumper support tabs, some lighting, etc etc!! and planning some engine swap work, etc! i;d say 95% planning, 5% wrenching

Yeah that's about my life percentage!
Good luck on your stuff! Hope ya can get it done sometime soon! Trying to narrow down my list before summer hits

 

[Fix4Dirt]

So if my stock 98 XLT doesn't have Control-Trac, I'm in RWD unless the Auto 4wd (which is always selected unless heavy snow) detects slipping? Or is 4A sending a little power to the front if no Control-Trac? (not sure which stock trans I have)

do you have the 4auto, 4 hi, 4lo switch? in that case,, you are rwd until slip is detected. (at least thats the way i understand it) and im confused by what you mean by doent have control trac... iirc control trac is the name for the ford auto 4wd system. its similiar to saying "mach audio system" for example... just a name for something simpler! so if you have the 4a/4hi/4lo, you have controltrac 4wd! another variation is the typethat reads 2wd,4a, 4lo. that is the style used in conjunction with the CAD, so it has true 2wdwith the front axle disconnected. however, 97 was the last year of CAD, soyours should have 4a,4hi,4lo and is control trac sending 100% power to the rear until there is slip... that isif i understand thi sright

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Yeah that's about my life percentage!
Good luck on your stuff! Hope ya can get it done sometime soon! Trying to narrow down my list before summer hits

thanks!!! yeah too much planning not enough wrenching and believe me, once summer break hits its gonna be a wrench fest!!! heck even winter and spring break was tons of wheeling and wrenching! just about a month to go

 

[DemonMudder]

Maybe we can get 410 or someone back in here to confirm this stuff, but I thought there was still power sent to the front in 4auto, hints our mileage and such lol

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Maybe we can get 410 or someone back in here to confirm this stuff, but I thought there was still power sent to the front in 4auto, hints our mileage and such lol

@410Fortune

please let me know if im ont he right track or driving myself into a mud pit deeper than expected

 

[joney]

do you have the 4auto, 4 hi, 4lo switch? in that case,, you are rwd until slip is detected. (at least thats the way i understand it) and im confused by what you mean by doent have control trac... iirc control trac is the name for the ford auto 4wd system. its similiar to saying "mach audio system" for example... just a name for something simpler! so if you have the 4a/4hi/4lo, you have controltrac 4wd! another variation is the typethat reads 2wd,4a, 4lo. that is the style used in conjunction with the CAD, so it has true 2wdwith the front axle disconnected. however, 97 was the last year of CAD, soyours should have 4a,4hi,4lo and is control trac sending 100% power to the rear until there is slip... that isif i understand thi sright

do you have the 4auto, 4 hi, 4lo switch? in that case,, you are rwd until slip is detected. (at least thats the way i understand it) and im confused by what you mean by doent have control trac... iirc control trac is the name for the ford auto 4wd system. its similiar to saying "mach audio system" for example... just a name for something simpler! so if you have the 4a/4hi/4lo, you have controltrac 4wd! another variation is the typethat reads 2wd,4a, 4lo. that is the style used in conjunction with the CAD, so it has true 2wdwith the front axle disconnected. however, 97 was the last year of CAD, soyours should have 4a,4hi,4lo and is control trac sending 100% power to the rear until there is slip... that isif i understand thi sright

Yes, have the 4A, 4Hi, 4Lo switch. I understand that you're saying the center axle doesn't disconnect as it's a 98. Just trying to understand what's in my truck. I'm a newb to most Explorer features and the last tranny I knew anything about was the Mopar 727 in my 76 big block, LOL. The level of complexity between the 90s and the 70s is amazing.

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Yes, have the 4A, 4Hi, 4Lo switch. I understand that you're saying the center axle doesn't disconnect as it's a 98. Just trying to understand what's in my truck. I'm a newb to most Explorer features and the last tranny I knew anything about was the Mopar 727 in my 76 big block, LOL. The level of complexity between the 90s and the 70s is amazing.

well, thats my understanding from the bwm thread, my experience w 4wheeling, and. the forum. i may however be wrong!!! still young, still in school learning... this is no different! i may be wrong still and yep... seeing the differences between a 22r and this... huge difference.... but neither compares to new motors!! can berely understand them! at least i can make sense of these

 

[DemonMudder]

Yeah, since the 70s, Ford has been trying to make that engine bay more and more compact! Hardly any room to work on half our crap, but we still get it done with a lot of time, effort, and colorful language!

 

[Fix4Dirt]

Yeah, since the 70s, Ford has been trying to make that engine bay more and more compact! Hardly any room to work on half our crap, but we still get it done with a lot of time, effort, and colorful language!

at least its nothing like todays 4cyls! the only thing easy about them is plug changes!!! turbos, computers... all they do is make stuff more complicated! when tis safety features, im willing to accept it, but in general most of the new non safety tech makes my life more confusing at least i can understand thees sohcs

 

[joney]

Glad for you young folks schooling this boomer! No, it's not even like the 5.0 in the 82 Crown Vic I enjoyed being able to get at everything under the hood from the top! But engines since the 70s have better tolerances and metallurgy, and supposedly last longer!

 

[DemonMudder]

at least its nothing like todays 4cyls! the only thing easy about them is plug changes!!!

Agreed! But I've got to admit, the amount of space in the engine bay of a 2000s silverado versus the 2000s f150, ain't even worth comparing, chevy left so much room, why can't we have that?

Make things like that dang thermostat housing so much nicer, rather than taking the top of the engine apart!

 

[DemonMudder]

Glad for you young folks schooling this boomer! No, it's not even like the 5.0 in the 82 Crown Vic I enjoyed being able to get at everything under the hood from the top! But engines since the 70s have better tolerances and metallurgy, and supposedly last longer!

"Supposedly" being the keyword. But in all honesty, engines and their other parts certainly have been improved over time, even comparing a 302 now versus what we had is sad (partially due to how much ford restricted it, that's why the SOHC actually out performed the explorer 5.0 at stock). Even the later SOHC engines were nicer to work on than ours if I recall right.