Temporarily disable AWD for long trip

[SenseiJ]

well. i decided to pass on the Explorer in arkansas as it is far to clean, a little above my budget BEFORE getting it to cali AND I found a local 2K Mounty 5.0 AWD for $1500, picking it up tomorrow(Sat). Ultimate goal was to have fun with it, take some stuff out, put some stuff in, etc. etc. I may go a nastruck type feel to start then start collecting parts for a SAS. Thanks again everyone!

 

[Tucs]

disable the front in the AWD

No need to reinvent the wheel
Search

disable AWD site:https://www.explorerforum.com/forums/threads - Google Search

www.google.com

 

[SenseiJ]

No need to reinvent the wheel
Search

disable AWD site:https://www.explorerforum.com/forums/threads - Google Search

www.google.com

you're way to late to the party search police.
besides that was a difficult thread to read through.
Although valuable.

 

[newmantjn]

Break one bolt. F up one part and suddenly the $14 save turns into a $250 SPEND.

 

[1998Exp]

...
I’m 99% sure the message center in the 5.0 is wrong. When I fill up, the truck always takes more fuel than the msg center says I burned.

Does anyone know how these things calculate MPG? The MAF is nowhere near accurate enough; injector dwell time in combination with fuel pressure even worse. And fuel tank gauge? No way, because it can do instantaneous MPG. Yet mine reads just about 6% too optimistic, which is amazing!

 

[Magee]

Hey everyone,
I'm picking up a 2000 XLT 5.0 AWD.
I'd like to disable the front in the AWD system for a 1600 mile trip.
Obviously removing front axle is the obvious option but not sure what to expect.

I've read having it in 2wd makes a big difference in mpg.

I understand i'll lose some traction, it's ok, it's summer and hot where i'll be, weather won't be a concern.

I'm not looking for any info or "concerns" I simply want to know can it be done, has anyone done it, and how?

Thank you all so much!

p.s. i'm knowledgeable so you can talk mechanic if you wish.

Not a good idea to remove an axle - you might catch your new ride on fire from all the sparks, I'm sure you meant the front driveshaft.

 

[Charles White]

Hey everyone,
I'm picking up a 2000 XLT 5.0 AWD.
I'd like to disable the front in the AWD system for a 1600 mile trip.
Obviously removing front axle is the obvious option but not sure what to expect.

I've read having it in 2wd makes a big difference in mpg.

I understand i'll lose some traction, it's ok, it's summer and hot where i'll be, weather won't be a concern.

I'm not looking for any info or "concerns" I simply want to know can it be done, has anyone done it, and how?

Thank you all so much!

p.s. i'm knowledgeable so you can talk mechanic if you wish.

You do not want to disconnect the front drive shaft. There is a viscous style differential coupling between the transmission and the front and rear axles. This not like a traditional 4WD transfer case. There is not a solid link between the transmission and the rear axle. Instead there is a vicious coupling differential that always splits the torque between the front and rear axles. Removing the front drive shaft would be the equivalent of having the front wheels on a surface with no traction. The viscous coupling would a till send driving torque to the rear wheels but because there is no load on the front drive of the center differential coupling you force the viscous coupling to work hard to send all the engine torque to the rear axle. You’ll end up heating the fluid in the coupling and if you drive for many miles you might damage the coupling. Plus as others have mentioned your park position won’t hold the truck on a hill (although the parking brake should assuming it is in good condition).

 

[C420sailor]

I don’t know for sure. But if I had to guess, it would be a calculation based on injector flow rate derived from fuel pressure, injector pulse width, etc.

 

[SenseiJ]

Not a good idea to remove an axle - you might catch your new ride on fire from all the sparks, I'm sure you meant the front driveshaft.

You got me! I consider myself a good mechanic. Knowledgeable and ALMOST always using the proper terminology. Clearly, I slipped. lol. thank you!

 

[SenseiJ]

You do not want to disconnect the front drive shaft. There is a viscous style differential coupling between the transmission and the front and rear axles. This not like a traditional 4WD transfer case. There is not a solid link between the transmission and the rear axle. Instead there is a vicious coupling differential that always splits the torque between the front and rear axles. Removing the front drive shaft would be the equivalent of having the front wheels on a surface with no traction. The viscous coupling would a till send driving torque to the rear wheels but because there is no load on the front drive of the center differential coupling you force the viscous coupling to work hard to send all the engine torque to the rear axle. You’ll end up heating the fluid in the coupling and if you drive for many miles you might damage the coupling. Plus as others have mentioned your park position won’t hold the truck on a hill (although the parking brake should assuming it is in good condition).

I agree. Although a guy on here(or a few) have driven without the front driveshaft "successfully" based on your explanation I agree completely. I don't think it's a good idea.

 

[McFudden]

Hey everyone,
I'm picking up a 2000 XLT 5.0 AWD.
I'd like to disable the front in the AWD system for a 1600 mile trip.
Obviously removing front axle is the obvious option but not sure what to expect.

I've read having it in 2wd makes a big difference in mpg.

I understand i'll lose some traction, it's ok, it's summer and hot where i'll be, weather won't be a concern.

I'm not looking for any info or "concerns" I simply want to know can it be done, has anyone done it, and how?

Thank you all so much!

p.s. i'm knowledgeable so you can talk mechanic if you wish.

It’s an interesting idea I’ve had, too. Or making it a true 4x4 instead of AWD. I’ve even tossed around putting lockers in it. Here’s what I learned. If you want to change it to a true 4x4 or disable AWD it’s possible but not plausible. It would be a pretty beefy project and I don’t think it would be worth the gains. If you’re looking to get your MPG up run nitrogen in your tires, air it up a little more, like 5lbs or so, get a better intake, reprogram your MAF, make sure your IAC isn’t all gummed up, keep the AC off, and keep your foot off the gas. To be honest, the front end is super tight and well designed. It’s not even worth putting a locker in the front. The way it slips back and forth between the front tires is actually pretty frikken impressive. Sure a locker would give you a little more pull climbing rocks but with the clearance of an explorer are you really gonna rock climb in it? I’ve flown through snow and mud with no slipping using the factory front end. You can put lockers in the rear if you want, but leave the front end alone. It’s not gonna get you enough MPGs to be worth it. I’d focus more on your intake... and your foot.

 

[McFudden]

Hey everyone,
I'm picking up a 2000 XLT 5.0 AWD.
I'd like to disable the front in the AWD system for a 1600 mile trip.
Obviously removing front axle is the obvious option but not sure what to expect.

I've read having it in 2wd makes a big difference in mpg.

I understand i'll lose some traction, it's ok, it's summer and hot where i'll be, weather won't be a concern.

I'm not looking for any info or "concerns" I simply want to know can it be done, has anyone done it, and how?

Thank you all so much!

p.s. i'm knowledgeable so you can talk mechanic if you wish.

It also depends on what state you are picking that explorer up from. If it’s California, enjoy all of their eco friendly crap they jam in it with their emissions package, expect a dip in performance with that, too.

 

[C420sailor]

Nitrogen in tires is an old wives tale. Does zero for performance.

 

[94Eddie]

Nitrogen in tires is an old wives tale. Does zero for performance.

It can if one doesn't check tire pressure regularly. Nitrogen will not fluctuate tire pressure much because the molecules are rather large and they have a much more difficult time leaking from tires. This keeps pressure very steady over long periods of time. I had a set of tires on my 2002 Explorer filled with nitrogen gas when the tires were installed. I never had to adjust the tire pressure the entire time these tires were on my car. I have never done that before or since. Also, this set of tires never gave me a minute of trouble. I didn't even need to balance them again and they wore evenly. Now I can't say this was due to the nitrogen in them but who knows, maybe it was a factor to some degree. Whether it is worth the price is subjective. If the driver never checks tire pressure then maybe it is worth it. I haven't filled another set with nitrogen but I would consider it if the shop installing the tires offered it. The process is tedious because it requires several fills, drains and refills of the tire to get a high percentage of nitrogen in the tires. My guess is this is why it is relatively expensive.

 

[McFudden]

Nitrogen in tires is an old wives tale. Does zero for performance.

Out of all I said, that’s all you picked out? Nitrogen doesn’t fluctuate with temperature. That’s how it helps performance. You don’t get those cold morning floppies.

 

[C420sailor]

It makes zero difference.

We are talking about a two decade old SUV that runs low performance tires at 29psi. TWENTY NINE.

I ran nitrogen in my last ride, but it endured temperature swings from -60°C to nearly 200°C in a single go, with a 350psi fill.

It was also an F/A-18 Super Hornet, but who’s counting. I’m sure the ol’ Ford Explorer is just as demanding on tires with all those whipped ponies under the hood.

Anyway, if you want to waste your money on nitrogen fills that result in a cold soak pressure differential well within the error tolerances of just about any pressure gauge known to man, have at it. Throw in a nice wax or ceramic coating too—I’m sure that’ll give you some extra em pee gees...

 

[McFudden]

It makes zero difference.

We are talking about a two decade old SUV that runs low performance tires at 29psi. TWENTY NINE.

I ran nitrogen in my last ride, but it endured temperature swings from -60°C to nearly 200°C in a single go, with a 350psi fill.

It was also an F/A-18 Super Hornet, but who’s counting. I’m sure the ol’ Ford Explorer is just as demanding on tires with all those whipped ponies under the hood.

Anyway, if you want to waste your money on nitrogen fills that result in a cold soak pressure differential well within the error tolerances of just about any pressure gauge known to man, have at it. Throw in a nice wax or ceramic coating too—I’m sure that’ll give you some extra em pee gees...

Easy tiger, you’re gonna impress us so much we’ll all get woodies.

 

[94Eddie]

Easy tiger, you’re gonna impress us so much we’ll all get woodies.

Someone got a nerve plucked. A dip in some liquid nitrogen might cool things down a little.

 

[1998Exp]

Out of all I said, that’s all you picked out? Nitrogen doesn’t fluctuate with temperature. That’s how it helps performance. You don’t get those cold morning floppies.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but all gases behave essentially the same vs. temperature. Moreover, just in case someone here missed that class in elementary school science: air is 80% nitrogen anyway. So what's the benefit of nitrogen? It has to do with how nitrogen is separated from air. It's done by extreme cooling, and as a result, unlike air, the nitrogen that comes from a cylinder contains no water vapor. That, and the absence of oxygen prevent the rims from corroding on the inside and probably reduce the degradation of rubber on the inside of the tire. I have never heard of a rim failing because of corrosion of that surface or of tires failing because of degradation of the rubber on the inside, but there certainly is something in there for the purist. Nevertheless, some automakers, like Honda expressly advise against inflating tires with pure nitrogen.

 

[94Eddie]

Nevertheless, some automakers, like Honda expressly advise against inflating tires with pure nitrogen.

Why do they say this? Nitrogen is generally inert. I see no reason to not do it other than cost.