AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

FROM AWD'S TO 2-SPEED MANUAL SHIFT, IF IT LINKS THE REAR AXLE TO THE FRONT AXLE, POST IT HERE.

Cobra
ASV Supporter
ASV Supporter
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:31 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by Cobra »

timelessbeing wrote:or going somewhere else.
:muhaha: well what fun would that be.
on a serious note how often do you here of the clutches failing in these TC's i never thought about it until someone mentioned it recently
1998 GMC Safari AWD, BFGoodrich AllTerrain T/A
Jet performance tuner 91 octane preset, Jet under-drive pulleys
Rancho 999000 series shock, on-board controller to be installed later
DHC rock rails and skid plate Add-A-Leaf
G3500 front calipers
Zexel Torsen Diff
11" drums
180 amp Alternator
Long tru-cool 4590 trans cooler

1997 gone

Meterpig
I finally get the smurf thing
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by Meterpig »

Well, I don't see myself doing a lot it.

Come to think of it-how often I am supposed to change it...and is the ALL trac the best stuff?
What do you think of my quest to swap transfer cases to the venerable BW4472?
viewtopic.php?f=58&t=9962

Photos including tear down for intake gaskets (PITA)
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-xSjRG/i-bHzD6cz
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

You'll know because the van will start to bind and hop in tight turns. You could always take a fluid sample. If it looks like coffee, it's time to change it.

I use GM Autotrak II. It costs $5/quart.
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

Check out the inferior AWD systems on these SUV's from off-shore companies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09ExAUgtyE
User avatar

Topic author
Great A'Tuin
I finally get the smurf thing
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:57 pm
Location: Boise, ID

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by Great A'Tuin »

It seems odd to me that they created a large hump of several inches for the rear wheels to drive over, just as the fronts reach the low traction area... :-k

john
john

2000 LS AWD
2.5" lift, 3.73 G80, Bilsteins, 235/75-15 Toyo A/T's, 2500 Brakes, Skid plate
Ultra-Gauge, Long/Tru-Cool tranny cooler, Electric fans, Bed Kit. 265,000 miles.
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

It should be no problem for an AWD vehicle. Roads in the real world aren't perfectly smooth.
User avatar

Topic author
Great A'Tuin
I finally get the smurf thing
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:57 pm
Location: Boise, ID

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by Great A'Tuin »

Being in the science community myself, I like looking at the way experiments are set up and the biases that are inherent to each experiment...
Considering that the hump is unnecessary, and that they attempt to keep it off camera makes me suspicious. It makes me think they are purposely trying to bias the results :-k

john
john

2000 LS AWD
2.5" lift, 3.73 G80, Bilsteins, 235/75-15 Toyo A/T's, 2500 Brakes, Skid plate
Ultra-Gauge, Long/Tru-Cool tranny cooler, Electric fans, Bed Kit. 265,000 miles.
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

It looks like the hump is there to keep the vehicle from rolling off backwards, and I don't think it's being intentionally hidden. The only significance is that a bit more torque is required in the rear wheels to overcome the hump. A bias would be something that specifically favours one vehicle over another, but since they all have to get over it, it's a level playing field. It's just a little hump, and it shouldn't pose an unfair problem.

leadtrombone
I finally get the smurf thing
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 2:36 am

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by leadtrombone »

I still felt like they were doing something to make the subies do it better. That being said. I would have liked to see more vehicles on the "ramp" for comparison. Like say a "real" 4wd with manual TC and lockers front and rear. But then there would have been a different winner ... eh..

but it does make one wonder about those active systems and how much they really help.
1999 Safari SLE. Stock. Proud owner since May 2010. So far I love it..

Image
P1050479 by leadtrombone, on Flickr

The old cars - my progression to here (most recent first)

1996 Honda Passport
1988 BMW 320i touring
1989 BMW 520
2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible
2002 Dodge 1500 Quad Cab
1989 BMW 320i
1990 Toyota Tercel EZ
1991 Mitshubishi Mirage
1970 Mercedes Benz 250 Saloon
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

I think the idea was not to find a "winner" of who can get up the ramp, but rather to compare how different AWD systems work, and observe the effects they have. For example, I really don't like the electronic traction control that makes the asian vehicles go side to side. The VW didn't do badIy. In my opinion, 4WD is in a category of its own and cannot be compared, although it seems the distinction in contemporary vehicles is being blurred more and more.

I would also like to see them test more different systems. There are quite a few out there. A Quattro may have even matched the Legacy.

One interesting point the video brings up, is how manufacturers don't disclose technical details any more. They hide behind catch phrases and buzz words, that don't actually MEAN anything, but to someone who isn't mechanically inclined they sound really high tech. And every manufacturer has their own proprietary names, so it's impossible to compare them. For example, see if you can find detailed information on the Chevy Express 1500 AWD.

It was also interesting how important weight distribution is, and I think it speaks to the advantage that Astros have. Namely, a longitudinally oriented engine, and lots of weight over each wheel. (something pickups don't share). That's what makes vans sure-footed like a goat. However, if only one front wheel has traction it still won't go anywhere.

Meterpig
I finally get the smurf thing
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by Meterpig »

I have a driveway with a hump at the the street. The hump is the height of a normal curb but rounded so the city didn't have to build driveway entrances for every house.

Anyway, I have tried it with the rear on snow or the front on snow, one axle gets me over the "hump".

It' isn't a Subaru..but I will take it for less money and tire wear. Oh, and quieter.
What do you think of my quest to swap transfer cases to the venerable BW4472?
viewtopic.php?f=58&t=9962

Photos including tear down for intake gaskets (PITA)
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-xSjRG/i-bHzD6cz

michalg
I am merely driving my van
I am merely driving my van
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:04 am

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by michalg »

timelessbeing wrote:The encoder motor isn't an ordinary motor like in a cordless drill. It's not driven by steady current.

Your transfer case isn't part-time 4WD. It's an active on-demand unit, that automatically sends just the right amount of power, at the right time, to the front wheels through a clutch. The clutch is actuated by the encoder motor, but a simple on/off switch is not precise enough to deliver little bits of torque. Instead, the motor is regulated by the transfer case control module (TCCM) which sends a pulse width modulated (PWM) signal thousands of times per second (think ABS). Putting a steady current to the encoder motor would be like pulling the trigger on your cordless and then stopping it from turning.

More sophisticated transfer cases like the NV236 do allow you to switch to 4WD. To do this, the encoder motor closes the clutch and then locks. Current to the motor can then be turned off.
I had to rebuild my NV136, ordered new clutch assembly, seals, etc and have the job done.
Working on it I noticed that it would be fairly easy to replace input shaft, add planet, linkage and encoder motor from NV236. So it would be effectively NV236 swap which gives me, if I understand correctly, additionally 4WD mode to the existing AWD mode.
The question is: how to plug it into my Astro ? Is it enough to replace TCCM and add a switch ?
Has anybody done this maybe ?
User avatar

MountainManJoe
I have my van tatooed on my cheeks
Posts: 3101
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: The Pacific North Wet
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by MountainManJoe »

I think a clutch locking mechanism is needed for 4WD. The encoder motor can't run all the time.

michalg
I am merely driving my van
I am merely driving my van
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:04 am

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by michalg »

Yes, I know - the encoder motor has to be replaced for the two way one from NV236. And internal linkage has to be changed to allow locking. I have verified that everything needed fits from 236.
I am worried about TCCM which has to be taken from another car (Blazer ?) and how it would work in Astro.
User avatar

mdmead
ASV Supporter
ASV Supporter
Posts: 2153
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Selah, WA
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: AWD Engage/Defeat switch?

Post by mdmead »

timelessbeing wrote:Check out the inferior AWD systems on these SUV's from off-shore companies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09ExAUgtyE
Not sure how I missed this post way back when... although I think a defeat switch doesn't provide any real benefits so probably wasn't following it... but I did find this video interesting.

But after the video concluded, this one popped up.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3i9_m5vGGI&noredirect=1[/youtube]

Granted, it is a different generation CR-V, and may or may not be the same as the like-year U.S. model, but it shows the system worked. (I've actually been looking for this generation CR-V to possible tow behind our motorhome, hence my interest in whether the AWD system really works.)
Matt
Selah, WA
-96 GMC Safari AWD Hi-Top Conversion -->Stalled 5.3L swap & 5" lift
-74 Ford Bronco -->Far from perfect but mine!
-99 V-10 Ford Super Duty Super Cab 4x4 -->Stock with 285 Cooper ATs
-00 Ford Focus Wagon -->The Red Turd
-95 Ford 24' Class C Motorhome -->My big block sleeper
-07 Can-Am Outlander XT -->My yellow 4x4 quad for work & play
-04 Ski Doo REV Summit -->Still several chassis behind!


No new projects until the current ones are done!
Post Reply