Dakota Forumz banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi I'm looking for help in finding a part to disengage my front axle so my dakota is not full time 4wd so I can save on fuel consumption. I'm looking for a kit similar to a posi lok
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
Hi I'm looking for help in finding a part to disengage my front axle so my dakota is not full time 4wd so I can save on fuel consumption. I'm looking for a kit similar to a posh lok

Ok, you have a little conflicting info here. If you have a full time 4x4 Dakota, simply disengaging the front axle will not work. You have to be able to disengage the front drive in the transfer case. Currently there is no "kit" available. Your only option is to swap out transfer cases and use a part-time t-case. There is no way to disengage the front axle. It is permanently locked in.

Even if you could somehow convert the truck so that you can shift it into 2wd and unlock a set of hubs, you really won't save much gas. The full time 4x4s were only about 1-3 MPG worse than a 2wd with the same engine. IMO not worth it.

Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
The best thing to do would be a transfer case swap. I thought only the Durango R/Ts had the full time 4WD option?
my 96 with a part time T case is a little worse on fuel than my 92 2wd already... (not complaining) both club cabs, both 318s both auto tranny though somehow according to the tach at any given road speed my 4x4 is running lower RPMs than my 2wd even though the 4X4 has 3.91 gearing and the 2wd is 3.55... and the difference between 215/75R15s on the 2wd and 235/75R15s on the 4X4 isn't enough height/circumference to make that much difference, I'd expect them to be the same at any given speed or for the lower-geared 4X4 to read higher....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
I thought only the Durango R/Ts had the full time 4WD option?
Nope, full time was available on Daks too.

my 96 with a part time T case is a little worse on fuel than my 92 2wd already... (not complaining)
Typically, 4wds will weigh more. You tend to burn more fuel when accelerating more mass. There is some increase in fuel consumption in the front drivetrain due to a small amount of hydraulic drag from turning the gears in the relatively thick gear oil in the front differential. Other 4wd related factors are tire size/rolling resistance, and increased aerodynamic drag, due to higher ride height) The combination of many factors can result in slightly less economy

both club cabs, both 318s both auto tranny though somehow according to the tach at any given road speed my 4x4 is running lower RPMs than my 2wd even though the 4X4 has 3.91 gearing and the 2wd is 3.55... and the difference between 215/75R15s on the 2wd and 235/75R15s on the 4X4 isn't enough height/circumference to make that much difference, I'd expect them to be the same at any given speed or for the lower-geared 4X4 to read higher....
Yes, you'd expect that both should be running at similar rpm, however both have automatics, and automatics use torque converters which can slip when not locked up. There could be a difference in PCM programming which causes the 2wd to run with the torque converter unlocked longer, resulting in higher rpm, despite the higher ratio gears in the axles. Or the higher ratio delays lock up.

Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Hi everyone, I just traded my 99 man, for a 2000 SLT 4×4 with a 5.9, have a couple of questions, kinda new to 4×'s, my truck does have the t-case shift lever for 2hi/4hi lock/4lo lock, if it's in 2hi is it actually a 2wd or is the front axle still locked in with no power being delivered through the front drive shaft ?
2nd question, it currently has 265/75R15's, will putting a smaller dia tire, say a 235/75R15, significantly improve gas mileage, getting 12.3 mpg in the city, any info would be appreciated, thanks
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top