Dumb question about lockers on Rubi - Page 2 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Wrangler Forums > JK Wrangler Technical Forum > Dumb question about lockers on Rubi

Iron Cross Customer JK and TJ Wrangler Bumpers now at ROCKZONE 4.25" combo lift for TJ available at Rockridge4wROCKRIDGE4WD Introduces a NEW Jeep Wrangler JK *led* tail

Reply
Unread 03-05-2007, 11:23 AM   #16
300bhp/ton
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountravlr
Keep in mind that the engine is turning 2-3 times the revs in 4 lo than it does in 4 hi, and that is why the owner's manual makes those warnings.
3000rpm is 3000rpm regardless of transfer box selection. Wheel speed will be slower however.

__________________
Jeep Cherokee XJ 4.0HO!!! - stock|Land Rover Discovery 200Tdi - diesel, 33's and one or two other mods currently being rebuilt as an 88 Hybrid|Camaro z/28 LS1 - 5.7 litres of OHV muscle!!!|1977 Triumph TR7 V8 - Lightweight and fun, with only the doors remaining stock|smart Roadster - small nippy and 58mpg|Ford Thunderbird - long term rebuild project
300bhp/ton is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-05-2007, 11:33 AM   #17
raskull
Registered User
2003 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 1,799
Generally for mud you will want 4hi, and lots of wheel spin. Which is a problem, because obviously lockers would be nice to have. That is why people do the modification to allow use of lockers in 4hi.. mud and snow.

A guy I wheel with has a '05 rubi, and has exactly the same problem. He hates not being able to use his lockers in mud, because 4lo will not give him the wheel spin he needs for the mud around here.
__________________
(O|||||||O)
l_l*-----*l_l

Raskull - Metallic Silver '03 Jeep TJ Sport (pic)
http://myjeeptj.com <- Write-ups on mods/maintenance/trips and a video/image gallery
Custom front bumper build
Custom rockers build
My build thread
raskull is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-05-2007, 03:14 PM   #18
JoeBlevins
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 180
Looks like a lot of fun in those pics. Not sure I can muddy the inside of my Rubi so quickly after buying it though..
__________________
-Joe
2007 Rubicon Unlimited Hardtop Black
JoeBlevins is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-05-2007, 11:37 PM   #19
bofer84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: lakeland florida/ seneca south carolina/tampa florida
Posts: 109
no matter what, you still dont need 4low in a jeep, 4hi will allways be better my friend, i have been through enough competitions to tell you this. 4low if you have really tall gears, but if you have a offroad rig, you most likely have lower gears.

i promise if you take your rig and try to go up a muddy hill in 4low and then try again in 4hi you will make it twice as far. its not even a debate my friend, everyone on this board will tell you 4hi is better in mud.

if you are having controle problems in the mud its either your tires, or the driver
bofer84 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 04:17 AM   #20
300bhp/ton
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by bofer84
no matter what, you still dont need 4low in a jeep, 4hi will allways be better my friend, i have been through enough competitions to tell you this. 4low if you have really tall gears, but if you have a offroad rig, you most likely have lower gears.

i promise if you take your rig and try to go up a muddy hill in 4low and then try again in 4hi you will make it twice as far. its not even a debate my friend, everyone on this board will tell you 4hi is better in mud.

if you are having controle problems in the mud its either your tires, or the driver
I hear what you are saying, but seriously I think we are at crossed purposes.

These photo's are from trialing competitions. This was the National event 2006 and we had hundreds of competitors some from as far away as the States and Australia.

EVERY single vehicle competing was using low range, you simply would not be able to navigate the other obsticles in high range, not even one with 4.10:1 final drive diff gears. Also if it was a manual you'd be stalling it all the time.

I admit the JK Rubicon 4.1:1 transfer box does give it extremly good crawling speeds, but if it was being used where these pics where taken you'd also need it in low range, it is just a must for this type of competition work.

Some of the decents where near vericle and very slippy, using high range on them would have meant rolling the vehicle at the bottom or otherwise doing other serious damage.

In other off road series here in the UK TJ's often feature, with big wheels and all the mods you guys in the States do, however under the same conditions they too will use low range when Land Rovers are also using it.
__________________
Jeep Cherokee XJ 4.0HO!!! - stock|Land Rover Discovery 200Tdi - diesel, 33's and one or two other mods currently being rebuilt as an 88 Hybrid|Camaro z/28 LS1 - 5.7 litres of OHV muscle!!!|1977 Triumph TR7 V8 - Lightweight and fun, with only the doors remaining stock|smart Roadster - small nippy and 58mpg|Ford Thunderbird - long term rebuild project
300bhp/ton is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 10:47 AM   #21
bofer84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: lakeland florida/ seneca south carolina/tampa florida
Posts: 109
i still find it weird that you all were using 4hi, but to each his own.

as far as rolling down the hills, use the brakes haha.

Land rovers dont have as low of a crawl range (stock gears) as the jeeps rubis do, if you had a jeep in 4low, you would prolly just stop, you simply cant get enough wheel spin in 4low in a rubi, now a land rover with diffrent gears, (373) a V8 and 3rd gear is alot diffrent, you can get plenty of wheel spead, and if you need more torque, you can downshift to 2nd.

but in a jeep, with 410s, 4hi is perfect
bofer84 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 11:04 AM   #22
300bhp/ton
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by bofer84
i still find it weird that you all were using 4hi, but to each his own.

as far as rolling down the hills, use the brakes haha.
You NEVER use brakes on a steep decent you always use engine braking. Using the brakes would lock up and cause a loss of control and probably slide sideways and roll.

Seriously I think we are not speaking the same language here. Even with 4.10 gears a Rubicon would be uncontrollable in high range in the situations I'm talking about.

I mean how fast does a Rubicon go in 1st (manual or auto) in high range? 20mph maybe. This is road speeds, when off road in tight slipp conditions with adverse cambers and sideslopes you need control and speeds nearer the 2mph mark.

No stock Rubi is going to muster that in high range.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bofer84
Land rovers dont have as low of a crawl range (stock gears) as the jeeps rubis do, if you had a jeep in 4low, you would prolly just stop, you simply cant get enough wheel spin in 4low in a rubi, now a land rover with diffrent gears, (373) a V8 and 3rd gear is alot diffrent, you can get plenty of wheel spead, and if you need more torque, you can downshift to 2nd.

but in a jeep, with 410s, 4hi is perfect
__________________
Jeep Cherokee XJ 4.0HO!!! - stock|Land Rover Discovery 200Tdi - diesel, 33's and one or two other mods currently being rebuilt as an 88 Hybrid|Camaro z/28 LS1 - 5.7 litres of OHV muscle!!!|1977 Triumph TR7 V8 - Lightweight and fun, with only the doors remaining stock|smart Roadster - small nippy and 58mpg|Ford Thunderbird - long term rebuild project
300bhp/ton is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 02:41 PM   #23
greggradwohl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 159
It is more accurate to say that a 4:1 gearing is less than optimal for mud. The rubi is designed more as a rock crawler than a mudder. If mudding is your desire, something closer to 2.5:1 is better.
greggradwohl is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 04:37 PM   #24
bofer84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: lakeland florida/ seneca south carolina/tampa florida
Posts: 109
i understand that a jeep in 1st gear will go 20 mph on the road, but were talking about mud, slippery conditions right? its not going to go 20, your wheels will go 20mph but not the truck itself. i can understand using low range for rock crawling, but not for mud, 2mph isnt going to cut it in the slick stuff, how do you even make it up a steap camber going 2mph??

4hi 2nd gear is a 2.61 ratio so you know
bofer84 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 05:02 PM   #25
Crashnburn80
Registered User
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Kirkland, WA
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bofer84
4hi 2nd gear is a 2.61 ratio so you know
When the previous poster mentioned that a ratio of 2.5 is ideal for mud, they were not talking tranny gear ratio, they were talking Transfer case ratio. Thats 2.73 in a non-rubi wrangler. No, a 4:1 Tcase ratio of a Rubi is not ideal for mud, it is ideal for slower speed technical wheeling such as rock crawling or very technical trails.

You do not want to use your brakes for steep down hills on slick surfaces, always use your low range. Brakes can cause the wheels to lock up and a loss of control.


To Answer the OP questions:

-From the factory, lockers can only be engaged in 4 Low.

-Once lockers are engaged, your only speed limiting factor is being in low range, on a TJ thats 15mph comfortably, 20mph if you want to rev high, since final drive and low range are the same same on a TJ Rubicon vs JK Rubicon, the results will be similar though your engine will rev a bit higher.

-If your in a situation where you are using low range and lockers, I would personally shift the auto manually. To reach the max speed of low range you may need to be in drive, can't say for sure as I have a 5spd.
Crashnburn80 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 07:58 PM   #26
2JK
Registered User
2005 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: El Paso, Texas, Texas
Posts: 104
Mud is bad. Mountains and desert are locker/lo country. Both my Rubis love them.

JK
__________________
05 TJ Rubicon (Highly Enhanced) - Black
10 Dodge Charger R/T (HEMI) - Red
08 Dodge Challenger SRT8 first edition - HEMI ORANGE
2JK is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 08:40 PM   #27
86 CJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leonard, MI
Posts: 2
Guys, lets keep in mind the original topic of this thread. JK locker operation. The 15 mph mentioned earlier referrs to the max speed allowed with the lockers engaged. When you go over 15mph, the lockers unlock until you drop back below 15mph.
86 CJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-06-2007, 09:45 PM   #28
SecondTJ
Registered User
2000 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 5,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86 CJ
When you go over 15mph, the lockers unlock until you drop back below 15mph.
They don't re-engage automatically, after they disengage you have to manually re-lock them
__________________
'98 Sport, 5-speed, D44, stock, 9k original miles.

Gone - 2000 Sport, 1987 YJ, 1997 SE
SecondTJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-07-2007, 04:53 AM   #29
300bhp/ton
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by 86 CJ
Guys, lets keep in mind the original topic of this thread. JK locker operation. The 15 mph mentioned earlier referrs to the max speed allowed with the lockers engaged. When you go over 15mph, the lockers unlock until you drop back below 15mph.
Cheers that makes much more sense.
__________________
Jeep Cherokee XJ 4.0HO!!! - stock|Land Rover Discovery 200Tdi - diesel, 33's and one or two other mods currently being rebuilt as an 88 Hybrid|Camaro z/28 LS1 - 5.7 litres of OHV muscle!!!|1977 Triumph TR7 V8 - Lightweight and fun, with only the doors remaining stock|smart Roadster - small nippy and 58mpg|Ford Thunderbird - long term rebuild project
300bhp/ton is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 03-07-2007, 05:23 AM   #30
300bhp/ton
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 268
fftopic:

Quote:
Originally Posted by bofer84
i understand that a jeep in 1st gear will go 20 mph on the road, but were talking about mud, slippery conditions right? its not going to go 20, your wheels will go 20mph but not the truck itself. i can understand using low range for rock crawling, but not for mud, 2mph isnt going to cut it in the slick stuff, how do you even make it up a steap camber going 2mph??

4hi 2nd gear is a 2.61 ratio so you know
ok just checked your location (FL).

All I can say is the terrain I drive on and is predominant across most of the UK would require low range, yet it is still muddy.

But this may include holes, dips, craters, hills, side slopes, ruts, rocks, trees, you name it really.

Low range is essential in my Discovery when on a competitive trial I'll generally use 2nd low as this will crawl at a fast walking pace (3.6mph) and have enough rpms to see over 14mph when needed.

For a steeper hill (going up) or higher wheel speeds 3rd low gives a sensible range of 5.5mph - 20mph

For taking a steep decent or really tight terrain 1st low is good for 2.3mph - 9mph

This is on 33" tyres (stock would be 29") with stock transfer box of 3.32:1 (low range) and stock diff gears of 3.54:1

Honestly I do hear and understand what you are saying, but I also under stand that there are very few hills in Florida and the terrain local to you is a world of difference to what I'm used too.

Take these pics, this is a Land Rover trial you have to drive around/over obsticles and thru gates, you can not stop.








This was very muddy and some parts very wet and some of the inclines required pretty hefty wheel speed espcially if the tyres being used where not great. However it was tight and twisty and slippy and the down hill decents where a lot steeper than the pics make it look.

Using high range would have been dangerous in such a location and you seriously would have damaged the vehicle or simply not been able to negotiate the terrain.
__________________
Jeep Cherokee XJ 4.0HO!!! - stock|Land Rover Discovery 200Tdi - diesel, 33's and one or two other mods currently being rebuilt as an 88 Hybrid|Camaro z/28 LS1 - 5.7 litres of OHV muscle!!!|1977 Triumph TR7 V8 - Lightweight and fun, with only the doors remaining stock|smart Roadster - small nippy and 58mpg|Ford Thunderbird - long term rebuild project
300bhp/ton is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.