Robert Pepper review coming

Krabby said:

I never realized that but now that I think about it, it makes sense.

Click to expand...

stickshifter said:

Sure, there are different 4-wheel drive systems in different vehicles, but the point I was making you summarize in your last sentence. A fair number of people seem to think that a vehicle that can be “triple-locked” is functionally superior - when in that triple-locked state - to a part-time 4-wheel drive that has front and rear lockers. When both vehicles are fully locked, both vehicles are “triple-locked”.

Click to expand...

James said:

I agree that this is often misunderstood, not having a centre diff, that therefore needs no locking.

interestingly, i have found having owned a few of both, that the fulltime 4wd wears tyres both more evenly, and less, than part time. Its a stark difference, at least with my driving style, to the point where i have not needed to rotate tyres on fulltime 4wd, and have been able to replace all 4 at the same time. Typically 75,000 km. Not sure if others have similar results.
j

Click to expand...

stickshifter said:

Interesting! I would not have guessed that. What full-time rigs have you owned?

Click to expand...

James said:

Defenders (real ones) and the part time were a series IIA, and a suzuki modified lj80 that I still miss…
the defender underpinnings were very similar to rangies and discos, ive never thought to ask friends if they were experiencing the same. Just sadly sold the 300tdi, with a lovely new set of falken tyres on, and am settling into the k02. So far I havent found any weird behaviour in the wet either!
i am wondering about asking about putting narrower tyres on the ineos - 235s, which probably puts me into a very small venn diagram bubble! But I’ll prob wait a bit.

Click to expand...

stickshifter said:

Not trying to be argumentative - but I'm genuinely unclear on what you are objecting to.

To be super clear, my 'blanket statement' was as follows - and I'll provide more detail here, though I thought this was all inherent in the original post:

All vehicles that have the following characteristics are capable of being functionally "triple locked":
(1) Part Time four-wheel drive, with a two range transfer case (high and low). The transfer case lever is used to shift from 2-High (the default for on-road driving) to 4-High, or to 4-Low. (I have owned 9 vehicles that meet this first criteria, so perhaps I was lazy in not spelling all these features out, but I think I reference them in that post)
(2) A locking differential in both the front and rear axles.

My blanket statement statement was that any vehicle that has these features is a vehicle that, when shifted into 4-wheel drive (and often this would need to be 4-Low), and after one locks both the front and rear diffs, the vehicle is "triple locked", because the shift from 2-High to 4-High functions like locking the center differential in a full-time four-wheel drive vehicle like the G-Wagen.

You mention a Mitsubishi as an exception to this, but - if I read you right - you go on to say that the Mitsubishi can be triple locked. So I don't see how it is an exception to what I was saying. So I must be misreading what you wrote, or you are misreading what I wrote.

Do you know of a vehicle that has the characteristics I describe, that - when "fully locked" (i.e. 4-Low, front and rear diffs locked) is not equivalent to a full-time four-wheel drive that is "triple-locked"? Thanks!

Click to expand...