Automatic hubs switched to manual ... what to expect??

so now you've switched your tune to 'shock loads' ?

The one most appropriate here would be the old ford line truck with an A frame and a 300 6 cylinder. One time the driver set the truck back down after it'd shifted a little to the side and came down on a tie fence post which slipped up between the fender and front tire.

To get it off the corner fence post it was decided to repeat the operation but with the wench cable tied to the pole-line pole after being slipped around to the otherside and the rest of the gang pushing it with our pikes and 11 foot shovels. I wanted to cut off the fence post and reset it, thinking it was the safer bet (body damage). It went real well their way and was a lot quicker. :)

That one is my favorite (both truck and story). :)

The front end of those old line trucks spent a lot of time up in the air. The other was a dodge with a 318 in it. I drove that one more, both had the two speed rear ends and a winch embedded inside the front of the bed surrounded by all those 5 foot tall side bins full of line material.

Changing an inside rear tire could be a half day adventure (union job;).

The old Ford died (told in confidence) after he let the clutch out in a down shift in way too low of a gear and supposedly warped all the valves. Does that sound like that could happen to an engine?

The newer ones were even bigger and heavier with hydralic booms and augers etc.

The line work days beat the ditch digging days so everybody was usually in a good mood while doing line work. :)

Alvin in AZ

gearing's

failure

indicator

failure, it

structural

failure.

You just like to argue, don't you? It doesn't matter if it is a shock load or not. I used that example so you could more easily understand the problem. Once the metal has reached a structural failure, it will take less of a load to generate a total failure, in other words a broken part.

no, but I enjoy watching you switch gears every time someone deflates one of your pet theories

you still haven't explained your amazing statement that a vehicle has 'more power' in 4WD

So you had a boom and a winch similar to a tow truck. I'm guessing you had the brakes locked and maybe a set of wheel chocks in place when you were pulling with the winch, if that's the case there wasn't "any" torque being applied to the axles and the only way they could have broken was by fact that so much weight was resting on them. Kind of irrelevant to the discussion I think. Bob

Seeing as I started this thread I will try to answer it. I have been in 4 low a lot but not in my F-250. My Jeep YJ has a lot lower gearing in 4 low then my tow vehicle and I use 2-low on my YJ (rock crawler) to do such things as load it on the trailer and even on the trails at times. I can see at times with the truck it would be helpful to have 2 low. (as it is in loading my YJ on the trailer) for control. I in no way suggested romping on the gas pedal in high traction areas. (My mistake I assumed common sense). 2 low can be helpful in certain situations for control. Just like 4 low is not helpful in snow or ice as you have to much torque. Bottom line is I assumed common sense. My mistake! Jim F.

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 23:29:08 +0000, Tyrone rearranged some electrons to form:

Tyrone, I think you are confusing power with torque.

breaking

dimensions

overloaded

components

understand

Gary - It is too bad that you are not able to grasp that we are not talking about theories here. I never said any such thing as you claim. I said, "In 4WD, that added power is delivered to 4 wheels." Instead of looking for an argument, if you had read my post immediately following that one, you would have seen that I corrected that statement to read, "In 4WD *Low,* that added power is delivered to *all* 4 wheels."

Actually, the power available to the rear wheels is halved when you drop it into 4WD Hi with the front hubs engaged. If you disengage the front hubs, the power available to the back wheels is again the same as it was before engaging 4WD Hi, or the same as in 2WD Hi. The engine can only deliver so much power (torque.) But that torque can be multiplied by using a lower gear such as 4WD Low. And it can then effectively be doubled to the rear wheels, by disengaging the front hubs. If this is too much for you to understand, there is no hope for you.

so where is this 'added power' coming from ?

you are the one that first coined the phrase 'added power'

YOU explain it

so you admit you screwed the pooch by using 'power' instead of 'torque' ?

and that your " engine can only deliver so much power (torque.) But that torque can be multiplied " bit above is a half-assed attempt to cover your ass ?

GOOD !

Gary,

Back on 12/11 Tyrone stated that he was using 'power' and 'torque' interchangeably. It kind of got lost in the thread. You both are correct. We just got kind of hung up on the term 'power'.

"Gary Glaenzer" wrote in message news:Y7FCb.337729$Dw6.1120198@attbi_s02... : : "Tyrone" wrote in message : news:DDzCb.446278$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... : >

: > "Gary Glaenzer" wrote in message : > news:ePtCb.529574$Fm2.508509@attbi_s04... : > >

: > > "Tyrone" wrote in message : > >

news:bJtCb.444491$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... : > > >

: > > > "Gary Glaenzer" wrote in message : > > > news:u4tCb.524049$Tr4.1447797@attbi_s03... : > > > >

: > > > > "Tyrone" wrote in message : > > > >

: > news:0XsCb.444221$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... : > > > > >

: > > > > > wrote in message : > > > news:brd1om$sek$ snipped-for-privacy@reader2.panix.com... : > > > > > > Your wrench example is bogus unless you add the fact that the : > 6 : > > > foot : > > > > > > cheater pipe makes the whole assembly move, instead of : > breaking : > > > the : > > > > > > bolt or the nut breaks loose and turns like it's supposed to. : > (in : > > > > > > other words) : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > The truck moves and provides the torsion relief. : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > I bet I could break/ruin just about anything if I tried to, : > but in : > > > > > > this case a guy's not trying to break the vehicle... he's : > trying : > > > to : > > > > > > move it. If it's that glued to the spot then it's not the : > > > gearing's : > > > > > > fault. : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > How many have you broken with 4 low in 2wd? : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > We've had company tucks with their front ends 6 feet up in the : > air : > > > > > > before trying to pull obsolete "poured in place" cantilever : > signal : > > > > > > foundations out or pulling up swelled-butt, line-poles up : > without : > > > > > > digging so much. ;) : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > This dumb hammer mechanic has used cheater bars/pipes a lot : > longer : > > > > > > than 6 foot before. :) I have combination wrenches with the : > open : > > > > > > end cut off, so a pipe can be slipped over them- 1+7/16 (36mm) : > and : > > > > > > 1+5/8" (41mm) and a 1+13/16" (46mm). For some reason never : > needed : > > > > > > to do that to the 1+3/4" or the company owned 2+3/8". :) : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > "in theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice, : > they : > > > are : > > > > > > not" -who is credited with that one? I just read it as a sig : > file : > > > :/ : > > > > > >

: > > > > > > Alvin in AZ : > > > > >

: > > > > > Alvin, what you don't seem to understand is that a structural : > > > failure : > > > > > does not necessarily result in a piece of metal breaking. All : > > > metals : > > > > > will bend to a certain extent. When the load that has been : > applied : > > > is : > > > > > removed, the metal should return to the exact shape and : > dimensions : > > > that : > > > > > it had before the load was applied. The fact that you can not : > see : > > > that : > > > > > the metal has not returned to it's original shape does not : > change : > > > the : > > > > > fact that, it has failed. Take a single span beam placed upon : > two : > > > > > blocks. A dial indicator is placed below the beam and set at : > zero. : > > > > > Then the beam is loaded. When the load is removed, the dial : > > > indicator : > > > > > should return to zero. If it does not, the beam has been : > overloaded : > > > and : > > > > > has structurally failed. Just because your eyeball can not : > perceive : > > > > > that the beam did not fully recover does not mean that it did : > not : > > > fail. : > > > > > The fact that it did not recover now tells us that it will never : > > > recover : > > > > > in the future. As such, it will never be able to perform the : > job : > > > > > intended, exactly as it was designed to do. Overload it again : > and : > > > it : > > > > > will fail a little further. Drop a load on it in and it may : > fail : > > > > > completely. If it had not already been pushed to structural : > > > failure, it : > > > > > may have survived that shock load. The same holds true, in the : > case : > > > of : > > > > > your drive train. After you have pushed the components to : > > > structural : > > > > > failure without a complete failure, you have reduced the : > components : > > > > > ability to withstand shock loads without producing a complete : > > > failure. : > > > >

: > > > > so now you've switched your tune to 'shock loads' ? : > > > >

: > > >

: > > > You just like to argue, don't you? It doesn't matter if it is a : > shock : > > > load or not. I used that example so you could more easily : > understand : > > > the problem. Once the metal has reached a structural failure, it : > will : > > > take less of a load to generate a total failure, in other words a : > broken : > > > part. : > > >

: > >

: > > no, but I enjoy watching you switch gears every time someone deflates : > one of : > > your pet theories : > >

: > > you still haven't explained your amazing statement that a vehicle has : > 'more : > > power' in 4WD : > >

: > >

: >

: > Gary - It is too bad that you are not able to grasp that we are not : > talking about theories here. I never said any such thing as you claim. : > I said, "In 4WD, that added power is delivered to 4 wheels." Instead of : > looking for an argument, if you had read my post immediately following : > that one, you would have seen that I corrected that statement to read, : > "In 4WD *Low,* that added power is delivered to *all* 4 wheels." : : so where is this 'added power' coming from ? : : you are the one that first coined the phrase 'added power' : : YOU explain it : : >

: > Actually, the power available to the rear wheels is halved when you drop : > it into 4WD Hi with the front hubs engaged. If you disengage the front : > hubs, the power available to the back wheels is again the same as it was : > before engaging 4WD Hi, or the same as in 2WD Hi. The engine can only : > deliver so much power (torque.) But that torque can be multiplied by : > using a lower gear such as 4WD Low. And it can then effectively be : > doubled to the rear wheels, by disengaging the front hubs. If this is : > too much for you to understand, there is no hope for you. : : so you admit you screwed the pooch by using 'power' instead of 'torque' ? : : and that your " engine can only deliver so much power (torque.) But that : torque can be multiplied " bit above is a half-assed attempt to cover your : ass ? : : GOOD ! : :

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 06:55:46 -0800, Mellowed rearranged some electrons to form:

Power and torque are even close to being the same.

Torque is a force applied around a point.

Work is such a force moved through a distance; ie. if you have 200 pound-feet of torque applied to the driveshaft, but the wheels are locked, then you are doing no work. Motion must occur to perform work.

Power is a measure of how much work is performed over a given time.

Power = (force * distance) / time

If you want to know more, read this:

That's the point I've been trying to make to him, but he appears to be too defensive to grasp it

Dave, We know that. It was just a miss use of terms and Tyrone noted the same on 12/11.

: > Gary, : >

: > Back on 12/11 Tyrone stated that he was using 'power' and 'torque' : > interchangeably. It kind of got lost in the thread. You both are : > correct. We just got kind of hung up on the term 'power'. : >

: >

: : Power and torque are even close to being the same. : : Torque is a force applied around a point. : : Work is such a force moved through a distance; ie. if you have 200 : pound-feet of torque applied to the driveshaft, but the wheels are locked, : then you are doing no work. Motion must occur to perform work. : : Power is a measure of how much work is performed over a given time. : : Power = (force * distance) / time : : : If you want to know more, read this:

cantilever

structural

complete

Instead of

following

'torque' ?

What is so hard for you to understand? I assume that English is not your first language. OTOH, maybe you rode to school on one of those short busses, if you went to school at all. I'm done with you.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:28:37 +0000, David M rearranged some electrons to form:

should have read

Power and torque are NOT even close to being the same.

sorry

ahhhh...personal insults

the last refuge of the defeated.....................

Yep right after I posted it I realized that description used the power-take-off not the drive shaft. :/ But that one was just my favorite example of getting the front in 6 feet in the air, which you asked for not specifying a drive shaft torque example.

The others that used the drive shaft torque really need to be explained to you? Especially after "the fun with the fence post" story? ;)

The others where the A frame wasn't being used and we were just pulling "poured in place" signal foundations out was mentioned before.

Dolly-ing off the cable too low can make you loose traction so sometimes we'd use the "headache bar". See it now? :) All I know is the trucks were treated like s*it and the drive lines never gave out in 1st-low or any other gear. And the suckers were loaded heavy too.

Service stations with the two separate lifts for front and rear notice on railroad pickups (not the line trucks) that the rear end was -way- heavier than the fronts and it was mostly due to the after market steel side bins and bed installed. Yep the side bins were full of tools and material but just the side bins make a big difference. Guys would swear "you needed a four whell drive to get in there" wasn't a problem with a pickup with most of its weight on the rear tires. BTDT. :)

The old Ford was hardly ever in the company shop for repairs etc but the stinkin old Dodge was, but if I remember right, it was mostly from that sorry-ass carb they had on there (Ball&Ball? but I think it was a Carter).

Driving them was like driving an old Bug with a forty horse, shift and mash the peddle to the floor, shift and mash the peddle to the floor... over and over. :)

Alvin in AZ

That's enough to refure your "all caps" warning.

You were talking about elastic limit and plasticity right?

If the drive shaft/drive line is pushed past it's elastic limit yes- it will first plastically deform and then you'll know it from -then on- as vibration at speed. But... you were talking about "breaking" the drive line before and I assumed you meant the u-joints but that doesn't matter because the system is a lot stronger than you suggest or figure!

Simply doubling the torque to a drive line than it normally "sees" isn't anywhere near what it -can take-.

In theory you are right(?) but in practice you are way off the mark.

Funny but just like everything else there is such a thing as "fair wear and tear" drive lines fit in there too. Some vibration after hard use (abuse?) is to be expected but still they just aren't as weak as you made them out to be in your first response, in caps, BTW.

Also the old lines trucks I used were company owned not Gelco leased, they were old compared to the Gelco leased stuff. I should find out for sure (just for me) but I remember the Ford as being a '65 with the funny old style front hood. (not my favorite looking which is the '70 style) The old sucker came down on that fence post in '73, (the funniest thing I can remember doing with the old clunker!:) the drive line never gave out on it, that I know of.

A guy I was working with was driving like a friggin maniac (as usual!:) and couldn't make the turn just before the wash/canyon and bent the drive shaft going over the edge. That's the only vehicle I can ever remember suddenly developing a drive line vibration. He braked enough to keep from squashing the front end but slowed the old (about two years old and ready to be turned in) chevy 3/4 ton so the belly of the truck hit the rocky corner of the "cliff" we went over. I put my hand on the dash on that one. :/

I always wore my seat belt and the object was for him- to see if he could make me put my hand on the dash. Can we borrow your pickup? ;) The scarriest thing he ever did (to himself) had him pretty shook up and I never flinched and I made a big deal about that for the next year we worked together and he couldn't make me put my hand on the dash again after the "cliff" incident. He got fired. :)

Did you know that thing had a stupid automatic in it and the valves would start floating(or something) at 91-92 miles an hour in second gear. That sucker would set you back in the seat when the auto was kicked up into drive at 91-92. Did I tell you he got fired? ;)

Tyrone, you are under-estimating how much extra strength is engineered into vehicles and especially pickup's drive lines.

Guys have had all kinds of trouble with their personal chevy pickup drive lines, but at work we didn't, they were serviced every 3000 miles, could that be the difference?

Nothing like engineering dune buggys to make you really (never fully) appreaciate how strong and light weight the factory stuff is! No kidding on that.

Alvin in AZ

"Short Bus" Yes! Good album! :) (-by Filter, next album sucked)

I didn't ride the short-bus to school... "i walked 20 miles in the snow... up hill... both ways".

Alvin in AZ (tool, rage, staind)