Who was it that said I didn't need lockers...?

A guy in town has a snowmobile modification he has been working on, that uses two rear axles and a track to connect the tires on each side.

Earle

---snip--snip--snip---

It's kind of like skiing downhill on ice. Ever done that? Keep your skiis flat and don't try to stop real fast. A fresh diaper is a good idea too, before you start...

Earle

LOL!

Oh ya, been on a few of those type of runs.

I lived in the Canadian Rockies and the east coast and ski lots.

Spring skiing... When the sun goes away, look out!

Mike

Jeff knows this subject well ;)

KH

Mud.

I hate mud!

Tom

Mud=4wheeling heaven. (But I live in the Midwest.)

• * * Matt Macchiarolo
  formatting link
  formatting link
  formatting link

CRWLR is right. Sometimes Low 1st is too low. One example is in sand, from what I'm told (I've not driven in sand yet). The point is that brakes alone are a bad idea. Brakes are applied unevenly (more toward the front) and it's harder to modulate them. Many people will over apply them and when they get into a bad situation will let off completely and lose control, like Travis did. Use your drive train to slow your vehicle down. To paraphrase Mark Smith, "Getyourfootoffthedamnclutch!". :-)

I'm with you, Matt! Mud and water are where it's at!

Ok, so if I understand right, you are saying that brakes are worse than engine-braking because 1) Brakes are more likely to lock the tires up, and 2) When the tires are locked up, you can't steer.

Is the same risk present though if you are backing down a hill, and therefore most of the braking is being done by the back tires, which presumably are not used for steering on most rigs? I ask because that is the situation I had in mind when I posed the question. I was recently trying to climb a steep hill and came up to a 4' sheer rock embankment that I simply couldn't climb. So my only real option was to go back down the hill. Not wanting to risk turning around on the side of a steep hill, I decided to do it in reverse. Because the trail had lots of obstacles on either side and was kind of twisty, and visibility in reverse isn't that great, I found that the one gear available to me (reverse) was way too fast, even in 4-low... so I felt my only option was to put things in neutral and ride the brakes haltingly back down the hill. I did that successfully but there was definitely a pucker factor!

You are lucky to still have a Jeep.....

Even if the lowest gear is too fast, leave it in gear and use the brakes.

As long as you are moving, you won't stall out and if you are going slow enough to stall out, then dump the clutch and stop.

Reverse can be really snaky. If the front wheels lock up, they can easily slide you sideways enough to flip.

If you are in gear, the front wheels can't lock up without all 4 locking so your control stays with you.

Mike

Joshua Nels>

Joshua, You did the right thing until you put it in neutral. Leave it in reverse and lightly apply the brakes as needed to slow you down a bit. You stand a much lower chance of locking up a wheel if you are in gear. Any time you lock up a wheel or two with braking, you degrade your controllability. You need to keep all your wheels turning. You were also correct in not trying to turn around. That could have been disastrous.

Yes, that's what I said. Of course, being there is a very important part of this discussion because being there lets you experience a wealth of other variables that make cut-and-dry statements impossible. Basically, my first thing to do ALWAYS is to select the proper gear that will hold me back, and allow me to feather the brakes to "fine tune" my decent. Sometimes I select a gear that is too low, then I use a healthy application of the brakes while shifting to the next gear that will give greater comfort and control while allowing a slightly faster decent.

The general rule of thumb is that if you are not comfortable, you are also not being safe. If you are being safe, your comfort levels will increase dramatically. Be safe and comfortable, and you will live to tell the stories.

Pardon me for breaking your thought in two, or more. This is a good question.

Yes, the same rules apply when backing down a hill. NEVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER expect to retain control of you vehicle while backing down a hill and using the brakes. The front tires will lock up and steering control will be lost. It is ALWAYS best if you must back down a hill, to come to a full stop FIRST, and select Reverse, and probably LO range. Do this even if the engine has stalled. Then start the motor and back down in Reverse, If the motor won't start, then back down on the starter motor at least until the vehicle is stabalized to the point that you can walk away from it without concern that it is going to go places on its own.

The brakes are intended to stop you while moving forward, they don't work nearly as well in Reverse as in any of the forward gears. The front brakes are metered to take 60% to 70% of the braking load while going forward, they still take the brake pressures in R but the loads are shifted, making the front brakes lock too soon.

I ask because that

You need to make gearing adjustments if you can not go slow enough in R. My CJ has a 6.69:1 first gear, and R is similar, maybe even lower, so I can literally get out of my Jeep and walk down the hill faster than it will go on the engine.

You would be better off keeping the trans in R, and ridiing the brakes to the threshold of stalling the motor than shifting into N and using the brakes exclusively.

"CRWLR" spake thusly in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

What do you mean by this term "on the starter motor"?

Couldn't you just leave the leave the trans in reverse and the clutch engaged with the engine not running? Or is that what you are saying?

-Fred W

Hi mike,

I'm not trying to argue with you, but this wasn't an option. I have a V8 and 4.10 gear ratio, and when it's in 4-low and a low gear such as reverse, not to mention a downhill incline, there is no way the brakes can apply enough stopping power to stall the engine. The torque simply overpowers the brakes. I can't help but suspect that this is the case for many others here as well, since a lot of folks have quite powerful engines.

You're not reading his post correcty.

I have a

If that is the case you should have had enough engine compression braking to safely back down, feathering the brake pedal just to augment the compression braking.

The torque

You may want to have your brakes looked at. Remember, acceleration is optional, stopping is not.

Your CJ8 might be too much machine to learn to 'wheel on. Better stick with that TJ 4-popper.

• * * Matt Macchiarolo
  formatting link
  formatting link
  formatting link

You'd be parked. Engaging the starter motor will turn the engine slower than idle. It's an old trick also used to s l o w l y crawl, but your truck needs to be set up to where you can crank starter in gear. TJ's can easily defeat the clutch lockout by inserting a fuse in the "clutch lockout" fuse socket.

When I am on the trail, in low gear/low range, I often leave the clutch and brake alone and stop just by switching off the engine. This has held me in place at the steepest inclines I have yet encountered, and to get going I don't have to disengage the clutch...just turn the key and off I go.

• * * Matt Macchiarolo
  formatting link
  formatting link
  formatting link

Put it in gear (Reverse usually, but 1st will work too - depending upon which end is up and where you need to be when the dust settles), and turn the key. The vehicle will move because the starter is turning. This is what is meant by the term, "on the starter motor."

This is not a "routine" operation by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a trick that one should keep up one's sleeve to be pulled out when needed. My CJ, before fuel injection, would stall out easily when I managed to tip it steeply - I managed to do this with alarming regularity , and as with all carburated Jeeps, it would refuse to start again until it was sufficiently satisfied that it was on level ground. I often times had to shift into R, and twist the key to back off the hill and get a fresh start. Many times, I prayed both silently and aloud that the motor would not take this particular opportunity to not be fussy about the operating angle, and suddenly roar to life and hurl me ever closer to my doom over the side of the hill. A few times, it did decide that hills and angles were not an important factor as to whether or not it would run, and it did indeed roar to life unexpectedly.

Now that I have fuel injection, I don't stall nearly as often, and when I do, I have every confidence that the motor will refire immediately, so I get to actually drive off the hill in R while haveing the full benefit of an operational motor. This, however, is merely a wild-eyed dream resulting from an overactive imagination for guys that haul a carburator around with them. These drivers must be able to shift into R when the engine has chosen an inopportune moment to take a break from the day's activities, and back off the hill under the limited power of the starter motor. In the perfect world that I live in, the gear ratio is sufficient to not over-spin the starter motor. Your mileage may vary.

I don't remember if it was Josh or Travis that said they decided that R sent them down the hill with too much speed. I'm with you, the brakes should have keep things managable while the trans was set in R, if there was still more speed than one would have liked, then the Idle Speed must be too high.

spam snipped-for-privacy@ev1.net