Falcon XY 4WD
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Noddy on 21 Oct 2007 09:20 "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:13hmf1hq65ota0a(a)corp.supernews.com... > Just as well Toyota didn't think that way when they started making > Landcruisers all those years ago or they would have missed out on a lot of > money. Yeah, but a Landcruiser ain't a Falcon ute. > The market for 4WD utes may have been small in the early 70's but its huge > now and if Ford had known that they could have developed a good product > over the last 30 odd years that could have been a competitor to the > Japanese who have a strangle hold on that market. True enough. The Falcon 4wd ute was fairly unique in that it was built for the specific task of getting into reasonably remote areas while having a decent carrying capacity. 4wd's of the era were limited to carrying people into such places. The "twig" for a combination of both didn't come until a *long* time later. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: Noddy on 21 Oct 2007 16:23 "John McKenzie" <jmac_melbourne(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message news:471BA5A8.6C69(a)bigpond.com... > The friend of the family that had the ex SES willysd had em - but he > diy-ed it - not sure the source. A few blokes in the club I used to be in had them, and there used to be a "kit" available to convert them. Not that all that many old jeeps saw regular off road duty I expect, but having to get out and manually engage the front hubs always seemed like the greatest waste of time ever in my opinion. > He reckoned it made about 1-2mpg difference, but I don't recall exactly If it did, his front diff had an awful lot of drag. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: DAvid on 21 Oct 2007 20:08 "Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote in message news:471af2a0$0$74410$c30e37c6(a)lon-reader.news.telstra.net... > > "Andy" <nospam(a)no.no> wrote in message > news:471aef7c$0$30542$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au... > >> Righteo. Hilarious. > > Lol :) > > It was lost on me as well :) > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. That's only because I was having some fun with one of your A/L's. Now if I had ever lowered myself to become one too, you would have pissed yourself laughing. They say when you marry someone long enough you both start thinking the same....I guess it could be said when you've been A/L long enough, the same applies. DAVO
From: Noddy on 21 Oct 2007 21:37 "DAvid" <davideo(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message news:bSRSi.2785$CN4.1478(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > That's only because I was having some fun with one of your A/L's. Actually, I was thinking it was because you seem to have the sense of humor of a toilet cistern. Maybe your boyfriend Oz needs to give you a good going over as toilet cisterns are rght up his alley I believe.... > Now if I had ever lowered myself to become one too, you would have pissed > yourself laughing. They say when you marry someone long enough you both > start thinking the same....I guess it could be said when you've been A/L > long enough, the same applies. You would guess that, but then again you'd b wrong. As usual. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: jonz on 21 Oct 2007 22:04
Kev wrote: > Daryl Walford wrote: >> Noddy wrote: >>> "DAvid" <davideo(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message >>> news:UIASi.2510$CN4.1741(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... >>> >>>> Well that puts a whole new perspective on what I said earlier. >>>> Unless you engaged the front axle, it wouldn't be 4WD. >>> >>> No different to any other "dedicated" 4wd as far as I'm aware. >>> >>> It's only most of the "soft roaders" that have constant full or part >>> time 4wd. >>> >> Most Landcruisers have been constant 4WD since 80 series as are >> Landrovers. >> >>>> Putting it into low range gives it another gear or three. Now it's a >>>> serious 4WD. >>> >>> When I rebuilt my Jeep's transfer case I left the detent rod out that >>> stopped low range from being selected without the front axle being >>> engaged, which enabled low range for the rear axle only if you wanted >>> it. >>> >>> Why I did it at the time I can't tell you other than the idea of >>> *not* being able to have low range in 2wd seemed stupid to me, and as >>> all that was required to have it was to remove a simple 1/4 inch rod >>> that had no effect on the vehicle's operation I left it sitting on >>> the bench when the box went back together. >>> >> >> Did it have a low range lever and a 4WD lever? >> If I remember correctly early Landys had separate controls for each >> function. >> My Hilux and the BJ40 Landcruiser I owned has one lever that performs >> both functions, if you want low range 2WD you just leave the front >> hubs unlocked but I guess the Jeep didn't have unlockable front hubs? >> >> >> >> Daryl > > > Landrovers I know had two, one was a lever and the other was a push down > rod, which I think was for low range, once you pulled the 4WD lever into > 2WD the push down lever would pop back up > > some other 4WDs were like this too nearly, the push button (yellow knob) engages 4*4 in high range, this can be done at any speed, and handy if you hit a bit of soft going, or running on dirt roads. (as long as the hubs are engaged) to get back to 2wd you move the hi-lo lever (red knob) to lo and back to hi and yellow knob pops up. (can be done on the move, if you slow right down and double shuffle, there were some synchro t/cases but i havent seen one :^( ) pulling the lever back to lo automatically engages 4*4, lo range..... > > BTW you can buy(or if you have the skills make them yourself) twin > levers for Hilux(and others I presume) that separate the single stick > functions so you can have low range without engaging 4WD > also looks cool, and if you have twin transfers you have three levers > > Kev -- If at first you don't succeed, look in the trash for the instructions.. |