My Unlimited X has the factory elocker in the rear. I am wondering if I can add a Rubicon front axle and wire it in (with factory wiring parts) to work with the existing locker switch.

Anyone this is easily possible and would it require some sort of reprogramming?

Probably not worth it, but just wondering.

 

It woudn't be too hard to wire it so that it engaged simultaneously with the rear, using your factory switch. Getting it to work independently from the rear using your factory switch would be difficult and would likely require reprogramming your computer. If you want it to work independently, I would recommend wiring up your own switches for the front and/or rear. Many people are doing this with their Rubicons anyway for greater locker control. Good luck. Also, do you have an '07 or '08?

 

I have an '07 front Rubicon Dana 44 housing if you are interested.

 

Had an 07, now have an 08.

 

Not sure about just the housing. Might be getting to involved for me.

 

You will have to regear one end or the other since the '08 doesn't have 4.10 gears (or both if going even lower). You could probably pick up a good used 4.10 for the rear pretty inexpensively.

 

A lot of people are finding that font lockers do more for you than rear lockers. Interestingly, this was also discovered a few of decades ago, but the pack of dogma chanting "lock the rear first" traditionalists used the mantra to drown out anyone one who published the information.

The tradition was based upon the fact that its harder to steer a locked front end....which it is...and to the prevalence of front diffs breaking in general more easily than rear diffs, as the fronts needed to turn as well as propel the jeeps, etc.....

....before selectable lockers allowed disengaging the locker when needed, etc. These same chanters had no problem locking the front as long as you installed a locker in the rear too....it just made their heads explode if you didn't put one in back too, an odd conflict, but, then again, a lot of traditions are odd in retrospect.

The tests were conducted with a series of CJ's, and involved a rather lengthy series of obstacles. The end result was that a front only locked jeep could go about 80% of where a dual locked jeep could go, and a rear only locked jeep could only go about 50% of where a dual locked jeep could.

All jeeps with additional wheel travel benefitted the least, and those with limited articulation benefitted the most. This was shown to be related to why a locker helps at all...when one tire loses traction, but the other still has it.

Essentially, under many conditions, the front becomes unweighted more than the rear...and the end that is unweighted the most, is the end that will benefit the most from a locker.

As on a hill climb, etc...the weight is transferred to the rear, the front end is most likley to slip, and, most likely to benefit from a locker.

When approaching a stair step, ledge, etc...the rear tires are planted firmly, but, the fronts tend to be at a 45 degree angle of attack to the rock, etc...IE: ONE TIRE with traction...the other....in the air....another good locker scenario.

When clambering OVER that rock, the rear tires have to leave the ground altogether...zero traction to either tire...and the front tires have to claw their way forward to pull the butt end over the rest of the way...with the front end in the air...and all the weight hanging off the back...unweighting the front tires right when they need all the down force/traction they can muster, another good locker scenario.

So, places where its more important to push the jeep through on one tire go to the rear locker, places where its more important to pull the jeep through on one tire go to the front locker.

Overall, it seems there are more situations that pulling oneself with one tire is more useful.

Its like your climbing up a steep slope...you lean way forward, and grab at bushes or branches, or use your hands in front of you on the ground to help your self up...your legs might be doing the lion's share of the propulson, but without being able to lean forward and pull too, you can't get up the slope.

When both ends of the jeep are propelling you, either end can lose traction here and there...and the other end will keep the jeep moving, and get the other tires to a good patch of traction again, and so forth.

Again - A locker makes you more capable ONLY when otherwise you'd end up on one tire traction-wise...so, the axle most likley to LOSE traction is the one to lock from a performance perspective.

IFS rigs find this out too, in spades, as IFS rigs can't leverage one tire down if one is ramped up...they lose one IFS tire's traction regularly due to limited wheel travel and limited axle leverage.

A guy I wheel with has a front only locked Xterra...it kicks the rear only locked Xterras' butts...huge difference.



The jeeps I know have either rear, or dual lockers, so I can't compare.

Manufacturers only lock the rear to avoid liability issues, as dumb asses who don't read the manual, etc...can't even be trusted to shift, let alone know when to engage/disengage a locker.

 

WOW! That took a lot of typing. It wasn't exacty being debated...but I agree with you.

 

There are some good threads in this forum about this. I plan on having this completed by the time the snows melt in the passes this year (mid-June or so.) 4wd.com is selling a complete bolt in front Dana 44. http://www.4wd.com/jeep-parts.aspx?j...e&dir=asc&pg=1

It is 4:10 so you would have to deal with your rear diff. The Mopar part number for the wiring harness with the plug is here on the site and some folks who have done it switch, relay, etc... are here as well. One guy I remember claims it took him about 6 hours to do the physical switch. Good luck on this.

 

I think he got that part number wrong. I was PM'd last week about it, if it is the same one. It turns out the OP contains the part number for the locker SENSOR harness. I'm still running mine with the wires pressed in over the terminals and zip-tied. I WOULD lke to have that plug though if anyone really has it.