hey im new! (4x4 info please!)

BX Tech talk
inferno
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: essex

Post by inferno » Thu May 11, 2006 12:21 pm

yay go vanny!

ive been informed by gearbox builders that its unlikely to break under the cars power alone and even with the turbo ansd around 200bhp. they advised that poor services and abusive driving is more the reason. abuse could involve tyre tread ect, ie u get a puncture and put a new tyre on the one corner , that wheel will be trying to force the diff to slow down causing severe stress.

how many people know that pulling the handbrake at speed also affects the strain on the diffs? mot brake testing for instance has to be done with a stopometer , not the normal rollers.

ive found another box on 72 k with a 3month warrenty so all hopes not lost yet. i am going to make this work

User avatar
Philip Chidlow
Over 2k
Posts: 11548
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex
x 11

Post by Philip Chidlow » Thu May 11, 2006 12:31 pm

Hats off to your determination. Hopefully this voyage of discovery will enlighten us as a whole. I must say what I know about these things you could write on a stamp!

=D>
• COMING SOON... 1992 Citroen BX TZD Turbo Hurricane
• COMING SOON... 1998 Citroen Xantia 2.0 16v auto Exclusive
• Xsara Picasso 1.6 16v
and some Ford tat lol

User avatar
DavidRutherford
BX Digit man!
Posts: 2704
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 5:07 pm
Location: Placing comments on YouTube.

Post by DavidRutherford » Thu May 11, 2006 12:46 pm

inferno wrote: mot brake testing for instance has to be done with a stopometer , not the normal rollers.
This depends entirely on the type of 4x4 system. One with open differentials is fine on MOT rollers. One with a viscous / limited slip / torsen centre arrangement has to be done with a decelerometer.

And I'm afraid to say that gearbox designers do get it wrong sometimes. There are known design faults with a number of gearboxes out there, the BX4x4 being one of these.

It's a case of: in theory, the fine-tooth drive should be strong enough. In practice, it isn't.

Likewise:
In theory, the rear half-shafts on a series 3 land-rover should be strong enough. In practice, they aren't.
In theory, the rear differential on a MK3 Ford granada should be strong enough. In practice, it isn't.

And so the list goes on.
this might be a signature

inferno
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: essex

Post by inferno » Thu May 11, 2006 2:32 pm

well i now have a spare box on the way and will keep an eye open for an mi16x4... if all else fails ill put the turbo into the black meteor i have for sale at work ;)

jeremy
Over 2k
Posts: 2112
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Hampshire UK

Post by jeremy » Thu May 11, 2006 2:34 pm

Ah yes but the Land Rover is a strange one - as the long wheel and some others have a channel strengthening section welded to the bottom of the axle case which suggests that the case itself is weak and when its loaded the case bends and tries to bend the shafts - which eventually fatigues and cracks.

the curious thing is that all Range Rovers (certainly to Classics) have the Rover final drive at both ends, Land Rovers did originally, some in the 60's had a better eNF or something axle at the rear and a Rover at the front and later ones (certainly 90 and 110 onwards) have Salisbury at the back and Rover at the front.

So 2.5TDI has a Salisbury back, 4.2 EFI Range Rover has a Rover back diff!

User avatar
DavidRutherford
BX Digit man!
Posts: 2704
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 5:07 pm
Location: Placing comments on YouTube.

Post by DavidRutherford » Thu May 11, 2006 2:55 pm

jeremy wrote:some in the 60's had a better eNF or something axle at the rear
ENV. (which are a pain as parts are rare for these)

And I agree... but again it just highlights that motor manufacturers do make mistakes, and have some bad designs out there that break even under normal use. The weak gear pair in the BX4x4 system being one of these, so by adding more power to an already weak system is just throwing money away.
this might be a signature

User avatar
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6183
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
x 47

Post by Kitch » Thu May 11, 2006 6:23 pm

You'd be far better off with a 405 Mi16x4 setup.

When Dimma built the second 309 Dimma, they made the Ultima model, which was an Mi16 and 4x4. They used the 405 rear setup and I believe the hydraulics aswell.....as obviously the 405 ones are electronically operated, not belt driven like a BX.