NP 231 to NP242, feasable?

[AIbandit]

I switched from a 242 to a 231 because I wanted lunchbox lockers and the availability of aftermarket parts...primarily an actual SYE.

Lol it may be old but someone brought it back. Nominated

 

[ECKSJAY]

Lol it may be old but someone brought it back. Nominated

So...you guys are saying that if he puts it in fulltime the lockers won't engage?

 

[Begster]

So...you guys are saying that if he puts it in fulltime the lockers won't engage?

So...you're saying that if he has lunchbox lockers, and puts it in fulltime, the transfercase won't engage?

 

[ECKSJAY]

So...you're saying that if he has lunchbox lockers, and puts it in fulltime, the transfercase won't engage?

Nobody said that. It just defeats the purpose of running 'fulltime' if you're going to spool up auto lockers. Run selectable and the diffs are ideal for slippery conditions. I know what the OP means and I know what you guys mean, but I think people are scared of trying to justify $$$ for the convenience of less slipping in those conditions. I've run both a 231/auto lockers and a 242 with selectable...and the 242 w/ air lockers wins for sand/snow/ice. It tracks the best and ends aren't trying to shoot off the roadways. :badpc:

 

[AIbandit]

And you can't run lunchbox lockers with the 242.

This^? Front or rear this is Tard worthy.

All the Full Time does is allow your front and rear axles to travel at different speeds. So having a locker up front would actually be better if your spinning since most of the power is sent to the axle with the least traction. Maybe my understanding of it is wrong. I would think the purpose would be A. Save your Tcase from wear. B. Prevent the front and rear axles from trying to keep up with eachother breaking their traction on Ice.

Yes having front lockers can break your traction but that leads to every other front locker conversation on this board.

The purpose of full time would still be there.

 

[FlexdXJ]

I swapped to the 242 from the 231 for my son's 96 XJ, he is a young driver and may need the xtra traction on wet roads and snow without having to think about shifting in and out of 4wd, for others who live in the snow belt, probably more of a convenience of being able to leave it in full time through the whole winter without really bothering the handling or gas mileage.

2wd works in the snow just fine. I throw it in 4 only when absolutely necessary i.e. pulling out people or it won't stay straight while driving down the road. Thats the advantage of MT's I guess. I only had street tires on it for about 2 small snowfalls, so I'm not sure how it would have done in deep snow. Ask XJ Stryker what he thinks of the 242. I think he has a 242 as a mistress!


HAHA, Oh this is an old thread!

 

[goodburbon]

You sir are reverse nominated. Full time with auto lockers is scary as shit to drive, even on dry pavement. Do a little research. While It's not necessary to change to an NP231 Full time option on the NP242 becomes useless with auto lockers, and all lunchbox lockers are autolockers.

 

[AIbandit]

And your reasoning behind this? I'm glad your such a big fan

 

[goodburbon]

My reasoning behind what?

The nomination, because you seem to be just a bit over zealous with your nominations. Nominating someone who posted something valid that you just didn't understand.

The comment on NP242 with auto lockers being scary? Experience.

I'm a fan of the nomination thread, and I check out all of the nominations. I don't want to seem like I'm picking on you, stalking you or anything of that sort. I just click the links and happen to disagree on your most recent nomination.

 

[AIbandit]

NP242 becomes useless with auto lockers

No your reasoning behind this. How does left and right axle speed translate into an issue with front and rear axle speed?

I ran a detroit locker rear and a true trac front for years with my 242. I never had an issue like I said the front axle locker thing will be the same argument that comes up all of the time here.


Did he not say this?

you can't run lunchbox lockers with the 242.

I believe my Detroit qualifies

 

[ehall]

I wouldn't run an auto-locker with the 242 in full-time. Power will move between the front and rear driveshafts as needed, and any shift may be enough to engage the locker on the affected axle. An LSD on the rear is about as far as I would go. A selectable is moot.

 

[winkosmosis]

If you have a front lunchbox with the 242, and have full time 4WD on here is what should happen:

If one rear wheel slips, all the power will go to that one wheel and it will spin.
If one front wheel slips, the locker will lock and power will be distributed between the other 3 wheels.
If both front wheels slip, all the power will go to those front wheels and they will spin.



The only issue here is that on the street you don't want your front axle locking, no matter what system you have.

 

[goodburbon]

*sigh*

A limited slip in the front is not a locker.
Running a an auto locker in the front axle of a jeep with full time 4wd renders that mode of the transfer case useless.

The auto lockers engage whenever the axle gets power. When your foot is on the accelerator the axles are getting power. If you apply the brakes to enter a curve both front and rear lockers are disengaged, the jeep will steer well and track the corner well. If you should apply the accelerator at any time during the cornering BOTH lockers will engage, suddenly causing massive understeer and the jeep will want to go in a straight line. You find yourself suddenly steering much further into the corner just to stay in your lane. Then if you were to release the accelerator the jeep would suddenly lurch toward the ditch, since now you have steering back. The stresses applied to the axle shafts and transfer case are farily strong and can be destructive, even in full time. Not only is it dangerous, as in low traction situations this can induce skidsand in high traction situations the jeep will have wild swings of understeer and oversteer, it is also destructive to your drivetrain components.

Running a locker in the rear will not have any ill effects in 4wd that you won't experience in 2wd, running a limited slip in the front allows enough slip to avoid the kind of severe negative effects I speak of.

My wife has an NP 242 and a detroit rear/ lock rite front. Before we locked the front Full time was still usable with a rear locker, since locking the front the full time option is unusable on the street.

Knowing what I do, the original nominated post makes perfect sense. Knowing what you do makes you think he is a tard. You lacked the information and experience to properly interpret a post and thought the original poster was a tard. Who do you think is the tard now?

 

[AIbandit]

A limited slip in the front is not a locker.

Damn and all of this time I thought... Oh wait I never said my limited slip was a locker.

I ran a detroit locker rear

And you can't run lunchbox lockers with the 242.

. Who do you think is the tard now?

hmmm arty:

The only issue here is that on the street you don't want your front axle locking, no matter what system you have.

Exactly what I was saying, same thing different words...

Yes having front lockers can break your traction but that leads to every other front locker conversation on this board.

 

[igotanxj]

Yeah... Im gonna have to go ahead and agree with mpslayer here.

The np242 has nothing to do with the front locker locking/unlocking when you accelerate/coast in the middle of a turn. The locker will do that no matter what transfer case u have.

Running a an auto locker in the front axle of a jeep with full time 4wd renders that mode of the transfer case useless

How is that mode of the transfer case useless when the front and rear axles are still rotating at different speeds? Is that not what full time 4 wheel drive IS?

 

[winkosmosis]

*sigh*

A limited slip in the front is not a locker.
Running a an auto locker in the front axle of a jeep with full time 4wd renders that mode of the transfer case useless.

The auto lockers engage whenever the axle gets power. When your foot is on the accelerator the axles are getting power. If you apply the brakes to enter a curve both front and rear lockers are disengaged, the jeep will steer well and track the corner well. If you should apply the accelerator at any time during the cornering BOTH lockers will engage, suddenly causing massive understeer and the jeep will want to go in a straight line. You find yourself suddenly steering much further into the corner just to stay in your lane. Then if you were to release the accelerator the jeep would suddenly lurch toward the ditch, since now you have steering back. The stresses applied to the axle shafts and transfer case are farily strong and can be destructive, even in full time. Not only is it dangerous, as in low traction situations this can induce skidsand in high traction situations the jeep will have wild swings of understeer and oversteer, it is also destructive to your drivetrain components.

Running a locker in the rear will not have any ill effects in 4wd that you won't experience in 2wd, running a limited slip in the front allows enough slip to avoid the kind of severe negative effects I speak of.

My wife has an NP 242 and a detroit rear/ lock rite front. Before we locked the front Full time was still usable with a rear locker, since locking the front the full time option is unusable on the street.

Knowing what I do, the original nominated post makes perfect sense. Knowing what you do makes you think he is a tard. You lacked the information and experience to properly interpret a post and thought the original poster was a tard. Who do you think is the tard now?

I thought they had to slip for a while before locking. A lunchbox is always locked while being powered? What about while engine braking?

 

[winkosmosis]

Yeah... Im gonna have to go ahead and agree with mpslayer here.

The np242 has nothing to do with the front locker locking/unlocking when you accelerate/coast in the middle of a turn. The locker will do that no matter what transfer case u have.


How is that mode of the transfer case useless when the front and rear axles are still rotating at different speeds? Is that not what full time 4 wheel drive IS?

.
You can't use the full time 4WD on the street, because it will be unsafe. When you apply power, the front lunchbox will lock. The same goes for an NP231 in part time 4wd... But the whole point of the NP242 is the full time 4WD. If you put in a front lunchbox and lose the ability to use that, you're nullifying a good benefit.

 

[muduck18]

My reasoning behind what?

The nomination, because you seem to be just a bit over zealous with your nominations. Nominating someone who posted something valid that you just didn't understand.

The comment on NP242 with auto lockers being scary? Experience.

I'm a fan of the nomination thread, and I check out all of the nominations. I don't want to seem like I'm picking on you, stalking you or anything of that sort. I just click the links and happen to disagree on your most recent nomination.

No your reasoning behind this. How does left and right axle speed translate into an issue with front and rear axle speed?

I ran a detroit locker rear and a true trac front for years with my 242. I never had an issue like I said the front axle locker thing will be the same argument that comes up all of the time here.


Did he not say this?


I believe my Detroit qualifies

*sigh*

A limited slip in the front is not a locker.
Running a an auto locker in the front axle of a jeep with full time 4wd renders that mode of the transfer case useless.

The auto lockers engage whenever the axle gets power. When your foot is on the accelerator the axles are getting power. If you apply the brakes to enter a curve both front and rear lockers are disengaged, the jeep will steer well and track the corner well. If you should apply the accelerator at any time during the cornering BOTH lockers will engage, suddenly causing massive understeer and the jeep will want to go in a straight line. You find yourself suddenly steering much further into the corner just to stay in your lane. Then if you were to release the accelerator the jeep would suddenly lurch toward the ditch, since now you have steering back. The stresses applied to the axle shafts and transfer case are farily strong and can be destructive, even in full time. Not only is it dangerous, as in low traction situations this can induce skidsand in high traction situations the jeep will have wild swings of understeer and oversteer, it is also destructive to your drivetrain components.

Running a locker in the rear will not have any ill effects in 4wd that you won't experience in 2wd, running a limited slip in the front allows enough slip to avoid the kind of severe negative effects I speak of.

My wife has an NP 242 and a detroit rear/ lock rite front. Before we locked the front Full time was still usable with a rear locker, since locking the front the full time option is unusable on the street.

Knowing what I do, the original nominated post makes perfect sense. Knowing what you do makes you think he is a tard. You lacked the information and experience to properly interpret a post and thought the original poster was a tard. Who do you think is the tard now?

Burton is right,
While the original statement that "you can't" is wrong, you can do what ever you like. But as soon as you hit the gas in the jeep your driving experience will change to dangerously unpredictable,

but guys...
This is not a thread to question that... why all the flaming, this guy was justified in saying that is a reason why he made the swap.
DONE
No nomination required. Get over it...

 

[winkosmosis]

Wait.. wtf is this nomination stuff?

 

[AIbandit]

Lol it's for our annual Tard Wars


Doesnt really matter what the NP242 does fact is he said he did a tcase swap and one of the reasons was because he couldnt use lockers... the NP242 Does have part time.