help settle an argument

[Matt_H]

"Back in the late sixties when Rover were designing the Range
Rover they opted for permanent 4x4 because it meant they
could use lighter axles keeping the unsprung weight down"

True or false?

[blackbob]

false cos the axles aint that light
 :lol:  :lol:

[Henry Webster]

Can't imagine its true!

H

[thermidorthelobster]

I doubt it, it wouldn't make much difference.

[barnhill4x4]

Why would an axle driven all the time be lighter than one that is only driven part time?

[Matt_H]

well i cant figure out why the other person is saying that either!

the only thing i can think of that would make any difference to weight if all things were equal is the addition of free wheeling hubs on a series and thats hardly much.

Matthew

[waveydavey]

I seem to remember that the reason for the permanant 4WD was because the power of the V8 was too much for a single axle at the time.

[datalas]

theoretically it *could* keep the weight in the transmission down, since you don't need to have any of the selecting gear in the transfer box...  whether or not that is taken up by the weight of the center diff and a difflock is a matter only a set of weighing scales could deliberate.

I personally don't see why an axle would weight more or less depending upon whether it's turning or not ...  although I suppose the argument could be that since the rear axle is no longer going to have to take the entire output of the drive train it could be made to withstand less force, and hence out of lighter material...  not 100% convinced that would hold up in court though.

[Range Rover Blues]

I'm with Datalas on this one, whilst it could be argued that by splitting the drive front and rear, the axles would not need to be as strong you have to consider worst case scenario, stuck in the mud, low box first gear and only one axle with grip.

It's probably more to do with the neutral handling of 4wd with that much power.  I tried driving the LSE withonly the front axle driven and it was really bad.

Add to that the thought that BL would not design a new part when they could find something in the parts bin, the Rover diffs are a straight swap for the P5 axle IIRC, just a taller ratio.

[mike142sl]

"Back in the late sixties when Rover were designing the Range
Rover they opted for permanent 4x4 because it meant they
could use lighter axles keeping the unsprung weight down"

True or false?

FALSE It was decided that, Unlike the Land Rover, the 100-inch Station Wagon as it was known then, would have its four-wheel-drive system permanently engaged - primarily to ensure that the massive torque of the V8 was split evenly between two lightly loaded axles.

[Range Rover Blues]

"Back in the late sixties when Rover were designing the Range
Rover they opted for permanent 4x4 because it meant they
could use lighter axles keeping the unsprung weight down"

True or false?

It was decided that, Unlike the Land Rover, the 100-inch Station Wagon as it was known then, would have its four-wheel-drive system permanently engaged - primarily to ensure that the massive torque of the V8 was split evenly between two lightly loaded axles.

Which is, in essence, what Matt is saying.  2 weaker axles sharing the torque would weigh less and therefore handling would be better.

[mike142sl]

Yes but No But......... Matt's original statement sugested that the perm 4x4 was decided on in order to fit lighter axles, rather than the other way around...... I think??????????

[Range Rover Blues]

NO, that's it, I need a drink now :-k

[mike142sl]

That's probably where this question started - good idea though  :)