OX Locker
- Thread starter hugh87
- Start date
David
New member
594000
I installed an Ox locker in my CJ about two months ago. So far, so good. It pretty much works as advertised. The only criticism I have so far is that when I was going downhill and had a load on the locker (wheels turning at different rates--i.e., I was turning), I couldn't get it unlocked. When I reached the bottom of the hill, it unlocked just fine.
Generally, you didn't say why you want or need the Ox or what else you're looking for. I would get it only with power steering--manual steering and a full-spool locker is just too difficult. I like it as a less complicated and expensive (though don't kid yourself--the locker and the instalation will set you back almost a thousand bucks) alternative to an ARB. If a limited slip will do the job for you, you might consider that. I wouldn't go full time locker (such as a Detroit) unless you've converted to manual hubs.
Also, what are you using/planning to use in the back? If you already have an ARB in the back, there's no reason not to put one up front as well. If you're not running a locker at all in the back, I'd put one there first.
I installed an Ox locker in my CJ about two months ago. So far, so good. It pretty much works as advertised. The only criticism I have so far is that when I was going downhill and had a load on the locker (wheels turning at different rates--i.e., I was turning), I couldn't get it unlocked. When I reached the bottom of the hill, it unlocked just fine.
Generally, you didn't say why you want or need the Ox or what else you're looking for. I would get it only with power steering--manual steering and a full-spool locker is just too difficult. I like it as a less complicated and expensive (though don't kid yourself--the locker and the instalation will set you back almost a thousand bucks) alternative to an ARB. If a limited slip will do the job for you, you might consider that. I wouldn't go full time locker (such as a Detroit) unless you've converted to manual hubs.
Also, what are you using/planning to use in the back? If you already have an ARB in the back, there's no reason not to put one up front as well. If you're not running a locker at all in the back, I'd put one there first.
O IIIIII O
New member
595000
I know several peoepl that have the OX and love it! Then I also know several that have ARB and love it as well.
My question is... What are the advantages to having one in the back only to having one in the front only? I have limited slip in the back. Does this mean I should just put one in the front? If I did not have limited slip should I put one in the back
I know several peoepl that have the OX and love it! Then I also know several that have ARB and love it as well.
My question is... What are the advantages to having one in the back only to having one in the front only? I have limited slip in the back. Does this mean I should just put one in the front? If I did not have limited slip should I put one in the back
David
New member
596000
Regarding my advice for putting a locker in the back first: All I meant was that if one is only going to lock one axle, it might as well be the rear. First, the rear axles are stronger than the front, and second, they don't adversely affect steering to the extent that front lockers do.
Regarding limited slips-- I'd go for a full locker in the rear, because a full locker is stronger and gives more traction than a limited slip. However, you've got to take into account your set up. If you're running 36's on a 35, I wouldn't lock the axle, too. This is true of any full locker--it will cause stress on the axle, which can tear it up. (This will also depend on the engine and the rest of the drivetrain.) Of course, that's equally true for the front axle, but when 4wd is engaged, the torque is cut in half. A limited slip will usually give way before the axles.
Regarding my advice for putting a locker in the back first: All I meant was that if one is only going to lock one axle, it might as well be the rear. First, the rear axles are stronger than the front, and second, they don't adversely affect steering to the extent that front lockers do.
Regarding limited slips-- I'd go for a full locker in the rear, because a full locker is stronger and gives more traction than a limited slip. However, you've got to take into account your set up. If you're running 36's on a 35, I wouldn't lock the axle, too. This is true of any full locker--it will cause stress on the axle, which can tear it up. (This will also depend on the engine and the rest of the drivetrain.) Of course, that's equally true for the front axle, but when 4wd is engaged, the torque is cut in half. A limited slip will usually give way before the axles.
O IIIIII O
New member
597000
Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the info.
598000
Sorry, I should have put more info. I have a 94 YJ with a 4 cyl. Right now I am not running anything in the front or rear for lockers. I was thinking of putting an ox locker in the front and rear as soon as they came out with something for the D35. Or should I just go with a full locker in the rear and manual hubs with a locker in the front? Thanks for the help.
Sorry, I should have put more info. I have a 94 YJ with a 4 cyl. Right now I am not running anything in the front or rear for lockers. I was thinking of putting an ox locker in the front and rear as soon as they came out with something for the D35. Or should I just go with a full locker in the rear and manual hubs with a locker in the front? Thanks for the help.
David
New member
600000
Personally, I would think hard before putting a full locker--or definitely a spool--on a Dana 35. 33" tires are about your max for that axle anyway. Now both of you guys run 4 cyls, which means that you stand less chance of breaking drive train components than someone with a V-8 does. Still . . . .
Now a selectable locker in the front, I think, is a great idea. It's especially nice for those vehicles which don't have manual hubs.
An Ox in the rear is, when locked, the same as a full spool. I guess it all depends on what your $$$ resources are. My personal suggestion--put a D 44 or better in the rear, and lock it with whatever you'd like. The Ox should work great for the front. If you can't afford that (and not too many folks can), then you're kinda skating on the edge with what you've suggested. To be safer, you could put a limited slip in the back, but of course (a) that's not fool-proof, and (b) you don't get as good traction. One consideration for the Ox in the rear is that if you spend $700 on a unit for a D-35, and another $200 installing it, what are you going to do if you break an axle and you want to then upgrade to a 44? At that point, you have a heavy, expensive paper weight. Of course, you can sell the locker, but you wouldn't come close to recovering your initial investment.
Basically, I'm not too fond of the D-35. I've just heard too many horror stories. With mild to lightly moderate four wheeling, as long as you have a 4 cyl. engine, everything ought to hold together. However, if you're out doing searious four wheeling with lots of high acceleration (Tellico comes to mind), and especially if you ever upgrade engines, I'd watch out for that rear axle.
Hope this has been somewhat helpful. I should mention that I drive a CJ with a 44 rear welded, and a 30 front Ox-locked.
Personally, I would think hard before putting a full locker--or definitely a spool--on a Dana 35. 33" tires are about your max for that axle anyway. Now both of you guys run 4 cyls, which means that you stand less chance of breaking drive train components than someone with a V-8 does. Still . . . .
Now a selectable locker in the front, I think, is a great idea. It's especially nice for those vehicles which don't have manual hubs.
An Ox in the rear is, when locked, the same as a full spool. I guess it all depends on what your $$$ resources are. My personal suggestion--put a D 44 or better in the rear, and lock it with whatever you'd like. The Ox should work great for the front. If you can't afford that (and not too many folks can), then you're kinda skating on the edge with what you've suggested. To be safer, you could put a limited slip in the back, but of course (a) that's not fool-proof, and (b) you don't get as good traction. One consideration for the Ox in the rear is that if you spend $700 on a unit for a D-35, and another $200 installing it, what are you going to do if you break an axle and you want to then upgrade to a 44? At that point, you have a heavy, expensive paper weight. Of course, you can sell the locker, but you wouldn't come close to recovering your initial investment.
Basically, I'm not too fond of the D-35. I've just heard too many horror stories. With mild to lightly moderate four wheeling, as long as you have a 4 cyl. engine, everything ought to hold together. However, if you're out doing searious four wheeling with lots of high acceleration (Tellico comes to mind), and especially if you ever upgrade engines, I'd watch out for that rear axle.
Hope this has been somewhat helpful. I should mention that I drive a CJ with a 44 rear welded, and a 30 front Ox-locked.
O IIIIII O
New member
601000
? I have seen that alot of people swap out the D35 outback but are more than happy leaving the D30 upfront. Why is this? The D30 is weaker than the D35. Does the front axle take less abuse?
? I have seen that alot of people swap out the D35 outback but are more than happy leaving the D30 upfront. Why is this? The D30 is weaker than the D35. Does the front axle take less abuse?
David
New member
602000
Here's my understanding: when in two wheel drive, the rear axle has to take all the torque generated by the driveline. However, when in four wheel drive, the transfer case splits this torque, sending half of it up front. Thus, the front axle only has to handle 1/2 of the torque of the rear axle. I don't know the specs, but I'm willing to bet that a Dana 30 is more than half as strong as a 35.
Now of course, this doesn't explain why a Dana 30 will stand up in 4wd while the 35 will not. In 4wd, each axle should take equal torque. I truly don't know why the 35's give out while the 30's seem all right. Maybe somebody else out there does? But in general, I've observed that people who are even moderately in to 4-wheeling lose the 35s, while someone usually has to be into pretty extreme stuff to want to upgrade to a 44 in the front. My jeep's gone, to the best of my knowlege, 27 or so years with the 30/44 combo without complaint (well, I did have to replace one rear axleshaft, but that's what comes with the welded rear and a Chev. 350).
[This message has been edited by David (edited July 18, 2001).]
Here's my understanding: when in two wheel drive, the rear axle has to take all the torque generated by the driveline. However, when in four wheel drive, the transfer case splits this torque, sending half of it up front. Thus, the front axle only has to handle 1/2 of the torque of the rear axle. I don't know the specs, but I'm willing to bet that a Dana 30 is more than half as strong as a 35.
Now of course, this doesn't explain why a Dana 30 will stand up in 4wd while the 35 will not. In 4wd, each axle should take equal torque. I truly don't know why the 35's give out while the 30's seem all right. Maybe somebody else out there does? But in general, I've observed that people who are even moderately in to 4-wheeling lose the 35s, while someone usually has to be into pretty extreme stuff to want to upgrade to a 44 in the front. My jeep's gone, to the best of my knowlege, 27 or so years with the 30/44 combo without complaint (well, I did have to replace one rear axleshaft, but that's what comes with the welded rear and a Chev. 350).
[This message has been edited by David (edited July 18, 2001).]
Similar threads
