Timber
Veteran Member
LOL I think that 1 struck a nerve, Oh well it happens, I think I'm OK now
Farmwithjunk said:WOW....! I'm going to attemt to speak my piece without directly responding to anyone in particular, in fear of starting the dogfight all over again.
For those who seriously believe 4WD should never be disengaged. Why do you suppose the manufacturers included a SHIFTER to disengage/engage it? (ANSWER? To prevent UNNECCISSARY WEAR AND TEAR) The logic that there is NO wear on front end components when in gear is pure folly. So, does that mean a conventional 2WD tractor is not subject to ANY wear in the rear end? And that 2WD tractor's rear end doesn't have to STEER. There's MORE parts to wear. And wear they will. Look at the relatively low worth of BIG 4WD AG tractors after they get a lot of hours on them. Why do you suppose they drop in value so far at a given point? Because they're in need of a LOT of expensive repairs to maintain reliability.
Farmwithjunk said:Staying out of the swamp is a better option to me.
whodat90 said:Look, I don't know why you keep trying to make such a point of this. I will attempt to speak for all of us here, :We know that parts wear when you use them. This isn't exactly a profound statement. Your point is made, we all agree. Move on. The question isn't whether or not it wears. It's a question of whether or not it wears any faster or slower than any other part of the tractor that's used. Unless it wears at a significantly different rate than any other part, then there is no valid point to bring up the wear.
Farmwithjunk said:First off, I don't see YOU speaking for everyone here. In fact, I'd go so far as to say you don't even speak WELL for your own arguement. Then let's go with the statement on how I "keep trying to make such a point of this" in regards to wear on a tractor. THIS IS THE FIRST COMMENT I'VE MADE IN THIS THREAD SLICK.... Where on earth did you come up with that statement? I wasn't attempting to make a "profound statement". All I was doing was expressing MY opinion. I have that right. It ISN'T up to you to determine who does and who DOESN'T have a say.
I certainly saw this 1 coming. People get personal and then it all goes down hill from there. There are people hear from all walks of life with all kinds of experience on how things can be done. You have to stay objective. Everyone has something to bring to the table. I will never understand a personal attack on another member sharing there opinion or experience on a subject. Just because someone disagrees or feels it irrelevant to another member doesn’t mean it is to everyone. This is a Place to share information and opinions and you take away what it relative to your lifestyle and apply it accordingly.Farmwithjunk said:First off, I don't see YOU speaking for everyone here. In fact, I'd go so far as to say you don't even speak WELL for your own arguement. Then let's go with the statement on how I "keep trying to make such a point of this" in regards to wear on a tractor. THAT POST WAS THE FIRST COMMENT I'VE MADE IN THIS THREAD .... Where on earth did you come up with that statement? I wasn't attempting to make a "profound statement". All I was doing was expressing MY opinion. I have that right. It ISN'T up to you to determine who does and who DOESN'T have a say.
whodat90 said:Um, look. I honestly apologize for confusing you with others that said the same or similar thing over the 19 pages of this thread. As for the rest of your reply, it seems like a case of attack the messenger rather than the message. Have you anything pertinent to add, or will it be more name calling?
RobJ said:I think having 4wd contributes to MORE 4wd tractors getting stuck (just look at this site and the pictures and posts). With my 2wd I look and say, "nope, to wet". If I (as in me myself) had a 4wd I know for certain I would be tempted to give it a try. But these things aren't ATV's, a tractor usually sinks.![]()
RobJ said:Regarding the turning radious. Kubota sort of "punts" on this one. My L2500 owners manual says 7.9' for both 2wd and 4wd. This is of course using the brakes. No real numbers in the book.
I had a flat while in 2WD once, does that count?SkyPup said:Sounds like one wheel drive may be the best of all based on the opinions expressed here!
Has anyone found two wheel drive too much for themselves and converted to one wheel?
RobJ said:Regarding the turning radious. Kubota sort of "punts" on this one. My L2500 owners manual says 7.9' for both 2wd and 4wd. This is of course using the brakes. No real numbers in the book.
dtd24 said:Man this thread is a hit. I haven't been able to log on in awhile, and was suprised to see it still going. I have been going in and out of 4x4 quite a bit. Switching it up a bit.
ovrszd said:Timber, your description of your truck system is a modern version of the full-time drive system of the 70s. It has no connection to your vehicle computer other than to trigger lights in the dash and engage the front axle disconnect if so equipped.
When in 2 wheel high, that's all the drive you have.
When it's in 4 wheel auto it is functioning as the previous mentioned full-time drive system splitting power to each axle. Similar to your semi rear ends when the power divider is unlocked. To prove this, jack up either end of your truck until both front or rear wheels are off the ground. Engage 4 wheel auto and try to drive off the jack. It will just spin whichever axle you have jacked up and won't move the vehicle.
When it's in 4 wheel high it is locked in 4 wheel drive and demands equal rotation of the front and rear driveshaft. Similar to your semi rear ends when the power divider is locked. If you jack the truck as described above, it will drive off the jack. This is what your B7800 has when you engage MFWD with the lever.
When it's in 4 wheel low it's locked in 4 wheel drive but is operating in low range of the T-case.