Quote
Quote
Offroad the 50% increase, that I see a few complaints about, it a wonderful thing. ALl I can say is "Try it before you say it should be more" It is enough to make a BIG difference.


Is it true for manual only or for automatic also ?
I have an automatic transmission and I have not felt
yet that I need more reduction. Actually, I even have to
switch from 4-Lo to 4-Hi sometimes to get better traction,
like when I stuck in deep soft sand. My 3.2V6 is strong
enough to pull me out of anything, if I have some traction.
And I have just 4.10 gears and 31" tires.

But sometimes I do have better traction with 4-Lo.
For example, in snow, when I switch to 4-Lo from 4-Hi
I feel better traction. May be, on such surface I'd do
better with 3.07, I do not know.

When really low T-case matters for automatic ?
(I know about downhills, I am asking about traction).

Oleg
Rodeo S 4wd 2002


I would say in general, that the lower-range gears are more for rock-crawling than sand or mud blasting. (But then again, I don't like mud, so I try to avoid it).

I gotta tell ya, with my 99 Amigo and the auto tranny, I really, really, really like the Tera gears. "Only a 50% reduction" translates into a lot more low speed crawl control, especially on some of the trails in Moab. They add a lot more finesse to my driving, as I don't have romp on the throttle much to get a line started on an obstacle. Also, my auto tranny will now actually lock up on steep downhill runs, so I *can* use the engine to help with the braking.

Of course, when Corbin gets me to crawl up some steep ledges and I decide to nail the skinny pedal, the lower gears do let me lift my front end off the ground:

[Linked Image]

I consider the money I spent on my Tera's the best investment that I've made so far. (now if I would just 'pull the trigger' and get the ARB out from behind the bedroom door and installed in the front axle <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> )

Jeff Mason

Whatever makes you upset in someone else...also exists in you