I never got the need or benefit to the Rubicrawler with an automatic transmission either, especially with a Rubicon that has the 4:1 transfer case. I can crawl as slow as I need to with an automatic transmission.
Question on Rubicrawler and stopping
- Thread starter DaveF
- Start date
OP
Main reason I wanted the rubicrawler, likely 99% of it's use will be simply to have a 2.7-1 ratio for easier trails/sandy areas etc. I find at times the 4-1 is too slow to keep up with the pack without winding up the rpms more than I want.
I may find times on rocks that the low/low would be nice... but time will tell on that and it will likely be rare.
To me, the best reason for a Rubicrawler in front of a 241 is to get the 2.72 for when the 4.1 is too low - which is most of the time. The low-low would be pretty useless though.
These are spot on. Where I wheel the conditions very greatly. One trail will have lots of large rocks where the 4:1 is a perfect fit. The same trail will also transition to black coal swap water or slick clay. Both of the latter requires wheel speed. The Rubicrawler, specifically with the Rubicon transfer case, allows for easy switching between 2.72:1 or 4:1.
As was said though, the 10.88:1 is useless and, if not used carefully can grenade u joints and rip the ears of the yokes with relative ease. I've seen it and it's not a pretty sight.
I cruise around the hood in 2.72 and from trail to trail. I use double low on steep downhill for control and engine braking. Not enough traction here to use it up anything. Out west, maybe different?
Exactly
The RC's value to an auto Rubi is gaining 2.72:1 for general trailing and sand.
I'm bored out of my mind in 4:1 on faster terrain, and 1:1 makes the transmission hot.
Hope to have the rig back up and running tomorrow.
Last edited:
Exactly
The RC's value to an auto Rubi is gaining 2.72:1 for general trailing and sand.
I'm bored out of my mind in 4:1 on faster terrain, and 1:1 makes the transmission hot.
Hope to have the rig back up and running tomorrow.
View attachment 512387
Now put an Atlas 2.0 behind that Rubicrawler and you’ll really have something.
Now put an Atlas 2.0 behind that Rubicrawler and you’ll really have something.
Lol I don’t want this $ project turning into a $$$ project (2.0 cost, plus driveshafts, plus custom under armor since the Savvy skid won’t fit the atlas).
But if I ever damage the TC, it would be nice to have 1:1, 2:1, 2.72:1, and 5.44:1 with a longer rear DS.
I’ve heard you say this before. But as we all know the RC was designed for the TJR with the 42RLE for the Main purpose of the 2.72:1 for multiple applications. Sand and mud are two examples when the 2.72:1 is MUCH better than 4:1
That said when I install the RC in my LJ with the 231 TC and 42RLE my options are also wide open. 2.72:1, 4:1 and overkill:1 that I’d love to try when descending in rough terrain.
I know you know all this but…..
Break them in again. You've let them slip out of good working condition.
I’ve heard you say this before. But as we all know the RC was designed for the TJR with the 42RLE for the Main purpose of the 2.72:1 for multiple applications. Sand and mud are two examples when the 2.72:1 is MUCH better than 4:1
That said when I install the RC in my LJ with the 231 TC and 42RLE my options are also wide open. 2.72:1, 4:1 and overkill:1 that I’d love to try when descending in rough terrain.
I know you know all this but…..
I've been trying to convince my son to get the Rubi-Crawler for his for that very reason but his money is best spent elsewhere at this time.
Mine will be ordered when the loot is ready.
I hear that. My RC install plans were greatly accelerated due to a leak where the tail housing meets the 241OR. Didn’t want to run with the leak for very long or crack the TC off twice since I’ll have less free time moving forward.
OP
So after posting that I actually went back and did exactly that, broke them in again... from 35-40 standing on the brake went from no squeal to lock up the tires so yeah, should be better. I rarely drive it on the road much and I'm beginning to realize that off road I usually use gearing to slow me more than brakes... using the brakes more when crawling on rocks than anything (for control) so not using them "hard" very often at all. Just going to have to add the brake break-in to my scheduled maintenance.
Only offroad since then was in goopy slippery ass mud so no idea how it impacted braking on 4-1 (put it in the Rubicrawler 2.72-1 and left it there all day... light years better than 4-1 on that trail system). Heading out to play on the rocks next month so I'll have a better idea.
This makes me super happy
How hot did your transmission temps get?
Just got the Savvy cross member back in, so I’m on track to finish today assuming I don’t mess something up. Blaine has been incredibly helpful and helped me learn a bunch on this job.
Now put an Atlas 2.0 behind that Rubicrawler and you’ll really have something.
You won’t have front axle ujoints for very long lol.
The 2.0/RC combo would likely be safer than the 241OR/RC (and the 231/RC) since idiots like me wouldn't have access to 10.88:1 (241OR) or 7.44:1 (231).
For sand and faster trails, the 2.0 offers a 2:1 low as a higher gearing option to the RC's 2.72:1 low. Moving the 2.0 and the RC both into low gives you 5.44:1 for crawling.
Not really. The final ratio winds up being a very useful 5.44 -1. The 10.88-1 is twice as deep and twice as bad at breaking things very easily. Even the 7.4 -1 you get with the 231 is a great way to break stuff very easily. I've warned several not to use it in JV without big axles, they regret not paying attention to that bit of advice. The Atlas 2.0-1 is the superior choice to mate up to the Rubicrawler. Or any case that gets you close to the 2-1 ratio.