I'm new to the whole Jeep world, so go easy, as I just don't know. I have a 97 TJ with the 2.5L and looking into doing a Eaton E-locker, im curious what would be best doing the front? Or rear? I'm in NW Oregon and don't plan on any crazy rock crawling, I use this Jeep as a daily diver, hunting, camping, and trails.
Would it be best to install a front or rear locker?
- Thread starter Johnnyrtheplumber
- Start date
I had a 2.5 in my '97, before doing an LS swap. I changed the gears to 4.88 and put a Detroit Truetrac in the rear and Aussie in the front. The Aussie is a beast and inexpensive. The Truetrac was awesome and cheaper than an e-locker - I could go anywhere! The 4.88s made it feel like I had a 5th cylinder!
If I had to choose between a front or rear locker, I'd choose the rear. I use the rear twice as much as the front locker when off road.
As pointed out by @TheBoogieman, locking a Dana 35 without addressing some of the other components can be problematic.
As pointed out by @TheBoogieman, locking a Dana 35 without addressing some of the other components can be problematic.
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
Just because you used it more; how do you know using the rear made the obstacle easier than if you had used just the front?
The rear locker increases traction without limiting mobility (as much). You get the "good" without the "bad" so to speak. I also use just the rear locker on slick/ muddy descents as it keeps the back end tracking with the front. Using a front locker in those situations could be bad news.
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
When I had a front locker only jeep, I always turned the front one on.
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
Both front and rear lockers will limit mobility. The front locker limits mobility more than the rear does because your steering can be drastically limited depending on traction.
I have both front and rear. I use the front most. In So.cal, we have rocks and waterfalls. The odd sand wash too LOL. I really cannot explain why but I will lock front first then back if it just does not want to go. Here is a vid of where "front lockers matter"
The first waterfall more than the second, but I left it locked on the second anyway.
The first waterfall more than the second, but I left it locked on the second anyway.
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
I would normally argue for front only over rear only. However, in the OP's case it doesn't sound like he's going to be climbing ledges and/or lifting a front tire. Just simple trails.
Might be better off with a limited slip in the rear.
Might be better off with a limited slip in the rear.
These discussions always devolve into this "mobility" argument. Just search "locker suggestions" and every one turns into a debate over whether rear or front locker limits steering/mobility. Not sure where the disconnect is in understanding that the rear locker keeps pushing forward while the front pulls the vehicle in the direction the wheels are aiming. I'm even more unsure why I engaged in this thread.
No, John Currie's experiment proved my point. I guess I should clarify, both front and rear lockers will limit mobility WHEN ENGAGED. I have E-lockers front and rear so I'm able to switch them off when I need to turn tightly. John's video shows the turning radius reduced with the rear E-locker disengaged. The Detroit in the front was also "unlocked" thru the turn.
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
You're replying to the wrong person. I never said mobility was limited by front or rear.
I'm trying to help the OP.
But that's just it. An engaged rear locker "pushes" thru the turn rather than allowing the rear tires to turn at different speeds. The pushing action is what limits mobility and increases the radius of the turn.