Would it be best to install a front or rear locker?

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.
I know that. But you said that the front locker decreases mobility more than the rear locker, which is false.
 
  • Like
Reactions: L J and jjvw
I think it comes down to where you wheel. If I was climbing boulders all the time, I could see wanting a front locker to walk the front up since it would be difficult to climb straight up a rock without the front. For mud, hills, and what I consider just general off-roading, I'd prefer a rear. In my wheeling I've found more places where I've wanted my rear locker than my front. The extra push from behind has just seemed more useful to me more often and I never use the front unless I'm coming up to a difficult obstacle. If you're doing those difficult obstacles in the first place, I'd have both lockers anyways.

I've rarely found mobility due to the lockers to be a limiting factor on the trail, but I've also never wheeled on trails that are just one continuous obstacle like you see in some places.
 
I know that. But you said that the front locker decreases mobility more than the rear locker, which is false.
A high traction scenario with the front end locked can make steering difficult - if not impossible. If that's not limiting your mobility then I don't know what to call it?
Currie's rig had a Detroit in the front which unlocks thru the turn, just like switching off an E-locker.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: L J
A high traction scenario with the front end locked can make steering difficult - if not impossible. If that's not limiting your mobility then I don't know what to call it?
Currie's rig had a Detroit in the front which unlocks thru the turn, just like switching off an E-locker.
Not saying the front locker doesn't limit mobility. I just disagree that it limits it more than the rear, as do many more on here far smarter and experienced than I. Don't want to keep beating a dead horse though. This forum has over-beaten dead horses strewn all over the place.
 
I think it comes down to where you wheel. If I was climbing boulders all the time, I could see wanting a front locker to walk the front up since it would be difficult to climb straight up a rock without the front. For mud, hills, and what I consider just general off-roading, I'd prefer a rear. In my wheeling I've found more places where I've wanted my rear locker than my front. The extra push from behind has just seemed more useful to me more often and I never use the front unless I'm coming up to a difficult obstacle. If you're doing those difficult obstacles in the first place, I'd have both lockers anyways.

I've rarely found mobility due to the lockers to be a limiting factor on the trail, but I've also never wheeled on trails that are just one continuous obstacle like you see in some places.
Correct. My guess is your turning off your lockers before you need to make tight maneuvers? Sorry, I can't see your profile to know what lockers you have.
 
Correct. My guess is your turning off your lockers before you need to make tight maneuvers? Sorry, I can't see your profile to know what lockers you have.

I wouldn't consider what I said correct, just my opinion. I don't think there is a right answer to this question besides "it depends".

If I have to turn on the trail and there isn't an obstacle, I just click my ARB switches off.
 
I wouldn't consider what I said correct, just my opinion. I don't think there is a right answer to this question besides "it depends".

If I have to turn on the trail and there isn't an obstacle, I just click my ARB switches off.
I agree. Front and rear locker use seems to vary widely based on terrain and driver preference.
 
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.

Damn that vid is clear!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WSS
A locked front does very little to restrict mobility. The most it does is make the steering wheel feel tight, but that doesn't translate to what is happening on the ground.
Why does the steering wheel feel tight? What is the root cause of this?
Furthermore, if a front locker doesn't restrict mobility, why not just install a spool up front?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viking Jeeper
And not to further muddy the water here, but why does Jeep design the Rubicon lockers to engage in a certain order? Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't the rear have to be locked first before the front can be locked? In other words, the factory front locker cannot be engaged without the rear being locked at the same time?
 
And not to further muddy the water here, but why does Jeep design the Rubicon lockers to engage in a certain order? Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't the rear have to be locked first before the front can be locked? In other words, the factory front locker cannot be engaged without the rear being locked at the same time?
Safety reasons for the Rubicon is my guess. That's why you can only engage them in 4LO without the locker switch mod.
 
I used to think the front locker restricted mobility more than the rear. That was when i was running a dying power steering pump and a stock box. When the front was locked it was very difficult to turn the steering wheel. Now that i have a proper power steering system, I cant even tell when the front is locked and i am turning the wheel.