Page 3 of 4

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:52 pm
by RoelfleRoux
Cas,
YES, you bought right :twisted: .
NO, if you do not have the D/L button, then you don't have the difflock. Only some Gen4 Pajeros have both D/L and traction control. I'm sure it depends on which import batch your car comes from. The gent that had both systems on his car said that the one sold after his didn't have both systems.

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:52 pm
by Cas
@ 4EP I already love it :mrgreen:

@ Roelf I think I've already given you sleepless nights ;)

I appreciate all the advice. Am a staunch Mitsu fan now :twisted:
( use to have a Fort and my anthem was roll over,roll over :lol: )

Now I'm as sure footed as a mountain goat!!

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:34 pm
by Gerrit Loubser
Roelf, here are some thoughts regarding some of your points.

RoelfleRoux wrote:The massive un-sprung weight, and bump-steer of the Panhard rod, is a big draw back (safety issue) on a solid axle vehicle. Not to mention ride comfort and quality.
The relatively high unsprung weight of a classic beam axle relative to an independent setup is due to the fact that the differential and entire axle bridge structure are part of the unsprung mass. The Panhard rod takes care of lateral location of the axle and its mass is not really a significant contributor to unsprung mass (typically only about half its mass counts as unsprung mass anyway).

A properly designed beam axle suspension and steering geometry does not bump-steer. This setup is inherently less refined than an independent system, but is definitely not dangerous.

In fact, beam axles are not at a disadvantage in terms of all aspects of roadholding: they have the benefit that they maintain the camber angle of the tyre relative to the road much better when cornering hard than independent axles where the actual suspension arm pivot points roll with the vehicle body and promote unfavourable camber angles on the highly laden ouside tyre in the corner.

RoelfleRoux wrote:The “middelmannetjie” issue:
The diff on a solid axle is MUCH closer to the ground than that of an independent system. I understand the reasoning of the independent diff being under threat to drop down under heavy load over bumpy surfaces. But if the car carries a legal weight load, then the diff will NEVER come as close to the ground as that on a solid axle.
Not so. The Gen 3 Paj has a spec sheet ground clearance of between 225mm and 235mm, depending on model under the center of the axles, whereas the Patrol runs 210mm to 230mm of the ground depending on model (this being under the rear diff).

5 to 15mm of suspension travel is nothing, given that the Gen 3 has around 100mm of rear suspension bump travel available in standard form.

You can easily do a little experiment by loading some weight into the boot over the axle and measuring the suspension drop. Now calculate the percentage that the mass in the boot is of the axle load and you have an idea of the g-force required to create the same drop (same holds for the front suspension, but it is easier to play with the rear). You will see that any significant bump will see the ground clearance drop much lower on the independently suspended Gen 3 than on the Patrol and then that lower clearance is over a much wider width than the single point under the diff of the Patrol.


RoelfleRoux wrote:If you plan to ignore the legal limits (like most SA citizens are likely to do), then air-helpers can eliminate the independent shortcoming over bumpy roads, but nothing can help the solid axle shortcomings at illegally high speeds.
I certainly do not plan to ignore any limits, but I say again that a vehicle such as my Patrol is not an unsafe monster waiting to bite if even slightly provoked. Not as refined as the Paj, yes, but not dangerous at all.

Also note that air helpers can not be fitted to the front suspension of the Gen 3 due to the coil-over-shock strut design.


RoelfleRoux wrote:The Gen4 GLS can definitely have both the difflock and the T/C. There is a member on the forum with such a Pajero.

I believe you are mistaken here, Roelf. Only the Gen 4 GLX (or at least some of them) gets the rear diff lock plus ETC. Who is the member with the diff locked Gen 4 GLS that you have in mind?

RoelfleRoux wrote:Also if you search the specs on the web, you will find reference to the fact that the Gen4 T/C is designed to operate with a difflock.
Could you perhaps share the URL where you found this? I believe this info is wrong. Activating the rear diff lock on the Gen 4 turns the ETC off (actually quite nice that, under certain conditions). Perhaps they were referring to the fact that the two systems are designed to work together in this way (diff lock turning off the ETC), but they are definitely not both active at the same time.

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:49 pm
by Gerrit Loubser
4ePikanini wrote:I may be mistaken but at the cost of floor space you can raise the rear diff, on an independent rear suspension, and with the correct springs/coils/shocks, you can trump a solid axle on articulation and clearance? :?
Why would the solid axle be trumped in terms of articulation?

By the way, I agree with your dad in terms of the limitations on sideshaft angles spoiling the fun.

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:11 pm
by SimonB
I luv it when Gerrit Speeks forin.....

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:28 am
by 4ePajero
SimonB wrote:I luv it when Gerrit Speeks forin.....
In "Dirty Harry" Clint Eastwood said "A man's got to know his limitations... especially a good man!" :D

I seldom respond to Mr Loubser's posts. I just read and learn.
When it comes to suspension and traction, we have the man as a member!

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:19 am
by RoelfleRoux
I lay down my pen in unconditional surrender!

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 7:04 pm
by Gerrit Loubser
Eish Guys! No you are making me blush :oops: .

I work in product development in a vehicle related industry, so I have a little vehicle related knowledge, but the fact of the matter is that there is a lot that I can learn. I always love a good technical discussion, so please don't stop :wink: .

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 1:19 pm
by Jenki
Nice discussion, very nice. ;)
Thank you Gerrit, for detailed explanation. Now I can understand, why I love so much my Patrol and Pajero :D And I can also understand why you have the same combination at home. Just you have better engine in Patrol, my 2,8 is really lazy. But my Pajero is another cup of tee.

Re: Better than my Paj??

Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:47 am
by greypaj
This is a great debate, I believe from experience that we all seek to have a vehicle that can have a number of variable applications and this could end up costing a person a large some of money. I believe we need to change the catorgories from vehicle types to applications to get a true perspective on what vehicle one should buy.
For example - weekend toy application is totally different to holiday / touring / cross border travel to remote destinations.
Gerrit and Roelof both make good points re the solid beam comparison to independent suspension. Here again one has to look a the terrain one usually is going to travel over. Most of us travel over sand stretches with high middle mannetjies therefor we need decent clearance. Not only does the suspension arguement hold sway but we also need to take into account tyres as well as deflation levels. I believe once you have decided on the above it really comes down to personnal choice.
With regard to the diff lock debate, I had a chat to Gerrit (April / May) on this subject through the forum and I have since found out that there is a post fit difflock available for gen 3 which I have. The TC would not be comprimised as when the diff lock is engaged there is no signal going to the TC to request lock ups on either rear wheel as there will be no slip. You still get the advantage of TC on the front wheels.
Ideal vehicle for is Mits Pajero with 50mm lift running on 32's or equivalent with post fit diff lock.
We must not loose sight of the fact that there as some very good d/C bakkies coming on the market that give great touring applications; i.e., New VW Amarok, Nissan Navara, and the new Ford T6 project being launched next year with 5 cyl 3.2 diesel. The Toyota and Izusu also fits in this frame. The added benefit is the extra storage space. I am considering letting the Wife have the Paj and getting a DC for Touring. The Paj will always be there when I want to drive quality!!!
(Remember a few VW Syncro's did Van Zyls Pass a few years ago)

What may be of interest is to develop a application spec sheet for minimum requirements for travel in various areas Botswana, Zim , Namibia etc then the vehicle choice is so much easier.
Toys will obviously have a different profile as it depends where you play!!!!!

If you want to play then buy anything else.

(Question for the Forum at Large)

I noticed when I was in Magadigadi last month that the sand ruts seemed to have changed from having equal corregations to more emphasized alternate corregation on each track. Is this being caused by TC application in the newer vehicles? It does make for an uncomfortable ride in some areas.
Enjoy your ride but choose appropriate application.

Regards

Mike vR