Explorer AWD T-cases?

[bobbywalter]

what i have worked with up to 2004...

4r70 4x4 is 31 spline


a4ld / 4r55 4r44 series 4x4 is 25 spline

2wd in both units are 28 spline.


the v8 trans and transfer case is the standard 6 bolt round pattern.


the v6 units i have seen are the retarded 5 bolt style.



things i dont know that may be causing confusion.


i was told there is a 31 spline input and different front cover for the smaller unit, but have never seen one. atec trans said it was not a 31 spline but a 28 and yet have no part number..

but, i cant source a 28 spline input for either.

so i relegated it to a bigfoot sighting.


both systems have awd cases, use what you have to.

 

[JoshT]

Hey guys, first off I want to say thank you for your input and not going the "don't lower a 4wd" or "AWD sucks" route. Usually it seems like these type threads always devolve into a flame fest. I really appreciate that not happening this time.

Seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding these transmissions and transfer cases, even on transmission and transfer case websites. Guess nobody cares about the AWD units, they mostly want to swap in part time 4wd transfer cases. This is what I've been able to nail down.

The 4404 was a full time AWD unit. It was used used behind the 4R70W.

The 4405 was a torque-on-demand (AKA: Control Trac) unit with 3 modes; Auto 4wd, 4WD High, and 4WD Low. It was used behind the 5R55E.

The 4410 was a full time AWD unit, seems to have been mostly used in the Aviator and Mountaineer. Their seems to have been 2 versions of the 4411. One was used in the Aviator and Mountaineer and was a Torque-on-demand with 2 modes; Auto 4wd, 4wd High. The other was used in the Explorer and had 3 modes; Auto 4wd, 4wd High, 4wd low. These transfer cases seem to have been used behind the 5R55W/S.

The 4405 and 4411 torque-on-demand units require shift motors and external electronic controls to operate, something I'd really prefer to not mess with.

The 4R70W was used only used behind the 5.0L and early 4.6L in the Explorer. The 5R55W/S seems to have been made in 2 different versions behind both the 4.0L and 4.6L.

For what I'm wanting to do it seems that the 4404 or 4410 full time AWD cases would be better option since they don't require external controls to operate. Best chance to make one of those to work would be the 4410 found behind the 5R55W/S since the same transmission was used in the 4.0L Explorers.

Guess next step will be to find some more info on the 4wd 5R55E/W/S transmissions.

Might be better off filing this idea away and just leave it a standard 4wd truck. See how it runs and handles with smaller tires, appropriate tuning, lower CG, and bigger anti-sway bars. Just keep the 4wd system for when I need to get through sticky stuff. This idea really makes more sense on a live axle truck where the front axles are turning all the time anyway. I've got AVM lockouts on my '99 so I can disconnect them, which might give better results than having an AWD V6.

 

[downer]

This topic has bounced around in my head for a year or two, and I keep telling myself I am going to dedicate an entire weekend to a fact finding mission at the junkyard. I too am here in Denver, and my current arrangement is as follows:

1987 short bed standard cab 4x4 truck. 2.3 turbo, M5ODR1, with 1350 manual TC behind it. D35 front axle with manual hubs. 8.8 rear

have you seen this thread
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=250083

 

[downer]

i was told there is a 31 spline input and different front cover for the smaller unit, but have never seen one. atec trans said it was not a 31 spline but a 28 and yet have no part number..

but, i cant source a 28 spline input for either.

so i relegated it to a bigfoot sighting

Which smaller unit are you referring to?

 

[Blown]

I was told a BW4410 is AWD and will bolt-up to a 5R55E (has the trapezoid shape not round5 bolt like the 1354). It has no electronics, uses a viscous coupling so there would be no wiring.

http://www.rsgear.com/technical/dia...rner-4410-torque-on-demand-transfer-case.aspx

BW4410 Fits:
FORD EXPLORER '02-'04 4.6L (NON-SPORT MODELS) ALL WHEEL DRIVE
LINCOLN AVIATOR '03-'05 4.6L ALL WHEEL DRIVE
MERCURY MOUNTAINEER '02-'05 4.0L & 4.6L ALL WHEEL DRIVE

So maybe the 02-05 Mounty with 4.0 has the 5 bolt circle pattern????

 

[JoshT]

That's interesting. I know that the 4410 bolts up to the 5R55W, but haven't been able to confirm if the 5R55W has the same case bolt pattern as the 5R55E.

I wish I had access to 5R55W or 4410, I'd be verifying it first hand.

 

[Blown]

The 4410 just doesn't look like it would bolt-up to the 5R55E, maybe the older 4404 would but I can't find definite answers online. I found a gasket for both 4404 and 1354 which is identical.

 

[bobbywalter]

I was told a BW4410 is AWD and will bolt-up to a 5R55E (has the trapezoid shape not round5 bolt like the 1354). It has no electronics, uses a viscous coupling so there would be no wiring.

http://www.rsgear.com/technical/dia...rner-4410-torque-on-demand-transfer-case.aspx

BW4410 Fits:
FORD EXPLORER '02-'04 4.6L (NON-SPORT MODELS) ALL WHEEL DRIVE
LINCOLN AVIATOR '03-'05 4.6L ALL WHEEL DRIVE
MERCURY MOUNTAINEER '02-'05 4.0L & 4.6L ALL WHEEL DRIVE

So maybe the 02-05 Mounty with 4.0 has the 5 bolt circle pattern????

The 4410 just doesn't look like it would bolt-up to the 5R55E, maybe the older 4404 would but I can't find definite answers online. I found a gasket for both 4404 and 1354 which is identical.

when i say big and little, i was referring to the old style mounts. the freak style newer mounts have a 28 spline setup available at some point...5r trans will have those.. but i could not find a 28 spline input gear that worked in the old style case. this would make converting a 2wd trans a cakewalk.. i do that with the 4l80 transmissions in my ranger so i can use the ford fullsize 208 case on the chevy trans... there is 31 for that style case and 25 the way i understood it. at least the parts i held in my hand were those. but the 4410-11-12 case were supposed to be that freak style only. seems like 28 spline was the rule though.

so your stuck running that 5 series if you want the trape style pattern.

or did i make this worse

 

[Blown]

Now I am back to wondering, like JoshT we could swap in both the 5R55W with the AWD 4410? That tranny is put behind the 4.0l starting 2002.

Then if it fits, would a 2001 computer for 5R55E control the "W" tranny?

I give for now..........................................

 

[don4331]

Blown:

"Easiest" is 5R55W/4410 from '02-05 Mountaineer, along with 4.0l computer, PATS, ignition, door tumblers, keys and probably some wires...

From here: http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-118439.html post, seems to indicate the 5W55E computer won't cut it.

JoshT:

I remembered after - my '98 coil spring is lowered 3"; 2.5" (4WD to 2WD) + 3" (lowered) resulted in front differential getting a tad too low. And there was no way to raise the front differential without major reconstruction...

 

[JoshT]

don, your link didn't work. Mind fixing it, I'd like to read what it has to say.

Everything I'm reading seems to suggest the same about the "e" computer not being compatible with the "w" transmission. On a SOHC motor swapping the electronics may work, but I'm not so sure that it would on an OHV like I've got.

I think that may be an easier way than than swapping in the whole later model control system. There seems to be a stand alone control box that works with these transmissions and would be much easier, though more expensive option. Of course it might still require some programming to disable the transmission in the ECU.

----------------------------------------

Not exactly sure what it is you are saying about the lowering. If your '98 is coil sprung, you wouldn't have a front differential to worry about. To better explain what I plan to do...

My truck currently has Explorer leaf springs and lift shackles in rear, but the factory lift block is removed. That puts it somewhere around 2" over stock 4wd height in the rear, and somewhere around 4" over stock 2wd height in the rear. The front is about level, with the rear.

I plan to reinstall stock shackles and leaf springs, while leaving the lift blocks out. That will put me at a 4" drop from current height, 2" drop from stock 4wd height, and at stock 2wd height. I plan to drop the front down to level or give it a slight rake. So while I'll be lowered from my 4wd height I will still be about the same height as your truck was stock. I know that there are many stock coil sprung trucks still running around on 29-30 inch tires, and that's about what I plan to run. I've found material on other sites that suggests I could potentially go much lower If I chose to do so.

This is about what I'm going for. It's a 4wd that's bee lowered a little and riding on 275/60/17 front and 285/60/17 rear. I'll be running same size 16" tires front and rear, and don't expect mine to look this nice though.

 

[don4331]

JoshT:

Bad assumption on my part: That you/Blown would have the 4.0 SoHC, not the OHV... (As his is supercharged, I would assume he has non-stock program, so reprogramming a SoHC computer wouldn't be impossible).

And I should have been more clear, my response was to expound on my 1st post of why I had concluded lowering 4wd would be hard on CVs/limited on suspension & ground clearance.

I was assuming you were going for Syclone altitude (which you have since clarified you are not - more Edge, less Syclone). On other hand, I was headed for weeds and my responses were based on that assumption.

My 2wd Ranger has a 331 = traction limited especially outside of summer; so I looked into solutions -> AWD. I have the torsion bar front from a regular cab long box (donor for the box/rear frame for my long box s/c) that could be substituted for the coil spring frame, so mounting front axle is not issue.

But to stay at current lowered 2WD ride height, I needed to lower the torsion suspension 5.5" (basically to bump stops). Which put CVs, at bad angles/kills suspension.

And I am running 'Mustang' 245/45R17s (25.5") which removes an additional couple inches from ground clearance. Result is front differential would have had less than 1" clearance pavement.

Your requirement is not as radical, therefore more workable.

 

[JoshT]

Don I'm going to break appart your post just to clarify what I'm thinking, though it may only be clearer for me...

JoshT:

Bad assumption on my part: That you/Blown would have the 4.0 SoHC, not the OHV... (As his is supercharged, I would assume he has non-stock program, so reprogramming a SoHC computer wouldn't be impossible).

It's all good. Being a 2001 I think Blown's is probably an SOHC, and you are correct that both can be programmed. I don't think that the existing computer in his SOHC or my OHV are capable of being programmed to control the "w". He probably could swap in the controls from a "w" equipped controller, but that would be a lot of work getting them in, working, and playing nice with the rest of the truck. If you were going to attempt that get a tuner to disable PATS in the donor vehicle then all you'll need to swap in is the ECU and Engine/Transmission wiring harness.

I still think that if one were going to go the route of installing the "w" transmission in a 4.0L Ranger, then they would be better off with a standalone trans controller and programming it out of the ECU if necessary. Doing that may also open up the potential to mod in a few transmission features not built into the Ranger (IE: paddle shifters).

If I had to swap in a 4.0L SOHC to make this work, I'd just drop the V6 and swap in an entire V8 drivetrain. It'd be about the same amount of work and cost, probably with better results.

And I should have been more clear, my response was to expound on my 1st post of why I had concluded lowering 4wd would be hard on CVs/limited on suspension & ground clearance.

I was assuming you were going for Syclone altitude (which you have since clarified you are not - more Edge, less Syclone). On other hand, I was headed for weeds and my responses were based on that assumption.

My 2wd Ranger has a 331 = traction limited especially outside of summer; so I looked into solutions -> AWD. I have the torsion bar front from a regular cab long box (donor for the box/rear frame for my long box s/c) that could be substituted for the coil spring frame, so mounting front axle is not issue.

I think I get what you're saying about the lowering now. This truck will be headed for the weeds. Difference is my weeds are in the back 40 which hasn't been cut in 6 months if you get what I'm saying. It'l never be that low or have that much of a traction problem, but AWD would still make for a fun addition.

I hadn't mentioned it earlier, but if AWD falls through on this truck it may still happen on another project I'm working. My true project truck is a 1986 Ranger W/ 5.0 and 4R70W, actually plan to stroke it out to a 331 as well when it needs a new motor. The 99 was kinda going to be a proof of concept for the future of that truck. If slightly lowered V6 AWD truck works well, then shorten a 98+ frame to put under the 86 and lower it as much as possible. Might still happen, but it'll be a side project for way later. I didn't previously bring it up because I started this thread about AWD transfer cases, but that's the easy part on my V8 truck. 4wd 4R70W with a 4404 t-case.

But to stay at current lowered 2WD ride height, I needed to lower the torsion suspension 5.5" (basically to bump stops). Which put CVs, at bad angles/kills suspension.

And I am running 'Mustang' 245/45R17s (25.5") which removes an additional couple inches from ground clearance. Result is front differential would have had less than 1" clearance pavement.

Your requirement is not as radical, therefore more workable.

Concerning CV angles, I don't know how much they need or can take. I have visible proof that they can handle a lot of angle lifted, stands to reason that they could handle as much angle lowered, the issue is how little angle can they survive at, can they handle being run straight or do they have to have some angle to work properly. I did find this thread over on RPS that seems to suggest that they might be able to take a lot more than anyone gives them credit for. http://www.rangerpowersports.com/forum/static-drop-lowered-suspension/260867-dropping-4x4-8.html

Lowering a torsion bar suspension isn't going to kill the suspension, but the bars will limit you. You'd have to ditch them and run coil overs, something I'm liable to do anyway once I decide on a ride height. The other stops you run into are bumpstops and camber/caster adjustment, but those have already been addressed by the EDGE lowering crowd. The true limiting factor will be when the CV axle starts hitting structure, be it frame or control arm.

I'm interested in continuing this but I'll be out of town until Sunday afternoon and might have limited access to the site.

 

[Blown]

I tuned my own, blown 4.0 SOHC. I see no plug and play possibility having looked at the transmission pigtails. Don't know enough to see if I might repin or rewire. Getting a trans to get the awd and then needing the newer computer means I would also have to retune the engine, if the 02 computers strategy is available to work with...................................AWD would be cool but is sounding like tooooooooooooo, way to much work!!!

 

[bobbywalter]

seems modding the tune on a 2002 would be doable.


or swapping in a gm system. trans and awd t case from a astrovan.