Not the sway bar disconnect, the front axle disconnect. it is a small electric motor on the passenger side front axle that disengages the front axle when in 2wd to create less drag on the driveline for better fuel economy (and is supposed to help with vibrations etc).Yes the 4xe Rubicon has the front/rear lockers and front disconnect just like the other Rubicons.
I did not realize they had 2 different full time 4x4 options. So the 4XE is just using the JT max tow / Rubicon axles with 4:10 gears, Lockers and larger brakes. then the rear has the JL brackets instead of the JT. Maybe the FAD will be less of an issue using the JT thicker tubes. Also happy to hear there is still a 2wd option. I assumed this was going to be the same system as the 392 and similar to a grand cherokee.This is all assumption, but I believe the 4xe has a FAD, even with a full-time 4wd system. The transfer system in the 392 is completely new, different. It does NOT have 2H available to choose from. While the 4xe does have a 2H option. From this picture, you can see that Jeep did not change/upgrade the front axle in the 4xe.
The front was changed to the JT axle as was the rear. I suppose they were needed to handle the 4xe's extra weight....From this picture, you can see that Jeep did not change/upgrade the front axle in the 4xe...
What I am wondering is why Jeep removed the 2wd from the 392. Does the 6.4L Hemi create so much power that they had to divert some of the power to the front wheels at all times? Very interesting. I guess fuel economy (saving the most tiniest amount of fuel with a FAD) wasn't even a thought for the 392.Also happy to hear there is still a 2wd option.
The type of tires put on a wrangler will not handle the pull power of a full 6.4 launch like sport car summer only tires. To try and get traction for the lead foots , I'm sure they decided all time 4 wheel drive similar to what some sport cars do. I had a 2016 Camaro 2SS with a 6.2 and I know what that would do with summer only tires. The traction controls on a wrangler are most likely programmed differently than you would put in a true sports car, so it would be scary. I've been interested in how the 4Xe will perform (lots of torque) but sadly we haven't gotten any real updates on that yet from owners.What I am wondering is why Jeep removed the 2wd from the 392. Does the 6.4L Hemi create so much power that they had to divert some of the power to the front wheels at all times? Very interesting. I guess fuel economy (saving the most tiniest amount of fuel with a FAD) wasn't even a thought for the 392.
Same here. I know people are getting them but we are not really seeing much out yet as to how they perform. However the 392 owners seem to be posting right away about those things.I've been interested in how the 4Xe will perform (lots of torque) but sadly we haven't gotten any real updates on that yet from owners.
At 6:30 on this video, there is a clear image of the transfer select knob for the 4xe.No there should not be a FAD. The 4wd is Auto, 4Hi and 4Lo. In Auto mode tranfercase distributes torque to front and rear axles depending on situation. Front wheels can spin faster than read and vice versa. In 4Hi and 4lo transfer case locks the front and rear axles together. Front axle is always getting some torque so no fad. Can't completely disconnect front.
^ This is true.At 6:30 on this video, there is a clear image of the transfer select knob for the 4xe.
2H, 4H Auto, 4H PartTime, N, 4LO.
If there is 2H, then there will most likely be a FAD.
Yeah, you're right. If it has 2Hi then it most definitely would have a fad. I thought it was the same tcase the 392 has, which has no 2Hi.At 6:30 on this video, there is a clear image of the transfer select knob for the 4xe.
2H, 4H Auto, 4H PartTime, N, 4LO.
If there is 2H, then there will most likely be a FAD.
That's what I thought too. I was discounting images I have seen so far as I assumed it was like having the off-road plus button. lots of jeep images show it, it the actual 4xe does not have it.Yeah, you're right. If it has 2Hi then it most definitely would have a fad. I thought it was the same tcase the 392 has, which has no 2Hi.
What I am wondering is why Jeep removed the 2wd from the 392. Does the 6.4L Hemi create so much power that they had to divert some of the power to the front wheels at all times? Very interesting. I guess fuel economy (saving the most tiniest amount of fuel with a FAD) wasn't even a thought for the 392.
FYI: the 392 has an auto FAD, which can apparently be turned off with a programming.No there should not be a FAD. The 4wd is Auto, 4Hi and 4Lo. In Auto mode tranfercase distributes torque to front and rear axles depending on situation. Front wheels can spin faster than read and vice versa. In 4Hi and 4lo transfer case locks the front and rear axles together. Front axle is always getting some torque so no fad. Can't completely disconnect front.