Monday, Jan 23, 2006 at 02:20
Well said Explorer.
So I guess for clarity, a little background on what we're wanting to do with the vehicle.
Like most 4x4ers I reackon, we go off-road a couple of times a month or more. That means better than 90% of the time we're poodling around on the blacktop.
This is our daily driver. It does that comfortably and does almost everything we've asked of it whilst having fun off road too.
We like
camping and fishing and this vehicle is just the right size to cart me and SWMBO where we need to go with the gear we need when we get there.
We can't justify having a truck to drive every day in order to get those few
places the Challenger can't get to (now)
We've been out with a few clubs and its gone everywhere the other vehicles have gone, lets face it, most of the time its more important where you put your
wheels and planning your approach than it is how high or tough your vehicle is.
However, out by ourselves we've gotten stuck a couple of times with one of each wheel (front and back) off the ground and going nowhere. 15 mins with a shovel, and we're on the go again, but with drive to the
wheels getting traction we would have driven out first time.
It carries about 2/3 (or less) the weight of a troopie. Runs on a heck of a lot less fuel than most 4x4's, and with a little tweaking will very likely get us everywhere we're likely to want to get to in the next few years.
If the reason the Lokka is cheaper is because its not as good then tell me why. If its cheaper because it uses less parts, is a simpler mechanism, and I can put it in myself then thats a good reason for me to consider it. If its going to drastically affect our daily blacktop driving then thats definately going to be a black mark against it.
At $700-800 for a Lokka vs $2000 for the ARB there's a heck of a difference. I agree that if we're spending thousands then its probably a good idea to look at what we're doing and find a vehicle more suitable for the job. However, the Challenger is a 2000 model, worth under $20k. What would we get that would still be a reasonable daily driver, good on fuel, and then much better off road too. Not much. If I can spend a grand or so and make this vehicle twice as capable as it is from stock then that was money
well spent in my books.
The other (very good reason) is that we're committed to keeping the vehicle for the next 2 years odd.
So lets forget about changing cars, I'll get back to you on that in a couple of years on that score. For now, if you've got any idea's how I can make the best of the vehicle I've got then lets hear them :-)
AnswerID:
150244
Follow Up By: V8troopie - Monday, Jan 23, 2006 at 15:17
Monday, Jan 23, 2006 at 15:17
My opinion on the lokka - and my troopie has one in the front diff - is that they are great for part time 4WD's. I have no idea where your challenger fits in there.
I use the troopie every day and on the blacktop, its my only car, with the hubs disengaged there is no indication that a lokka is fitted.
When I engage the hubs on the blacktop to stir up the diff oil a bit, I can feel no difference either, but I would not dream about engaging 4WD on the bitumen here in
Perth. I would think that a working lokka would make steering a tougher job for the power steering pump and driver.
Klaus
FollowupID:
403766
Follow Up By: Member - t0me (WA) - Monday, Jan 23, 2006 at 20:25
Monday, Jan 23, 2006 at 20:25
The Challenger is part-time 4wd too (lever to select, no free wheeling hubs). So that answers my question about whether it would be noticable when in 2wd.
How much do you notice it when you're cornering in 4wd?
Does it help with traction if you're trying to negotiate an incline on a corner or is that when its gonna cut out anyway?
I think that from what people are saying that in the case of an ARB or a Lokka if what you're stuck on is on a bend you're stuffed anyway, the Lokka will disengage and the ARB will make it impossible to turn.
FollowupID:
403853