I thought the nature of the limited slip differential is that the wheel with the LEAST amount of traction gets the torque. If this is true, how can these quads be much better than 2x4 in the same quad. Anyone drive both back to back in snow or light mud? How much difference is there really? I can't see spending the extra $800-$1000 for a non locking limited slip front diff if it only helps MINIMALLY. Please clear this up for me with experience related data.
Thanks.

 

Its 100 times better, 80% of the time both front tires are pulling its only when you hit certain conditions like uneven ground or ruts that only one tire pulls. Sure its not as good as a locking differential but every 4x4 Truck or jeep has the same problem unless you install a locker in it and then you useally break somthing..

 

Trust me, a 4x4 slip is much, much better than a 2x4. As long as you can keep all four tires on the ground, in the mud or in the snow you will pretty much keep all four tires turning. The only time I really have problems with one of the tires unloading is when hill climbing. And If you are skilled enough, you can navigate most hills and maintain the tires touching. ( And I'm talking hills at 60 degrees and higher )

 

Just a quick question to Hollywood or anyone else for that matter. How long can your machine continue to climb a hill of 60 degrees or more? Are these long pull hills or just short ones that you get a run at and hop over using the momentum of the quad?

 

There is absolutly no comparison. If you're not going to buy a sport quad don't buy a 2x4.

 

I'd have to agree with daminalfl hollywood that it makes a huge difference. Most of the time all four tires will be working, unless you are miserably stuck then only 3 will spin..

 

Most of the hills are sand hills.(80% of my riding is river riding, climbing the sand banks and so on.) With the sand, I hit most all of them in second gear, this is not with a 20 or 30 foot run either. I get about five feet from the base, start out in second gear and spin my way to the top. And to, the main key of not just spinning down, is running your tires at a low pressure. I have 27" tires and run them at 2 pounds each. Don't get me wrong, a lot of times I still don't make it. But, hey, thats the fun in it, to see what you can and can't do. ( I have rolled my quad a time or two. On rocky hills, its simply creeping up the hill in first gear. The Honda has a low enough first gear to do this without stalling.

 

The reason I asked was sort of a trick question. When I was in the service I had to do a lot of reading and one of the books that I found most interesting was on the Driving of vehicles up hills. It seems that it is physically and scientifically impossible to climb a hill of greater that 45 degrees for a sustained period of time with a wheeled vehicle. Hills of greater then 45 degrees can be climbed in a wheeled vehicle, but you must first have sufficient forward momentum, otherwise you will stall out and either roll backwards (not fun on long hills) or just plain stop. Tracked vehicles are able to climb 60 degree hills for sustained periods.

This is just food for thought. So if you can climb a long hill for a long time and make it to the top, the hill has to be 45 degrees or less. So the next time someone says that they can climb a hill of greater than 45 degrees, have them start from a dead stop at the bottom and give it a go. Can't be done..

 

but doesn't it depend on how tall the hill is too?

 

Read the last paragraph. On long hills you must have forward momentum otherwise forget it.

Even on short hills of greater than 45 degrees you cannot do it from a standing start with you wheels at the base of the hill.