Tank2112
Well-known member
- Nov 4, 2022
- 736
- 917
- Current Rides
- 2023 Rubicon 392 XR, Custom 2003 LJ with 6.1 Hemi, 2013 Ram 3500
Our stock front axles come with the previously factory installed FAD style axle housing. On our AWD 392's the factory used a fixed FAD delete fork that connects the passenger side 2-piece axle and used a FAD delete cover plate to cover where a factory electronically controlled FAD unit would go.
FAD was designed to help reduce friction to improve fuel economy while driving on-road in 2WD.
Driving with FAD not engaged (open), the one piece driver side internal axle is still turning, but with an open differential, this forces the passenger side to turn in the opposite direction... to the point of where the FAD disconnects the passenger side 2-pc axle. The electronically controlled FAD unit will slide the locking fork to one side, whereby disengaging the 2-pc axle. In an open differential design, this will result in the differential output not turning.
In our case, using Tazer Forced RWD and electronically controlled FAD (in unlocked position) should eliminate rotation of the front drive shaft.
Especially for lifted Jeeps, seems like a good idea to help prevent premature wear on front drive shaft u-joints or cv's that are on a more aggressive angle, along with eliminating drive shaft vibration.
I don't think one FAD fork (fixed vs. electronically engaged) is any stronger than the other.
I read somewhere a 392 owner did that very thing and used one of his AUX buttons to electronically engage FAD when 4WD is needed.
Pictures were shown of the conversion. I looked and can't find the post?
Claims it's basically a bolt-on modification that fixed his front drive shaft vibration issue created by a lift.
Edit: Turns out it was EBYCREEK here on this forum.
Has anyone here installed the electronically controlled FAD system on their stock 392 axle?
.
FAD was designed to help reduce friction to improve fuel economy while driving on-road in 2WD.
Driving with FAD not engaged (open), the one piece driver side internal axle is still turning, but with an open differential, this forces the passenger side to turn in the opposite direction... to the point of where the FAD disconnects the passenger side 2-pc axle. The electronically controlled FAD unit will slide the locking fork to one side, whereby disengaging the 2-pc axle. In an open differential design, this will result in the differential output not turning.
In our case, using Tazer Forced RWD and electronically controlled FAD (in unlocked position) should eliminate rotation of the front drive shaft.
Especially for lifted Jeeps, seems like a good idea to help prevent premature wear on front drive shaft u-joints or cv's that are on a more aggressive angle, along with eliminating drive shaft vibration.
I don't think one FAD fork (fixed vs. electronically engaged) is any stronger than the other.
I read somewhere a 392 owner did that very thing and used one of his AUX buttons to electronically engage FAD when 4WD is needed.
Pictures were shown of the conversion. I looked and can't find the post?
Claims it's basically a bolt-on modification that fixed his front drive shaft vibration issue created by a lift.
Edit: Turns out it was EBYCREEK here on this forum.
Has anyone here installed the electronically controlled FAD system on their stock 392 axle?
.
Last edited:
