killed new Jeep Wrangler by Flat-Towing It in 4-Low !

[8_1_Van]

This is what a Jeep engine looks like when revved to 50,000 rpm.

:S

[goducks10]

Roger10378 wrote:
I would think the insurance would deny any claim. This is pure and simple stupidity on the part of the owner.

Thats why they cancel you after they pay damages. It's their way of weeding out the dumb a$$'s.

[JRscooby]

lane hog wrote:


I'm also surprised the crankshaft gave up before the transfer case did. I always thought the chain in the case was made to be a first line of defense from bad things happening i.e. you over-torqued while under power. Curious if the fact the transfer case didn't go first is indeed a manufacturer defect.

When I had to pay the bills for what a driver tore up I hoped the driveshaft would go before a box of gears.
I would think the transfer case would handle all the power the engine could put out. I thing the engine damage was speed, not power.
What surprised me is the tires where able to overcome friction to push all the gears without sliding.

[lane_hog]

Learjet wrote:

Thank you...harsh crowd here..not like someone has never dropped a fifth wheel trailer, turned to sharp with their short bed truck and fifth wheel or put gas in a Diesel...etc

I've done two of the three... and neither one required a trip to the shop or an insurance claim, but I've heard about it from my wife for years and that's much worse.

Re: the Jeep.... two thoughts.

I'm surprised the driver couldn't feel the resistance from being in gear. We dolly-towed for 13 years and I never once didn't feel the weight of the van behind us. Having the car in gear would have felt a lot different.

I'm also surprised the crankshaft gave up before the transfer case did. I always thought the chain in the case was made to be a first line of defense from bad things happening i.e. you over-torqued while under power. Curious if the fact the transfer case didn't go first is indeed a manufacturer defect.

[LowRyter]

I don't know about the Jeep but I'm pretty impressed with the tow vehicle.

[dodge_guy]

Yes the transmission output shaft will spin due to fluid dynamics. Similar to how a torque converter works. With it in gear the shaft won't spin. These transmission do not lubricate themselves like some other manual transmissions do when they are flat towed. So if the trans was allowed to free wheel it could potentially damage the internals. Although in this case, the trans was being lubricated until it surpassed its rpm rating. LOL

You see all sorts of stuff working at a dealer. Right now I have a Ram 3500 dually with 9500 miles that the owner destroyed the rear axle on. It's a hotshot tuck, They hit something 5k miles ago (that's 5k miles in 2 weeks time) and replaced the 2 right side dually tires with Firestones and left the factory Nexens on the other side. Well they got an ABS light, I removed the sensor in the rear axle and found metal attached to it. Pullled the cover and found metal everywhere. The spider gears destroyed themselves. The reason.......the Firestones are a 1/2" larger in diameter than the OE tires. Causing the spider gears to be in continuos rotation (they are only designed to be rotating when turning corners), not in continuous operation for 5k miles! So it need a complete axle assembly. Right fender is damaged and the liner is missing, but the owner insists they didn't hit anything! LOL

[wnjj]

RoyJ wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

dodge guy wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

And they left it in gear. TWO major mistakes.

its actually supposed to be in gear with the T-case in N.

Didn't know that. Read up and see that the transmission must be in gear to keep things lubricated as it moves down the road. I retract my statement.

Unrelated, but why 1st or 2nd gear instead of 5th gear? Seems that 5th gear would keep rotation/lubrication, but with less rotation/stress than a lower gear.

I still don't get why the transmission needs to be in gear - if the t-case is in neutral, then the transmission is not spinning regardless of in-gear or neutral-gear.

Am I missing something?

If the transmission is in neutral there is nothing stopping the output shaft from starting to turn just due to drag within the transfer case.

[Huntindog]

RoyJ wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

dodge guy wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

And they left it in gear. TWO major mistakes.

its actually supposed to be in gear with the T-case in N.

Didn't know that. Read up and see that the transmission must be in gear to keep things lubricated as it moves down the road. I retract my statement.

Unrelated, but why 1st or 2nd gear instead of 5th gear? Seems that 5th gear would keep rotation/lubrication, but with less rotation/stress than a lower gear.

I still don't get why the transmission needs to be in gear - if the t-case is in neutral, then the transmission is not spinning regardless of in-gear or neutral-gear.

Am I missing something?

Yes,unless the drive shaft is removed, the output shaft in the tranny and whatever it is connected to is spinning as well.
Actually there are differnt ways it can be designed, but if the manual says it needs to be in gear..... There is a reason.

[RoyJ]

spoon059 wrote:

dodge guy wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

And they left it in gear. TWO major mistakes.

its actually supposed to be in gear with the T-case in N.

Didn't know that. Read up and see that the transmission must be in gear to keep things lubricated as it moves down the road. I retract my statement.

Unrelated, but why 1st or 2nd gear instead of 5th gear? Seems that 5th gear would keep rotation/lubrication, but with less rotation/stress than a lower gear.

I still don't get why the transmission needs to be in gear - if the t-case is in neutral, then the transmission is not spinning regardless of in-gear or neutral-gear.

Am I missing something?

[spoon059]

dodge guy wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

And they left it in gear. TWO major mistakes.

its actually supposed to be in gear with the T-case in N.

Didn't know that. Read up and see that the transmission must be in gear to keep things lubricated as it moves down the road. I retract my statement.

Unrelated, but why 1st or 2nd gear instead of 5th gear? Seems that 5th gear would keep rotation/lubrication, but with less rotation/stress than a lower gear.

[JRscooby]

Reisender wrote:


I like the idea but I would think it would require some kind of special towbar. I don’t think traditional tow bars are meant to push. There would have to be some pretty funky software written by the manufacturer of the EV as well. Thinking it might be awhile. :).

The software is way past me. I hate my hand-me-down smart phone because it is hard to make calls compared to my old flip phone.
Special towbar? The one used by everybody that doesn't think their toad needs brakes takes a lot of pushing.
AFAIK, no EV manufacturer has said their product is good for 4-down. But I can't see near as much trouble as IC vehicle. Normal brake and light solutions would transfer. If could tell it to regen when Jake comes on, so much better.

[colliehauler]

How would you like to be behind him when that thing started shelling out engine and drive train parts? I bet it made a hell of a racket as well.

Reminds me of the dude that was dragging a car with locked wheels with his motorhome setting the forest on fire behind him and refused to pull over. Wonder what the legal outcome of that was.

[Reisender]

JRscooby wrote:

rjstractor wrote:


Someday down the road when battery technology permits an electric motorhome with decent range, I can see connecting an electric toad and having the two vehicles communicate via Bluetooth or wired link. On an uphill the toad could kick in to provide a little more power, and on downhills regen braking could eliminate the need for sketchy, overpriced toad braking systems.

Why does the MH need to be electric for this to work? With adaptive cruse control, could it not be programed to when MH got to say 3/4 throttle, the toad motor kicks in to hold it the length of towbar behind MH? This would take weight of toad off MH powertrain. Then, when driver hit WFO, the toad tries to get 6 inches closer, pushing MH.

I like the idea but I would think it would require some kind of special towbar. I don’t think traditional tow bars are meant to push. There would have to be some pretty funky software written by the manufacturer of the EV as well. Thinking it might be awhile. :).

[Huntindog]

There is a insurance company that runs a lot of ads on TV about the stupid things people have done, and they COVERED it!

I believe the saying is. "We insure stupid"


If one stops and thinks about it, just about any claim is the result of someone making a mistake.

[pitch]

Geo*Boy wrote:

Learjet wrote:

Roger10378 wrote:
I would think the insurance would deny any claim. This is pure and simple stupidity on the part of the owner.

That is why people have insurance.

That’s why insurance rates keep rising.

No Insurance keeps rising due to the complexity and technology on newer vehicle. Idiots have always been included in the insurance companies metrics.