It is sarcasm and used to further highlight the point which is still valid--BFG KO2 tires are garbage to anyone using them in any serious A/T scenario. There are ONLY two things they do well--low road noise and low wear rates. Everything else is a joke--I tried to make them work in many...
Not sure, but I would opine that C rated all terrains are the exception and not the rule. It is (somewhat) incredulous the C rated tires are used for Baja given the potential damage from rocks.
I ran a set of Kanati Trail Hogs in LRE and they were not as stiff or as heavy as one would think.
Mickey Thompson Baja AT
Nittos
Even Falkens over BFG
I ran a set of 37x12.5x17s for about 40,000 mi and they are the worst set of tires I've ever owned. They would not stay balanced, they slipped and slid in rain and snow, they are complete crap in mud. The only thing they're good for is thin...
Meh...unless it is a light year improvement over the KO2 which did nothing well enough to be called a "top tier A/T tire" it will be another long on promise short on delivery tire.
BFG has been playing catchup to most of the real "top tier" tires for decades now...
Almost positive the threads are the same between them (1/2" NPT) so that is a good plan. I am doing the same when I change the transfer case fluid next time.
Stainless and aluminum typically do not play very well together, but if you are using teflon paste or tape, that should provide enough boundary/lubrication to prevent/limit corrosion.
From what I understand, it is not possible to purchase an entire bumper--even piecemeal, because Ford does not sell all of the parts. I picked up an 90% complete bumper (including sensors and wiring) for $200 and bought remaining plastic covers, etc.
Keep an eye out here and on Facebook...
Agree 1000%!
The "new" KO3 better be light years ahead of the competition or it will quickly gain the same reputation as its predecessor which is a POS that does not stay balanced, loses traction in rain/snow after several thousand miles, and does nothing well enough for it to be a "top...
We would need some trending data from a number of transfer cases to establish what would be considered "normal", but in lieu of that, I did not see anything out of the ordinary.
The most important thing that you want to see is the miles per PPM of iron/aluminum/copper increasing which means...
I disagree to a large extent, but it can depend on load, operating conditions, oil type, and viscosity. You have two gears moving at 90° to each other under incredible shearing forces that will cause wear metals to be generated. Sadly, Dana 44 Advantek axles produce more for long periods of time...
I have never not seen wear metals on magnets, but they will reduce over time producing less despite longer runs between oil changes. However, metal paste will always be present.
UOAs are for determining the health of the oil versus determining wear metal generation, but they can provide some...
In a blind test, I can assure you there is NO WAY that you can "feel" the difference between any of those viscosities--totally get that you think that you can and needed to change the viscosity, but it is not reality.
Gotcha. OK, I modified the sheet to have 3 tabs (6.1 QTs drained, 7.1 QTs drained, and 8.1 QTs drained).
This should provide a general idea of how many dump and fills are needed based upon the amount drained to get below 10% old fluid.
The Ford tech told me the pan holds about 5QTs and the filter itself as well as the amount that drops when it is pulled is about another 1QT (which is where I can up with the 6.1 QTs in the formula).
If you have a better number, let me know and I will edit the spreadsheet.