Anyone HAPPY with Borg Warner 44-44 / Auto 4WD

[yillbs]

I know if I was going to subject my Ram 1500 to many situations of Off-Road use or abuse-->I would prefer the off-road package and most importantly the 44-45 (chain driven) not the BW44-44 (Yuppie sports car) Clutch Design transfer case.
Major difference in off-road performance capabilities.

I do admire the PW concept.
Locking F/R diffs would be a major plus Off-Road.
I will bet this model does not sport the BW44-44!

I do have full confidence in my ram with the BW44-44 transfer case. I believe it will take me and my family anywhere I want to go as long as I keep the four tires on the pavement and not venture off road to seriously.
I know mine will not spend too much of it's life in the auto mode.

I will be honest. I will be very hesitant if ever called upon to pull out / or get unstuck other auto's from the deep snow or ice due to fear of burning up the clutch within the transfer case. (Just Me) I would not have this fear with the 44-45.
Let alone the fear of possibly being sued by the individuals you're trying to help if something goes wrong and you damage their vehicle.

I think you're reading to much, and getting on the band wagon. The 44-44 is by no means a yuppie sports car. The 44-44 is merely inferior to a 44-45 in the sense it has a clutch. Many people refer to it as an awd system and them, and you would be incorrect. Once in 4lo the transfer case does indeed lock, it just uses a clutch. The gearing and range is considerably better than that of an awd vehicle. You have no business going into snow without first being in 4wd, long as you are you'll be fine. The 44-44 gets a lot of crap, and no one really has a definitive reason why, other than its a clutch so it must be bad. Have you personally used the system and have it fail on you? I'm willing to bet most people in this thread haven't, you're all sumising based on this clutch system. How often does your clutch slip on your tranny ?

 

[Hemi395]

I think you're reading to much, and getting on the band wagon. The 44-44 is by no means a yuppie sports car. The 44-44 is merely inferior to a 44-45 in the sense it has a clutch. Many people refer to it as an awd system and them, and you would be incorrect. Once in 4lo the transfer case does indeed lock, it just uses a clutch. The gearing and range is considerably better than that of an awd vehicle. You have no business going into snow without first being in 4wd, long as you are you'll be fine. The 44-44 gets a lot of crap, and no one really has a definitive reason why, other than its a clutch so it must be bad. Have you personally used the system and have it fail on you? I'm willing to bet most people in this thread haven't, you're all sumising based on this clutch system. How often does your clutch slip on your tranny ?

It was proven many times in this thread: http://www.ramforum.com/showthread.php?t=40753 that the 44-44 does not lock in 4Low or any other mode. The clutch engages when you give it throttle and the rear wheels spin a few times. Then when the throttle is released and the engine returns to idle, the clutch releases.

Here's a video of another members truck showing it doesn't lock in 4Low: https://youtu.be/_VDSyWeljIg

Here's a video of my truck showing it doesn't lock in 4Low: https://youtu.be/YM2HY1qa9Po

If I wanted my truck to act like this I would've bought a Honda Ridgeline. However even the Ridgeline has an "AWD lock" button that engages the clutch no matter how much the throttle is pressed or released so I guess the only real advantage of the 44-44 of the Ridgeline is low range gearing.

I do agree that it hasn't failed for me and has got me where I needed to go when it was needed. However there have been several people on here who have had 44-44 failures requiring the replacement of the tcase.

As I've previously said, this could be remedied with a simple software update that keeps the clutch engaged while in 4Lock and 4Low. Not a true lock, but I would be happy with that and I'm sure I'm not alone.

 

[SyN]

My post was based on the hundreds of You Tube videos of owners showing this TC in action.

You are right I have not really had a chance to get out and abuse my BW44-44. I probably will not due to I really don't want a repair bill.
Like I posted above I feel it is fine of on-road 4WD situations but not suitable for off-road abuse.

I have my opinion! You have yours! I respect your opinion & thoughts! Fair Enough!

I consider the BW44-44 in the same light as limited slip rearend. Those who have owned one know they are not all that dependable and when you want & need them to perform as intended, well your left scratching your head & using nice loud swear words.

Just for the record: I have watched way more videos of owners cussing & complaining about this T/C. Compared to videos of owners bragging & praising its operation & performance.

I have zero complaints so far! I am more prepared to be let down then to be amazed & thrilled at its performance.

 

[yillbs]

My post was based on the hundreds of You Tube videos of owners showing this TC in action.

You are right I have not really had a chance to get out and abuse my BW44-44. I probably will not due to I really don't want a repair bill.
Like I posted above I feel it is fine of on-road 4WD situations but not suitable for off-road abuse.

I have my opinion! You have yours! I respect your opinion & thoughts! Fair Enough!

I consider the BW44-44 in the same light as limited slip rearend. Those who have owned one know they are not all that dependable and when you want & need them to perform as intended, well your left scratching your head & using nice loud swear words.

Just for the record: I have watched way more videos of owners cussing & complaining about this T/C. Compared to videos of owners bragging & praising its operation & performance.

I have zero complaints so far! I am more prepared to be let down then to be amazed & thrilled at its performance.

Your opinion is indeed yours, I'm merely saying it's flawed. Their are hundreds of thousands of this transfer case on the road, and there are a handful of YouTube videos showing its not locking at idle.... that's not definitive by any means. Soon as the wheel spins front locks up, which is why ram is saying it works. Their are also videos of 4lo spinning front tires at idle. I have beat the hell out of this case in the two weeks I've owned it. I've gone through small streams, 3-4 inches of mud and rock, etc. the case is solid and does exactly what any other case does. Its not really an opinion. Cause its a fact.

 

[Gump]

Just give it lots of throttle and let the magic happen :********:

 

[SyN]

Yillbs: I can tell already you are one who is always right.

Thanks for your input & all your facts !

 

[ColdCase]

There are situations like ice and snow starting off up a hill where one does not want to spin a tire, don't need the drama. This is a situation I often get into where the 44-44 is inferior to say the 44-45 or MP2023. So I just drive the MP2023 equipped Jeep in the nasty weather and leave the little red truck parked. The clutch equipped auto MP2023 works a heck of a lot better in nasty conditions than the 44-44.. primarily because it locks at idle and perhaps because its a variable clutch. Thats a fact not an opinion. There must be a durability reason RAM chose not to lock the 44-44 at idle, something like torque management perhaps.

The 44-44 is certainly adequate, however. But it could be much better. For those of us that have spouses that are not mechanically interested that can leave the transfer case in 4lock regardless, an "auto" type TCase is necessary.

 

[yillbs]

Yillbs: I can tell already you are one who is always right. I will trust your opinion and see what happens over the next few months.

Thanks for your input!

Don't mistake my assertion for accuracy to be me being a ****, that's not my intention. A lot of information that's found in situations like this comes from forums. When people start doing research on things they aren't sure of, surely they will stumble across a thread with the exact title as this is posted as.

It's important, at least to me, that accurate data, and proper information is shared. There is absolutely nothing sustainable that can be shown on youtube or otherwise, that the 44-44 are not any less capable other than user preference. I'm actually wrong quite frequently, but as I said, extremely important that some other sap who's looking at a Laramie next month and has no idea about how the off-road performance will work for them stumbles across data that's less confusing. The important aspect of everything I'm trying to say, is the 44-44 vs anything else, at this point, is pure user preference. Which honestly makes no sense, because the end result will be the same between the 44-45, and the 44-44 when it comes to offroad performance. With that said, there are tons of other things we could complain about, such as clutches are wearable items technically, and someone who chooses to sit in sand and try and dig their way out may not like, while that's a preference, that's different, because in that case, it would affect the usability of the system. in the end, though, that would strictly be user error, as no transfer case should just sit in sand and spin.

 

[yillbs]

There are situations like ice and snow starting off up a hill where one does not want to spin a tire, don't need the drama. This is a situation I often get into where the 44-44 is inferior to say the 44-45 or MP2023. So I just drive the MP2023 equipped Jeep in the nasty weather and leave the little red truck parked. The clutch equipped auto MP2023 works a heck of a lot better in nasty conditions than the 44-44.. primarily because it locks at idle and perhaps because it's a variable clutch. That's a fact, not an opinion. There must be a durability reason RAM chose not to lock the 44-44 at idle, something like torque management perhaps.

The 44-44 is certainly adequate, however. But it could be much better. For those of us that have spouses that are not mechanically interested that can leave the transfer case in 4lock regardless, an "auto" type TCase is necessary.

Absolutely, that is a preference on how a user wants something to work, it holds no merit to whether or not the system is capable of doing it, just because it doesn't do it the " traditional " way, doesn't mean it does it a bad way. Preference and function are two very, very different things. As for your factual statement, I can't attest to whether or not the 44-45 would be better in certain situations because I've yet to have the opportunity to get stuck. Mainly because no matter how thick, or nasty the terrain is, the 44-44 seems to always pull my very large truck out

 

[SyN]

Don't mistake my assertion for accuracy to be me being a ****, that's not my intention. A lot of information that's found in situations like this comes from forums. When people start doing research on things they aren't sure of, surely they will stumble across a thread with the exact title as this is posted as.

It's important, at least to me, that accurate data, and proper information is shared. There is absolutely nothing sustainable that can be shown on youtube or otherwise, that the 44-44 are not any less capable other than user preference. I'm actually wrong quite frequently, but as I said, extremely important that some other sap who's looking at a Laramie next month and has no idea about how the off-road performance will work for them stumbles across data that's less confusing. The important aspect of everything I'm trying to say, is the 44-44 vs anything else, at this point, is pure user preference. Which honestly makes no sense, because the end result will be the same between the 44-45, and the 44-44 when it comes to offroad performance. With that said, there are tons of other things we could complain about, such as clutches are wearable items technically, and someone who chooses to sit in sand and try and dig their way out may not like, while that's a preference, that's different, because in that case, it would affect the usability of the system. in the end, though, that would strictly be user error, as no transfer case should just sit in sand and spin.

 

[Hemi395]

So let me get this straight, you've owned the truck for 2 weeks, you have "beat the hell out of it", and now you're an expert on the 44-44? Wow I'm impressed! Let us know how that works out for you in a year or two!

Anyways moving on. For those that have the 44-44, keeping fresh fluid in the tcase is probably a good idea seeing as it's clutch based. I'm thinking I'll be replacing the fluid every 2 years just to be on the safe side.

 

[ColdCase]

Absolutely, that is a preference on how a user wants something to work, it holds no merit to whether or not the system is capable of doing it, just because it doesn't do it the " traditional " way, doesn't mean it does it a bad way.

I guess you saying that locking the transfer case in anticipation of wheel spin instead of waiting for wheel spin and a clutch to engage is a preference thing? Most of us are saying that its a capability advantage in nasty weather for one, not a preference. Whether that advantage is worth it to you is subjective and a preference thing, IMHO. Or are you saying you don't believe the tech data?

I used to drive my open rear 2wd base mercury to places that 4WD vehicles couldn't get into. But that was just doing the best I could with what I got (avoiding tire spin was key). By stretching your argument, 4WD would be a preference as I could do anything with 2WD. One can do pretty good with a 44-44 and decent tires without much skill.

There is no question the 2023 and software used in other FCA vehicles works better than a 44-44 and software used in the RAM maintaining vehicle control in nasty weather, particularly useful in tight spaces. Once you've driven vehicles with the two automatic systems for awhile you will come to the same conclusion. Or don't you think maintaing traction without spin is better than wheel spin, unless you just want to have fun?

The 44-45 does as well, but its not an automatic T Case, so there are other compromises. The 44-44 may be better overall than the 44-45 for some drivers, but its not better functionally than a automatic T-Case with software that locks in anticipation of wheel spin like the 2023 FCA uses in other vehicles. And thats all I'm saying. Some here have speculated that a software patch could fix this 44-44 deficiency, but there is probably more to it.

 

[yillbs]

So let me get this straight, you've owned the truck for 2 weeks, you have "beat the hell out of it", and now you're an expert on the 44-44? Wow I'm impressed! Let us know how that works out for you in a year or two!

Anyways moving on. For those that have the 44-44, keeping fresh fluid in the tcase is probably a good idea seeing as it's clutch based. I'm thinking I'll be replacing the fluid every 2 years just to be on the safe side.

I'm no expert, I just use a bit more rational thinking, and comprehension than others sometimes i guess. The way the unit performs will not change in " 2 years " lol. That kind of logic is extremely false. Unless the world somehow gets morphed into some sort of rocky, mountain/wetland, the transfer case will always be a 44-44, the amount of time it's used is not justifying something not working any more, in which case, you pay to get it fixed. I don't quite understand what you're trying to say.

 

[yillbs]

I guess you saying that locking the transfer case in anticipation of wheel spin instead of waiting for wheel spin and a clutch to engage is a preference thing? Most of us are saying that its a capability advantage in nasty weather for one, not a preference. Whether that advantage is worth it to you is subjective and a preference thing, IMHO. Or are you saying you don't believe the tech data?

I used to drive my open rear 2wd base mercury to places that 4WD vehicles couldn't get into. But that was just doing the best I could with what I got. By stretching your argument, 4WD would be a preference as I could do anything with 2WD. One can do pretty good with a 44-44 and decent tires without much skill.

There is no question the 2023 and software used in other FCA vehicles works better than a 44-44 and software used in the RAM maintaining vehicle control in nasty weather, however. Once you've driven vehicles with the two automatic systems for awhile you will come to the same conclusion. Or don't you think maintaing traction without spin is better than wheel spin?

The 44-45 does as well, but its not an automatic T Case, so there are other compromises. The 44-44 may be better overall than the 44-45 for some drivers, but its not better functionally than a automatic T-Case with software that locks in anticipation of wheel spin like the 2023 FCA uses in other vehicles. And thats all I'm saying. Some here have speculated that a software patch could fix this 44-44 deficiency, but there is probably more to it.

You make a valid point, but the benefits over your point versus mine are actually quite good. IF you're just wanting the 4wd for " nasty " weather, the 44-44 offers an auto mode, like you said, you couldn't possibly want it to be locked in auto mode, that would defeat the purpose. IF you're in snow you would drive in auto, I think you're trying to say that the movement to the wheels wouldn't be fast enough ? IF you're purposely going " offroad ", and you put it in 4hi, or 4lo, why would you need it at idle? If the back wheels have traction, then you don't need 4wd. Surely i'm no the only logical person here? on this point with the back wheels having traction, are you trying to say as a human you are going to be less error prone than a computer?

 

[smiley]

I'm no expert, I just use a bit more rational thinking, and comprehension than others sometimes i guess. The way the unit performs will not change in " 2 years " lol. That kind of logic is extremely false. Unless the world somehow gets morphed into some sort of rocky, mountain/wetland, the transfer case will always be a 44-44, the amount of time it's used is not justifying something not working any more, in which case, you pay to get it fixed. I don't quite understand what you're trying to say.

He is saying you can get by with the 44-44 but it if he has a choice the older ones or the 44-45 are far superior to the fuel saving 44-44 of all else is equal. Not being mean just fact not anything else. Locking in is an advantage.

 

[ColdCase]

You make a valid point, but the benefits over your point versus mine are actually quite good. IF you're just wanting the 4wd for " nasty " weather, the 44-44 offers an auto mode, like you said, you couldn't possibly want it to be locked in auto mode, that would defeat the purpose. IF you're in snow you would drive in auto, I think you're trying to say that the movement to the wheels wouldn't be fast enough ? IF you're purposely going " offroad ", and you put it in 4hi, or 4lo, why would you need it at idle? If the back wheels have traction, then you don't need 4wd. Surely i'm no the only logical person here? on this point with the back wheels having traction, are you trying to say as a human you are going to be less error prone than a computer?

You are missing some traction dynamics and physics from your thought train that is contributing to your flawed logic. The devil is in the details.

There is more tractive forces applied without wheel spin than with, especially on ice, due to things like stiction. So power applied to forward movement decreases when the tire starts to slip. Look up tire siping to get some background on stiction. When tires spin, they not only lose some ability to push the car forward, but lose lateral stability (i.e. fishtailing). So with the 44-44 the rear tires have already lost tractive power when the front tires are brought into play so you already lost that extra motive force and stability. For those systems that lock before wheel spin, more tires have to spin before there is loss of tractive power. Its gets more complicated, but thats the basics. There are other characteristics that put a 44-44 system at an disadvantage, but I think this is the simplest one to understand, and the one most folks that want to use their truck as a truck are annoyed about.

There are plenty of cases where you want all wheels spinning to dig down to surfaces with better traction. And I'm using the term system, as software can make a pretty good clutch based T-Case. Its still a clutch that can overheat and wear out over time, but functionally pretty good.

And the 44-44 can meet the needs of most and most can be very happy with it, the system is quite capable.

 

[yillbs]

He is saying you can get by with the 44-44 but it if he has a choice the older ones or the 44-45 are far superior to the fuel saving 44-44 of all else is equal. Not being mean just fact not anything else. Locking in is an advantage.

Fair enough, I agree it's inferior in a few various ways. The way it engages , imo, is not one of them.

 

[yillbs]

You are missing some traction dynamics and physics from your thought train that is contributing to your flawed logic. The devil is in the details.

There is more tractive forces applied without wheel spin than with, especially on ice, due to things like stiction. So power applied to forward movement decreases when the tire starts to slip. Look up tire siping to get some background on stiction. When tires spin, they not only lose some ability to push the car forward, but lose lateral stability (i.e. fishtailing). So with the 44-44 the rear tires have already lost tractive power when the front tires are brought into play so you already lost that extra motive force and stability. For those systems that lock before wheel spin, more tires have to spin before there is loss of tractive power. Its gets more complicated, but thats the basics. There are other characteristics that put a 44-44 system at an disadvantage, but I think this is the simplest one to understand, and the one most folks that want to use their truck as a truck are annoyed about.

There are plenty of cases where you want all wheels spinning to dig down to surfaces with better traction. And I'm using the term system, as software can make a pretty good clutch based T-Case. Its still a clutch that can overheat and wear out over time, but functionally pretty good.

And the 44-44 can meet the needs of most and most can be very happy with it, the system is quite capable.

THe amount of forward motion you lose by the time you spin a tire and the front tires kick in is minimal, extremely minimal. I'd highly suggest those of you with the 44-44 take it into some wet grass if you don't have snow, the moment you give it gas, it'll lock if the grass is to slippery. Moreover, if the wheel spins, then regain traction, the front will still engage. In cases like this, you lose no momentum. What you're describing would affect such a small % of users, it's hardly worth worrying about. That does not however negate the fact that you would be correct. I just feel the % of people your technical issue would effect is so small it's moot.

 

[ColdCase]

THe amount of forward motion you lose by the time you spin a tire and the front tires kick in is minimal, extremely minimal.

Are you saying 2WD is better than 4WD? Your opinion is that the time the 44-44 is in 2WD is minimal, but its more than a don't care for many. For folks that care, it needs to be highlighted, as its not an obvious characteristic.

With a 44-44 you have 2WD (even when locked) until rear tires spin. Some here would think 4WD provides better traction, however. Otherwise why would one want to lock the case or even buy a 4WD vehicle. The 44-45 when locked provides 4WD all the time. The 44-44 with traction control may be good, very effective, but the 44-45 with traction control is better in low traction situations, because 4WD seems to be better than 2WD... There are other big picture compromises, however.

Forward motion or momentum is irrelevant as thats what one wants to create when at a up hill stop or maneuvering in a tight spot. If you could get any momentum with the 44-44 without spinning tires over a 2WD truck it would be a different story. Sometimes many here don't want tire spin as one would rather not be slipping sideways sideswiping nearby vehicles or drop off into a ditch, and sometimes you just want to get to your destination safely without undue drama. Sometimes you don't want to rip up grassy lawns. Sometimes the jolt when the 4WD clutch kicks in (and out) is unexpected and annoying.

The delay is there, it hurts performance dramatically in all cases because a spinning tire provides less torque than one that is not spinning. But, in everyday driving, hammering the throttle should get you moving as the traction control software is sophisticated and fast enough to cope well. Thats what we tell those with little driving skill and when out in the open, just hammer the throttle and let the traction control system do its best.

Think about driving on a smooth ice skating ring with bald tires. Hammering the throttle spins tires, melts the ice providing a wonderful lubricant, and gets you no where. However, feathering the throttle, avoiding wheel spin, to take advantage of what little traction there may be and you are off to the races... the more tires trying to grab traction the better.. well until you try to stop

Just saying that I've driven both kinds of auto transfer cases (the 44-44 that starts in 2WD and the M2023 that starts and stays in 4WD) and can confirm that there is a significant difference in hairy situations or in situations where you need finesse. You don't need to be a skilled driver, however, to notice the difference in traction starting off in deep snow up hill.

 

[yillbs]

Are you saying 2WD is better than 4WD? Your opinion is that the time the 44-44 is in 2WD is minimal, but its more than a don't care for many. For folks that care, it needs to be highlighted, as its not an obvious characteristic.

With a 44-44 you have 2WD (even when locked) until rear tires spin. Some here would think 4WD provides better traction, however. Otherwise why would one want to lock the case or even buy a 4WD vehicle. The 44-45 when locked provides 4WD all the time. The 44-44 with traction control may be good, very effective, but the 44-45 with traction control is better in low traction situations, because 4WD seems to be better than 2WD... There are other big picture compromises, however.

Forward motion or momentum is irrelevant as thats what one wants to create when at a up hill stop or maneuvering in a tight spot. If you could get any momentum with the 44-44 without spinning tires over a 2WD truck it would be a different story. Sometimes many here don't want tire spin as one would rather not be slipping sideways sideswiping nearby vehicles or drop off into a ditch, and sometimes you just want to get to your destination safely without undue drama. Sometimes you don't want to rip up grassy lawns. Sometimes the jolt when the 4WD clutch kicks in (and out) is unexpected and annoying.

The delay is there, it hurts performance dramatically in all cases because a spinning tire provides less torque than one that is not spinning. But, in everyday driving, hammering the throttle should get you moving as the traction control software is sophisticated and fast enough to cope well. Thats what we tell those with little driving skill and when out in the open, just hammer the throttle and let the traction control system do its best.

Think about driving on a smooth ice skating ring with bald tires. Hammering the throttle spins tires, melts the ice providing a wonderful lubricant, and gets you no where. However, feathering the throttle, avoiding wheel spin, to take advantage of what little traction there may be and you are off to the races... the more tires trying to grab traction the better.. well until you try to stop

Just saying that I've driven both kinds of auto transfer cases (the 44-44 that starts in 2WD and the M2023 that starts and stays in 4WD) and can confirm that there is a significant difference in hairy situations or in situations where you need finesse. You don't need to be a skilled driver, however, to notice the difference in traction starting off in deep snow up hill.

When I'm in 4low I have 4 wheels moving before spin. In fact , I can't spin my wheels in 4low, I've tried. I'm still failing to see the flaw here.