Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hey all, I have a 1992 GMC sierra 2500, 5.7 liter automatic, with 4WD engaged by a lever and 110,000 miles. About 90% of the time, the truck will not go into 4wd drive, hi or low. It worked all last year, and this winter it started doing this. When it engages, it works normally, but getting it to engage is the issue. The indicator light works because when the 4wd works, the light is on, but when the 4wd doesn't engage, the light is off, as it should. Any ideas on a possible solution? Thanks, Brett

Posted

It should go into 4hi in gear while moving. Do you give it a good solid pull into 4hi?All the way? I found I need to shut my engine off to get it to go into 4lo so the gears in the transfer case won't grind.Remember the gears for 4lo are spinning at a much different rate.

Posted

Oh, believe me, I pull it all the way. And, it works some of the time when I move the lever, but not other times.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Seems silly, but crawl under there and see if there is something mashed up in the linkage. Also, make sure there isn't any rust impeding the movement from the lever. This happened to me once.. When I was 13, I took the old farm truck mudding in our neighbor's field and got stuck. Dad was pretty pissed, so was the neighbor. I got stuck because it wouldn't go into 4x4. I mashed so much mud up into it, the lever wouldn't fully move.

 

If that's not it, sounds like a transfer case problem.

Posted

Is the problem physically getting the lever into the 4hi or 4lo position or is 4wd not engaging in the front hubs?

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Thanks for all the responses guys. The lever moves into gear just fine, and when I put it into 4low the rear wheels do go into 4 wheel. I thought it was 4x4 lamp switch, and replaced it. This did NOT solve the problem. When I was under it today I noticed that while in park and not running the front drive shaft can be spun. Is this normal? I still do not have 4wd working, so any suggestions would be helpful. The guys at the part store thought it may be the actuator. It's about 90 bucks, so before I spend the money I thought I'd see if you guys would do the same.

Posted

The front axle actuator is thermal and they do go bad.

If the Xfer case is engaging, the front drive shaft should spin in 2wd and be fixed in 4wd if you are under the truck trying to spin it while the truck is stationary.

I'm trying to remember way back when the actuator went bad on my '95. I do believe that the 4x4 light would not come on when the actuator was bad.

Posted

Consider this...before spending the money on a thermal actuator investigate the upgrade to an electric(12v)actuator like the later model GMT400s.I got tired of waiting for the gas in the thermal actuator to get hot enough to extend the plunger to engage the diff.With the electric actuator it's almost instantaneous.Also it will not disengage until you shift out of 4hi or 4lo,the thermal one might disengage when it gets cold out or going through cold water or snow.I used Dorman parts.

Posted (edited)

If the system is vacuum actuated, check all the lines for cracks or other abnormalities. A leak can prevent 4x4 engagement.

Edited by oldscsc
  • 6 years later...
Posted

ok ,my 4wd in my 1988 k1500 will not engage ,i  have one hot wire to the actuator in the diff , if i have current there can it be anything but the faulty actuator ? i replaced the actuator once probably 15 years ago ,i heard they have updated it recently ?the two switches on back of transfer case is one a speed sensor ? rear most and what is the more forward one ? no current to the rear most and one hot wire to the forward one ?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...