Bottom line is I seriously doubt you'll ever take an OR anywhere the SE couldn't go.

The ABLS works VERY well in my limited experience. Climbing up steep sand dunes, the slip light flashes - the brakes pulse on the slipping wheel(s), and I never lose momentum. The system works as advertised.

Unless you plan on doing true rock crawling, the locker is a "nice to have", but not a must when you already have ABLS.

FWIW, finding any 4WD Xterra is an issue now in Central FL. They do have an OR locally, but it is the silly 2WD version. I guess I was lucky to get my 4WD SE when I did.

The stiffer shocks do nothing for me. I drive s-l-o-w offroad. It prevents tearing up my vehicle, and my body!

As usual, YMMV.

You might not ever take it some place a stock SE couldn't go, but I for one plan on it. ABLS is nice, but not perfect. Though I have never gotten stuck, there are hills and such that I would not have made it up if not for the locker.

How well does the ABLS perform in continuous application?

I remember the hearing about an H2 that cooked its brake pads going uphill at moab. wtf? bad design.

If the breaks get too hot ABLS turns off.

how does it know if the brakes are hot? i'd imagine an algorithm or even analog charging circuit that times the rotor heat dissapation constant vs. the total activated time over some time period to decide when to disable it. and brakes were designed to be able run pretty damn hot anyhow. I was trolling over at the FJC forums and this same logic seems to be there as well.

to answer another question back a couple of posts, the ABLS works pretty well, but the locker with abls front was VERY noticibly better on a tough climb.

All this is making my brain hurt. Personally I purchased the OR because it was in my budget. Didn't even consider an SE, but was expecting to purchase an S model at the dealer. Then he made me a nice offer on a OR MT. The rest is history.

Bottom line is I am happy and I am happy for the locker. No reason to purchase an OR if you plan to mall crawl.

I don't know how it does it.

From the Owners Manual;
---
ABLS is a form of traction control using
sensors from the Anti-lock Brake System
(ABS) to transfer power from a slipping drive
wheel to a wheel with more traction. The
ABLS system applies braking to the slipping
wheel, which helps redirect power to another
wheel.

On 4WD models the ABLS system operates
in both 4H and 4LO modes. On 2WD vehicles,
the ABLS system operates on the
drive axle only.

The ABLS system is always ON unless the
system detects brake pad overheating. If
high brake pad temperature is detected, it
will turn OFF, but normal brake function will
continue. ABLS will function even when the
VDC system (if so equipped) is turned OFF.
---

Uh, that's a pretty obvious thing to say, almost make their engineers look stupid.

Wonder if it says: On 2wd vehicles, only 2 wheels are driven.

Being new to this... can anyone point me to any good web reference (or otherwise) on these axles. I really don't understand what a D44 is and why is it different on a jeep and an XTerra. And where can I find info about the axle on the standard new gen X?

I am pretty sure there are a lot of lurkers interested in this as well.

a dana 44 is a light fullsize truck axle usually used in front axles on 4x4's. the newer style jeep ones use the smaller size outer axle tubes and a shortened width, but the center section on axle size is still the same.

the titan/xterra rear D44 uses the proper thick fullsize truck outer axle tubes and a little bit higher spline count axles for strength. the titans have had trouble towing with these and the newest ones have had differential improvements. It's a good sized axle for an SUV, but questionable for a 1/2 ton truck that tows. even the chevy 10 bolt is a little larger and those go out if you tow too much as well. the titan one looks to be improved internally which is good, but it would be better to use something else.

the dana 44 is a good sized jeep axle and parts are abundant. the xterra one reminds me of fullsized wagoneer or dodge front axles on old 4x4's. I wish they would put one on the front of the X..that would be the modern fullsize wagoneer for sure.

Now you can. Just get the 78-79 Broncho and use the axles. We now know that's the donor for us because that's the one that Koko used on his rig for the SAS.

Having watched a German SUV with their version of ABLS rockcrawling (tires in the air), I'm not going to sell ABLS short. Not sure if Nissan's version works as well as that, but it certainly has the potential.

Since you didn't get stuck, how do ya know an ABLS equipped X wouldn't have made it too?

Bronterra? Xtoncho? :p

Because I had to lock it. Without the locker I wouldn't have made it. Now with better tires at the time I might have.

ABLS is not as good as a locker, period.

It's not that I don't like ABLS (I do) and I adore the street ride of the IFS, but the front diff is so puny.

If Nissan could have kept the same lug pattern, we could be rolling on titan hubs and IFS diffs with maybe shorter X specific half shafts.

this argument aside.. the bronco D44 on coils might be the way to go if you can't afford to keep replacing busted parts up front. Just too bad you can't get it that way from the factory.

Thanks - I gained some knowledge there for sure.
I still cannot find anything about the modern axle on the '06 S/SE versions.

I think it is 200mm which is a 7.67" ring gear. this is about equivalent to the camaro and s-10 7&5/8" rear axle from the 90's.

someone verify the 200mm part. I think that is about the size of it. kind of like a dana 35 size more or less.

the c200 is the 200mm one, not sure what size the d44 is

Thanks for those answers.
I understand now that the old axle is not a c200 and is larger than the dana44 in the offroad.

The dana44 in the 05 offroad is larger than a jeep dana44? (which does not make as much sense to me since they are called the same thing)

and the new 05 c200 has a ring gear that is about 1" smaller than the dana44, and a shaft that is also smaller though I don't know by how much.

Assuming that my understanding of the above is correct???

What about accounting for matterial differences. They do claim that the steel they use for the frame is at least stronger than the old frame. Is the same true for the axles?

Have there been any studies done on how much force it takes to snap any of these axles?

I've got to say you guys have been helpful to this newbie.

there are yield torque specs and shock load ratings for axle shafts published somewhere. The more splines you have, the less deep they are cut making the axle cross section thicker. many axles snap at the end of the splines, not in the middle, for instance. I don't have a good link right now. the dana 44 ring gear diameter is 8.5" (about 216mm). the jeep one is exactly the same, but the titan diff now has an extra heavy double spider gear arrangement and a diff cover that holds more oil due to towing failures. the nissan version has a higher spline count than the standard classic 30 spline count on dana 44 axleshafts. So, in summary, the bearings and dimensional measurements are the same, but the nissan one has been ruggedized with 32 spline axles and the titan special diff arrangement. also, as I mentioned b4, the X/ titan get a full size truck axle tube thickness and brake flange whereas the jeep ones are dana 30 sized axle tubes pressed onto a dana 44 pumpkin. narrower and lighter duty (the same inner axles dia - but 30 spl, but the outer tubes are lighter duty).

so the axles aren't snapping on titans, but it was more of a heat treating problem with the diff gear set internals and that was adressed for 2006 it would seem. Now the 6 cyl fontys and X's don't weigh as much and don't tow as much so you don't hear anything rampant about 6 cyl D44 axle failures. An updated titan axle might make a kick ass upgrade for a 200mm base x axle assumming the abs is compatible. even then, X axles should fit in the titan housing unless the width is more on the titan. the d44 is a good X axle, but sucks for the titan. They ought to bring back the japanese one, but I know that they won't because it costs $50 more. the good thing is every napa in the country has axle seals and bearings for dana axles for cheap.

The odd thing is, when you read the 2005 Dana press release they state that the X will be using a standard Dana 44 diff. Seeing as it's not standard, I find it odd.

well yes, the casting is also beefier than th classic casting as well.. forgot about that. It could be a reference to the extra heavy titan variation whereas the x and fronty one is the "standard" regular duty nissanized one.

for all we know this axle kicks ass on paper. I don't know how much stronger the early x axles are, but the only thing that bugs me is the special lug pattern on the new axles and wheels.

another thought is that the smaller drivetrain on the next gen X has less rolling resistance and overall weight to help keep the epa rating from dropping a mpg for the fleet average and all that.