Ford transit (front or rear wheel drive)

caspermccormack

Hello,

Is there anyway to tell if a transit is driven by the front or rear wheels by the number on the door ie. 90T300? Just wondering so I can narrow my search.

Thanks in advance.

R.O.R

caspermccormack wrote: »

Hello,

Is there anyway to tell if a transit is driven by the front or rear wheels by the number on the door ie. 90T300? Just wondering so I can narrow my search.

Thanks in advance.

I don't think there is any way to tell from the door, but if you can narrow down the years I should be able to give a guide.

In the current model (2007 onwards)
The 260 - 300 are mainly FWD
330 - 350 are mainly RWD

There are some exceptions, but it usually the higher the GVW (330, 350) etc, the more likely it is to be RWD.

Eric Cartman

if it has something like this underneath the rear wheels its rwd

Saab Ed

As a rule I wouldn't out a front wheel drive Transit on the forecourt, except for a SWB 260. T300's are a soft van , 280/350 rear wheel drive is the way to go. Just watch out on 280's because they can be front or rear wheel drive depending on spec

cian1500ww

Just look underneath for the driveshaft running to the back axle

caspermccormack

Nice one lads, And thanks for the photo of the Diff!! I just wondered if the numbers on the door where anything to go by. Looking at a 2002-2005 mid roof, long wheel base.

cian1500ww

Just a note on RWD transits, they're inclined to spin a lot on anything slippy if you've got a very light load. During last winter I knew of a number of transit drivers who kept getting stuck due to the slippy conditions and little or no weight in the back. RWD is great if you have the weight but FWD drive is better if you don't. Just something to consider !!

Poly

cian1500ww wrote: »

Just a note on RWD transits, they're inclined to spin a lot on anything slippy if you've got a very light load. During last winter I knew of a number of transit drivers who kept getting stuck due to the slippy conditions and little or no weight in the back. RWD is great if you have the weight but FWD drive is better if you don't. Just something to consider !!

All Rwd vans are like that, throw your tool boxes, gravel, etc over the back wheels

caspermccormack

cian1500ww wrote: »

Just a note on RWD transits, they're inclined to spin a lot on anything slippy if you've got a very light load. During last winter I knew of a number of transit drivers who kept getting stuck due to the slippy conditions and little or no weight in the back. RWD is great if you have the weight but FWD drive is better if you don't. Just something to consider !!

Good point, but less stress on the front wheels, as they say front for sterring and rear for drive (unless your sideways;))

elipsoid84

Hi, I know I am digging out an old thread, but I have a question. How much weight needs to be above the rear wheels until a RWD is considered on par with FWD in terms of traction on wet grass/mud?
Would 500 - 600 kgs of load be enough?
Thanks!