hawairish

Welcome to the forum @eric76. Posting here is a fine start. Feel free to branch into the R50 section to post more specification information/topics, but replying here is fine. If you've got the All-Mode 4WD system (a dial below the radio) you'll likely have the LE. The Part-Time 4WD (shifter) was normal in SE. As far as brakes go, the LE had some fancier traction/brake control options, but hardware-wise they're identical. Fire away on questions...

It's a lot of work involving rewiring and modifying the dash, as this is a very specific R50 configuration. Nothing can be just swapped around, and every time I see someone attempt to do it, I cringe at the results. Sift around the NICO forums for a few threads: https://forums.nicoclub.com/pathfinder-forum-qx4-forum.html This one in particular has been around a while: https://forums.nicoclub.com/update-removed-navigation-and-rewired-automatic-climate-control-t483201.html

This topic has reminded me that my knock-off fob case is due for replacement. It's such a knock-off that it says "Calsonis Kansel" instead of the actual OEM company Calsonic Kansei.

The fob can't be used to open the rear glass hatch. The keyless entry system doesn't support it. Both of my fobs are non-OE 3-button, but both circuit chips have 4 buttons. The hidden 4th button on mine sets off the panic mode.

Great suggestions in there, especially cutting the extension cable. The ribbon cable on that sort of application also helps, since it can be flat or rolled up to wrap around existing wires...and being power wires for PC application like what you provided, they'll do well handling 12V and a bit more current. And definitely make wiring diagrams!

By my estimate, most applications should be doable in 8 wires (12V, illumination, and 6 signal leads) while using a ground in the roof (I presume there's a good one on the sunroof motor). If you don't plan to have the switches handling the load, you can get away with a smaller gauge wire and a relay module. With an array of modules, that wire could then become one or two multi-conductor cables (i.e., a Cat6 cable can handle the voltage, but only a small current...but it allows the use of other RJ45 connection means, which might help things). But, I don't think routing wires up there is too problematic. Not having a rat's nest above the panel is the real challenge. It would be terrible if removing the console meant disconnecting two dozen slide connectors. I use pinned harnesses for this sort of stuff. The do sell Carling switch harnesses, but they look really bulky.

No problem, Gerry! Please keep us posted on this project, it sounds great! Oh, and we love pics here at NPORA...post some up when you can. Again, having looked into an EV conversion recently myself (on a far simpler Nissan platform...practically without any electronics), I was definitely intrigued by the idea, so I absolutely want to see (and learn and contribute) more. A particular Ford Ranger done by EV West several years ago struck me as the standard I'd want to achieve. I'm planning to rebuild the engine and transmission later this year, so you've still got time to convince me (I do have shiny new headers in a box, and an eyeball on a turbocharger kit, btw...). Sounds like you've had a great career, but sorry to hear about the accident. Better to have some mobility than none, I'll say, so I'm glad you're able to make the most of it and hopefully there's still room for improvement. This project is one helluva way to prove what you're still capable of. As for the conversion, I was definitely seeing a declining cost for equipment, especially for salvaged OEM batteries. For sure, an array of standard car batteries isn't any cheaper today than it was a decade ago. And pretty funny to hear you've got two of the BMW i3 batteries already...it feels like those are almost brand new cars still! Display looks pretty slick, too. (BTW, for anyone looking, remove the "." from the URL.) About the R51 transfer case...just to be sure, does yours have the "Auto" mode on the dial? I knew the R51 to have the ATX14B All-Mode case (some R50s and all QX4s have the ATX14A), but I did not realize that the FSM also specs the TX15B as being an option (this was the only option on the Frontier and Xterra at the time). The R50 uses the TX10A case, which is a lever-driven Part-Time 4wd unit, while this TX15B unit is an actuator-driven relative that lacks an Auto mode on the dial switch (that is, 2H/4H/4L vs. 2H/Auto/4H/4L). More importantly, the TX cases lack the clutch-plate system—and consequently, a lot of complexity—that's in the ATX cases. Presuming you have the ATX, I feel like it'd be worth exploring the TX...spitballing here, but probably easy to find, I'd expect it to be a direct replacement, share similar (same?) wiring harnesses, same output flanges, etc. I'd probably still utilize the actuator system if I could (it read like there's a position sensor in it, too), if nothing more than to save the trouble of cutting into the transmission hump to install a lever and linkage, but perhaps the TX10A (also found on pre-MY05 Frontiers, Xterras, Pathfinders, and Hardbodies) would be a suitable donor for linkage, lever, and even shifter boots/bezels. Food for thought. Good call on getting the mechanical side of things sorted first, though. Also, I decided to do an actual search to see if others have tried the Quaife...and sure enough they have, so I'm certain we're on the right path. I prefer to do my own research on stuff like this (in this case, I would've never had a reason to bother looking), but I'm always certain I'm not the first to reach such conclusions. This was the first result: https://www.clubfrontier.org/threads/quaife-qdf11l-installed-in-my-c200k-rear-axle.350923/. The author used a QDF11L, which supports the carrier break theory as his 2015 Frontier S 2.5L would have a gear ratio of either 4.083 (49:12) or 4.363 (48:11). It at least confirms that the overall carrier series dimensions are spot on, so now it's just a matter of confirming L4.

This is amazing, by the way. It has a name. This unequivocally sums up my interaction...and it bled over into another post, too. It was entertaining for a while, but "arguing with a fool only proves that there are two."

Hey Gerry, Ooooooohhh, that "all-electric"! I totally misinterpreted that. We've had a 98 Frontier in the family with manual windows, locks, and mirrors and every day for 22+ years I've wanted it to be the other other "all electric" (power windows, etc.). I was actually researching EV options for that truck a few months ago, too. Seemed neat, but the costs seem out of my league. I can only afford to reach across the seat to roll down the window. Anyway... So now, about the Quaife...I have a modified recommendation: I think the QDF10L is the correct model for your application, not the QDF13L. When I previously dug into this, it was only cursory searching just to shut that guy up (which it didn't, apparently). Digging a little deeper, I see Quaife has 4 possible replacements for the 350Z, depending on the transmission and the diff type it came came with: Auto/Open: QDF10L Manual/Open: QDF11L Manual/VLSD: QDF13L Auto/VLSD: QDF18L The Quaife website has dimensional spec sheets on each model (except the 18L, which just linked to the 10L spec sheet). The 10L has a 0.4"/10.2mm difference on the "L4" bearing-to-crown-surface measurement vs. the 11L/13L models, which suggests a "carrier break" between gear ratios. The 2003 350Z FSM shows that the MT has 3.538 (46:13) gears, while the AT has 3.357 (47:14). That extra pinion tooth (13 vs. 14) is enough to require pushing the ring gear over that extra amount to accommodate the larger pinion head. The 2005 R51 FSM shows the 4WD ratio as also being 3.357, and sure enough, the ring and pinion set (38100-2C360 -> 38100-0F36A) is the same as used in 2003-09 350Z and 2005-12 R51 (and same years D40 Frontier and 2009-20 370Z). So, my money's on the QDF10L. My confidence is pretty high just based on the part number cross refs alone, but with your carrier out and the specs online, that should confirm just about everything. I wouldn't even be surprised if someone else has done this, but I've not searched around for it. Your front diff is a smaller R180A model. Nissan did use R180A's as front diffs in older W/D21 Pathfinders/Hardbodies, and also as rear diffs in older Z cars (Subaru even used R180s), but it's a longshot they're similar. My Google-Fu suggests the car diffs were 8-bolt ring gears...not sure about the trucks, but I'll guess there weren't LSD options. ARB offers two lockers (RD180 and RD181, depending on carrier break) and shows the R180A as being a 10-bolt ring gear with 27-spline shafts at 1.09"/27.8mm. This "CD52P" LSD from Mother Russia might be just the ticket: https://www.ebay.com/itm/123629507939 At this point, I'd say running dual LSDs on that R51 would be pretty slick in itself...but since you're pushing the envelope by going EV...oh man... Speaking very broadly here since I've not worked on an R51 and haven't scoured the FSM (yet?): the removal of the transmission alone will very likely be problematic. The Transmission Control Module (TCM) provides input signals to practically every system on the truck. Even if you keep the transfer case, the transfer control unit (TCU) uses TCM data. I imagine much of this can be bypassed to some degree with some re-wiring (after all, it's just 12v solenoids doing the actual work, with some brains in between to keep anyone from engaging 4L at freeway speeds), so ideally the switch can be wired to provide basic signalling. To that extent, I use an All-Mode switch from R50/QX4 models to run my air compressor and air lockers...so I'd reasonably expect the R51/D40/N40 switch to be repurposable to signal the transfer case to be in 2H/4H/4L. But, it's a broad assumption having not looked into it. The brake/traction systems also rely on TCM data. On the plus side, if the transfer case is similar to the R50 versions (specifically those with All-Mode, including all QX4) then I believe the vehicle speed sensor (VSS) is on the transfer case and not the transmission. There may be another revolution sensor that might need to be simulated, but you really have to hope that the TCM-to-ECM (Engine Control Module) is not deeply impacted as well. The ECM in itself will be another problem. Do you plan to use the gauge cluster, or will you have some other interface/display showing EV-specific data? Of course, everything really all depends on what features/functions/system from the truck you want/need to keep. My best recommendation there is to list out all those items, download all the FSM chapters for the truck, and review all the system descriptions. The FSMs do a great job of describing function and indicating which systems/sensors are used and how. The troubleshooting/diagnostic sections will also provide voltage/resistance data for sensors. This way, you might be able to gauge which inputs can be simulated by switch and/or resistor to preserve a function, or otherwise trick a control module.

Just to make sure we have the main goal in mind here, I've interpreted "bypass[ing] the electronic AWD feature" as meaning you're looking to bypass whatever software-driven traction system you've got (ABS, VDC, TCS, ABLS, etc.) on the truck with a mechanical LSD. If so, my quick response would be that if you can find a suitable LSD, bypassing any system wouldn't be necessary: the system would just be supplemental to the device's functions. That is, the system would only kick in after it determined that a LSD (if it existed) was allowing enough slip to satisfy detection logic via sensors. Otherwise, if you do mean to bypass AWD, you may need to expand on what function you're referring to. The All-Mode system on the truck already has the means to bypass the mode simply by turning the dial to 2WD, but that option seems out of context to the questions. Either way, I'd just focus on the LSD part for now, if that's what you're really after. Admittedly, I don't know much about R51, but I can infer enough just from FSM data (https://www.nicoclub.com/nissan-service-manuals) and part numbers. Follow along... The 2005 FSM indicates you've got an R200 rear final drive. A parts cross-reference indicates that the side gears in your differential (38423-0C000 -> 38423-0C00A) are also used in 2003-2008 350Z cars and 2005-2010 Frontiers, Xterras, and Pathfinders. That means the splining between those vehicles are the same. The differential carrier (38421-0C000) for those trucks were all the same, and since the Frontier and Xterra have C200 rear axles, and yours has an R200 rear, it means those differentials are the same. (R200/C200 compatibility was also true on pre-MY05 trucks/SUVs/cars, but MY05+ R200/C200 are different from pre-MY05 versions.) From prior research just the other week, I can also confirm that the C200 open carrier from a 2.5L D40 Frontier is the same as a 350Z, and they too shared the same side gear. All the above vehicles use the same carrier bearings. I presume more parts to be identical. The end result is that, in theory, all the differentials from 2003-2008 350Z and 2005-2010 Frontiers, Xterras, and Pathfinders with R200 rear diffs (G35, R51) or C200 rear diffs (D40, N40) are all interchangeable. If that's true, a Quaife QDF13L LSD for 2003-08 350Z/G35 with VLSD should work in the truck. My full technical assessment is available here: https://www.clubfrontier.org/threads/rear-axel-swap.368234/post-3903321, but the abstract that's relevant here is: If you decide to read into that post further, please enjoy my bashing of some idiot. There's also some technical "talk" about what Nissan calls a system versus what said-idiot calls a device, just to clear up the differences in traction systems and devices.

I'm pretty sure I have one, but I haven't the slightest clue where it is. I might need a few days to dig around...it's probably buried under my workbench.

I've been exchanging emails with Kenay and he's been very helpful. Here's the trim pics from his website (https://kenaykustoms.com.au/) so that we have some consolidated info here: Order in the pic above: W, K, G As mentioned previously, he is planning to update the site to allow for shipping to US, price will be around $70 AUD shipped (about $54 USD as of today). I may actually pick up the W trim since I light gray might be a nice contrast. But, I can wait out @PathyGig12's review...keep us posted.

Typo on my part (now corrected)...I ordered the "K" trim, not the "W". Also, I ordered two of them. @TowndawgR50 has the other one now and can weigh in on things. I also reached out to Kenay Kustoms and got a reply from the man himself, Kenay. An interesting notable was that the panel also fits an older Subaru Forester console. But he did share some advice about the color trims and thinks the "W" might be a better look. I'm checking if he's okay with me posting up some of the trim color pics here to keep the colors convo in context. He also mentioned changes to the website to allow for shipping to the US soon. (Duke's Camping also did a great job on the ebay transaction, despite ebay complicating things; they sorted everything out very quickly.)

@R50JR sent me an ebay link the other week for a Patrol switch panel and convinced me that it'd fit. I did some additional comparisons and agreed that it would. I had some concerns about how well the trim colors would match (there was a "K" gray, "W" light gray, and "G" tan, as far as I could tell), since it was clear the trim color codes were not the same here (my all-black interior trim is "G") and all the photos I could find seemed too tough to tell the exact tone. After some deliberation, I ordered the last pair of "W" "K" panels the seller had. After waiting a few days, they arrived. Product looked great. The color was a slightly brownish-gray. (My Frontier has a "K" gray trim, and it's not even remotely close). In hindsight, the light gray "W" might have been good contrast. But overall, I dig it. Fitment is good. Material quality is really good. Getting the console down from the roof and detaching the wiring harnesses from the backside of the sunglasses tray was the toughest part. Things may get a little more complicated once wires are up there. The company that makes them is Kenay Kustoms out of AUS. Unfortunately, they do not ship direct to the US, but I plan to reach out to them to confirm fitment based on the pics below. They also made color-matching blanks, except they were out of stock of them. The black ones were reasonably priced, ordered through the same ebay seller (dukes_4x4_and_camping) that sold the panels. Anyway, some pics below. Not sure what all I'll put in them yet, but it'll be way more useful than the worthless the sunglasses holder that doesn't fit any sunglasses I've ever owned. It does block the climate and compass readouts a little, but a slight head dip resolves that easily. It's not something I stare at regularly anyway. From this perspective, the color match is perfect: And it's too bad there aren't any cool Nissan switches to put here, but they would fit reasonably well:

@03TroutFinder My bet would be a bent LCA. Same symptoms/cause as a buddy’s truck. Check the area of the arm where it leads into the rear stem mount.

But lemme think on it. I’m a few weeks from moving forward on that project and it’s a possibility.

Thanks! The Detroit locker is currently sold as a complete full-carrier replacement (p/n 187SL167A), but I think it was also previously sold as a carrier-internals kit. The AC link you provided would be that kit pre-installed in an LSD carrier. They also sell just the internals: https://www.4x4parts.com/i-18915813-detroit-locker.html Since the older H233B 4-pinion open carriers were similar in style to all the LSD carriers, it suggests that this Detroit would've fit into both carriers. I've not done a close comparison between the 4-pinion open and LSD carriers to confirm that's true, but I might be able to. If the above is true, either option should work if you've got a 90 WD21. Note, too, that this was a 31-spline option only. Sites like this wrongly suggest it fits 33-spline applications: https://www.justdifferentials.com/Nissan-H233B-Detroit-Locker-p/det187sl-167a.htm

Possibly. I never got around to making any new sets, and in the years that have passed, I've been wanting to do a redesign on my setup. That may be happening soon. Undecided on that. I'd have to see if I still even have originals to work with, but there's a general reluctance to hand-over work like that unfortunately.

That is odd, not sure I have a good explanation there. Is it the same piece just being moved to a new location? There shouldn’t be a difference, at least not something that drastic. The backside of the side gear is machined smooth so I’d expect friction to be minimal relative to disc/plate friction regardless of the piece used (new vs worn) but hard to say. The amount of oil used during assembly could also be a factor, but I’m assuming it’s reasonably the same.

Here you go! Ford Maverick vs. Nissan Patrol: Mercury Villager vs. Nissan Quest vs. Guangdong Bus Works vs. Nissan Pathfinder:

https://www.remcodsc.com/coupling/ I'd never heard of such a thing, and now seeing it, I'm completely intrigued. A very neat concept...but something about trying to attach a contraption to the snout of an H233B just doesn't sit well with me...it's such an irregular shape, but I see how notching some of the ribs would help. I think I'd just be content reaching under and flipping the collar by hand, but I'd really love to see something like that in person. That'd surely simplify towing, although it looks like a pretty expensive option between the kit and driveshaft modification. Since it uses Dana 1310-series u-joints, just need to find an outside-clip flange yoke for the H233B. I think all the R50s used some non-standard inside-clip u-joint, but there's a 1310 OE unit; just used one the other week for my H190A-->H233B swap. I wrote down the Spicer p/n for it somewhere, and I think it's still available new.

Crawling around to disconnect and reconnect the driveshaft would suck, even on dry surface. You'd also need to make sure no one, including yourself, decides to start the truck and put it in gear when it's disconnected. That'll make for a bad day. Doing some additional light reading into the topic, though, I'm going to have to retract my prior opinion. The locked vs. unlocked steering got me thinking...it seems doable, but potentially unsafe. Compelling arguments read about included: Locked wheels being a slight angle, causing the vehicle to be towed crooked. The steering wheel lock being damaged. Unlocked wheels being able to turn left or right, causing fishtailing. Steering and suspension components being designed primarily for forward motion, not reverse. U-Haul having specific warnings to never to a car backwards on a dollly: https://www.uhaul.com/Articles/Tips/120/Tow-Dolly-User-Instructions/ So, given that, while it seems mechanically possible to do what's proposed, I'd say it's advised not to...which leaves disconnecting the driveshaft as the winning option. Carry a blanket to throw on the ground, and some big warning flag to throw on the steering wheel to prevent starting (perhaps in addition to disconnecting the battery once it's on the dolly).

And even if you pull the driveshaft, you’d still need a splined yoke to keep the fluid from draining out the rear output. Towing backwards on a dolly with manual hubs...I don’t see a problem with that. Should work out pretty well, actually.

I'd love to see the new Jimny's over here. Agreed on Nissan not taking some bolder steps in vehicles, outside the GTR. The Z Proto doesn't do enough for me, either. I really wish the IDx concept would come to fruition with a proper engine and RWD configuration. But, they just seem exceptionally weak in the truck and SUV market. The pickups have always been a staple, though I'm not sure if the Titan has made significant gains in popularity over the last 15+ years.

I don't like it. Congratulations, Nissan, for making another lackluster car...or another Honda Pilot. I've grown so tired of Nissan engineers talking about WD21 inspiration and then they still produce some homage crapmobile. There's no lineage here whatsoever (and arguably, any lineage may have only ever existed in the Xterra). A second generation in a row they couldn't even get the rear door handles correct. Personally, I like the new Navara front end over the Frontier. I was hopeful that the new Frontier would have the body lines of the more recent Navara, but both were a departure. I keep hoping that Nissan will produce another matching-body truck/SUV combo like the Hardbody/Pathfinder and 1st and 2nd gen Frontiers/Xterras (and even 3rd gen Pathfinder). In this case, I was hoping for a Frontier/Terra joint release. Disappointed yet again. I'll add that the Pathfinders (R50 and R51) and Xterras (WD22 and N40) should never have coexisted (and the R50 wasn't a good successor to the WD21)...which gets me to the new Pathfinder: With the Xterra having been out of the picture for a several years, Nissan should have done a chassis-share between the Frontier and Pathfinder. And bring the diesels over! (There are a single- and twin-turbo diesels overseas!) Nissan just continues to create bland vehicles here. I can't tell the difference between a Versa, Sentra, Altima, or Maxima any more. It's probably just a matter of time before the Frontier and Titan are FWD, too.