[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: open diffs at the limit.
actually glen, the point was that with the locked centre, tshift(max) is
100% of torque (to the rear axle) and so is worse than tshift(max) with
the torsen which is 70%. upon regaining traction, you get tshift
forward again, etc. for example, given 200 lb ft and lifted inside
locked centre: tshift (to rear) 100 lb ft, torque at front 0 lb ft.
torsen: tshift to rear 40 lb ft, torque at front 60 lb ft (dictated by
the bias ratio)
locked centre:tshift to front 100 lb ft, torque at front 100 lb ft.
torsen: tshift to front 40 lb ft, torque at front 100 lb ft.
so the 'spider bite' is much less (better) with the torsen, than with
the locked centre...
>From: quattro [SMTP:email@example.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 1998 7:54 AM
>To: David Eaton; 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
>Subject: RE: open diffs at the limit.
>>no dave, we've lost traction at [either] axle. same scenario as scott
>>proposed with the torsen....
>>agree with your conclusions about the open centre diff, but you 'lose'
>>an axle with the centre diff locked and you might be sending 50% of
>>torque that way, but none is getting to the ground. the torsen is
>>sending (wasting) 30% of it's torque, while the generation 1 setup is
>>wasting 50%. win for the torsen.
>Actually, with a traditional mechanical locking centre diff and one axle with
>no traction (both front -OR- both rear wheels have no traction) then 100% of
>torque will be directed by the locked diff to the axle with the traction and
>torque directed to the axle with no traction..