[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: new t*rs*n paper (no flames)
>"the ideal centre diff torque bias ratio layout in the 4 operating modes is a
>function of vehicle dimensions (wheel base, track width, centre of gravity
>height, ...), suspension elastio-kinematic design (stiffness front/rear,
>angular variations, ...) and engine torque characteristics for given road
>the reason that the famed spider bite hasn't been seen in an ur-q or rs2 (or
>s4?), but has been seen in a type 44 is given above. chassis dynamics.
I haven't read the paper yet so I can't comment upon what it says ...
however, I _will_ say that you're making a VERY large inferential leap to
arrive at your conclusion since the above statement refers only to the
"ideal center diff torque bias ratio layout" and to my mind, that's another
subject entirely than chassis dynamics or the spider-bite phenomenon. After
all, who's to say Audi hasn't already chosen the "ideal" BR for the various
cars in which the Torsen was used? (And if that's the case, then why is it
the same for all of them?!)
That said, I think this discussion is best held elswhere ... to that end,
I've setup a discussion forum for it at the following URL:
... I'm not looking for another flame-fest, though, and will delete any
comments intended solely to inflame rather than to educate.
/ | _| o | \ _| o Jeffrey Goggin
/__| | | / | | __ | | | | / | | firstname.lastname@example.org
/ | |_| \_| | |_/ |_| \_| | http://www.mindspring.com/~audidudi/