[torsen] Re: [s-cars] TORSEN pissing contest truce proposal
QSHIPQ at aol.com
QSHIPQ at aol.com
Tue Dec 5 10:35:03 EST 2000
Understand the device and it's limitations, that's my proposal. I'm here to
learn from btdt and reference material, from which I draw conclusions, help
(sometimes). The s-car list should have the most to gain from this
discussion (or the most to lose if you have experienced some of my btdt wrt
this device). Just a week ago, I put forth a very clear and concise q&a for
a lister looking for information. I'm open to new and better, but don't
consider this at all a debate, maybe part of my problem in presentation...
Those with '00S4 should read Lawson's Vegas report with great interest, and
think in context of what the champions concluded to become them. I read it
with great interest too, since I doubted any audi sponsored teams would be
allowed to 'go solid' 17years after the fact.
I also accept the fact that audi has dealt this list a bit of a blow, in the
context of ultimate traction in deference to the masses. I've explored
several options for a S car customer wrt correcting (improving, modifying)
the 'anomolies' that come forth when the locker guys are really starting to
have fun. My summation of Torsen mods, VC's clutchpacks etc: Cost
prohibitive, too many 'other' compromises short of full track regalia. This
exploration (and Dave L report) just solidified my position that for full
ordinance, the locker conversion makes the most sense.
That said, short of full battle dress, we need to accept the compromises
dealt. Understanding what they are, I hope is helpful with someone who finds
a whole bunch of spiders in their lap with loved ones incidentally sharing
the ride, whereever it ultimately leads, btdt.
I respectfully offer thanks for *that* consideration.
In a message dated 12/5/00 8:31:34 AM Central Standard Time,
jani.peltopuro at poyry.fi writes:
> I too partly agree to this, though that is irrelevant, since I already
> stopped the T-discussion from my part. Both sides have made their
> arguments, let's get on with it.
> However, I don't think the T-word should be banned from the list, since it
> is an integral part of s-cars, except S3. Maybe lockers should be banned
> from negative spamming on the subject of T? Don't get me wrong, I welcome
> Scott's first 3 posts on any (new) subject, he has useful info and genuine
> btdt, but I skip the ones after that.
> So if anyone has ideas how to improve the drivetrain and suspension
> behaviour, feel free to post to the list, IMO. But lets assume the basics
> stay the same, I don't see anyone bastarding their lovely s-car to FWD,
> RWD, locker, normally aspirated, or 1.8turbo for that matter. Oops sorry
> S3 guys with your 1.8t...
> So I suggest that if some of you are so fed up with the T-word, don't read
> any posts that include it. Most email program allow you to make filters.
> We might use the full torsen-word, and you can make rule that moves all
> mails containing word torsen directly to thrash.
More information about the Torsen