quattro digest, Vol 1 #4684 - 14 msgs

[Larry C Leung]

Not trying to start a Torsen thread, but I'd have to agree
with Scott. Although I haven't tracked a Q, (GTi though,
and autocrossed the Q's), I think I have some idea of
driving at the limit. IMHO, (although there's a little of apples
vs. oranges here, the 200 has a TON more grunt), the
predictability of my 4KQ was greater than my 200Q, when
really pushing the car (center diff locked). For more tame
street driving (even pushing it), the torsen is somewhat
more relaxed in having less to deal with. It works when
needed, but then again at the limit, you're not quite sure
when it's going to act. BUT compared to my beater Subie
(autobox, electronic diffy), EITHER Q is much more predictable,
the Subie slips the front, then the rears trigger. In street
driving it means taking off from a slippery stop into traffic
is kind of a hit or miss deal. This is  why I don't want a
Haldex car....

LL - NY

BTW - My understanding is that Subie standards are like
Q's.....

> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 17:55:25 -0500
> From: QSHIPQ at aol.com
> To: JShadzi at aol.com
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com, urq at audifans.com, torsen at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: [torsen] Re: 3B tranny same as MC-2 tranny?
> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:07:35 -0500
> From: QSHIPQ at aol.com
> To: benswann at comcast.net
> Cc: JShadzi at aol.com, quattro at audifans.com, 200q20v at audifans.com,
>         auditude at cox.net, urq at audifans.com, torsen at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: [torsen] Re: 3B tranny same as MC-2 tranny?
>
> I'm a locker guy thru and thru.  It requires more involvement from
> the driv=
> er, and you lose ABS function during activation (and don't forget
> that with=
>  the conversion you will need to run an ABS OFF wire), but it also
> depends =
> on what you plan on doing with the car in terms of performance
> and/or drivi=
> ng environment.
>
> As a rule, lockers are predictable at the limit (read U all the
> time), Tors=
> ens aren't.  What you need to assess is where you drive.  Don't
> forget to f=
> actor that *at the limit* is at the limit of adhesion, which isn't
> always i=
> n a performance environment, read: it's strictly a HP/CF ratio.
>
> Ben, you've had both, trust your instincts.
>
> Scott aka "torsen boy" Justusson
> In a message dated 3/5/2003 12:18:50 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> benswann at com=
> cast.net writes:
>
> > Scott, Q-Phile,
> >
> > Now for the question that perhaps should go to the T* list.  Is
> there
> > any merit to doing this, or is the t* system in there
> > really better,
> > even though it doesn't feel like it to me.
> >
> > Any BTDT?
> >
> > Ben
>