[s-cars] Torsens is there a difference ??!!

[rbraun at foni.net]

Hi Bob:

This is perfectly correct! It is one of the reasons
that Audi was forced to use a wider first beginning
in 1995 with the RS2.

BTW, ALL mainshafts are hardened!! Charlie's info
about a wide, non hardened mainshaft is wrong.
Mr. Kluge laughed when I asked him why only
some mainshafts are hardened. He told me that all
mainshafts are hardened or they would wear out
after 20,000 miles.

The other big drawback of the Torsen is that the
rubber bushings holding things together wear out
faster.

If you accelerate lightly and back off the gas and
then step on the gas lightly, watch the shifter move
back and forth. This is the direct result of the
Torsen moving torque back and forth..

It is also way Audi changed the design of the front
subframes. In Type 85 and 89s, the engine and
trans were mounted to the subframe, but B4
models have the engine mounted directly to the
car's "frame". Even today, the rubber bushings
wear out faster on Quattros than non Quattro
models.

I spoke at length with Mr. Kluge about lockers and
Torsens (that's when he told me why Audi changed
to Torsen) and actually got depressed listening to
all the negatives. Alas, you can't change a Torsen
equipped car to a locking diff for less than the price
of a 2 bedroom bungalo, so we have to live with
drawbacks of the Torsen.

HTH

Rob

****

---- Originalnachricht ----
>Datum: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:56:17 -0500
>Von: Robert Pastore
<rpastore at animalfeeds.com>
>Betreff: RE: [s-cars] Torsens is there a
difference ??!!
>An: "'rbraun at foni.net'" <rbraun at foni.net>, Frank
Amoroso <fjamoroso at webtv.net>
>Cc: QSHIPQ at aol.com, s-car-list at audifans.com
>
><snip>
>>He (Kluge) personally doesn't like the Torsen
much
>because it transfers torque back and forth too
>much
><snip>
>
>I remember having conversation with Peter
Blaser when the 1st gear problems
>were first becoming prevalent, and his theory
(which seems to be supported
>by, if not originated by Mr. Kluge) was that the
wear and galling that was
>being experienced was one of the drawbacks of
using the Torsen. Apparently,
>the "rocking" of torque to both faces of a gear is
a very difficult
>engineering problem to solve -- most gears are
designed for the thrust load
>to be applied in one direction. The thought/theory
was load back and forth
>as the Torsen hunted, and engine modifications
that raised the torque
>output, resulted in loads in excess of the design
limitation, and the
>combination was contributing to the excessive
gear wear.
>
>
>Bob
>