Re: 4th gen. quattro

[Eliot Lim <eliot@u.washington.edu>]

On Thu, 14 Dec 1995, Terry Donohue wrote:
> >        Corrections? Comments? Anyone have any clue about why Audi didn't
> >stick with the V8's double TORSEN setup? Seems like the best to me, although
> >it takes all the fun out of manually locking the diffs.

>      Fun is the major point in having this car-don't want to make it too
> automatic.  Torsen's are expensive.

i had a 4KCSQ and now a V8.  many here have expressed a preference for
the manual locks, but i have to say that i far prefer the automatic
locks on the v8.  the locking action and the car's behavior is much
more consistent and predictable, whereas there are two or three
different sets of behaviors with the manual locks. to me, fun in
driving the quattro is sweeping by everyone else under difficult
conditions, not fiddling with coarse grained controls that would
radically alter the car's behavior.

i am not a fan of the manual locks in the same way that i am not a fan
of part time, manually engaging f*** truck 4wd.

before anybody's ego gets bruised, let me reiterate that this is
simply my preference and not a declaration of superiority of one
over the other.

>  Also note that a few enlightened
> manufacturers of high-performance FWD cars are starting to offer LSD's
> (sorry, can't remember who at the moment).  With FWD, you can't use a
> clutch-type since it tends to jerk the wheel out of your hands (for racing
> only), but Gleason/Torsen types can work quite well in this application.

i have come across european cars that offer torsen in the front.  the
rover 820i turbo comes to mind.  i think nissan offers the (inferior)
viscous coupling LSD for the primera/g20.

eliot