Re: Misquoting the spiderman (generation 1 spider bite)

[Dave Eaton <dave.eaton@minedu.govt.nz>]

yes matt, another well written and thoughtful contribution...

1) what happened to the car tested by performance car magazine is a *good*
thing.  it is *supposed* to happen.  the car is trying to get traction in a low
cf environment. it is trying to maximise traction whereever it can get it. want
to talk about what the locker would do in the same situation? 

2) as i've said (and re-said), the issue is *not* the low cf environment.  as
has been stated and re-stated, it's spider bite (aka uncontrolled torsen
'hunt') occuring at 7/10th's in a dry tarmac curve.  want to talk about that?

3) as well, i'm supposed to believe your experience of spider bite (of which
you have never elaborated, but presumably it wasn't caused by the application
of the handbrake on a wet slip road), but you don't accept the experiences of
ur-quattro owners who say "nope, donesn't happen in our cars?"  lets see, how
many ur-quattro (torsen) owners are we talking about here?  2 directly (phil
and myself), 30-50 indirectly (via uk ur-q club)?  all to attempt to re-create
an event which nobody can describe in enough detail to get someone else to
reproduce?  this despite the diatribe that "this is physics".  theres a message
in there somewhere...

4) in all this debate, i am not aware of *any* contribution that you have made
other than saying "yup, happened to me".  meaningful dialogue?  substantive
discussions?  yeah, right.  i, at least, have contributed theory and my own
practical experience, and taken the heat for it.

i, like a lot of other people i'm sure, would welcome meaningful contributions
to this topic.  want to start?

dave
'95 rs2
'90 ur-q

>Dave Eaton writes:
>"and the same people cannot tell me how to re-create this effect on either
>of my cars.  it sure is mysterious.."
>
>Ahhh, I was waiting for the world famous ostrich argument - as in head in
>the sand.  I haven't seen it, hasn't happened to me, I can't reproduce it
>easily therefore it must be untrue or "mysterious."  This usually occurs
>after coming out on the short end of the substantive discussions.
>
>If you recall, this round of the torsen debate began with my post which
>stated:  "As one who has been bitten, I offer the February 1998 Performance
>Car (p.
>50) as another possible reporting of the torsen bite.  In a comparison
>between a fwd A6 and an A6q for 0-30mph acceleration on simulated ice the
>article says  "By contrast, the quattro dragged itself up to 30 mph with
>ease.  There were some unusual sensations as the drivetrain juggled the
>torque, favouring the front and rear wheels in turn..."
>
>It seems to me that if this happens in a straight line, there is no reason
>it couldn't happen during a turn thereby causing US, OS, and US.  I think
>Scott was claiming that lower cf really brings out the bite.  I'll leave it
>to the more technically inclined to explain the cause/physics."
>
>Since apparently the technical proof that the bite "can happen" isn't
>enough - why won't you accept the words from a European car mag testing a
>spanking new A6.  They put that car on a completely wet surface (see
>pictures in mag) and accelerated - result was torsen hunt.  This is no
>different than laying into a wet exit ramp, etc. during a turn.  IMO, Scott
>has pretty clearly established this.  Are you absolutely unable to admit
>that there may be any flaws or compromises in an Audi?
>
>Matt Pfeffer - 89 200TQW - bitten;  former owner of 87 5ktq - never bitten.
>
>
>