The switch formerly called... Er ah, a switch

[QSHIPQ <QSHIPQ@aol.com>]

Dave E writes, and I respond on Friday, tongue firmly in cheek:
>1) all the experiences have been in the usa, and in type 44 (vast majority
5??)
>and 89 cars (how many?).
Really?  Can you say that based on your island 'n = 2' or Phil's island 'n'
(=7 by his definition).  You must come taste our spiders dave.  They are
tastier and less shy here in the states, "it's different in Europe, you know"
than over here.

>2) there have been no experiences of spider bite in the ur-q, and other
>european cars.  we've even had juoko going to ice school in a4's and
reporting
>no problems.  i have undertaken skid training in a4's and a6's (including
skid
>training with *both* wheels on the same side of the car exposed to low cf
>surfaces).  i have watched walter rohrl from the passenger seat as he took my
>ur-q around a circuit.  guess it wasn't at 7/10ths.  no bite, no mention of
>bite from the instructors, no experience of bite from any of the
>drivers/instructors.
Damn.  All that Tshift, and it must just not happen.  Except exactly when it's
supposed to.  ONLY when it's supposed to.  IT has to, cuz I haven't been
struck by lightning standing under the tree.  Audi would never compromise an
absolute traction device, even if it isn't theirs'.  And most of us just look
at the pictures and never read the print that defines U-O-U in the articles.
Leastways here in the States.

>3) it is now beyond dispute that audi rallyed and raced with the torsen
centre.
>despite that, according to scott, a torsen is a torsen is a torsen.
Really?  What would the BR of those racing torsens be?  The same as the 78/22
you run?  Not beyond dispute, just a switch among several listed as "used".
And not defined BR.

>4) clearly an event has happened to drivers at various times.  this is not in
>dispute.  what is in dispute is the cause of the event, and the solution to
it.
> much like the bmw driver complaining to the dealer because of an
oversteering
>moment caused by worn tyres, wrong throttle imputs and bad conditons, and
then
>blaming the car, more data has to be gathered to fully understand this event.

More data from you.  Those that have btdt, understand it's limitations, and
it's actions as an absolute traction device.  That's all it is.  "No", Dave
and Phil say,  "It's more...  It's smart."  It knows that slip angle is
constant, even though it's a variable.  What does a driver and the chassis
know that the torsen don't?  Nuttin, no sir, it's an audi.  A smart one."

>5) a number of people (myself included) have tried very hard to reproduce
this
>problem.  i have tried to deliberately unsettle my cars areound wet
>round-abouts, left foot braking, sudden throttle inputs, oversteer on entry,
>understeer on entry.  all at the dead of night, all in the wet, all at high
>speed.  phil has done simmilar things on this ur-q.  i have undertaken a
number
>(3) of driver training courses, and at the most recent one, came 2nd out of
30
>people in the timed laps, beating 2 national saloon champions (and lost to
1). 
>i am a reasonable driver, who understands my cars and their behaviour at
speed
>and in extremis.
Yup, and this ole redneck just spits and says, "Well golly jeepers Davey, I'm
just a goofball, no racing, rallying, auto-x or steamboat experience (the win
in another guy's car was an accident, I swear, it had to be, it was a locker,
by golly).  Jeex er Petes, I sure can't 'splain that O-U-O in the same turn.
Cannu? 

>6) it has been shown that audi used different model torsens in my two cars,
the
>ur-q and the rs2, with significant differences apparent from the fiche
>diagrams.  despite this, neither of my cars displays any different
>charactersitics when cornering at speed.
Er, ok Dave.  And the exact same torsen that is used in your Urq is used in
the torsen v8, no springs in either.  Do these cars "display any different
characteristics when cornering at speed"?  Darn good point.  You made that one
clear.

>7) i have *never* been surprised by my car when cornering.  with oversteer,
>opposite lock and throttle will correct it.  with understeer, throttle lift
>and/or lf braking will correct it.  i have (eg. this morning) had wheel lift
in
>my cars on twisty roads, without any surprises.  i can corner with 4-wheel
>drifts, or screw up a corner completely without the car ever giving me a
moment
>of concern, other than what i shoud expect :-)
Yupper, and while y'all were messin 'round on the street, I hid under a tree
cuz it was litenin' out.  Know what?  I have *never* been surprised by no bolt
neither.  Flat out doesn't happen, those lighting strikes.  Not a moment of
concern from me, other than what I s'pected :').  

>>8) clearly the torsen depends upon the torque reaction from the wheels for
it's
>inputs.  the state of the tyres, the traction conditions, the quality of the
>suspension, the state of the dampers, all pay a significant role in this
>equation.  let-alone the design of the chassis.  none of the argument has
taken
>any account of these factors.  in fact the argument has been that, because of
>the physics [sic] of the torsen, *none* of these things matter.  this is
>completely wrong, obviously.
Er, yup, nothing else matters.  It just flat don't happen. Y'aknow, my horse
trigger (I named him after a sweech, ya know) has blinders too.  He don't see
slip angles or relative slip angles as anything but constants either.  Give us
a brake, Davey, you are starting to insult those who have been bitten.  You
never asked.  Let me be the first to assure you, it has little to do with
suspension, damper and tires.  Cf you got right anyhow.  How 'bout slip angle?
Might want to take a reread of lines 11-15 of section 5.2.  How bout slip
angle in a center torsen again?

>7) no one who proposes that this is a fundamental propoerty of the torsen,
has
>been able to describe to me that things i should do to reproduce this event,
>despite the mantra that it occurs at 7/10th's on dry tarmac.  i am still
>waiting for this, but trying my best despite the lack of information...

So let me get this straight, Davey.  Ya'll have been runnin around the streets
of NZ trying to reproduce an event that you don't: A) understand, b) can't get
a description of, and 3) butt yer tryin yer best?  To do whaaat?

>i resent the implications about me of a number of the contributors to this
>thread, but hey, we're all big boys, and ignore this shit.
>what i'd like to see now is for each person who has experienced this event to
>provide documentation of the event, the conditions, the drivers actions, the
>vehicles reactions, the type and repair of the vehicle.
>lets get some data here.
>7/10th's on dry tarmac corners?  sheesh...
Guess you never saw jesus er a UFO either?  Must be the tirs, the driver, er
the vehicle.  Maybe a tuneupudwork. :)

Dave, a lot of us are getting the impression that you resent the implications
about your cars and their absolute traction devices.  It doesn't reflect on
you.  Really.  It's that you have been given the utmost lattitude by several
folks here that have been bitten.  And this phenomenon has been explained
compared and rehashed so many times, it's getting funny.  YOU DON"T GET IT.
Some might go so far as to say, maybe there is a reason for that that has
nothing to do with physics.  That sir,  might just reflect on you. 

Your attempts at different part numbers to claim torsen differences,
attributing part numbers to a torsen, that have nothing to do with it's
operation, kinda seems like a desperate attempt at justifying something.

None of us bitten, really knows what that is.  And we still like your choice
of audis.  Damn torsen or no.  When one hasn't been bitten, are you sure you
want to question those that have.  I believe you to insult those btdt, sir.
And you claim that as a one way street?

I'm starting to laugh at myself.  I've been with this a looonng time.  Too
long?

Scott