Re: Dave + Torsen

[QSHIPQ <QSHIPQ@aol.com>]

Dave:
In an effort to cool the nasties, I'll drop the edit paste
*  Forget cof, go cf.
*  Read Jeff's description, and address it.  It was sent to you
*  Torsens in Racing is not an argument.  Audi did not commit to it, neither
did anyone else.  Who uses it now?  Why not, if it's a great absolute traction
device.
*  Come to steamboat next year with only your watch.  An absolute traction
device should prove superior to the locker (according to you).  Dave, it ain't
close.  And you have never seen more spiders in your life.  
*  If you drive a torsen that can be fooled to make the wrong outputs in a
turn, and you go off, you claim driver error?  Not with you there.
*  Dave, you are reading Carroll Smiths book (that most performance drivers
own) and interpreting his cornering to mean that a torsen does the right
things in a turn.  And yet you say it's fooled into doing the wrong things in
a turn.  Which is it?  
*  Discrediting Chocholek for his paper and his understanding of a torsen,
makes me laugh.  You and Audi must know something B-L didn't, Chocholek
didn't, and every audi racer didn't.  What would that be exactly?  
*  Dave, you don't understand the device.  Please read Jeff's bite post
carefully.  Your disagreement is somewhat vague.  You agree that a torsen can
be fooled in a turn.  If it can, why would you choose that for a race car?
Why would you choose that for a street car?  Is it not a compromise?  For a
wide range of cf (not cof).
*  I'm not clear on your argument anymore.  Maybe it's time for a beer.  Or
you to come to steamboat and show the rest of us how to drive a torsen faster
without bites.  Then we can back out cf from the equation.

Darn turns

Scott Justusson