Re: *no handers*- masters of ones own domain in NZ

[QSHIPQ@aol.com]

In a message dated 98-06-30 17:32:46 EDT, you write:

<< errrr scott, what *is* your problem?  i demonstrated that the ur-quattro
 >was so *stable* in the turns that i could take my hands from the wheel,
> and the car continued to track on the throttle around the turn.  braking
> at this point (clutch in) centred the steering wheel and broadsided the
> car.  so noted.  do you want witnesses?  happy to oblige.

No, laughing scoobie doo drivers need not testify.  Dave, I think again you
miss the point.  What exactly does taking your hands off a wheel mean in an
awd car?  What does it mean in a torsen car?  What inferences can you draw
from this exercise?  What does this mean in terms of the device and/or chassis
dynamics of a turn?
 
> it was proof to me that your "u-o-u-o-u" simply doesn't occur in very
> low cf conditions with the ur-q.  despite your (many) theories on this
> matter.

Bring your pink slip for the Rs2 to Steamboat, maybe we can convince one of
the torsen owners to let you make us all laugh.  Dave this exercise is not
*proof* of anything.  But most of us are laughing as loud as your Subie
friends did, and we weren't even there.  
 
> seems that the facts do not fit with your "physics".  still i guess that
> it's not the first time.  who's laughing now professor?

Me, I'm laughing my ass off.  I firmly believe that anyone who "proves" non-
events by going *no hands* really has proven something...  Where exactly to
you put your hands when they are off the wheel?  In your lap?
 
> back to your drawing board i guess....
> dave
> '95 rs2 >>

Ok, so let's summarize.  The device is not only smart in an Urq chassis, it
also anticipates when you want it to turn and how, all by throttle input.  It
*can* be dumb elsewhere, but it's so smart in an Urq that no driver steering
input is needed while turning.

Hey I'm with you all the way Dave.  By the time you come to steamboat to make
us all laugh, I should have figured out my "retraction".:)

Dave, you have the last word on this.  I understand your claim perfectly.  My
experience has been that torsens need two hands on the wheel and prayer, and
the 'anticipation' is hardly consistent with expectation.  How fast were you
going anyhow?

I'll make sure we bring this up for discussion at Pikes Peak.  Maybe we can
get Blomqvist to give it a try.

The absolute *best* argument for a dumb device being smart I've ever seen.

Thanks for making your "proof" so clear Dave.  You have gathered the ultimate
empirical data, and discredited even the Zexel boys, Chocholek has retired,
the controversy of the device has ended.  So witnessed by said scubies.  Jeff
and I will fester on, lost in the physics and our own btdt.  Appreciate your
sharing THE answer with us.

Oops, I spilt some beer...

Scott