RE: A new look at torsens

[QSHIPQ@aol.com]

Dave E writes:
>ummm, weren't you the person who has so stoutly being saying that chassis is
>not a factor in this???  i appreciate the public retraction...

Problem:  If you take a gander at Dave L part numbers, chassis is not a 
factor in the design of the torsen for an audi application?  How could it be, 
the wheelbase of a v8q and an Urq aren't the same.  I discount chassis 
because the torsen BR in a turning input is fooled into allocating torque.  
More or less doesn't matter, all we need to do is change the effective BR by 
turning radius (that's in your paper).  Stated another way, isn't wheelbase 
the same thing as the given turn radius?  All these things are constants in 
your reference paper.  Why?  At some point we need to make a reasonable 
conclusion:  A torsen fooled by slip angle of xx/xx is oversteer condition, a 
slip angle of xx/xx is understeer condition.  If you look really hard at your 
reference paper, that's a conclusion that's expressly missing.  Why? 

>also, you continue to misunderstand that the *fixed* centre diff (not just
>the torsen) continually varies torque front and rear through a corner.  so
>your statement "a torsen with torque applied to it, ALWAYS varies the BR
>when you aren't in a straight line", could equally well be "a locked centre
>diff with torque applied to it, ALWAYS varies the BR when you aren't in a
>straight line".

Your conclusion.  Ok,  for sake of argument let's let you take that position 
for now.  Explain how a locked center oversteers?  Or per your intrinsic 
argument, explain how a locked center gets U-O-U in the same turn ala torsen. 
Lots of us locker owners would love to know.  Buffum included. 

>with all due respect scott, your baseline understanding of either the torsen
>of a simple locker is well off.

I've answered your questions, and made quite a few (unchallenged by you) 
torsen statements, scenarios and conclusions.  Now in all fairness, you can 
*correct me* if you feel I'm wrong (I know I have this totally screwed up in 
your head, but 'your' reference paper gives my conclusions on the torsen 
validity), and answer the questions I posed to you re 885140. 

Thanks in advance Dave.

Scott Justusson