RE: A new look at t*rsens

[QSHIPQ@aol.com]

Gary writes:
>gnore the temptation to contine the insanity of the
>previous threads.  They don't work.  I'm not sure this will work either, but
>I am willing to try.  
>So, has anyone thought of any new reasons why spiders bite here (USA) and
>not there (UK, NZ, Greece?{Pantelis?})??  Did anyone answer Huw's question
>about steering wheel orientation in NZ??  Dave???Gary

Gary, your question really is moot.  In order for you to proceed in the 
leadership role here, *you* have to get the basic information in front of 
you.  Since Dave E chose a reference on which to base our discussions, let's 
use it (I don't think Greg gets to count this:).  In order to use it, one 
would either have to get a copy or find a site with it (declined by the 
initiator).  

To make this easy for you and others to understand, a simple torsen summary:  
A torsen allocates torque in *any* turn under acceleration at some Bias Ratio 
other than 50f/50r.  It can *ONLY* do this based on two inputs to the device, 
these *can* be, but are not *necessarily*, independent events.  1) traction 
at a given wheel.  A wheel spins up (or is about to), so does it's respective 
axle, torque is allocated to the other axle.  2) Slip angle differences 
across the center axle.  At a given radius, given dry pavement (no traction 
problems for any wheel) with a given amount of accleration, (on a given 
wheelbase, on a given cf, on a given fully laden q), the exact Bias Ratio 
rear can be measured.  Any of those givens change, so does the measured BR.

>From the above, we can also make the reasonable conclusion that a) 75r/25f 
torque would make oversteer = O on any audi chassis with a torsen, and that 
b) 50f>75f // 50r>25r would made understeer = U on any audi chassis with a 
torsen (I make that conclusion since we have locker data for all audi torsen 
chassis).  Those specific numbers will also change in terms of chassis 
dynamics given cf and/or engine torque (they are effectively the same thing 
to a torsen), wheelbase, cog etc.  However, we can make the conclusion within 
the maximum BR front or rear, *all* audi torsen chassis can O and U based on 
the right (or wrong) torque allocation (MAJOR conclusion, anyone disagreeing 
*must* correct me here)

Given the above, what can we say about your question?  Irrelevent perhaps?  
Changing the orientation of the driver/steering wheel placement doesn't 
affect either of the two inputs to traction.  Specifically, in order for you 
to make the 'orientation correlation', you would need to make it fit in 1 of 
the 2 inputs to torque allocation arguments above.  I'm not convinced you 
can.  

A possibly more relevent question:  Why isn't there 'proven success' 
documentation with the center device in racing venues, dirt, snow, ice or dry 
pavement?  That is a worldwide AudiSport, (how bout a more general 
motorsports teams = any/all) documented fact.  Why haven't *any* other awd 
teams ever used the device in racing either?

The device part application was not altered do to LHD or RHD per Dave L's 
post.  LHD or RHD don't confuse or improve torsen applications, they don't 
care, it's not an input to torque allocation.

I might propose to you Gary, part of the 'insanity', is due to irrelevency.

Scott Justusson