| [ Total Views: 220794 | Total Replies: 42 | Thread Id: 90413 ] |
| Pages: 1 2 |
|
|
 Ollie
A.k.a.: Ollie Clarke
Insano Dub Head
Yeah Buddy
Posts: 840
Threads: 122
Registered: October 5th, 2009
Member Is Offline
Location: Sydney
Theme: UltimaBB Streamlined2
Mood: Hungry for another 676cc
|
| posted on May 14th, 2011 at 07:45 PM |
|
|
Dear God, what have I started...
|
|
|
amazeer
A.k.a.: Surly Duff
Bishop of Volkswagenism
Posts: 3029
Threads: 387
Registered: November 14th, 2005
Member Is Offline
Location: Wollongong
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: bitter
|
| posted on May 14th, 2011 at 08:45 PM |
|
|
you're just lucky you didnt ask if a 1916 would fit.
|
|
|
Snap Crackle Bang
Seriously Crusin Dubber
Posts: 146
Threads: 9
Registered: August 30th, 2009
Member Is Offline
Location: Fernvale
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
|
| posted on May 15th, 2011 at 12:00 AM |
|
|
Like others have said, AWD is just a marketing term.
First generation Audi quattros had separate driver controlled diff locks for the centre and rear diffs, (the rally cars tended to run without a centre
diff however), which is more hard core than many "real" 4 wheel drives.
Hypothetical question: if you take a Baja and stick a Golf GTi drivetrain in the front to make it twin engine, should we call that AWD or 4wd,........
or just insane?
|
|
|
beetleboyjeff
A.k.a.: Jeff Walsh
Custom Title Time!
Posts: 1779
Threads: 40
Registered: February 13th, 2009
Member Is Online
Location: Port Macquarie
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: Drive bugs hard
|
| posted on May 15th, 2011 at 12:02 AM |
|
|
Maybe a 'bolf', or a 'gug'?
From your ole' mate Jeff
|
|
|
amazeer
A.k.a.: Surly Duff
Bishop of Volkswagenism
Posts: 3029
Threads: 387
Registered: November 14th, 2005
Member Is Offline
Location: Wollongong
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: bitter
|
| posted on May 15th, 2011 at 12:35 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally
posted by Snap Crackle Bang
Hypothetical question: if you take a Baja and stick a Golf GTi drivetrain in the front to make it twin engine, should we call that AWD or 4wd,........
or just insane?
|
Not an altogether original idea. Here's a BMC version. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwxzQf90bcI No centre diff in that baby.
what do I call my lancers? I guess they're not 2WD because they dont go anywhere with one front wheel up in the air. Neither did my kombi when pushed
around corners.
|
|
|
MickH
A.k.a.: Michael Hutchinson
Bishop of Volkswagenism
Hairy Gutted Sloth
Posts: 3389
Threads: 29
Registered: September 6th, 2003
Member Is Offline
Location: TownsvilleTropical North QLD
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: Grow a brain...walls don't hit back...
|
| posted on May 15th, 2011 at 08:11 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally
posted by Ben386
Hmmmm.....not correct. A T25 Syncro is a FULL TIME 4WD,the coupling only changes the amount of torque/power applied to the front differential. To
determin the difference between AWD and 4WD - there IS a big difference- is easy....jack up one back wheel,the car will not drive off if it is a AWD
vehicle, a true 4WD vehicle will drive off powered by the front wheels...
If a VC has gone aggressive then it will drive the front wheels.If it is functioning properly and there is no difference in rear and front wheel speed
then there should be no torque applied to the front,Is this not correct?
|
No. There will be some torque applied at all times,more when its really needed. I should give Stan a ring.....1916 has more power than the 2.1
wasserdripper....
tssnq.com.au
|
|
|
Andy
Son of Jim - Creator of Good
Andy's Adventures
Posts: 2818
Threads: 181
Registered: November 5th, 2002
Member Is Offline
Location: Brisbane
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: Happy Man
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 02:53 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally
posted by grinderman
I was under the impression that an AWD normally receives its power to either the front wheels ( ie; vw transporter,honda crv ) or rear wheels ( ie;
ford territory ) UNTIL WHEEL SLIP IS DETECTED then the power is sent electronically or mechanically (syncro) to the opposite diff.
ohhh it just goes on and on and on.............
|
(removed parts of your quote)
This is how I have always understood it, AWD requires wheel slip before power transfer occurs.
AWD/4WD/4x4 as far as I'm aware has nothing to do with off road capability, simply a drive train principle.
Each can be tailored to the coditions the 'vehicle' is intended to be used in.
AWD in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09ExAUgtyE&NR=1
Incidently MickH, the VW syncro system was used equally in golf's, Passat's and T4 tranporters, and continues on today in the 4-motion. It's the
suspension, ground clearance and diff lock option that determins it's ability in rough conditions, not the drive type.
Here's some more fun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iANXR_ePST4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4lXYqRFLj4&NR=1
|
|
|
Phil74Camper
Son of Jim - Creator of Good
Head in the Clouds
Posts: 2703
Threads: 193
Registered: August 28th, 2002
Member Is Offline
Location: Sydney
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 09:00 AM |
|
|
Interesting posts. There may have been technical differences between '4WD' and 'AWD' in the early days, but as a few people have noted the
differences have become blurred by marketing and nowadays they're probably the same thing in most cases.
* There is no such thing as a VW 'T25' - the 1979-92 third-generation Transporter ('Vanagon' to Americans) is the T3. It comes from confusion with
the 'Model 25' on the VIN, which refers only to the van body. The T3 pickup is a 'Type 24'. BOTH are T3s.
* The previous VW 'syncro' system and the current '4Motion' are not the same thing.
* Both Audi's 'quattro' system and Volkswagen's '4Motion' systems refer to their trademarks, NOT to any particular design or layout. For
example, Volkswagen's transverse engine layouts use a Haldex traction system (eg Golf R, Tiguan, Caddy, T5 Transporter, some Passats), while
longitudinal layouts (older Passat, Phaeton, Amarok) use Torsen centre diffs. The Touareg uses a third design, by Borg Warner. ALL three systems are
called '4Motion'. VW no longer uses the old 'syncro' visous coupling system. Likewise, the original 1981-87 Audi quattro system is totally
different from the current Torsen systems; in fact there have been SIX different 'generations' of quattro design. They only share the 'quattro'
marketing name. To add to the confusion, there has been considerable sharing of systems between VW and Audi, particularly on the Passat, Touareg and
Phaeton models. In all cases, VWs are called '4Motion' and Audis are 'quattro'. Even Skoda and SEAT have shared VW/Audi layouts, with their OWN
names.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quattro_ (four_wheel_drive_system)
I was going to suggest that VW fits 4WD/AWD to the Golf R as it has 195 kW (in Europe) and that may be too much for FWD alone. BUT - the Scirocco R
uses the same motor but is only FWD. Likewise the coming Beetle R will be FWD only (and same 195 kW).
VW made a twin-engine Scirocco prototype in 1981, and used the technology for a Golf Rallye twin-engine race car for Pikes Peak. There are a number of
converters that make twin-engine Golfs today - here's a 600 kW one in South Africa for example:
http://www.cartorque.co.za/0118.htm
| Error |
| Sorry, you must be a registered user in order to download attachments. |
|
|
|
|
Kuchster
A.k.a.: Robert Kuch
Insano Dub Head
Posts: 762
Threads: 182
Registered: September 6th, 2003
Member Is Offline
Location: Sydney
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 09:59 AM |
|
|
I've looked at subaru awd as i was looking to buy an outback and this is how i understand the awd to work.
It is mainly a fwd, however power is applied to both front and back at all times.
when more power is required at the opposite end, it it applied.
there are 2 wheels turning at the same time on the car, never 4.
if bogged, the subaru awd will always spin the stuck wheel and not the easiest wheel such as a commodore open wheel diff will always spin the easiest
so you can never get out of a boggy situation.
Is this the same system for t3 syncro?
|
|
|
azzatron
Seriously Crusin Dubber
Posts: 152
Threads: 21
Registered: February 11th, 2011
Member Is Offline
Location: Sydney
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 03:48 PM |
|
|
Differences between AWD and 4 wheel drive = marketing.
Two different phrases describing the same thing essentially. It's semantics.
The phrases don't describe any fundamental operational difference, as each "system" can be built to replicate the other easily enough. People may
attach technical differences to each system post hoc, but at it's core both labels describe drive going through each wheel. Nothing more than
that.
All wheel drive is marketed at people who like the thought of having a car with "extra" traction and road handling without having to contend with a
jacked up lumbering offroad behemoth. 4 wheel drive is marketed at people who like the feeling that their car can drive through rivers and over
mountains of mud (and people in AWD cars).
|
|
|
pete wood
A.k.a.: figure itout
23 Windows of Awesome
Posts: 6828
Threads: 389
Registered: January 15th, 2004
Member Is Offline
Location: Nth Nth StMarys, Sydney
Theme: UltimaBB Pro White
Mood: upgrades = jackstands
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 11:42 PM |
|
|
AWD = more diffs, more weight, more mechanical resistance and more fuel needed to drive
4WD = even bigger [more] diffs, even more more weight, more resistance to everything (going, stopping and turning), more fuel and... more chance of
rolling over.
What AWD does mostly is encourages people to drive faster on wet days... 
|
|
|
amazeer
A.k.a.: Surly Duff
Bishop of Volkswagenism
Posts: 3029
Threads: 387
Registered: November 14th, 2005
Member Is Offline
Location: Wollongong
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue ( Default )
Mood: bitter
|
| posted on July 6th, 2011 at 11:49 PM |
|
|
awd/4wd teaches people that driving though flooded creek beds is safe and easy.
awd/4wd teaches people going to the snow that chains are for pussies. (a thought sponsored by rule makers)
Much like ABS teaches people that 1 car length gap is plenty.
|
|
|
donn
Wolfsburg Elder
Posts: 3515
Threads: 428
Registered: November 30th, 2005
Member Is Offline
Location: NEWCASTLE NSW
Theme: UltimaBB Pro Blue
Mood: LAID BACK AND CONFUSED
|
| posted on July 7th, 2011 at 09:45 AM |
|
|
| Quote: | Originally
posted by pete wood
AWD = more diffs, more weight, more mechanical resistance and more fuel needed to drive
4WD = even bigger [more] diffs, even more more weight, more resistance to everything (going, stopping and turning), more fuel and... more chance of
rolling over.
What AWD does mostly is encourages people to drive faster on wet days...
|
Glad you said "mostly" when driving my Forester I have no urge to drive faster just because it is AWD, however I did find out when entering a
roundabout on a wet road that the AWD definatly saved me from having a problem when the clown in the other lane tryed to take over my spot on the
road, any "normal" 2WD (rear) would have given me some real drama. 
awd/4wd teaches people that driving though flooded creek beds is safe and easy.
awd/4wd teaches people going to the snow that chains are for pussies. (a thought sponsored by rule makers)
Much like ABS teaches people that 1 car length gap is plenty.
Hmmm I do wonder where these ideas come from, no way it can teach you that something that is not safe IS safe, it may lead fools into THINKING it's
safe but they would soon find out differently.
Chains? well AWD would make the going easyer but lets drive to the conditions and if chains are required then on they go, simple.
One car gap is heaps, if your parked.
I dream of a day when a chicken can cross a road without being asked for it's motive!
|
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 |
