Author |
Message |
Waldi Samba Member
Joined: February 28, 2014 Posts: 1752 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:43 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Do you have a VC test bench in USA at all ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IdahoDoug Samba Member
Joined: June 12, 2010 Posts: 10251 Location: N. Idaho
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:48 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Hellenic,
So did you miss the part on the Porsche 993 system where they had to "make the rear tires slightly smaller in order to transfer torque to the front wheels all the time". Doing that achieved only a "5-15%" transfer. So applying logic to that statement, if the tires are the same size on the rear, it exposes a weakness of using a VC to transfer torque from the slower rotating rears exactly as I stated.
If the rears "slip all the time" then Porsche would not have had to do that. So do a simple power to weight ratio calculation on the Porsche 993 vs the Vanagon Syncro and you will see that with the Porsche's massive power the engineers were not seeing the rear tires slip all the time to activate their VC to the fronts. So they did something to fix that, (which was using different size tires).
So if they had trouble getting rear wheel slip with a lot of power and less weight on the drive wheels, do you think there's a teensy, weensy little possibility that the heavier, incredibly low powered 95hp Vanagon has an even greater problem transferring torque to the front tires?
Doug _________________ 1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader |
|
Back to top |
|
|
raoul mitgong Samba Member
Joined: July 05, 2009 Posts: 1338 Location: Denver, CO
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:13 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
hellenic vanagon wrote: |
It seems that documents like this:
have no validity for some persons here...
After that I quit.
Thank you for your time. |
If you browser is like mine and can't translate pictures:
Heckantrieb = rear drive
Allradantrieb = all wheel drive
Lenkwinkel = steering angle
Querbeschleunigung = lateral acceleration
EDIT: The Y axis is really confusing me. Is this steering wheel rotation? Front tire angle doesn't make sense. Perhaps more coffee and another think. Hellenic, any help on context translation for us? My browser doesn't translate PDFs either.
-d _________________ 84 Westy with a 2.1 (Groover)
86 Tintop Syncro (Crow)
86 Tintop Syncro to Westy project (Tom Servo)
91 Westy (Only the top 12 inches of this van (a burn victim)) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:35 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
IdahoDoug wrote: |
Hellenic,
So did you miss the part on the Porsche 993 system where they had to "make the rear tires slightly smaller in order to transfer torque to the front wheels all the time". Doing that achieved only a "5-15%" transfer. So applying logic to that statement, if the tires are the same size on the rear, it exposes a weakness of using a VC to transfer torque from the slower rotating rears exactly as I stated.
If the rears "slip all the time" then Porsche would not have had to do that. So do a simple power to weight ratio calculation on the Porsche 993 vs the Vanagon Syncro and you will see that with the Porsche's massive power the engineers were not seeing the rear tires slip all the time to activate their VC to the fronts. So they did something to fix that, (which was using different size tires).
So if they had trouble getting rear wheel slip with a lot of power and less weight on the drive wheels, do you think there's a teensy, weensy little possibility that the heavier, incredibly low powered 95hp Vanagon has an even greater problem transferring torque to the front tires?
Doug |
This difference, in fact, is so minuscule that the tire calculators cannot count!
These are the official tire dimensions for the Porsche 993, (front-rear):
In reality, any difference more than 1% is not accepted, according to vw,
but this is a general rule, I suppose.
S.A.E. paper mentions a 3mm difference between the front vs the rear is safe, and the system remains operable, since this difference is created to the transaxle, due to wear, make it to turn faster.
Here you can find a case study about:
http://www.vwsyncro.eu/p/blog-page_442.html
Last edited by hellenic vanagon on Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:57 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
raoul mitgong Samba Member
Joined: July 05, 2009 Posts: 1338 Location: Denver, CO
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:42 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Waldi wrote:
Quote: |
With over 200k miles without decoupler your VC is way off the specs. If you are lucky it is softer due to gear oil inside. |
I believe I am lucky then (not failed locked or open). If I do have gear oil in the VC (and I believe you as you have hands on experience like few others) it is still doing a very good job in snow (see video) and I have no problem driving around modern SUVs stuck on I-70 without spinning a tire. Perhaps I just buy better and appropriate tires.
My project van has about 80k on its VC if the PO is to be believed. Can't wait to compare.
-d _________________ 84 Westy with a 2.1 (Groover)
86 Tintop Syncro (Crow)
86 Tintop Syncro to Westy project (Tom Servo)
91 Westy (Only the top 12 inches of this van (a burn victim)) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Waldi Samba Member
Joined: February 28, 2014 Posts: 1752 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:01 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
IdahoDoug wrote: |
Hellenic,
So did you miss the part on the Porsche 993 system where they had to "make the rear tires slightly smaller in order to transfer torque to the front wheels all the time". Doing that achieved only a "5-15%" transfer. So applying logic to that statement, if the tires are the same size on the rear, it exposes a weakness of using a VC to transfer torque from the slower rotating rears exactly as I stated.
If the rears "slip all the time" then Porsche would not have had to do that. So do a simple power to weight ratio calculation on the Porsche 993 vs the Vanagon Syncro and you will see that with the Porsche's massive power the engineers were not seeing the rear tires slip all the time to activate their VC to the fronts. So they did something to fix that, (which was using different size tires).
So if they had trouble getting rear wheel slip with a lot of power and less weight on the drive wheels, do you think there's a teensy, weensy little possibility that the heavier, incredibly low powered 95hp Vanagon has an even greater problem transferring torque to the front tires?
Doug |
ID you have a major problem with physics !
If the tires would not slip all the time, they would not push the car forward. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gears Samba Member
Joined: October 28, 2002 Posts: 4391 Location: Tamarack, Bend, Kailua
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:20 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Quote: |
.. I put in a rebuilt VC (German transaxle in bend, I think).. |
Yes, German Transaxle does the majority of VC rebuilds in the U.S., and they bench test breakaway torque on each unit.
As a total aside to the discussion (which I definitely don't wish to derail), is anyone familiar with which marque opted for a slightly different front R&P ratio, for off-road 4WD use only? _________________ aka Pablo, Geary
9.36 @ 146 in '86 Hot & Sticky
'90 Syncro Westy SVX
'87 Syncro GL 2.5
https://guardtransaxle.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
raoul mitgong Samba Member
Joined: July 05, 2009 Posts: 1338 Location: Denver, CO
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
hellenic vanagon wrote: |
IdahoDoug wrote: |
Hellenic,
So did you miss the part on the Porsche 993 system where they had to "make the rear tires slightly smaller in order to transfer torque to the front wheels all the time". Doing that achieved only a "5-15%" transfer. So applying logic to that statement, if the tires are the same size on the rear, it exposes a weakness of using a VC to transfer torque from the slower rotating rears exactly as I stated.
If the rears "slip all the time" then Porsche would not have had to do that. So do a simple power to weight ratio calculation on the Porsche 993 vs the Vanagon Syncro and you will see that with the Porsche's massive power the engineers were not seeing the rear tires slip all the time to activate their VC to the fronts. So they did something to fix that, (which was using different size tires).
So if they had trouble getting rear wheel slip with a lot of power and less weight on the drive wheels, do you think there's a teensy, weensy little possibility that the heavier, incredibly low powered 95hp Vanagon has an even greater problem transferring torque to the front tires?
Doug |
This difference, in fact, is so minuscule that the tire calculators cannot count!
These are the official tire dimensions for the Porsche 993, (front-rear):
In reality, any difference more than 1% is not accepted, according to vw,
but this is a general rule, I suppose.
S.A.E. paper mentions a 3mm difference between the front vs the rear is safe, and the system remains operable, since this difference is created to the transaxle, due to wear, make it to turn faster.
Here you can find a case study about:
http://www.vwsyncro.eu/p/blog-page_442.html |
For perspective, that tire difference is equal to about 1/32" more wear on the rear tires.
My 5 wheel rotation puts always puts my spare (theoretically lowest milage) on my front left. Most 5 wheel rotation schedules I've seen sends the spare to the rear.
-d _________________ 84 Westy with a 2.1 (Groover)
86 Tintop Syncro (Crow)
86 Tintop Syncro to Westy project (Tom Servo)
91 Westy (Only the top 12 inches of this van (a burn victim)) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:52 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
For perspective, that tire difference is equal to about 1/32" more wear on the rear tires.
My 5 wheel rotation puts always puts my spare (theoretically lowest milage) on my front left. Most 5 wheel rotation schedules I've seen sends the spare to the rear.
-d[/quote]
In my archives I found these two diagrams for tire rotation:
Without spare tire:
With two spare tires:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:56 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
raoul mitgong wrote: |
hellenic vanagon wrote: |
It seems that documents like this:
have no validity for some persons here...
After that I quit.
Thank you for your time. |
If you browser is like mine and can't translate pictures:
Heckantrieb = rear drive
Allradantrieb = all wheel drive
Lenkwinkel = steering angle
Querbeschleunigung = lateral acceleration
EDIT: The Y axis is really confusing me. Is this steering wheel rotation? Front tire angle doesn't make sense. Perhaps more coffee and another think. Hellenic, any help on context translation for us? My browser doesn't translate PDFs either.
-d |
Please give me some time. I am working on this.
Thank you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IdahoDoug Samba Member
Joined: June 12, 2010 Posts: 10251 Location: N. Idaho
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:03 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Hellenistic - So, Porsche went to the trouble with all that rear wheel power/wheelspin to specify tires that are 1% smaller in diameter (and naturally that % increases with tire wear to make the system engage more over time) to achieve front tire torque for a road system? And you believe the Vanagon WITHOUT that power and without that tire diameter difference transfers torque to the front tires all the time?
Waldi - I am quite familiar with contact patch dynamics, having studied it. There is no traction without torque applied. There is no torque applied or traction generated without slippage. However, its worth pointing out that a tire achieves that "slippage" during the phase of the front of the contact patch becoming the rear of the contact patch as the tire rolls and the rubber stretches and tread "squirms" which is a stretching/rebounding effect. It is largely the tension through the contact patch from front to rear that achieves this, and the VC doesn't "see" that. The idea that the tires only achieve this tractive effort by the axle spinning against the ground is false, and we should discuss how that "traction" happens. There is some of that (which the VC would "feel") but not much in ordinary driving around levels of torque. To change the ratio of traction achieved through tension into outright wheelspin you have to apply enough power to put the tire into "breakaway" mode through the entire contact patch. I have studied high speed photography of tire contact patches under engine torque and braking torque, driven the cars over the glass plates in the track, etc. There is tension and stretching and rebounding through the contact patch in 3 general phases. This is what makes the rubber tire such an amazing engineered product actually. It's a great conversation and a cool topic to discuss.
General:
My main point here is that if Porsche saw a VC with equal size tires in a powerful rear engined, RWD car as needing the "help" of smaller rear tires to be effective for a road system, it should send a message to the folks that think the VC is "always sending torque to the front tires" on a Vanagon on the road. If we did further research on the Porsche VC, I suspect we would also find that Porsche designed it to be much more sensitive than VW in order to raise its sensitivity to transfer torque appropriate to a road oriented performance enhancing system. Likely different fluid viscosity, likely different plate shape, number and orientation, and likely other factors. I'd also be curious if they built in some type of "one way" declutch feature so it does not cause the front tire braking of binding, etc? I cannot imagine Porsche engineers would tolerate parking binding and the negative aspects of other binding while driving.
We can split hairs on tire size and other things but the Vanagon was designed with a slipping VC clutch that is largely inactive until enough rear wheel spin happens to engage it. It was designed as a simple, low cost item to engage the front wheels on low traction surfaces with significant wheelspin - snow, offroad, etc. It was not designed, to provide constant power to the fronts on the road and enhance handling and performance with all 4 contact patches pulling. That type of performance is achieved with a center differential vehicle like a Quattro or in modern times with electronics. Or, in our example above with the Porsche VC system - likely with a completely different VC response characteristic.
Because the Vanagon VC system was designed as a low cost way of achieving power to the front wheels on a van to achieve some rough terrain and slippery surface mobility, there are some negatives in the other end of the spectrum such as road performance. Among them are undesirable front wheel braking on curves (very undesirable on ice when turning), lower fuel economy, binding while parking and a shorter life than a mechanical differential.
I think that's what Jon and I have been saying for some time. Its a great system but I feel the "benefits" have been exaggerated through misunderstanding of the forces at work, and the operation of the VC itself. Speaking for myself, I would enjoy seeing the discussion focus on data and facts and less on "The Syncro VC is perfect in every way and makes the Syncro outperform all other systems under all conditions and even though it was designed for X, it also does Y."
Doug _________________ 1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader
Last edited by IdahoDoug on Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:14 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:10 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
raoul mitgong wrote: |
hellenic vanagon wrote: |
It seems that documents like this:
have no validity for some persons here...
After that I quit.
Thank you for your time. |
If you browser is like mine and can't translate pictures:
Heckantrieb = rear drive
Allradantrieb = all wheel drive
Lenkwinkel = steering angle
Querbeschleunigung = lateral acceleration
EDIT: The Y axis is really confusing me. Is this steering wheel rotation? Front tire angle doesn't make sense. Perhaps more coffee and another think. Hellenic, any help on context translation for us? My browser doesn't translate PDFs either.
-d |
So it is degrees. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:15 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
IdahoDoug wrote: |
Hellenistic - So, Porsche went to the trouble with all that rear wheel power/wheelspin to specify tires that are 1% smaller in diameter (and naturally that % increases with tire wear to make the system engage more over time) to achieve front tire torque for a road system? And you believe the Vanagon WITHOUT that power and without that tire diameter difference transfers torque to the front tires all the time?
Waldi - I am quite familiar with contact patch dynamics, having studied it. There is no traction without torque applied. There is no torque applied or traction generated without slippage. However, its worth pointing out that a tire achieves that "slippage" during the phase of the front of the contact patch becoming the rear of the contact patch as the tire rolls and the rubber stretches and tread "squirms" which is a stretching/rebounding effect. It is largely the tension through the contact patch from front to rear that achieves this, and the VC doesn't "see" that. The idea that the tires only achieve this tractive effort by the axle spinning against the ground is false, and we should discuss how that "traction" happens. There is some of that (which the VC would "feel") but not much in ordinary driving around levels of torque. To change the ratio of traction achieved through tension into outright wheelspin you have to apply enough power to put the tire into "breakaway" mode through the entire contact patch. I have studied high speed photography of tire contact patches under engine torque and braking torque, driven the cars over the glass plates in the track, etc. There is tension and stretching and rebounding through the contact patch in 3 general phases. This is what makes the rubber tire such an amazing engineered product actually. It's a great conversation and a cool topic to discuss.
General:
My main point here is that if Porsche saw a VC with equal size tires in a powerful rear engined, RWD car as needing the "help" of smaller rear tires to be effective for a road system, it should send a message to the folks that think the VC is "always sending torque to the front tires" on a Vanagon on the road. If we did further research on the Porsche VC, I suspect we would also find that Porsche designed it to be much more sensitive than VW in order to raise its sensitivity to transfer torque appropriate to a road oriented performance enhancing system. Likely different fluid viscosity, likely different plate shape, number and orientation, and likely other factors. I'd also be curious if they built in some type of "one way" declutch feature so it does not cause the front tire braking of binding, etc? I cannot imagine Porsche engineers would tolerate parking binding and the negative aspects of other binding while driving.
We can split hairs on tire size and other things but the Vanagon was designed with a slipping VC clutch that is largely inactive until enough rear wheel spin happens to engage it. It was designed as a simple, low cost item to engage the rear wheels on low traction surfaces with significant wheelspin - snow, offroad, etc. It was not designed, to provide constant power to the fronts on the road and enhance handling and performance with all 4 contact patches pulling. That type of performance is achieved with a center differential vehicle like a Quattro or in modern times with electronics. Or, in our example above with the Porsche VC system - likely with a completely different VC response characteristic.
Because the Vanagon VC system was designed as a low cost way of achieving power to the front wheels on a van to achieve some rough terrain and slippery surface mobility, there are some negatives in the other end of the spectrum such as road performance. Among them are undesirable front wheel braking on curves (very undesirable on ice when turning), lower fuel economy, binding while parking and a shorter life than a mechanical differential.
I think that's what Jon and I have been saying for some time. Its a great system but I feel the "benefits" have been exaggerated through misunderstanding of the forces at work, and the operation of the VC itself. Speaking for myself, I would enjoy seeing the discussion focus on data and facts and less on "The Syncro VC is perfect in every way and makes the Syncro outperform all other systems under all conditions and even though it was designed for X, it also does Y."
Doug |
Your conclusions are against both: theory and practice. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
raoul mitgong Samba Member
Joined: July 05, 2009 Posts: 1338 Location: Denver, CO
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:27 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
My steering wheel at 400 degrees makes for a very tight turn. A 0.5 g turn at a full steering wheel rotation? Doughnuts?
EDIT: So a 4wd/AWD (not sure which in that graph) is creating more g's than a rear wheel drive at the same steering wheel rotation. Is this the same vehicle just coupled/uncoupled?
-d _________________ 84 Westy with a 2.1 (Groover)
86 Tintop Syncro (Crow)
86 Tintop Syncro to Westy project (Tom Servo)
91 Westy (Only the top 12 inches of this van (a burn victim))
Last edited by raoul mitgong on Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Waldi Samba Member
Joined: February 28, 2014 Posts: 1752 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:33 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
IdahoDoug wrote: |
...
Doug |
ID please reread the last 20 side post about Syncro VC and AWD ability.
There you have formulas, dates, and everything you need to understand.
Looks like you and some others realy need 20 sides every year to capice what we are talking about.
Thats nothing of bad.
If somebody trys to explain to me how life comes from atoms and moleküls, i am also alot behind
Last edited by Waldi on Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IdahoDoug Samba Member
Joined: June 12, 2010 Posts: 10251 Location: N. Idaho
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:37 am Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
R - Yeah I was wondering about that as well. We used either steering wheel angle or tire/wheel angle. I'm also wondering as mentioned earlier about the vehicle, the surface, and a bunch of other stuff and what the graph points are as it says at the bottom something about the rear wheels. Hopefully we'll figure it out - no worries. Still lots to talk about.
Doug _________________ 1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Merian Samba Member
Joined: January 04, 2014 Posts: 5212 Location: Orygun
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:10 pm Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
this thread is a good advertisement for electric wheel hub motors... _________________ .... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hellenic vanagon Samba Member
Joined: December 28, 2007 Posts: 283 Location: ATHENS GREECE
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:21 pm Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
raoul mitgong wrote: |
My steering wheel at 400 degrees makes for a very tight turn. A 0.5 g turn at a full steering wheel rotation? Doughnuts?
EDIT: So a 4wd/AWD (not sure which in that graph) is creating more g's than a rear wheel drive at the same steering wheel rotation. Is this the same vehicle just coupled/uncoupled?
-d |
No it isn't...400°
Ιt is, just, 40°...
Compares a 2wd Syncro to a Visco 4wd Syncro.
(It is from the Syncro white paper).
I gave you and the link but anybody is talking as if I haven't. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IdahoDoug Samba Member
Joined: June 12, 2010 Posts: 10251 Location: N. Idaho
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:46 pm Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
I looked through the Peschke white SAE paper you linked and could not find that graph. No worries, just curious about the background and don't want to derail the discussion.... _________________ 1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jon_slider Samba Member
Joined: April 11, 2007 Posts: 5091 Location: Santa Cruz, Crowdifornia
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:59 pm Post subject: Re: Syncro “AWD” Capabilty |
|
|
Waldi wrote: |
Now the question, how many of yue have ever driven a new tested within VW specs VC ? |
I have. It scrubbed when parking. So I added a decoupler. I liked how it handled on dry pavement curves decoupled, better than coupled.
WLD*WSTY wrote: |
Quite a few cars use or have used viscous couplers. |
true,
There is a difference between using a VC by itself, as in a syncro, or using a VC in combination with a Center Differential.
My factual takeaway from these discussions:
1. A VC has One output.
2. A Center Differential has Two outputs.
3. A Syncro has a VC, but no Center Differential. _________________ My Soapboxes: Inflation; Handling; Gearing; Decoupling; Swepco
Last edited by Jon_slider on Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:37 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|