Variable F/R torque split (to 50/50) idea

Ok, this maybe an insane idea but call this brainstorming

There is a company called Haldex (part of BorgWarner) that make compact electronically variable clutch units.

They look/work like this (this is a recent gen 5 unit):


How its used on an Audi TT:


They mainly get used in Audi's and look like this (this is an Audi TT unit):


When combined with a rear diff it looks like this (also from an Audi TT):


I hope you guys can see what im thinking here...
We lock up the viscous center in the transfer case so there is always a 50:50 split of torque to the front axles and to the rear drive-shaft.
We then adapt a haldex unit in front of our rear diff, or use a full diff from something like an Audi TT.

We would then have an electronically controlled variable 100F/0R to 50F/50R torque split.
Obviously moving more power to the rear than 50/50 would be nice, but its not possible without using a different gearbox.

Im unsure yet how the haldex units are controlled, but it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with a controller for it.

Thoughts?

There is also the possiblity of using a much more advanced unit like:


... but i think that might be taking it too far.
The control system required is probably out of the range of DIY.

Why would you want to do this?

Because the viscous center diff's we have are far from ideal for high performance applications.
They were ok back in the early 90's, but they are VERY outdated today.
If you need to ask why, you should be looking at some older threads like: viewtopic.php?f=43&t=37969

Can we please not start a debate about viscous centers or 4wd vs all-wheel-drive vs rear-assisted-drive in here! There are plenty of old threads on those topics.

There is a great tech doc here about how the Haldex unit works in a VW 4MOTION equipt car:
http://admin.audionlinetraining.com/Upl ... n%20IV.pdf

So from what I'm gathering here this basically allows slip before the rear diff, reducing the power that goes to the rear end? Wouldn't this make it more 50/0 than 100/0?

If you were going to do this I would say mating it to the front of our rear diff would be easier than trying to cram an Audi rear diff into our subframe and try to make some funky axles. But that begs the question, why would you want to reduce the power going to the rear wheels? It sounds like Audi would be using this to make a normally FWD car up to 50/50 if needed.

Unless you add a front LSD, I don't see how this system is an improvement over stock. Unless you can find a way to take power from the front and have a rear bias, you will always need to resolve the open front LSD.

underscore":1d7ytg1h said:

So from what I'm gathering here this basically allows slip before the rear diff, reducing the power that goes to the rear end? Wouldn't this make it more 50/0 than 100/0?

Click to expand...

No.
When its fully unlocked, youll get 100% FWD and 0% RWD.
When its fully locked you get 50% FWD and 50% RWD.

Before you start thinking this is worse than the viscous center diff... it is not, its far better (more below).

If you were going to do this I would say mating it to the front of our rear diff would be easier than trying to cram an Audi rear diff into our subframe and try to make some funky axles.

Click to expand...

Yeah, agreed. Or it could be put on the end of the gearbox transfer case.

But that begs the question, why would you want to reduce the power going to the rear wheels?

Click to expand...

Because you have to... you cant have a solid 50/50 torque split.
There has to be some way of the front wheels being able to spin at a different speed to the rear to allow for cornering, slightly different wheel sizes, etc.
This is why the viscous center (and all diff's for that matter) is there.

A haldex unit would take the place (not physically, but operationally) of the viscous center.
It has the advantage over the viscous center of being able to completely lock up when the front wheels start to spin.
The viscous center doesnt do this. It slowly transfers more torque to the rear as there is more slip. There is also a limit to how much torque it can transfer, as they age, or you increase engine power, you may only be getting say 20% of torque to the rear wheels.

CMS-GT4":2xaby4rn said:

Unless you add a front LSD, I don't see how this system is an improvement over stock. Unless you can find a way to take power from the front and have a rear bias, you will always need to resolve the open front diff.

Click to expand...

If you transfer more torque to the rear wheels, there will be less power to spin up one of the front wheels.

Even with an open front diff, it'll still be far better than the 4WD system we have at the moment.

BTW, if you want to do a quick test...
Jack up the front of your Alltrac/GT4, and leave the rear wheels on the ground (chock them!!).
Get in the driver seat, start the car and put it in 1st gear. Very slowly let out the clutch.

Youll probably find youll spin up both front wheels no problem, while the rears dont turn.
This is the viscous center not transferring torque to the rear wheels like it ideally should be.
If the viscous center was giving you a proper 50/50 F/R torque split, you would either stall the engine, or the rear wheels would drive over the chocks.

Using the haldex unit, you would get that true 50/50 split.
It would would either stall the engine, or the rear wheels would drive over the chocks as a good 4WD system should do.

We have already done this test, and examined this operation in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=45503

Unless your VC is shot, the car should operate at 50/50 split all the time. There is some give in there because if it was a locked system all the time it would bind and eventually something would break. The same reason you can't drive the early manual locking version at high speeds or all the time. The locking mechanism is only designed to act when there is a difference in front to rear speed.

If you watch video 3 of the series it will explain to you fully how the power split operation in our cars actually work and how they operate in slip and driving conditions. The first 2 videos covers the original manual locking system.

You can try this if you want, but I really think for the money and effort you would be better off trying to just swap an awd gearbox with a proper LSD system already. Most likely what will happen is if you permanently lock the VC section, you will likely bind something if and when power gets transferred to the rear at high speeds or at a long period of time. From what I have looked at, the EVO boxes are the closest match, and one gtfour uses an aftermarket evo gearbox already.

I was looking at a gearbox and transfer that was pulled out of a 185 this weekend because we thought we might be able to adapt a transfer case from another car to give us better options, but sadly the diffs are in the gearbox and just the VC is in the transfer, so that rules that out.

I think more interesting research could be done into the Porsche that uses VC in its awd system as it has a rear bias. I have talked to a few mechanics and no one really understands how this works since the VC is supposed to prevent difference in speeds, but there must be a way to mimic this mechanical system in that way.
http://www.awdwiki.com/en/porsche/

EDIT: After reading this, I think even trying to change the bias might be far harder than I could want to attempt. http://www.stealth316.com/2-awd3.htm

MWP":2s2qj8qe said:

There is also a limit to how much torque it can transfer, as they age, or you increase engine power, you may only be getting say 20% of torque to the rear wheels.

Click to expand...

If this is your concern, I'd suggest getting one of the upgraded units from Mario. Otherwise as far as I can tell you're doing a lot of work for basically the same system we have now.

CMS-GT4":2z08m4dy said:

Unless your VC is shot, the car should operate at 50/50 split all the time. There is some give in there because if it was a locked system all the time it would bind and eventually something would break. The same reason you can't drive the early manual locking version at high speeds or all the time. The locking mechanism is only designed to act when there is a difference in front to rear speed.

Click to expand...

Our viscous centers never "lock".
There is always some slip in between the viscous plates, which increases as they wear (which they do), or as you increase torque loading (they can only transfer so much torque before they slip).
Our viscous centers "try" to produce a 50/50 split, but they never actually do it unless you are on a rather slippery surface.

The VC centers when brand new were only designed to transfer a max of XX ft/lb of torque.
Dont ask me what that figure is, but it wouldn't be much more than 50% of what the factory engine is capable of producing.
Above this value they do slip.
This is why rally teams and the units Mario modify have a higher torque rating, but its still not high enough for even a modestly modified 3SGTE engine.

Its not a problem on loose surfaces as the VC can easily transfer enough torque to spin the rear wheels as well.
On sticky surfaces (tarmac) with a powerful engine, its a very different story.

You can try this if you want, but I really think for the money and effort you would be better off trying to just swap an awd gearbox with a proper LSD system already. Most likely what will happen is if you permanently lock the VC section, you will likely bind something if and when power gets transferred to the rear at high speeds or at a long period of time. From what I have looked at, the EVO boxes are the closest match, and one gtfour uses an aftermarket evo gearbox already.

Click to expand...

At a cost of?
Locking up our VC, and using a Haldex unit will be *far* cheaper.

I think more interesting research could be done into the Porsche that uses VC in its awd system as it has a rear bias. I have talked to a few mechanics and no one really understands how this works since the VC is supposed to prevent difference in speeds, but there must be a way to mimic this mechanical system in that way.
http://www.awdwiki.com/en/porsche/

Click to expand...

They do it by having a hard link to the rear diff, and using a clutch system to change how much is transferred to the front (the exact reverse of how our gearbox/diffs are setup).
There is no mystical voodoo involved, and many other cars with rear bias do it the same way.

EDIT: After reading this, I think even trying to change the bias might be far harder than I could want to attempt. http://www.stealth316.com/2-awd3.htm

Click to expand...

We'll never be able to change to rear bias without using a completely different gearbox/diff. Its just not possible.
We can however make the best of the gearbox we have which is what this thread is about.

underscore":2z08m4dy said:

MWP":2z08m4dy said:

There is also a limit to how much torque it can transfer, as they age, or you increase engine power, you may only be getting say 20% of torque to the rear wheels.

Click to expand...

If this is your concern, I'd suggest getting one of the upgraded units from Mario. Otherwise as far as I can tell you're doing a lot of work for basically the same system we have now.

Click to expand...

As i said, it still wont be as good a Haldex unit.

The other big plus about a Haldex system is its electronically tunable.
At the drag strip for example, you could flick a switch and set the Haldex unit to full lock before you even get to the line.
Youll then get a proper hard 50/50 torque split from the moment you drop the clutch. It'll shave a decent amount off the 60ft time.

There is a very good reason why viscous centers arent used that much anymore, and active clutched systems like the Haldex are popular.
They simply work much better at giving the rear wheels more torque, and quicker.
Why would manufacturers install a more complex, more expensive system otherwise

I want to make sure we are all on the same page here...

For a standard open differential (Front, Rear, Center, whatever) - there is ALWAYS a 50/50 torque split. When one output side of the differential spins and 'loses' torque, the the other output shaft loses the same amount. Hopefully we can agree on that one.

A fully locked differential (well, that's not a differential now, is it?) - is anywhere from a 100:0 to 0:100 split - whatever output side is going at a slower rate gets 100% of the torque.

Fun video:
http://www.awdwiki.com/en/videoviscous/

As for a viscous center - it is good for safety (getting out of low traction situations), but not the best for performance. A well designed one should be able to transfer a large amount of torque, though not instantaneously or preemptively... Keep in mind that video above though - VC units can easily be ruined by abuse or age/wear.

In a perfect world for my uses though, I'd want a viscous center and F/R torsen diffs. I'm not 100% about performance though - street-ability is high on my list too.

-Charlie

I have a haldex gen 3 in my S60R. Now, I know they've come a long way in improving them since 2005 but its not a very good AWD system at all. The alltrac stock system is much better.

The selling point for the Haldex system was always its compact size and ease of use. It made it very easy for manufactures to convert FWD into AWD platforms.

Look at the vehicles that employ this system, they are either not high performance cars, or they are factory hotrod variants of FWD vehicles.

This is not something to waste your time or effort on.

mx6er2587":3ayf88ii said:

The selling point for the Haldex system was always its compact size and ease of use. It made it very easy for manufactures to convert FWD into AWD platforms.
Look at the vehicles that employ this system, they are either not high performance cars, or they are factory hotrod variants of FWD vehicles.

Click to expand...

The Haldex units are just a electronically controlled clutch packs. How you use them and how they are controlled makes the difference.
If its not working as well as you would like on your Volvo, its because Volvo set it up that way.

The Haldex clutch pack systems are used in VW/Audi and other high-end sport & super cars (Lamborghini's and the Veyron too).

This is a great simple diagram of what i would achieve by making the mods:

Check the list of vehicles that use Haldex. I"ll highlight a few for you:

VW Golf R
Audi S3
Ford Taurus
Saab 9-3 XWD
Volvo S60R
Mazdaspeed 6

Notice the pattern? Hot AWD versions of FWD cars.

The only two true performance vehicles are mid engine rwd drive cars using the system for a little front wheel traction. Do some digging around forums of haldex equipped vehicles. You'll change your mind pretty quick.

And yes I understand how the system works. but thanks anyway for the diagram.

Actually, it funny you say "Hot AWD versions of FWD cars", because thats what a Celica AllTrac/GT4 is

So you are telling me all the Audi RSx cars aren't very good? They are all front engined 4WD haldex systems.
I would happily forget everything to do with Toyotas & Celicas (all ive ever owned) to have a Audi RS4.

Audi TT RS? I dont believe there is a FWD version of that.

Nissan GTR uses electronic clutches to move power around, as does the Mitsu EvoX and Subrau WRX STIs with DCCD.

WRC Corollas (based on ST205 drivetrain) had front & center electronically controlled clutch diffs.

Again, its not the clutches themselves that make the difference, its how they are used.

I normally dont post here, but now I had to.
MWP have a look at our drivetrain and the last picture of the haldex.
The haldex system drives the driveshaft to rhe rear haldexdiff stright out of the gearbox. Here we have a open diff with a viscouse lsd added.
What will happen when you add a haldex unit in the rear is this:
When haldex is locked it will be just like the haldex was not there. A solid transfer of power between the front and rear end of the propeller shaft. Just like on our stock drivetrain.
When haldex is not engaged it will be as if you cut the propellershaft in two or just took it of the car. This would result in a overworked viscouse lsd and not much power to the front wheels. Remember our open centerdiff wich the haldex systems dont have.

If it was to work you would have to "weld/lock" the center diff somehow.

Sorry about my bad spelling.