i brought this up before about acd...
Sep 9, 2005, 04:18 PM
#16
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Boltz.
^ not enough difference in weight to be able to actually tell. Also, an extra 40 pounds isn't going to anything for understeer, the car just doesnt like to rotate like the evo.
There are 2 big reasons the EVO outhandles the STI stock.
1) tires are better
2) camber is more aggressive (really helps with understeer)
The sti also requires a different driving style you have to start turning the car while braking earlier to actually get the rear to slide enough not to understeer hardcore.
And for the record, subarus do have better AWD systems than the evo's.
There are 2 big reasons the EVO outhandles the STI stock.
1) tires are better
2) camber is more aggressive (really helps with understeer)
The sti also requires a different driving style you have to start turning the car while braking earlier to actually get the rear to slide enough not to understeer hardcore.
And for the record, subarus do have better AWD systems than the evo's.
Sep 9, 2005, 07:14 PM
#17
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast US
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Boltz.
And for the record, subarus do have better AWD systems than the evo's.
If you want the details of why the Evo's ACD is superior to the Subaru DCCD, see:
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...001/13E_09.pdf
Sep 9, 2005, 08:01 PM
#18
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewgene OR
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And here's the quote that answers the question: "....better directional response can be realized by employing a differential-limiting device with controllable torque-transmission characteristics and preventing it from limiting the speed difference {between front and rear tires} at the start of cornering maneuvers..."
Basically the torque split should be 50:50 for best traction.
A locked differential provides great traction but crappy turn-in.
The ACD is 50:50 torque split almost all the time, but unlocks the center differential when turn-in starts (at the most basic level); the rate of unlocking depends on various sensor inputs. One might construe this to be a 100:0 torque split at times, but those times are when there is little or no torque applied by the engine anyway. Most of the time it's somewhere in between or 50:50 unless you do slaloms while cruising at a set speed.
My understanding of the Subaru is that it is always locked, but varies the torque split depending on circumstances. Leading to better stability in some circumstances but not as good turn-in (read: understeer) because the front tires can never turn faster than the rear tires. Plus their suspension seems way softer
.
Just my take on the situation. Based on the above article and a few others.
Basically the torque split should be 50:50 for best traction.
A locked differential provides great traction but crappy turn-in.
The ACD is 50:50 torque split almost all the time, but unlocks the center differential when turn-in starts (at the most basic level); the rate of unlocking depends on various sensor inputs. One might construe this to be a 100:0 torque split at times, but those times are when there is little or no torque applied by the engine anyway. Most of the time it's somewhere in between or 50:50 unless you do slaloms while cruising at a set speed.
My understanding of the Subaru is that it is always locked, but varies the torque split depending on circumstances. Leading to better stability in some circumstances but not as good turn-in (read: understeer) because the front tires can never turn faster than the rear tires. Plus their suspension seems way softer
.Just my take on the situation. Based on the above article and a few others.
Last edited by Impulsoren; Sep 9, 2005 at 08:06 PM.
Sep 9, 2005, 08:08 PM
#19
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Harbor City
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Boltz.
^ not enough difference in weight to be able to actually tell. Also, an extra 40 pounds isn't going to anything for understeer, the car just doesnt like to rotate like the evo.
There are 2 big reasons the EVO outhandles the STI stock.
1) tires are better
2) camber is more aggressive (really helps with understeer)
The sti also requires a different driving style you have to start turning the car while braking earlier to actually get the rear to slide enough not to understeer hardcore.
And for the record, subarus do have better AWD systems than the evo's.
There are 2 big reasons the EVO outhandles the STI stock.
1) tires are better
2) camber is more aggressive (really helps with understeer)
The sti also requires a different driving style you have to start turning the car while braking earlier to actually get the rear to slide enough not to understeer hardcore.
And for the record, subarus do have better AWD systems than the evo's.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
