The beating heart of the Porsche 911 Carrera 4 (and Turbo) is the company's own proprietary wet-clutch all-wheel-drive system. Its traction dynamics are what Porsche owners and enthusiasts have come to know and trust for generations. Reports are now circulating, however, that
[Source: World Car Fans]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
| # | Blogger | Posts | Cmts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Damon Lavrinc | 100 | 5 |
| 2 | Noah Joseph | 83 | 0 |
| 3 | Jeremy Korzeniewski | 74 | 9 |
| 4 | Chris Shunk | 73 | 1 |
| 5 | Dan Roth | 56 | 16 |
| 6 | Alex Nunez | 50 | 32 |
| 7 | Drew Phillips | 38 | 3 |
| 8 | Jonathon Ramsey | 38 | 0 |
| 9 | Sam Abuelsamid | 28 | 6 |
| 10 | Michael Harley | 28 | 9 |
| 11 | John Neff | 23 | 6 |
| 12 | Sebastian Blanco | 10 | 0 |
| 13 | Chris Tutor | 8 | 0 |
| 14 | Merritt Johnson | 8 | 4 |
| 15 | Frank Filipponio | 7 | 2 |
| 16 | John McElroy | 2 | 0 |
| 17 | Justin Gardiner | 1 | 0 |
MORE ON AOL AUTOS: Detroit Auto Show Coverage, New Cars | Used Cars | Kelley Blue Book | Car Reviews | Car Buying Tips | Car Insurance | Auto Loans
All contents copyright © 2003-2008, Weblogs, Inc. All rights reserved
Autoblog is a member of the Weblogs, Inc. Network. Privacy Policy, Terms of Service, Notify AOL
Other Weblogs Inc. Network blogs you might be interested in:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ccweems @ Mar 27th 2008 1:48PM
If 4wd was a $2000 option instead of standard I be there are a lot of folk in the South and West that would pocket the cash and enjoy better MPG and performance.
As the gas crunch gets deeper I expect there is going to be a lot of introspection examining the difference between truly needing 4wd and just wanting it. As it is it provide a quick way to drop buck, lbs and add a couple of MPG.
mk @ Mar 27th 2008 1:55PM
If you don't want AWD... Get a Carrera or Carrera S, rather than a 4 or 4S.
That essentially IS optional.
And with Porsche 911 Turbo's amount of horsepower, AWD is pretty necessary to keep that power getting to the ground, otherwise there is the GT2 for people with an adrenaline addiction problem.
rndmnme @ Mar 27th 2008 1:56PM
Somebody is missing the point of AWD (not 4x4) in a sports car... let alone a sports car with 500+ hp.
The Other Bob @ Mar 27th 2008 2:37PM
I agree with you. Everyone assumes I get 4wd in my trucks here in Michigan. I don't and have never really needed it. I keep the money, save gas and get a truck that rides more comfortably.
ello @ Mar 27th 2008 3:40PM
With all due respect most people who buy Porsche Carreras don't give a rats ass about MPG, if they can afford a car, they can surely afford the gasoline for it, and if they care about the environment, they don't buy sport cars in the first place.
mk @ Mar 27th 2008 1:52PM
please, say it ain't so...
Porsche deserves better than Faux-wheel-drive.
Although rear-nominal, front-assist is better than vice versa in most front engine arrangements that use haldex.
Clutch-based is good, center-differential-based is best. Both are better than a reactive viscous coupling, like haldex has. Even computer controlled, it is still reactive, rather than being constant, and preventing slip. Reacting to slip is not the same thing.
I hope boxer engines with real AWD are not going away... Porsche or Subaru. I want to continue to buy boxer/AWD vehicles into the future.
Dondonel @ Mar 27th 2008 2:37PM
Haldex is not viscous coupling, neither faux AWD. The initial system was a simple/cheap clutch based differential, compared to the clutch based differentials available at that time (much cheaper than Porsche PSK for instance).
For manufacturers today, Haldex-like differentials are any clutch based differentials. Haldex can be used for any axle differential, as well as for the center differential.
Clutch based differential are better than any of the alternatives, mechanical (Torsen) or viscous coupling, because they can be controlled better and in most cases are more efficient as well.
moa @ Mar 28th 2008 7:56AM
well but haldex simply does not work as well as old fashioned mechanical diff. at least versions used in vw group fwd cars. it goes like that: you lose traction, you try to correct with steering/throttle and _then_ rear end gets it's part of torque and ruins your efforts. to avoid this you have to delay your reaction to the moment when haldex kicks in. higher audi models get quattro system based on torsen and they are much more nice to drive.
jgp @ Mar 27th 2008 2:19PM
Ugh...Haldex is fake AWD.
I'll phrase it so people in Stuttgart can understand: Fick den Haldex!
MikeW @ Mar 27th 2008 2:25PM
The VW group already has a good example of this, it is called the Bugatti Veyron.
Porsche already had a center differential, the purists didn't like it. and the 911 doesn't want for more traction
http://www.autozine.org/911/911_9.htm
mk @ Mar 27th 2008 3:00PM
Not sure where you get your info...
But most haldex systems are viscous couplings, some of the newest ones with a computer controlled clutch associated with it.
That is not a differential at all. Viscous-bias and/or clutch-engagement elements can be used INSIDE a differential as a limited slip device, or torque-bias adjustment, but those components are not the differential themselves. A differential uses gears to multiply motion outputs but not lock those outputs together, and is constantly engaged, and can't be disengaged.
Haldex does not use a center differential at all. It uses a rear differential which is driven by a driveshaft that takes power off of the front differential, by way of a viscous coupling, and maybe a clutch, as I mentioned.
The Bugatti Veyron's Haldex system is, of course, more advanced, and with a mid-engine arrangement drives the rear wheels natively, with power taken off for front assist, which is more natural to a performance car. It probably also uses a host of computer controlled clutch packs to manage torque distribution, considering how much the car costs, and how much power it has.
Chances are, if Porsche 911 were to get haldex, it would be similar to that, rather than the simpler, less capable FWD-rear-assist Haldex systems, but a center differential is still better.
A car with a real center differential, like Audi's longitudinal-layout Quattro, and Subaru's AWD systems are much more capable, and are constantly engaged, they don't "automatically engage", they never disengage, and have a more even torque bias split, and they prevent more slip than a reactive system like haldex possibly can.
Dondonel @ Mar 27th 2008 5:32PM
@mk
You are totally confused, I am sorry to say that. But it is not surprising because I heard this confusion repeated a thousand of times, even in auto press.
Viscous coupling does NOT use clutches and it transfers torque only when the driving axle looses grip. Haldex uses clutches (always did) and can have a permanent split ratio between axles (like 50:50, 40:60 etc).
Here's how the viscous coupling looks like:
http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr?i=wNTU5NDk2czQxM2RmZDMxeTU0MQ%3D%3D
and this is a cutaway through the real thing:
viscous coupling:
http://www.technolab.org/Bilder/pic-hako/Pic-cutaway/Hako1139.JPG
mechanical Torsen diff:
http://www.technolab.org/Bilder/pic-hako/Pic-cutaway/Hako1272.JPG
Haldex active diff:
http://www.technolab.org/Bilder/pic-hako/Pic-cutaway/Hako1241.JPG
Note the clutch pack in the Haldex diff.
And yes, the Haldex clutches are actuated electro-hydraulically, but to say that Haldex is viscous coupling because of that, is as far off as saying that DSG transmission is a hydraulic transmission, because the wet clutches are actuated electro-hydraulically.
mk @ Mar 27th 2008 6:40PM
@dondonel,
You may be right. Haldex may use clutches, rather than viscous couplings. Some that I have heard of, were claimed to have a viscous coupling after the power-take-off for the rear axle, and were primarily FWD, with rear-wheel assistance when slip occurs, and heats the viscous fluid, making it "thicker" and transmitting more torque to it's output, to the rear driveline. Perhaps some do use fixed-bias clutch plates, or electro-hydraulic variable clutch packs.
But my main point is that is STILL not a center differential, it is still a power-take-off of the main differential, which is the front differential, in most FWD cases, the Rear differential in mid or rear-engine cases.
The Viscous coupling and torsen unit (which is NOT a differential itself, but a limited slip device INSIDE a differential) cutaways you showed each have a linear rotational motion. in one side, and out the other, the output being varied by the device itself, by it's design parameters.
A differential is what you showed in your last link. One input, and TWO somewhat independent outputs, with your example having a clutch pack on the input side. The design of the cutaway appears to be a REAR differential for a FWD-based system, or a Front differential in a rear-based system. You can see the driveshaft flange input, and the flanges for lateral outputs to wheel hubs, presumeably.
That however, does not address the main split in the driveline, BETWEEN THE AXLES, which with Haldex, is still likely a power-take-off shaft, feeding into either a viscous coupling, or a helical gear arrangement (torsen), or a clutch pack, ALL of which allow different methods of the same basic variance between the input and the output, to account for speed differential between the axles, or between the wheels on each axle.
That Haldex Active Differential you showed has clutch packs in it, due to the fact that there is NO central differential between the axles, and that clutch pack is the only variable link (the clutch can slip somewhat) between the front differential and the integral rear differential that you show. Such a variable link is required, otherwise the front and rear differentials would be disengaged, or locked together, like a transfer case 4x4, or a locked-hub front axle on a 4x4. I've had one of those, too, and they don't like to turn corners.
If you look at a good Quattro system, or Subaru's Symmetrical or VDC systems, you will see three, not just two, differentials. The transmission output is mechanically multiplied by the center differential between front and rear. The Front differential gets input from that, and multiplies again, for the front wheels. The central and front differentials are contained in the transmission case, making it a transaxle. The rear differential ALSO multiplies it's input from the center differential, for it's two tires.
With a viscous coupling, or a clutch pack, there is the potential for the input and output to be essentially disconnected (clutch disengaged, or viscous fluid absorbing the input, and not transmitting any output). With a differential, a mechanical disconnect doesn't happen, especially with a viscous, helical, or clutch-pack limited slip element inside it, which are the same things that regulate speed differential between the outputs, after the multiplication.
Getting viscous couplings, helical gear couplings, or clutch pack couplings confused with a differential is where the issue is. They are not the same sort of machine, but they can work together or independently.
And btw, some Haldex systems have reported that a permanent split ratio is as much as 95:5 front-bias standard, with increasing capacity under slip to 50:50, but not higher than that.
On the other hand, variable 3-diff systems, like Subaru's VDC or DCCD system, can vary torque bias with a clutch pack in the center differential (not in place of the center differential, but inside it) from a standard 65:30 rear bias to much more front OR rear bias, with a Torsen Limited Slip element in the rear, and some installations the front differential, as well. Their symmetrical AWD has a standard 50:50 bias absolutely with no loss in driveability, and turning a corner doesn't require wear-causing clutch-pack slippage, but standard differential behavior. They also have a viscous Limited slip element in the rear differential.
I drove to work this morning through a snow event on symmetrical AWD, when there were a lot of 4x4s in the ditches, mired in the recently thawed mud under the new snow cover. I'd say the system is pretty darn capable, without requiring wheel-spin or slip to be active, like many VW, Ford, Volvo, Mazda, and other haldex systems do seem to require for AWD to really transfer torque.
mk @ Mar 27th 2008 3:03PM
Sorry, that Haldex explanation comment was directed toward Dondonel.
I wish this reply system worked as it is supposed to.
nastinupe @ Mar 27th 2008 3:10PM
To ccweams: The "4" is a $10,000 option. However, most Porsche owners purchase the 4 for two reasons.
#1) Because the rear fenders are 22 mm wider on each side.
#2) Because the car handles better than the RWD set up.
Duncan @ Mar 27th 2008 4:51PM
To everyone bitching that Haldex isn't a real system, or that center differentials are better: Yes, in a front-engine-front-drive layout that has an awd system slapped on, you're right.
In a rear-drive rear-engine setup, where you want the rear wheels driven all the time, and only want torque going to the front wheels when the rears start to slip (so that it behaves like a rear-drive car until you need it not to) a part-time haldex system is EXACTLY what you want.
The existing Porsche system functions basically the same as the Haldex systems (It's part time, and the rears are always driven). This is really just a change in supplier more than a drastic change to the drivetrain (that is, unless they use an E-Diff from haldex in the rear).
MikeW @ Mar 27th 2008 5:47PM
Well Porsche could use a Torsen3 center differential.
Say 30/70 mechanical split. Have that run to 15/85 on front overrun, and then push forward to 40/60 on rear overrun.
That would give even better traction {all the better for a 600hp factory turbo model}
It wouldn't piss off the purists 'oh the steering feel...'
It wouldn't/shouldn't cause too much understeer.
and it could still save the bacon of the rich owners.
I still say put a speed sensitive rear differential. The 911 starts with so much traction, installing a torque sensitive differential just causes too many problems (wheel hop, understeer,etc.)
MikeW @ Mar 27th 2008 5:55PM
Okay, due to manufacturing limitations they might be limited to 30/70 +-10%
20/80 on front overrun
40/60 on rear overrun
Nick @ Mar 27th 2008 7:55PM
Only the 997 Turbo has the new Porsche Traction Management system, the C4S retains the old viscous coupling. Conceptually, there doesn't appear to be any difference between PTM and haldex, they are both electrohyrdaulic clutch based systems.
OUtsourcing this development to a company that specializes in the technology may result in a cheaper, better system. Haldex has had a bad reputation for their initial systems which could not precharge to provide off-the-line traction, but they now have the capability to transfer torque before any slipping occurs.
This system is much like the original 964 Carrera 4 system in that it is a clutch based system with no center differential.
Matt @ Mar 27th 2008 10:22PM
for sport cars of that caliber, they should stick to mechanical differentials, why? predictability.
just like with manual transmissions, the mechanical (torsen/viscous) diffs have predicable slip-grip characteristics defined by their physical properties -- and those can be learned and taken advantage of.
electronic diffs have their characteristics defined by software and programming and thus are less consistent, and in addition, may not always work better than the mechanical versions.
or, you can get the best of both worlds and go with what subaru did on the new DCCD system, both mechanical and with electronic assist/supplementation inside.