Quote:
Originally Posted by Megator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poochie
Sorry about the delayed response, I've just now notice you had tagged me..
Anyways, on the subject of LSDs; I've also notice that the Porsche GT3 uses a standard locking diff, instead of their renowned torque-vectoring unit they currently offer. I believe torque vectoring is superior to a LSD in both applications.
However, It's more complex, which means more expensive and (maybe) failure prone. Racing is expensive enough as it is, I think teams don't want to deal with torque vectoring differentials at this point in time.
Whom ever at M Motorsports that writes the CS-R technical specs has decided to include a "regular" LSD to keep things simple.
Racing series will do this all the time to keep the series competitive. I tried to find a source on this but couldn't. Maybe someone else can.
I believe a racecar with a LSD would go around a corner (even a slow one) faster than a road car with torque vectoring because of the better tires and lower weight of the race car.
|
You missunderstood me and still missunderstand how the M diff works. (even after I explained it to you a while back in another thread  ).
The M diff IS NOT TORQUE VECTORING!!!! it is VARIABLE LOCKING. These are two different things. Torque vectoring is what a Focus RS rear diff does, it can individually control how much torque goes to each rear wheel.
The M diff is variable locking so it can decide how much and when to lock "freely" compared to a normal mechanical locking diff which can only do so when the speed differential between the wheels reaches whatever preset.
Complexity/cost/rules/performance could be a reason for not including it in the CS racing.
Coming back to your original point and my question.
Where did you read that the M2 has brake based torque vectoring?
I would be curious to know if the M2 has this as I have not seen it anywhere and was part of what made my Focus RS handle great but overheat the brakes way too quickly on track. |
There is a bit of confusion here. We're both saying the same thing but I'm referring to as a "torque-vectoring" because of how it's described in BMW literature and it operates.
The main difference is that Active M diff only transfer torque from slower to faster. The M diff is a basically a typical LSD, say a clutch-type, where the clutches, and therefore amount of lockup, are electronically controlled instead of passively activated based on the difference in speed between the two wheels on an axle, like say on a AWD vehicle or an EV. That means that they can control when and how much to lock up but by different means.
It's basically the same principal of being able to disturbing torque in either direction, via the locking method. Perhaps I should of been a little clearer.
In addition, BMW also states that it also liberally uses the DSC system to distribute torque. Hence my suggestion that it uses the brakes also to bias the distribution.
I did not mean the M2 has only a brake-based
torque-distribution like the standard vehicles but more of
assistance from the brakes, based on when the computer determines its needed, in addition to the clutch locking diff.