Autozeitung: Audi developing new quattro drivetrain...

[roadrunner]

...with the agility of RWD configuration. Up to 100% to rear wheels (up to 60% front wheels)

http://www.autozeitung.de/sites/default/files/imagecache/1024x768/images/bildergalerie/2009/06/az14_09_094_Tech_DiffAudi.jpg

source: http://www.autozeitung.de/node/380055/24?destination=

Now we are talking :jlol:

[florin08]

problably a noob question but is this a mechanical system ?

[Erik]

problably a noob question but is this a mechanical system ?

Obviously mechanics has to be involived, together with electronics.

[roadrunner]

I will try to get the Autozeitung this afternoon.

But what i can identify from this pic:

"Differential mit Lammelenkupplung...Planetensatz im Getriebegehäuse" - no idea what all this is called in english

[Trebor]

I will try to get the Autozeitung this afternoon.

But what i can identify from this pic:

"Differential mit Lammelenkupplung...Planetensatz im Getriebegehäuse" - no idea what all this is called in english

Best approximation is
" Differential with Lammelenkupplung (good question some kind of clutch)… planet set in the transmission case

[RXBG]

looks like a multiplate electronic clutch with two sport differentials- front and rear. jesus christ.

if audi makes this and puts it in the r8 replacement with a dsg i will skip the current V10 and wait for this. can't be more than 4 years away.

[roadrunner]

...
if audi makes this and puts it in the r8 replacement with a dsg i will skip the current V10 and wait for this. can't be more than 4 years away.

Doubt, that the R8 successor will be the 1st one to use it. it is already RW biased.

[RXBG]

Doubt, that the R8 successor will be the 1st one to use it. it is already RW biased.

i dont mind if another audi uses it first :)

i think its time audi took leadership with awd again. perhaps the first will be the A7 or new A8. the system is likely over one year out, though. they have been announcing the DSG for years now and not one longitudinal engined audi has it yet.

[roadrunner]

... they have been announcing the DSG for years now and not one longitudinal engined audi has it yet.

I hope you are reffering to the US only, because in Europe, the S-tronic (=DSG) is the only auto option for the Q5, and some motor & gearbox combos for A4, A5 have it as well. Not to talk about the S4.

[RXBG]

I hope you are reffering to the US only, because in Europe, the S-tronic (=DSG) is the only auto option for the Q5, and some motor & gearbox combos for A4, A5 have it as well. Not to talk about the S4.


meant usa- you are right, some a4 models are getting it slowly over there in EU. i wasn't aware the Q5 had it!

[Damienr8]

Interesting tidits on the new drivetrain. I hope the mechanics involved are not overly complicated and result in serious costs if something is broken. Other than that, good news, im glad that something other than power increases are progressing.

[OfftheHeZie]

I'm not certain, but I think this article suggests Audi will be moving to a viscous coupling center diff method for their AWD system instead of Torsen. Just from tidbits of a weak translation. Which I believe is BULL.

~Mason

[RXBG]

viscous is what R8 has. old system. hopefully not. unless they add some trickery to avoid any agricultural behavior at low speeds.

[The Pretender]

I'm not certain, but I think this article suggests Audi will be moving to a viscous coupling center diff method for their AWD system instead of Torsen. Just from tidbits of a weak translation. Which I believe is BULL.

~Mason
Yes, in this layout (no 1) they replace the Torsen diff for a electronically regular middle differential with planetary gear and multiple disk/plate clutch.

[The Pretender]

viscous is what R8 has. old system. hopefully not. unless they add some trickery to avoid any agricultural behavior at low speeds.

Agricultural behavior. ???
like a tractor. ?

[tailpipe]

This is very interesting and I suspect very close to production readiness. Will the new A8 be the first model to incorporate it?

I don't know whether this article mentions it, but i would imagine that the length of the transmission housing is probably much shorter to enable engines to be mounted further rearwards.

(Tailpipe now puts on Nomex flame retardant suit.)

I said in a separate post a month or so back (for which I was intensely flamed) that Martin Winterkorn, Audi's previous boss and now head of the entire VAG Group, had wanted Audi to adopt rear wheel drive. He felt this was necessary to compete on equal terms with BMW and M-B. The plan was vetoed by ex-VAG head Bernd Pischestreider.

While AWD Audi's will get a 100% RWD bias as an option, I wonder what this new transmission means for non-Quattro models? Maybe it will be a flexible enough system to be used for either new RWD models (A8, A7 and A6?) and FWD models (A4 and A5?)

it's certainly going to be interesting to see how this plays out, not only for Audi but other models, including Porsche variants, eh?

[RXBG]

Agricultural behavior. ???
like a tractor. ?


yep. at low speeds it grinds and groans like a semi. not a major thing. but something that needs to be worked out in the next car.

i suspect audi engineers can take the best elements of the viscous and incorporate electronic diffs and some other advancements that could make the GTR system pale by comparison. we'll see.

[Leadfoot]

This is great news if true and will finally make Audi cars truly great driver cars instead being incredibly competent/confident cars with incredible ability but ultimately bland compared to such cars as the Cayman and M3.

I suspect that either the A8 could have such a system or is it wishful thinking to suggest the opposibility of the RS5 introducing it first.

Who knows, this might still be some years off being production ready.

[artur777]

Agree with you
But the competitors also going on
I dont believe that any of automotive companies will deliver srious lead in this field.
All leading ones will be more or less on par

[Leadfoot]

Agree with you
But the competitors also going on
I dont believe that any of automotive companies will deliver srious lead in this field.
All leading ones will be more or less on par

Given the choice of an Audi RS model with a awd system that can shift all of it's power to the rear or buy a normal M or AMG rwd car I know which one would get my vote and I bet a lot of AMG and M owners will definitely consider this option first too.

RWD has too many limitations when conditions turn bad and as such will always be considered fair weather motoring.

[QuattroFun]

Obviously an enhanced AWD with a rear diff and up 100% of the torque to the rear wheels would be very interesting indeed. However, an equally relevant question: will the new system also allow for a better weight distribution with the engine mounted further back than in the latest MLP configuration, which still only has the back end of the engine 15 cm behind the front axle and the center of weight on the front axle? If yes, then it could be a real gamer changer and should really worry especially M as they also move away from high revving machines towards torque-laden charged engines, which will make the rear wheels struggle.

[Marv]

This diagram shows the engine still sits in front of the differential and front wheels - IMHO Audi have got to find a better solution for this or however good the new torque vectoring is there will still be a heavy lump of an engine right out in the front of the nose. Hopefully this diagram is not a true layout.

[Leadfoot]

This diagram shows the engine still sits in front of the differential and front wheels - IMHO Audi have got to find a better solution for this or however good the new torque vectoring is there will still be a heavy lump of an engine right out in the front of the nose. Hopefully this diagram is not a true layout.

Can I ask the question as to how much weight everyone here reckons is right for a front engined awd car?

I know I have my own opinion and I doubt it's the same as most think here, especially the ones that own BMWs. For a start look at the GTR, it's balance is roughly 55/45 and I seem to do pretty well don't you think.

In fact a bit of extra weight at the front is a good thing, it's always better to have the tell-tale signs of grip being breached at the front than at the rear, all Audi needs is the ability it gain some throttle control which this 100% rear bias option would offer.

[QuattroFun]

Can I ask the question as to how much weight everyone here reckons is right for a front engined awd car?

I know I have my own opinion and I doubt it's the same as most think here, especially the ones that own BMWs. For a start look at the GTR, it's balance is roughly 55/45 and I seem to do pretty well don't you think.

In fact a bit of extra weight at the front is a good thing, it's always better to have the tell-tale signs of grip being breached at the front than at the rear, all Audi needs is the ability it gain some throttle control which this 100% rear bias option would offer.

I think it is both well established and well known that with rear biased torque split like the one discussed in this thread (RWD or AWD) a R8-like weight distribution (i.e. mid engine layout) is the ideal one - i.e. the mirror image of your typical Audi set-up. Of course, a FWD car needs the typical Audi weight distribution. BMW's mantra of 50%/50% in a RWD car is okay for neutrality (second best front engined solution), but not the ideal one - which is why all serious sports cars (no, I am not talking about the GTR) , most of which are RWD, are mid-engined.

[Leadfoot]

I think it is both well established and well known that with rear biased torque split like the one discussed in this thread (RWD or AWD) a R8-like weight distribution (i.e. mid engine layout) is the ideal one - i.e. the mirror image of your typical Audi set-up. Of course, a FWD car needs the typical Audi weight distribution. BMW's mantra of 50%/50% in a RWD car is okay for neutrality (second best front engined solution), but not the ideal one - which is why all serious sports cars (no, I am not talking about the GTR) , most of which are RWD, are mid-engined.

Listen, the real world isn't an ideal world, for a normal Audi car it can not be mid-engined, no real mid-engine can offer practicality and a decent boot. So what you are left with is a front-engined setup and if you use an awd setup then you are stuck with a front weight bias. Even the GTR with it's transaxle weighs more at the front and considering Audi's present setup I think they are doing a brilliant job managing the weight balance.

So now we have established that for practical reasons all normal Audis will not be mid-engined we have to discuss how best to manage the weight and improved the handling. My argument is that Nissan have shown that a 55/45 balance (something very achieveable by Audi) can exceed all expectations, as long as the awd setup offers a proper transfer of power to the rear and maintain a rear bias most of the time.

IF this leaked rumour is indeed true then I do believe Audi will be the new choice for a German mainstream drivers car brand, not BMW or Mercedes but Audi.

[QuattroFun]

In the absence of the ideal, every step towards 50%-50% is and must be the right goal also for Audi if it attempts to increase the AWD rear bias further. For example, my RS4 with the R8 AWD split would have been bordering on suicidal. 100% of the torque to the rear wheels combined with 60% of the weight upfront is both lunacy and unstable - from doggy understeer from an overly heavy nose to serious oversteer from an overly light rear in one stroke as the AWD swings the torque between the axles. The pendling anti-911. Not balanced, not neutral - but an odd pendlum. Yes, the GTR is truly remarkable - but it is against all odds just like the 911, which in turn is way too good for an overly rear weighted machine - both are progressive enough by virtue of engineering. Lets not confuse world class engineering with the basic set-up shall we. Lets put the 911 S or GT3 engine and LSD in a Cayman with all the stubborn engineering determination of the 911 and let us see what happens.

[Leadfoot]

I am not disagreeing with you, far from it but I think you are making the mistake of thinking that an RS4 with an R8 setup would be dangerously bad, it wouldn't be ideal but you might be forgetting that it's not a rwd car with that 60/40 weight split but an awd one which can shift power forward to control any instability.

The GTR isn't the exception to the rule, it's just that no other brand has adopted it's awd setup. In fact on reflection I think you will find the EVOs all have a similar weight balance to that of the RS4, only their awd system is more advanced and offers a better variation than Audi currently offers. I personally agree that getting a more balanced chassis will help but 50/50 is something that is more crucial to rwd cars than it ever will with an awd one, and in fact might not be even ideal.

[Marv]

In the absence of the ideal, every step towards 50%-50% is and must be the right goal also for Audi if it attempts to increase the AWD rear bias further. For example, my RS4 with the R8 AWD split would have been bordering on suicidal. 100% of the torque to the rear wheels combined with 60% of the weight upfront is both lunacy and unstable - from doggy understeer from an overly heavy nose to serious oversteer from an overly light rear in one stroke as the AWD swings the torque between the axles. The pendling anti-911. Not balanced, not neutral - but an odd pendlum. Yes, the GTR is truly remarkable - but it is against all odds just like the 911, which in turn is way too good for an overly rear weighted machine - both are progressive enough by virtue of engineering. Lets not confuse world class engineering with the basic set-up shall we. Lets put the 911 S or GT3 engine and LSD in a Cayman with all the stubborn engineering determination of the 911 and let us see what happens.

I also think the 'pendulum effect' is just as important to consider as the actual front/rear distribution. Whatever the front/rear weight split, having more of that weight between the wheels is better than having it in front of the front wheels or behind the rear wheels. I agree with you here, the RS4 (and 911) is a triumph of engineering over physics. Much better to move some of that Audi engine weight in between the wheels with a clever gearbox and front differential arrangement.

[QuattroFun]

I suppose the AWD torque split should be broken down into two different questions: 1) what is the typical/default torque split and 2) what is the maximum/minimum torque split? I believe an R8 sends at most 35% and at least 10% of the torque in any situation to the front wheels so I really doubt it would suit a typical nose heavy, high power and especially torque-focused Audi like the current RS6.

[S6V10Avant]

In my view the most important aspect is the weight distribution, then you can fine tune the chassis and drive systems to achive consistancy on the limit. If you try to compensate for an unfavourable weight balance with a variable transfer of power, you often achieve unconsistancy when driving on the limit. This is my experience after 10 years driving WRC cars competitively.

[Leadfoot]

In my view the most important aspect is the weight distribution, then you can fine tune the chassis and drive systems to achive consistancy on the limit. If you try to compensate for an unfavourable weight balance with a variable transfer of power, you often achieve unconsistancy when driving on the limit. This is my experience after 10 years driving WRC cars competitively.

My experience is that BMW 50/50 split is a bit too lively on anything other than ideal conditions. So I personally don't agree that for a mainstream performance car like what Audi S and RS models are that they should offer the same as BMW's split. Understeer is ideal for most people, especially on the road but what we are all wanting is that when you add more throttle the understeer can be reined in and replaced with some on-throttle oversteer, this is what the GTR and EVOs have.

I am looking forward to the new RS5 to see what improvement quattroGmbH can make with the introduction of SportsDiff and hopefully give us a car more in character of the GTR.

[tailpipe]

In my view the most important aspect is the weight distribution, then you can fine tune the chassis and drive systems to achive consistancy on the limit. If you try to compensate for an unfavourable weight balance with a variable transfer of power, you often achieve unconsistancy when driving on the limit. This is my experience after 10 years driving WRC cars competitively.

Amen.:thumb: