Motoring Discussion > torque vectoring control	Miscellaneous
Thread Author: Zero	Replies: 104

New Wed 6 Apr 11 15:51   torque vectoring control - Zero

The new Ford Focus is fitted with: Torque Vectoring Control Torque Vectoring Control reacts to the road 100 times per second. The system then uses this information to repeatedly balance the amount of power between the two front wheels. Fitted as standard, this technology maximises grip and increases the dynamic capabilities of the new Focus, while helping you gracefully negotiate curves and undulations in the road Isnt this a posh name for a differential? Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:05   torque vectoring control - RichardW

It's presumably some sort of active LSD - or is it just new marketing speak for ESP? Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:17   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

And at what speed do you have to corner at to benefit from this magic diff? I recon it will be above child vomit and wife inflicted violence speed. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:19   torque vectoring control - Zero

Apparently its: A form of electronic limited slip differential that works by adding brakes to the inside wheel in a turn to slow that wheel and ensure both wheels turn at the same rate Doesn't a diff does this anyway? Last edited by: Zero on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 16:21 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:22   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

Is it still April 1st? The wheels rotate at different speeds in a bend, how can it ensure the both rotate at the same rate? Are you trying a troll Z? Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 16:23 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:29   torque vectoring control - Zero

>> Is it still April 1st? The wheels rotate at different speeds in a bend, how >> can it ensure the both rotate at the same rate? >> >> Are you trying a troll Z? Nope - that was a cut and paste quote from a web site. www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2010/12/2012-ford-focus-torque-vectoring-control-explained.html Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:25   torque vectoring control - Lygonos

A diff maintains the different wheel speeds when cornering but ceases to function well when the (usually inner) wheel starts to spin. Rather than dumping engine power/torque, applying the brake to a spinning wheel transfers torque to the other side of the 'axle'. I presume it's cheaper and perhaps more effective than a mechanical LSD for FWD cars. If you're goating the car enough to cause both wheels to spin then I guess the ECU turns the wick down for the idiot in the driver's seat. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:25   torque vectoring control - Alanovich

Maybe, but this is a digital system. So they can't call it a diff. And I presume you're rasing this as you think it should be called a diff? Perhaps they could call it a Digital Differential, but all applications in cars must have three words in their names so that the application can become a "must have" acronym. It's got TVC, must have one of those. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:28   torque vectoring control - Zero

I just wondered if they were trying to suggest a differential was a an exclusive ford "must have" because that's what it sounded like in the adds! Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:30   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

The standard antiskid system on my car brakes wheels individually in extreme brown trouser situations, how is this gadget different? Apparently. :-) Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 16:30 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:34   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

Sounds to me like a basic form of traction control. An lsd locks the diff, or stiffens it, when one driven wheel starts to spin. Full power continues to be delivered and the vehicle bounds happily forward with a wriggle of variable violence and a cheery snort. Traction control which comes in various forms, some very elaborate, works either by reducing power delivery to the spinning wheel or by applying its brake until traction is regained. It may be necessary for some mass-market snorting monsters to prevent mayhem on wet roads but I don't like the idea of setting the engine and the brakes, even one at a time, against each other. There's something nasty and Ken Livingstonish about it. Much better for the driver to cultivate his brain and a sensitive right foot. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:37   torque vectoring control - Zero

>> a time, against each other. There's something nasty and Ken Livingstonish about it. Much better >> for the driver to cultivate his brain and a sensitive right foot. A dab of left foot brake fixes it too. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:39   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

My TC is part of the ESC system, (Electronic Sability Control). Sounds like Ford marketing waffle to me. Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 16:42 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:42   torque vectoring control - Skoda

If they were honest types it'd be called ESP version n+1. I've got it on mine and reckon it's ace. You can treat it something like a mildly effective LSD, the effect's not as good as a mechanical one, but there's also no torque steer or weight penalty. Real world example, wet fast corners can be accelerated through (not out) on the hard side of mild and the line will tighten. It's pretty safe too, it let's you know when you're reaching the limit through the steering response no longer tightening on the throttle, where an LSD would more or less just snap to the straight ahead in a fwd. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:47   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

I am so glad that I learned my car control on skinny tyres before the electronic driver aids, I would rather not rely on them to keep me safe. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:54   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

Quite ON. Think of the weight, the expense, the long-term maintenance problems... Simple and lightweight are best. When these devices kick in it usually means the driver's made a mistake or been clumsy. The exception may be the VW part-time 4wd which seems very good for pressing on in the wet. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:00   torque vectoring control - Alanovich

The problem with controlling old cars was never the hardware, but the wetware (or the majority of it, anyway - I'm sure you, AC know and always did know what you were doing behind the wheel). We now live in times with millions more cars on the roads than the 1950s/60s, but with far fewer deaths. We have elected to improve the safety of cars rather than trust in people to learn to handle them more safely. Probably a wise choice on the whole, but far better driver training still wouldn't go amiss. I'm always promising myself that I'll do some skid pan training one day - I believe it should be part of obtaining a driving licence. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:25   torque vectoring control - Zero

> >> We now live in times with millions more cars on the roads than the 1950s/60s, >> but with far fewer deaths. We have elected to improve the safety of cars rather >> than trust in people to learn to handle them more safely. I really dont think that ESP's have made any difference to death or accident rates, nor do I consider them even remotely essential for safety, Unlike ABS for example. I find it faintly sinister that only top of the range cars cars the latest "safety features" fitted as standard, if its a safety feature that's currently available and fitted to some models, the maker has a moral responsibility to fit it to all models. >> amiss. I'm always promising myself that I'll do some skid pan training one day - >> I believe it should be part of obtaining a driving licence. Yup. Along with braking and swerving round obstacles at the same time. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:18   torque vectoring control - Robin O'Reliant

>> I'm always promising myself that I'll do some skid pan training one day - >> I believe it should be part of obtaining a driving licence. >> Believe me, you wouldn't if you met a teenager coming the other way on a bend. Some things should only be taught to those mature enough not to misuse them (not too often, anyway). Last edited by: Robin Regal on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 19:19 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:03   torque vectoring control - Skoda

Theres no weight AC and it's cheap too. Youre using your brake pads all the time in modern cars, just ask any q7 driver who likes to press on. "new pads and disks at 12k miles? But I rarely brake!" the brains do though, that's how the 2.5 ton monster manages it's "handles like a hatchback" trick. I await your inked response through the letterbox grandpa :-P Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:24   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

>> that's how the 2.5 ton monster manages it's "handles like a hatchback" trick. Oh, very damn efficient and elegant. And how much exactly do the four discs and new pads cost installed at the main dealer every 12,000 miles? Of course weighing only two and a half tons must make it super-thrifty on juice as well. At least the weight of the cheap electronic and other gubbins will just be a drop in the ocean. But when a warning light comes on after a few years, an owner who wants to keep the thing may be faced with another set of knock-on steep demands by the main dealer (few others will be able to cope). In any case few drivers pilot those big fat monsters 'like a hatchback'. Most of them get in the way even more than they would in small cars. They are just self-important management twonks whose motoring is heavily subsidised. I must say I am surprised that one bearing your handle, the name of one of the world's most distinguished old engineering companies and maker these days of the Octavia with that same VAG 4wd device, a very good vehicle, should choose to show open disrespect to his elders. Cheeky little blackguard. (raspberry) Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:55   torque vectoring control - Skoda

>> cheeky little Haha, I'll wear that with pride coming from you AC :-) Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 16:59   torque vectoring control - Skoda

Not sure it qualifies under safety like ESP does. You need to be on the throttle. VAG call it XDS, although a similar idea they called EDL was enabled from the mk3 golf I think, although it was only active up to 30mph or something. There's a basic description in the Octavia brochure on the Skoda website. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:04   torque vectoring control - rtj70

Isn't it just an electronic (and hence cheaper) way to emulate what a LSD would do? Torque vectoring sounds good I suppose. Audi calls it torque vectoring too. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:11   torque vectoring control - IJWS14

Sounds very line the electronic diff lock the 1.8T Passat had 10-12 years ago! Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:48   torque vectoring control - rtj70

Did the 1.8T Passat from 10 years ago have EDL. Can't say I noticed it in mine. The car tended to wallow a bit due to soft(ish) suspension and it only had 15" wheels. Mine was the Sport with the lowered "sport" suspension. Having said that, after learning where all the dips, pot holes, etc. were on the Snake Pass from Glossop to Sheffield, I could travel at a decent (legal) speed. Probably faster than I risked in the Passat CC the other weekend because I was getting the feel for the car. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 17:51   torque vectoring control - Zero

>> Probably >> faster than I risked in the Passat CC the other weekend Pffftt. It wasnt yours, loan or hire cars are always the fastest. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Wed 6 Apr 11 18:52   torque vectoring control - rtj70

No but my employer would have paid for any damage. I'd have been popular with my manager! Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:31   torque vectoring control - Iffy

Simple explanation here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Duj1Jm8FzJs More in-depth explanation here: www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2010/12/2012-ford-focus-torque-vectoring-control-explained.html Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:34   torque vectoring control - spamcan61

>> Isn't it just an electronic (and hence cheaper) way to emulate what a LSD would >> do? Torque vectoring sounds good I suppose. Audi calls it torque vectoring too. >> Sure sounds like it, traction control with a fancier name; the Ford blurb sounds exactly how Vauxhall described traction control on the Omega. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:36   torque vectoring control - Iffy

There appears to be even more on Ford's American website, but I can't get the 'more details' link open: www.ford.com/cars/focus/features/Feature5/#page=Feature5 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:46   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

What absolute rubbish in the Ford website. It slows the inside wheel in a bend so that the wheels turn at the same rate! The wheels can't turn at the same rate in a turn, thats why cars have differentials. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:08   torque vectoring control - sherlock47

>>>>What absolute rubbish in the Ford website. It slows the inside wheel in a bend so that the wheels turn at the same rate! The wheels can't turn at the same rate in a turn, thats why cars have differentials<<< If "turn" equals "rotate" it is rubbish! however if "turn" actually means something akin to " align themselves wrt to the car body, to cause the vehicle to change direction" maybe Ford have got it correct? Is it a case of marketing department trying to oversimplify a technical description? Last edited by: pmh on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 20:09 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:15   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> however if "turn" actually means something akin to " align themselves wrt to the car >> body, to cause the vehicle to change direction" maybe Ford have got it correct? >> >> Is it a case of marketing department trying to oversimplify a technical description? >> As I said earlier in the thread, marketing waffle. Even if they mean the turning of the wheels by the steering it is wrong as the wheels turn by different amounts due to the steering geometry. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:40   torque vectoring control - Manatee

Strikes me as unnecessary and inefficient - why would you want to apply the brakes in normal cornering? It's just throwing energy away. And I'd be as mad as hell if I had a Q7 or any other car that wore its own brakes out in 12,000 miles. The faithful CRV is still on the originals at 94,000. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 19:58   torque vectoring control - Skoda

It wont come on in normal cornering. My last octy had days on track and generally driven quite hard when I was able too, it's a more sensible size and weight than a q7. After ~12k miles the pads were approaching the half way mark, the tyres were done right enough. Apparently by 20k in a Q7, 8 tyres, 4 pads and 4 discs is standard fayre. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:17   torque vectoring control - Manatee

>> It wont come on in normal cornering. That's not the impression given by "while helping you gracefully negotiate curves and undulations in the road" which suggests it's not a safety aid like ESP, but something that works all the time. Sounds more like something else useless, but with the potential to go wrong. It would put me off if anything. Probably looks like a genius idea to Ford. 'Added value' at zero marginal cost of production. All the hardware is already there - once the development of the firmware is done, no more cost. And by the sound of it, more parts sales, and service income for the dealers. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:25   torque vectoring control - spamcan61

>> >> Probably looks like a genius idea to Ford. 'Added value' at zero marginal cost of >> production. All the hardware is already there - once the development of the firmware is >> done, no more cost. And by the sound of it, more parts sales, and service >> income for the dealers. >> That's what many of the features of the last boil down to IMHO; you need to be able to brake each wheel and measure its rotational seed anyway to do ABS properly, so once you've got those basic transducers the rest is just code. Throw in level sensors (needed for Xenon lights anyway) and you can do the ESP stuff as well. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:41   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

>> the rest is just code. Throw in level sensors (needed for Xenon lights anyway) and you can do the ESP stuff as well. Yes, it's beautiful and on a mass-production scale cheap and even sort of simple. I am a technophile at heart and I love a bit of good Heath Robinson as much as the next man. But isn't the long-term problem with these devices going to be wear and deterioration in the actuators and valves to distribute braking effort delicately and very fast between the four wheels? Not to mention wear and deterioration in the brakes themselves, and corrosion in valves, cylinders etc caused by leaving the brake fluid in too long, something that often happens? When after a few years a light comes on, there may be a whole chain of expensive things to do, one leading to another and the amount it is costing going up every time... I've seen enough threads complaining about just that to know I am not just imagining all this. I don't deny though that if well designed such systems can really cut the mustard. I certainly believe Skoda. You have to get something for all those service costs. And of course it's wasted on the average home counties mimser although it may save the carphound's life when he does something extra silly. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 6 Apr 11 20:49   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>>When after a few years a light comes on, there may be a whole chain of expensive things to do, one leading to another and the amount it is costing going up every time... I've seen enough threads complaining about just that to know I am not just imagining all this.>> The manufacturers must love these systems and that they will put cars beyond economical repair earlier, good for sales. Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 20:49 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 01:18   torque vectoring control - AnotherJohnH

All this electronic cunning is fine, until you are driving in a way which needs it to be working, and it isn't. ISTR an issue with German Police who were trained to rely on "DSC", and then there were a couple of crashes. I think this link relates to it, but there may be better: www.m5board.com/vbulletin/e39-m5-e52-z8-discussion/48593-e39-dsc-failure.html However, it must be said 120kg's is a good push of the pedal... Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 03:03   torque vectoring control - devonite

monitors the road 100 times a second?? - whats the point? the piece of road it has just monitored and is about to make adjustments for. will be long gone! - you could be on an entirely different surface by then! Haven`t a clue how I used to drive my cars in the 70`s without all this computer jiggery-pokery! Last edited by: devonite on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 03:05 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 07:36   torque vectoring control - Fenlander

>>> the piece of road it has just monitored and is about to make adjustments for. will be long gone! - you could be on an entirely different surface by then! Not so sure... at 60mph I guess it will be reacting to each section of road less than 12" long. I've said in a previous thread some months back I'm very impressed by the ESC system on my C5 and can easily see how it could avoid an accident. I have driven the car into ESC mode many times now up to 60mph and the way it guides you round a corner is an amazing feeling. There is a lot of research on the net and it is widely accepted your chance of a fatal accident with ESC is 25% less... the chance of a severe accident 10% less. It is said you stand a good chance of avoiding the accident completely but if you do make contact you have a better chance of the car travelling in a direction which will reselt in fewer injuries. I honed my skills on tricky Triumph Heralds, VW rear engine models, V8 RWDs and torque steering FWD Saab Turbos so I'm fine with a car that needs loads of skill but I'd be very pleased of help from ESC in an unplanned emergency. Last edited by: Fenlander on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 07:39 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 08:30   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> I have driven the car into ESC mode many times now up to 60mph and the >> way it guides you round a corner is an amazing feeling. >> I guanantee that one day it will fail, or there will be diesel or ice on the road, and you will regret driving like an idiot. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 10:04   torque vectoring control - PR

Alfa introduced a similar system in 2008. Explained here.... www.mangoletsi.com/alfa/news/alfa-add-electronic-q2-to-new-generation.html Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 10:11   torque vectoring control - Mike Hannon

Good old Ford - the usual bullshine. Do they fit two windscreen wipers on base models yet? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 10:23   torque vectoring control - Iffy

...Good old Ford - the usual bullshine... Dear oh dear, what a grumpy bunch some of us are (not just you, Mike) for so-called motoring enthusiasts. The Focus has always handled like a dream, and it looks as if Ford has improved on that. One of those improvements is this torque vectoring system. Who cares if it's a stupid name, so long as it works? Can we not celebrate engineering innovation and excellence? The Focus has given the ordinary family motorist access to a driving experience that used to be available only to those lucky enough to be able to afford a sports car. Last edited by: Iffy on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 10:24 Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 7 Apr 11 19:14   torque vectoring control - Number_Cruncher

>>what a grumpy bunch some of us are for so-called motoring enthusiasts. I agree, the sniping about new technology is extremely dull and tedious. Doubtlessy some on here think a horse and cart rather avant garde and that the concept of the wheel still needs to prove itself. You would think that they would be out smashing up power looms rather than trusting their thoughts and wisdom to electronics. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 20:42   torque vectoring control - Manatee

>> You would think that they would be out smashing up power looms rather than trusting >> their thoughts and wisdom to electronics. Hmm. I have nothing to say to torque vectoring control, but I wouldn't say I am technophobic, reactionary or Luddite. What I do react to, I suppose, is solutions that seem to be looking for a problem. I mean, gratuitously wearing the brakes out for a better "driving experience"? As Cheddar said, it's marketing. Just like all those horsepowers we don't need either. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 7 Apr 11 10:10   torque vectoring control - Fenlander

>>>and you will regret driving like an idiot. You're making assumptions about the frequency, circumstances and my skills. >>>I guanantee that one day it will fail. Unlikely... it's a Citroen after all. My uncle was one of the first people I knew to have a car with ABS and it was about 8yrs before he activated it in a minor emergency. He was so taken aback by the pulsing he nearly released the brakes and phoned me when he got home asking if I thought it was faulty. In safe deserted circumstances I like to know how how these things feel and how they affect the car's stability/handling. Last edited by: Fenlander on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 10:10 Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Thu 7 Apr 11 11:17   torque vectoring control - bathtub tom

I wonder how many people have used the electronic, handling gizmos on modern vehicles and would they know if they did? Anyone else checked their ABS on a warm, dry road? It hurts when you hit the seat belt. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 11:34   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> >> In safe deserted circumstances I like to know how how these things feel and how >> they affect the car's stability/handling. >> A bit like using a mountain bike in the Fens? :-) Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 11:35 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 11:46   torque vectoring control - Fenlander

>>>A bit like using a mountain bike in the Fens? :-) It's great for going up and down the kerbs outside the village bus shelter showing the kids how it should be done... Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:08   torque vectoring control - Mike Hannon

>>The Focus has given the ordinary family motorist access to a driving experience that used to be available only to those lucky enough to be able to afford a sports car.<< Not true. The sports car experience is not as simple as that. And it also involves enjoying actually standing and looking at the machine in question - an experience that, I guess, is unknown to Ford Focus owners. I'm not actually a miserable old s*d. Ask anyone. But Henry Ford has rubbed me up the wrong way ever since he hired thugs to shoot at his unhappy workforce. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:22   torque vectoring control - Alanovich

Do you like VWs Mike? Or Porsches? I'd suggest that one of their founders was slightly more reprehensible than Henry Ford. Bit unfair to bash to the Ford brand for such ancient misdeeds. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:33   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

>> Porsches? I'd suggest that one of their founders was slightly more reprehensible than Henry Ford. I hope you don't mean Dr Porsche Alanovic. His mistake was to allow himself to be made a pet of by Hitler. He certainly wasn't a Nazi. He just couldn't resist being given a free hand to pursue some of his engineering idees fixes. He even made a giant 400-ton tank (Der Maus) that the army turned down, feeling it was too expensive and made too big a target. Should have been obvious, but he wasn't really interested in military stuff: just in machines. Henry Ford did become an unpleasant reactionary fairly early on. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:41   torque vectoring control - Alanovich

>> I hope you don't mean Dr Porsche Alanovic. No no, was just referring to the links Porsche had with the unitesticular one. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:26   torque vectoring control - Iffy

...standing and looking at the machine in question - an experience that, I guess, is unknown to Ford Focus owners... I did say 'driving experience'. But on the subject of just looking, a lot of people have looked at my Focus CC3 in the two years I've had it. It's the only car I've owned which attracts such attention. The last glance tends to be at the grille. I'm no mind reader, but I suspect some people are quite disappointed: "Oh, it's only a Ford." Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:33   torque vectoring control - Fenlander

There was a CC3 in Tescos the other morning and I parked near it for a look round. Wondered about hanging about for the female driver to return so I could see the roof in operation.... then thought it was a bit stalker-like so left. As something of a childish joke since they were tiny I've always told my girls convertibles were unfinished cars people could buy cheaply. The conditioning has obviously worked as this morning the 14yr old said look there's a roofless car in front of us. Last edited by: Fenlander on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 13:34 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 13:42   torque vectoring control - Hard Cheese

Back on topic, its marketing, its what Ford call a clever technology that is not unique to them. Though as with any technology the clever part is in the application. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 20:19   torque vectoring control - ....

>> >> Back on topic, its marketing, its what Ford call a clever technology that is not >> unique to them. >> >> Though as with any technology the clever part is in the application. >> Exactly, this is something which is been made available to the mainstream. It was implemented on the RS500 and has now been passed on to the next generation Focus. I suppose if VW had put it on a Golf people would be saying what an excellent creation and how did we manage without it. First to market in the sector in a car wearing the Blue oval and it's carp...Nowt so queer as folk ! as some might say. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 14:33   torque vectoring control - bathtub tom

>>I've always told my girls convertibles were unfinished cars And ice-cream vans make that sound when they've run out? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 14:58   torque vectoring control - Fenlander

Ha... said it was the wet fish van... that slowed them down for a few years. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 15:07   torque vectoring control - Bromptonaut

>> Ha... said it was the wet fish van... that slowed them down for a few >> years. We used to tell ours it was the sausage van. Friend of ours explained to his sons that France had gangs of toilet thieves. Their activities accounted for the prevalence of 'hole in the ground' bogs at autoroute 'aires'. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 19:23   torque vectoring control - -

Drive the correct wheels, the rear, and none of this rubbish is necessary or wanted. If it ain't broke.... Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:26   torque vectoring control - Iffy

Now they've got one that will do 80mpg: www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/8432669/80mpg-Ford-Focus-for-2012.html It's a simple diesel - no hybrid complications - and has more than 100bhp, so it should at least be able to pull its hat off. To keep the snipers going, there's Active Grille Shutter to reduce drag at speed: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx66DYQbd4o Last edited by: Iffy on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 21:27 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:31   torque vectoring control - -

>> To keep the snipers going, there's Active Grille Shutter to reduce drag at speed: It takes a while but they'll catch up in the end, Scammell Crusader's had venetian blind style grille shutters back in the 70's...might have looked harmless but you wouldn't want your fingers caught in the thing as it closed. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:38   torque vectoring control - ....

Don't forget, Iffy, to mention the revised underbody between front and rear axle including rear axle panels to improve airflow. Add in the new water cooled intercooler, revised injection, modified turbo, added friction reduction coatings and some people won't know where to start. Last edited by: gmac on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 21:39 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:42   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> Don't forget, Iffy, to mention the revised underbody between front and rear axle including rear >> axle panels to improve airflow. >> Add in the new water cooled intercooler, revised injection, modified turbo, added friction reduction coatings >> and some people won't know where to start. >> I still don't believe 80mpg in normal daily use. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:52   torque vectoring control - ....

Why single this car out though ON ? Do you believe the other published figures of all other cars sold ? They all follow the same guidelines, if the method is flawed why is one model wrong for quoting according to them ? Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:00   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> Why single this car out though ON ? >> >> Do you believe the other published figures of all other cars sold ?>> No. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:03   torque vectoring control - Focusless

>> Do you believe the other published figures of all other cars sold ? They all >> follow the same guidelines, From the article: "Like other fuel saving models on sale, the Focus Econetic uses ... and a shift light indicator to achieve its headline figures." Will the method of obtaining the official mpg figures take into account a 'shift light indicator'? A bit pedantic perhaps, but just curious. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:07   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

My car has a shift light indicator, if you obeyed it you would never use more than 2500 revs and be a mobile road block. Thats why I said "normal daily use". Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:13   torque vectoring control - ....

That depends on your car and how much over the speed limit you want to drive at. I don't generally go over 2000rpm unless going onto the motorway. I don't hang about and drive to the speed limits. 30 mph is 1500rpm in fourth, 60 mph is 2000 rpm in fifth in my car, no change up lights. Last edited by: gmac on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 22:14 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:18   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> That depends on your car and how much over the speed limit you want to >> drive at. >> I don't generally go over 2000rpm unless going onto the motorway. I don't hang about >> and drive to the speed limits. 30 mph is 1500rpm in fourth, 60 mph is >> 2000 rpm in fifth in my car, no change up lights. >> Its not the speed you drive at, my car is at 2000rpm at 70mph in 6th gear. Its how long it takes to get up to speed. Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 22:28   torque vectoring control - ....

The problem with the EU wide test is it has to give an average fuel consumption figure from Inverness to Sagres. It doesn't consider what you might encounter between Kirkcaldy and Ainstruther or dropping off young Tarquin at Eton. With such variations in one country, how do you work out a typical daily MPG for the whole of Europe ? Definately a backwards step. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 05:46   torque vectoring control - Focusless

>> My car has a shift light indicator, if you obeyed it you would never use >> more than 2500 revs and be a mobile road block. Thats why I said "normal >> daily use". But does your car's shift light indicator have any effect on its official fuel consumption figures? I suspect it doesn't, but am happy to be corrected. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 09:07   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> >> My car has a shift light indicator, if you obeyed it you would never >> use >> >> more than 2500 revs and be a mobile road block. Thats why I said >> "normal >> >> daily use". >> >> But does your car's shift light indicator have any effect on its official fuel consumption >> figures? I suspect it doesn't, but am happy to be correctedoddon't I dont know, I ignore it. If you did use it you would be the ultimate mimser so I would expect it to make some difference. It works by indicating the number of the gear the car thinks you should be in with an up or down triangular arrow alongside it. When I first got the car it annoyed me, I have been using a gearbox for over 40 years, I think I have it sussed. Now I forget it is there unless I check my speed while accelerating and it is on. Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 8 Apr 11 at 09:08 Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 09:14   torque vectoring control - Focusless

>> I dont know, I ignore it. If you did use it you would be the >> ultimate mimser so I would expect it to make some difference. ...to my figures. But what I'm saying is that I think it would also be ignored in the tests which generate the official figures; they follow a fixed procedure which AFAIK doesn't allow for taking any notice of lights on the dashboard. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 09:36   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> ...to my figures. But what I'm saying is that I think it would also be >> ignored in the tests which generate the official figures; they follow a fixed procedure which >> AFAIK doesn't allow for taking any notice of lights on the dashboard. >> I agree. my manufacturers figures are so wildly optimistic I have no idea how they achieved them. They are - Urban 52.3 mpg, Extra urban 65.3 mpg, Combined 60.1 mpg. I get an average of 43 mpg around town 50 mpg on the motorway, similar to my 2.0 tdci Focus but with a 1.6 crdi in a heavier bodyshell. About the same as I got from an 850cc Mini in the 60's when climate control was the (manual) window. :-) Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 09:38   torque vectoring control - Crankcase

My manufacturer's figures are spot on, and I regularly get the combined figure. I had an email the other day from Toyota boasting of the next gen Prius, on sale from 2012. I appreciate it's a hybrid, but in any event the figure they claim is 108 mpg. Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 10:17   torque vectoring control - Focusless

>> They are - Urban 52.3 mpg, Extra urban 65.3 mpg, Combined 60.1 mpg. >> >> I get an average of 43 mpg around town 50 mpg on the motorway, I'm surprised the extra urban figure is so different to your motorway figure - I would have thought that at least those would be similar. Have you compared your figures with other owners'? Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 8 Apr 11 10:30   torque vectoring control - -

Have you compared your figures with other owners'? >> It's them old lead diver's boots he forgot to hand back. :-) Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Fri 8 Apr 11 10:33   torque vectoring control - Old Navy

>> >> They are - Urban 52.3 mpg, Extra urban 65.3 mpg, Combined 60.1 mpg. >> >> >> >> I get an average of 43 mpg around town 50 mpg on the motorway, >> >> I'm surprised the extra urban figure is so different to your motorway figure - I >> would have thought that at least those would be similar. Have you compared your figures >> with other owners'? >> The ones that I believe are truthful get similar figures. Although I drive within the speed limits (ish) I do not hang about. Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 8 Apr 11 at 10:35 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:51   torque vectoring control - Skoda

>> Add in the new water cooled intercooler The marketing people get a free reign on this stuff, eh? Isn't that what everyone else calls a charge cooler? :-) Last edited by: Skoda on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 21:52 Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 7 Apr 11 21:53   torque vectoring control - ....

Use words like charge cooling and people start thinking GTi and Poweeeerrrrr ! Doesn't really fit with green, eco motoring :-) Last edited by: gmac on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 21:54 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 12:25   torque vectoring control - Mike Hannon

>>I agree, the sniping about new technology is extremely dull and tedious. Doubtlessy some on here think a horse and cart rather avant garde and that the concept of the wheel still needs to prove itself. << I don't really have any problem with new technology. When it is new and not bullshine. Honda put a similar-sounding system to the Ford one on Preludes 15 years ago. I don't think it went on UK versions though. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 12:57   torque vectoring control - swiss tony

>> I don't really have any problem with new technology. When it is new and not >> bullshine. Honda put a similar-sounding system to the Ford one on Preludes 15 years ago. >> I don't think it went on UK versions though. The main issue I have, with 'new' technology, is when it is used to cover up poor design, or excesses... Some cars are totally undrivable with the technology turned off. This isn't a problem, until something goes wrong, either with the system, or outside influences. Case in point... AMG 63's totally useless at the 1st hint of ice. - so much power that the traction control will not allow the car to move! Many cars I have driven give little or no feed-back 'through the seat of your pants' as people used to say. the electronics's do that for you - up to a point. I was speaking to a recovery drive recently, he said how accidents today regularly seem to be at higher speed than in the past. I think that's because people 'feel' safer but when something happens physics takes over. The deciding factor is not, and never has been how good the driver is, or nowdays how good the electronics are, but the laws of physics - ie the grip between the tyres and the road, condition of the road itself, hit a bump at high speed, the car may leave the ground etc. Reply to this message | Report message       1

New Sat 9 Apr 11 15:25   torque vectoring control - Focusless

>> Some cars are totally undrivable with the technology turned off. Perhaps they're following the lead set by modern jet fighters? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability :) Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 12:57   torque vectoring control - Hard Cheese

>> Honda put a similar-sounding system to the Ford one on Preludes 15 years ago. >> I don't think it went on UK versions though. >> Many manufacturers had TC systems on FWD cars in the mid 90's though the latest systems are much more sophisticated. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 12:58   torque vectoring control - bathtub tom

Whatever happened to rear wheel steering? Is it now just an acceptable feature of rear suspension caused by flexing of bushes? I recall Vauxhall shouting from the rooftops about negative offset steering geometry, that now seems to be standard. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 13:39   torque vectoring control - Number_Cruncher

>>When it is new and not bullshine. As far as I can see, no one on this thread is absolutely sure *excatly* what this system does. Lots of people think they know - they might even be right, but, rubbishing an announcement or technology before it is fully understood is surely not particularly bright. Even if this technology isn't going knock sliced bread off the number one podium, it does represent change and advancement in understanding. Even if it eventually is shown to be a failure, our understanding is moved on. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sat 9 Apr 11 16:12   torque vectoring control - Manatee

I can't gainsay you NC, and I have never stood accused of being luminous. I have leapt to judgement, of a kind, on what I have heard. So what? I'm not the Nobel committee. If my assumptions are wrong, then I might change my mind, but I can't give credit for what Ford hasn't told me. On what I know or have inferred, correctly or otherwise, I would be put off by it. We could all agree that there are insufficient details to make a discussion of any value, but that wouldn't be very interesting. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 00:00   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

>> it does represent change and advancement in understanding I think this stuff has been around for a few years now NC, and it has trickled down to Ford small-repmobile level. My understanding was that in expensive original versions, sensors measured sideways g-forces, throttle opening, rotation speeds of all four wheels and computed somehow other data like slip angles on each axle, and then prevented the idiot driver from under- or oversteering into the scenery by applying delicate, fast, perhaps repeated braking to the individual wheel or wheels where the computer thinks it is most needed. Obviously this is not something a driver can do. The brake pedal works crudely on all the wheels at once. You know me of old NC as a happy technophile to the core, and I am impressed by the descriptions of these things although I have never put one to the test. I can't help feeling though that this system would slow you down just as you started to get to grips with the handling and really get a move on. Could save countless lives though perhaps. But I certainly think the system is beautiful in principle however well or badly the linked mechanical parts stand the test of time (and perhaps more constant slight use than they were really designed to take, see remarks on Q7 brakes above). Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 00:31   torque vectoring control - Number_Cruncher

I wouldn't automatically assume that Ford are simply copying the work of others. Yes, the idea of applying a brake to provide some dynamic assistance isn't new per se, but, what we don't know is how Ford are deciding when and how the brake should be applied. It's entirely possible that Ford have been very clever in using the data available on the vehicle to best effect, and have produced a genuine advance. In a similar vein to my laudatory comments about the 2CV, I have a great respect for Ford's engineering. Ford excel at getting the very best possible performance out of mundane and cheap components. Increasingly, the difference between makes and types of car will be seen in how clever their control algorithms are. It's relatively easy to reverse engineer a mechanical part and work out how to make something similar, but, it's much more difficult to get at the engineering thought behind a controller. It's easy to scoff when we find situations where electronic systems don't work well, but, it's difficult to say how many lives have already been saved by the fitment of ABS etc. The occaisonal loss in performance is more than repaid in the constant vigilance an electronic system can provide - far more reliably than any human. All too frequently, we see a knee jerk reaction of a number of members of this site where the discussion of any modern technology brings forth a near baseless rant - exemplified perfectly by this thread. Orwell wrote about virtues and evils based purely on limb count, but, we are seeing the same judgements purely based on the presence or absence of a microchip. It's difficult to think of parts of a car which are more reliable than the microchips - if the rest of the car was even similarly reliable, most garages would be out of business. Manatee mentions the Nobel committee, and takes my point to its logical opposite. However, I think my argument still stands, we can't sensibly comment on anything without at least an understanding of what that thing actually is. Yes, this is an informal setting, but, making judgements from complete ignorance can't ever be seen as shrewd. Getting back onto the topic of the thread - are there any technical papers which describe what this sytem actually does? Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 00:49   torque vectoring control - Armel Coussine

>> It's difficult to think of parts of a car which are more reliable than the microchips - if the rest of the car was even similarly reliable, most garages would be out of business. That's my very point, or part of it. Car electronics are very reliable as we all know. Problems are much more likely in linked mechanical parts. No doubt Ford has its own latest secret software and tweaks, but this sort of mechanism has been around for years. It isn't a question of copying, it's a question of common knowledge and practice surely? That isn't a putdown aimed at Ford. Indeed I agree with you largely about Ford engineering philosophy. I still can't help wondering how well the software and chips, which perform properly until they fail catastrophically, will cope with comfortably, slowly deteriorating mechanical parts. A driver can accommodate a measure of slop in braking, steering and so on. But a chip will expect brand-new response every time. I know this means people will therefore have to maintain their cars to as-new chassis standard all their working lives, and a damn good thing too of course. But it sounds a bit dear. And lots of owners won't do it in the real world. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 00:49   torque vectoring control - swiss tony

NC, I hope you know me better than thinking what I said was a 'near baseless rant'. What I am saying is, no matter how good technology is, humans by default often negate any benefit. Fitting electronic systems DOES make the vehicle safer, but people then feel more confident, thus 'pushing' the envelope -perhaps raising the road speed they feel safe at - until they past the point that the systems can help. Once this point is reached, IF an accident does occur, then it will be a more major one. Edit.... And of course, AC puts over another valid point... as cars age, parts wear, things don't work exactly as they should...... Last edited by: swiss tony on Sun 10 Apr 11 at 00:51 Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 13:00   torque vectoring control - swiss tony

Looking at the link supplied by NortonES2 in the biking weather thread ( tinyurl.com/3mf8y4 ) seems that there is some proof regards my opinion about over confidence being a factor...... look at page 50, 5.2 regarding skid-pan training in Sweden. I appreciate training isn't the same thing as electronic aids, but its the confidence or OVER confidence that results, that is the point Im trying to make. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 22:20   torque vectoring control - Manatee

>>Getting back onto the topic of the thread - are there any technical papers which describe what this sytem actually does? Truth to tell, I'm far more interested in knowing what they've got, if anything, than in 'dissing' it. It's not very surprising that PR and brochures are dumbed down to pointlessness, but it is frustrating that proper information can't be found at all - especially for anyone who might actually be tempted to buy on the strength of it. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 23:06   torque vectoring control - Number_Cruncher

>>but this sort of mechanism has been around for years. It isn't a question of copying, it's a question of common knowledge and practice surely? Here's the change in engineering approach I was mentioning. The hardware side of what a car is, hybrid and electric propulsion systems aside, hasn't changed much in 30 years. The electronics, and particularly the software will become more and more how we tell one car from another. The manufacturers who can use the data available to them on the car's bus system most cleverly will be the ones who will make the most desirable cars. I can't go much further without being accused of throwing equations in, but, to get an idea of the type of the clever uses of data, it's worth having a read of "Automotive Control Systems" by Kiencke and Nielsen. >>I still can't help wondering how well the software and chips, which perform properly until they fail catastrophically, will cope with comfortably, slowly deteriorating mechanical parts. A driver can accommodate a measure of slop in braking, steering and so on. But a chip will expect brand-new response every time. In general, a well designed controller is much more able to cope with changes in the dynamics of the system. The technical name for this is "robust control". It's a question of how well the controller is engineered at the outset. In the early days of vehicle electronics, many controller designs were quite naive, and easily fooled, but, that situation isn't true any more, and now most of the lessons have been learnt. >>I know this means people will therefore have to maintain their cars to as-new chassis standard all their working lives, and a damn good thing too of course. I don't think this is necessarily the case. As an example, our Audi 80 is now 20 years old, and its closed loop engine controller is still controlling the engine well enough to pass a catalyst MOT emissions test (even though the car doesn't need to). It isn't a car that has been pampered - either by the previous owners or by me! ----------------- >>NC, I hope you know me better than thinking what I said was a 'near baseless rant'. I wasn't pointing the finger at anyone in particular. I was trying, but failing!, to make the general point that this site is oddly negative about vehicle technology. I'm sure many have forgotten how truly carp cars were in the pre-electronics times. In this thread, any chance of exploring what this system is actually all about has been lost among the ignorant rantings. >>What I am saying is, no matter how good technology is, humans by default often negate any benefit. Yes! My view is that the sooner we remove the human from the loop entirely, the better. We really aren't well evolved for the driving task. It's not my field, but, I heard a figure of 20 minutes being the longest time a human being can truly concentrate on one task. The electronics face no similar limitation. I tend to take the view that the gain we get from constant monitoring and vigilence over vehicle systems far outweighs our efforts to drive towards a constant level of perceived risk. -------------------------------- >>Truth to tell, I'm far more interested in knowing what they've got, if anything, than in 'dissing' it. It's not very surprising that PR and brochures are dumbed down to pointlessness, but it is frustrating that proper information can't be found at all - especially for anyone who might actually be tempted to buy on the strength of it. Yes, it is a truly frustrating situation. I fully agree. As you may know, for the last 6 months or so, I've been teaching engineering to undergraduates. My colleagues and I are consistently dismayed by how frequently we see marketing BS, and nonsense websites being included in the references they include in their work. We have a very well stocked library, and we pay extotionate fees to access online peer reviewed journals, but, the students only find the carp! However, manufacturers did release extremely detailled information about their products. I have technical data for the Marina (of all cars!) where, for example, the engineering design data for each major part of the suspension, its material, and the manufacturing processes are all documented. Reply to this message | Report message

New Sun 10 Apr 11 23:29   torque vectoring control - Lygonos

Including the (presumably urban myth) Marina found to have a drum on one front wheel and a disc/calliper on the other... Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 11 Apr 11 08:53   torque vectoring control - Zero

like the one with two doors on one side and one on the other? Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 11 Apr 11 09:10   torque vectoring control - Iffy

...like the one with two doors on one side and one on the other?... We once had a Renault 5 come in which was trimmed as a TL on one side and a GTL on the other. The main difference was the side bumpers. As I recall, we put bumpers on the other side at the expense of Mr Renualt, and sold the car as a slightly odd GTL for TL money. Reply to this message | Report message

New Mon 11 Apr 11 12:40   torque vectoring control - Boxsterboy

>> I have technical data for >> the Marina (of all cars!) where, for example, the engineering design data for each major >> part of the suspension, its material, and the manufacturing processes are all documented. >> What, you mean "re-hashed Morris Minor"? Reply to this message | Report message

New Tue 12 Apr 11 09:33   torque vectoring control - Hard Cheese

>> I wouldn't automatically assume that Ford are simply copying the work of others. >> >> Yes, the idea of applying a brake to provide some dynamic assistance isn't new per >> se, but, what we don't know is how Ford are deciding when and how the >> brake should be applied. >> >> It's entirely possible that Ford have been very clever in using the data available on >> the vehicle to best effect, and have produced a genuine advance. >> >> Agreed, as I said above the technology is not unique to Ford though as with any technology the clever part is in the application. Reply to this message | Report message