sparcosoul
New member
eband do you really exist?
Subaru AWD System.
- Thread starter od_man99
- Start date
HellyHans
Legacy Member
Use question comme sa....
Sa marcherais tu de faire croire au system que la roue a de la grippe en appuyant sur le brake un peu et donner du gas en meme temps?
Je sais que sur un subaru, sa fonctionne pas, parceque c'est un viscous LSD... mais sur un Audi ou Mitsubishi, si une roue arrière slip et transfert vers l'autre qui fait rien.. si tu donne du brake un peu.. sa peu tu aider a transférer la puissance vers la roue qui fait rien?
neon rt bleu 98
Legacy Member
Dois-je répondre avec une grammaire parfaite, des tabulations et des sujets / verbes / compléments comme à l'école ou une réponse rapide est acceptée !?
Hellyhans, non ca fonctionais pas, meme avec le brake.
le probleme que je trouve con est que le différentiel arriere du outlander ne barre pas. lorsque tu es pris, ta pas les 2 roues arrieres.
Parcontre, sur la neige tappé ca travaille tres bien. Lorsque je le met en dérapage, (metton 70 km/h) et que je fais la corection le volant deviens tellements dur que ca prend les 2 mains pour contre braqué et le rammener droit. ca me fais l'impression que le devant barre ....
à LOCK, ca roule et tourne comme un LOCK de camion, mais un coup jammé, c'est fini.
je voterais mauvaise programations du systeme de traction et non probleme mécanique.
Aussi, le stability / traction control de Mitsubishi est royalement primitif ! ta le temp de te faire peur avant que ca agisse. Chez Audi, meme sur la glace vives àa 120, tu peux pas perdre le control de la voiture ... je parle délibérément la !!!!
Hellyhans, non ca fonctionais pas, meme avec le brake.
le probleme que je trouve con est que le différentiel arriere du outlander ne barre pas. lorsque tu es pris, ta pas les 2 roues arrieres.
Parcontre, sur la neige tappé ca travaille tres bien. Lorsque je le met en dérapage, (metton 70 km/h) et que je fais la corection le volant deviens tellements dur que ca prend les 2 mains pour contre braqué et le rammener droit. ca me fais l'impression que le devant barre ....
à LOCK, ca roule et tourne comme un LOCK de camion, mais un coup jammé, c'est fini.
je voterais mauvaise programations du systeme de traction et non probleme mécanique.
Aussi, le stability / traction control de Mitsubishi est royalement primitif ! ta le temp de te faire peur avant que ca agisse. Chez Audi, meme sur la glace vives àa 120, tu peux pas perdre le control de la voiture ... je parle délibérément la !!!!
HellyHans
Legacy Member
J'ai jamais rouler avec un mistubishi, mais tu est surement pas capable de rouler a haute vitesse en mode lock non?
Pour le volant, sa se peut tu que le système hydraulique ajuste la direction pour quelle sois plus stiff?
J'ai rouler avec un Forester 2010, outback et impreza 2010 automatique ( voiture garage DULL!!).. et quand j'enlevais le traction control, c'est ok comme conduite... j'ai pas remarquer que le système essaie de revenir en mode stabilité même au haute vitesse quand désactivée... je sais que certain véhicules, même si tu enlève le traction control, il est encore la a un certain %
Sa doit être différent pour les modèles performance... exemple.. WRX et STI, c'est pas la même affaire que les autres suby
Evo doit pas être pareil non plus au autres modèles..
HellyHans
Legacy Member
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/why-do-these-similar-cars-feel-so-different
UN bon article qui décrit les deux système STI vs EVO, en gros ils sont TRÈS similaires coté performance, le suby sort gagnant,parceque il est capable de distribuer le torque plus efficacement au roues, le moteur boxer qui est bas, alors un center-gravity plus bas... que la EVO,mais tout dépends de la conduite et les conditions.
The Evo MR and the WRX STi feel very different when evaluated one against the other on the track, so we did a few more handling tests to see if we could gather some data that would shed light on our seat-of-the-pants assessment.
First off, although these cars appear to be quite similar (turbocharged four-cylinder engines, four-door bodies, four-wheel drive, limited-slip front and rear differentials, etc.), there is a major difference in the way the four-wheel-drive systems distribute engine torque.
The Subaru employs an electromagnetic clutch on the center differential. Under normal driving conditions, say you're just cruising down the interstate, the diff clutch is disengaged, and 65 percent of the engine power is routed to the rear wheels, with the remaining 35 to the front (a 35/65 front-to-rear split). The car's engine computer adjusts that center-diff clutch, based on information from the yaw-rate and throttle-position sensors, and can send as much as 50 percent of engine torque to the front wheels. So the Subaru varies the torque split between 50/50 and 35/65. The driver can also manually select the torque split via a center-console switch.
The Mitsubishi, on the other hand, never sends the majority of engine torque to the rear axle. Instead, it can send all the engine torque to the front wheels or 50 percent of it (using an electrohydraulic clutch on the center diff). So the Evo varies the front-to-rear torque split between 100/0 and 50/50. In addition to the yaw-rate and throttle-position sensors, the Evo has a steering-wheel-angle sensor that also provides the computer with information.
Now, we're simplifying things a little because it would take pages to describe exactly when those center-diff clutches operate, but basically, the aim of these systems is to make the car go where the driver wants. For sporty cars like these, four-wheel drive can simply be another tool in the engineer's box that improves handling, and the computer algorithm that controls these center diffs is tuned in much the same way as the car's suspension. Four-wheel drive is another interconnected variable-like shocks, springs, anti-roll bars, and tires-that affects vehicle handling.
Judging by the Subaru's four-wheel-drive system, we initially figured the STi would be better at the racetrack simply because putting more torque to the rear wheels frees the front tires to do their main job, which is turning the car. The Subaru also has better weight distribution (58.2/41.8 versus 60.7/39.3 for the Evo), which should improve its handling.
But despite the STi's power-to-weight advantage, it wasn't the faster car at GingerMan, as Swan reports. The STi's best lap time was 1:39.15 and the Evo's was 1:38.88.
To dig a little deeper, we decided to perform some tests that go beyond our usual procedures, but before we went back to the track, we put both cars on Kumho Ecsta MX tires to remove that variable from our results. And even though these cars have driver-operated switches that can alter the function of the center diffs, we did all our testing in the automatic mode.
First, let's talk about the split-traction-surface test. We used Bosch's proving ground in nearby Flat Rock, Michigan. That facility has lanes of pavement running side by side with tiled surfaces, ideal for measuring varying traction levels. For this test, we put the left-side tires on a tiled lane that simulates driving on packed snow and the right-side tires on dry concrete. Then we accelerated from 5 to 50 mph. We also performed the same test with all four tires on dry concrete.
The Subaru accelerated at the same rate on both the dry section and the split-traction surface, whereas the Mitsubishi was 0.4 second slower on the slippery section than it was on the dry.
That test tells us the Subaru's four-wheel-drive system is a little better at sending torque to the wheels with traction.
Next we ran increasing and decreasing slaloms. Here, the cars were close, but the STi had a significant 2.2-mph-faster run through the decreasing slalom. So far, the Subaru was looking pretty good, and we were starting to wonder if perhaps GingerMan was a track that suited the Evolution but not the STi.
That thinking led us to DaimlerChrysler's 1.7-mile evaluation and handling loop in Chelsea, Michigan. It's a little like GingerMan in that it has a few long, constant-radius turns, but it also has a high-speed sweeper that can be taken at more than 100 mph.
We did two four-lap sessions in each car, and the STi was always quicker. The margin, however, was a scant 0.15 second. We also timed the cars over the tightest and slowest half of the track and found that both went through that section at an identical 52.80 seconds.
The numbers don't tell half the story, and this extra testing only reinforced what we learned during the comparo. The Subaru understeers more than the Evo, and that hurts its corner-entry and midcorner speeds. But the STi is extremely good at accelerating out of turns. And in some situations where stability was the name of the game, as in the decreasing-slalom exercise and on high-speed turns, the Subaru had the advantage.
The Evo felt quite a bit livelier, and drivers could rotate the car easier, which meant getting on the gas sooner than in the Subaru.
The Mitsu's neutral handling, however, was only able to overcome the Subaru's gutsy motor at one track. And we think some subtle chassis tuning on the STi would likely make it quicker everywhere. The tuning may be something as easy as an air-pressure adjustment. But that's tough to say without testing, so maybe we'll have to borrow these cars again and head back to the track.
UN bon article qui décrit les deux système STI vs EVO, en gros ils sont TRÈS similaires coté performance, le suby sort gagnant,parceque il est capable de distribuer le torque plus efficacement au roues, le moteur boxer qui est bas, alors un center-gravity plus bas... que la EVO,mais tout dépends de la conduite et les conditions.
The Evo MR and the WRX STi feel very different when evaluated one against the other on the track, so we did a few more handling tests to see if we could gather some data that would shed light on our seat-of-the-pants assessment.
First off, although these cars appear to be quite similar (turbocharged four-cylinder engines, four-door bodies, four-wheel drive, limited-slip front and rear differentials, etc.), there is a major difference in the way the four-wheel-drive systems distribute engine torque.
The Subaru employs an electromagnetic clutch on the center differential. Under normal driving conditions, say you're just cruising down the interstate, the diff clutch is disengaged, and 65 percent of the engine power is routed to the rear wheels, with the remaining 35 to the front (a 35/65 front-to-rear split). The car's engine computer adjusts that center-diff clutch, based on information from the yaw-rate and throttle-position sensors, and can send as much as 50 percent of engine torque to the front wheels. So the Subaru varies the torque split between 50/50 and 35/65. The driver can also manually select the torque split via a center-console switch.
The Mitsubishi, on the other hand, never sends the majority of engine torque to the rear axle. Instead, it can send all the engine torque to the front wheels or 50 percent of it (using an electrohydraulic clutch on the center diff). So the Evo varies the front-to-rear torque split between 100/0 and 50/50. In addition to the yaw-rate and throttle-position sensors, the Evo has a steering-wheel-angle sensor that also provides the computer with information.
Now, we're simplifying things a little because it would take pages to describe exactly when those center-diff clutches operate, but basically, the aim of these systems is to make the car go where the driver wants. For sporty cars like these, four-wheel drive can simply be another tool in the engineer's box that improves handling, and the computer algorithm that controls these center diffs is tuned in much the same way as the car's suspension. Four-wheel drive is another interconnected variable-like shocks, springs, anti-roll bars, and tires-that affects vehicle handling.
Judging by the Subaru's four-wheel-drive system, we initially figured the STi would be better at the racetrack simply because putting more torque to the rear wheels frees the front tires to do their main job, which is turning the car. The Subaru also has better weight distribution (58.2/41.8 versus 60.7/39.3 for the Evo), which should improve its handling.
But despite the STi's power-to-weight advantage, it wasn't the faster car at GingerMan, as Swan reports. The STi's best lap time was 1:39.15 and the Evo's was 1:38.88.
To dig a little deeper, we decided to perform some tests that go beyond our usual procedures, but before we went back to the track, we put both cars on Kumho Ecsta MX tires to remove that variable from our results. And even though these cars have driver-operated switches that can alter the function of the center diffs, we did all our testing in the automatic mode.
First, let's talk about the split-traction-surface test. We used Bosch's proving ground in nearby Flat Rock, Michigan. That facility has lanes of pavement running side by side with tiled surfaces, ideal for measuring varying traction levels. For this test, we put the left-side tires on a tiled lane that simulates driving on packed snow and the right-side tires on dry concrete. Then we accelerated from 5 to 50 mph. We also performed the same test with all four tires on dry concrete.
The Subaru accelerated at the same rate on both the dry section and the split-traction surface, whereas the Mitsubishi was 0.4 second slower on the slippery section than it was on the dry.
That test tells us the Subaru's four-wheel-drive system is a little better at sending torque to the wheels with traction.
Next we ran increasing and decreasing slaloms. Here, the cars were close, but the STi had a significant 2.2-mph-faster run through the decreasing slalom. So far, the Subaru was looking pretty good, and we were starting to wonder if perhaps GingerMan was a track that suited the Evolution but not the STi.
That thinking led us to DaimlerChrysler's 1.7-mile evaluation and handling loop in Chelsea, Michigan. It's a little like GingerMan in that it has a few long, constant-radius turns, but it also has a high-speed sweeper that can be taken at more than 100 mph.
We did two four-lap sessions in each car, and the STi was always quicker. The margin, however, was a scant 0.15 second. We also timed the cars over the tightest and slowest half of the track and found that both went through that section at an identical 52.80 seconds.
The numbers don't tell half the story, and this extra testing only reinforced what we learned during the comparo. The Subaru understeers more than the Evo, and that hurts its corner-entry and midcorner speeds. But the STi is extremely good at accelerating out of turns. And in some situations where stability was the name of the game, as in the decreasing-slalom exercise and on high-speed turns, the Subaru had the advantage.
The Evo felt quite a bit livelier, and drivers could rotate the car easier, which meant getting on the gas sooner than in the Subaru.
The Mitsu's neutral handling, however, was only able to overcome the Subaru's gutsy motor at one track. And we think some subtle chassis tuning on the STi would likely make it quicker everywhere. The tuning may be something as easy as an air-pressure adjustment. But that's tough to say without testing, so maybe we'll have to borrow these cars again and head back to the track.
HellyHans
Legacy Member
Justement, sa dépends des conditions de la trac, comme ils disent, la STI rentre moins vite dans le detour, mais en sors plus rapide. Aussi que le système a l'air a mieux gérer le torque, alors dans certains détours, ils applique mieux sont torque au roues= plus vite.
Je pense que être poigner dans la neige ben raide... la STI va avoir plus de chance a sortir car elle distribue, 50/50 ou 35/65, et la EVO 50/05 ou 100/0...
Pour moi 100/0... si ta 0 traction en avant, il va pas te sortir de la car il va spinner dans lbeurre...mais je sais pas, chu pas 100% sur.
Une chose que je sais, l'hiver passé, au rallye Maniwaki, j'ai aider un gars avec une Evo qui était jammé le cul du char grimpé dans un banc de neige, pis le devant était pogné dans un troue de glace, les roues arrières fessait fuck all... Moi jai grimpé dans le banc de neige en avant de lui pis je l'ai sortie de la, quand il est partie, j'ai essayer avec mon char,a la meme place que lui.. pis jai grimper mon cul a meme place, pis j'ai reussi a sortir de la sans même faire spinner mes roues, les rear wheels ont gripper. Mais je roule en forester, alors chu un peu plus haut que lui, peut-être qu'il était jacker.
HellyHans
Legacy Member
Une chose qui est sur, la EVO et la STI ont deux système complètements différents que les autres modèles de base de leurs manufacturer respectifs.
J’aimerais bien sa essayer une EVO un jour sur un circuit de neige a ste-eustache ou mecaglisse, pis après essayer une STI.
Une chose est sur, la garantie mitsubishi est 100x mieux que subaru.
EVO= launch control
STI, nope
J’aimerais bien sa essayer une EVO un jour sur un circuit de neige a ste-eustache ou mecaglisse, pis après essayer une STI.
Une chose est sur, la garantie mitsubishi est 100x mieux que subaru.
EVO= launch control
STI, nope
arsenic06
New member
Juste comme ça la EVO n'a pas de 100/0 ça je suis sur. Le AWD des Evo est full-time 50/50. Le ACD (Tarmac, Gravel, Snow) détermine après combien de temps le diff. arrière va débarrer.
La évo qui était prise dans la neige avait-elle le ACD? Il était seulement disponible sur les EVO 8 2005 et les EVO 9 (2006)
Ce que je viens de dire ne s'applique pas aux nouvelles Evo qui on le S-AWC en passant
Quand je magasinais j'hésitais justement entre les deux chars, pis c'est fou comment la EVO est plus sharp que la STi... vraiment plus ruff comme conduite. La STi en daily drive est pas mal mieux que la Evo par contre
En bout de ligne... on dirait que ça finit toujours en combat pour savoir lequel est le mieux. J'suis pas d'accord avec cette vision la. Je vois plus la STi et la EVO comme des frères que comme des rivales lol
La évo qui était prise dans la neige avait-elle le ACD? Il était seulement disponible sur les EVO 8 2005 et les EVO 9 (2006)
Ce que je viens de dire ne s'applique pas aux nouvelles Evo qui on le S-AWC en passant
Quand je magasinais j'hésitais justement entre les deux chars, pis c'est fou comment la EVO est plus sharp que la STi... vraiment plus ruff comme conduite. La STi en daily drive est pas mal mieux que la Evo par contre
En bout de ligne... on dirait que ça finit toujours en combat pour savoir lequel est le mieux. J'suis pas d'accord avec cette vision la. Je vois plus la STi et la EVO comme des frères que comme des rivales lol
HellyHans
Legacy Member
Non une 2009 ou 2010 la, mais comme jdit, c'est justement peut-etre il était jacké sur le banc de neige, aucune idée, peut-etre il était juste un dull qui savait pas comment conduire, lol.
Mais chu d'accord que les deux chars sont comparable et deux freres. J’aimerais bien voir plus de EVO dans les rallye ici,(dans les top 5) apart l'estage, ya pas grand monde qui roule en EVO X, Losier en 5 et 8, mais y commence a en avoir plus, mais dans les top 10, ya juste les losiers qui roule en EVO et lestage, mais jamais ben ben dans le top 3-4. c'est toujours Lestage vs subaru lol
neon rt bleu 98
Legacy Member
pour le stability control qui ne se désactive pas completement, Audi sont comme ca. mais il embarque té rendu le steering completement braqué et tu l'aurrais échappé dans la seconde qui suit !!!!
il n'est pas reconnamdé de roulé à LOCK mais ca se met et enleve en roulant. je l'ai fait souvent sur l'autoroute et ca fonctione.
Les EVO, meme si ils ont la meme plateforme S-AWC ont pas la meme programations !
Drunkn~st4r
New member
my forester is awesome to drive so far ?? 2.5l 5MT 1998 Forester with 356000 clics on it... still running strong!
HellyHans
Legacy Member
Moi je m'amuse pomal avec mon Forester l'été en lapping ou rally-X l'hiver, pis aussi les chemins de gravel c'est pomal le fun etre capable de partir sur une drift pis de la tenir juste en donnant du gas. Pas comme ma veille GTI que j'etais oubliger dme batter avec pour la faire partir, pis quand elle pars, c'est tout... profite-en de ta drift, pis espere que ta calculer ton point de corde comme du monde pcq aussi tot quel se termine, tu peux pas redonner du gas pour la tenir avec un FWD.
neon rt bleu 98
Legacy Member
anyway, juste les outlander XLS qui ont le S-AWC et la transmission 6 vitesses double enbrayage.