CNY_Dave
Members-
Posts
2032 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Everything posted by CNY_Dave
-
I've been asking myself, is there any way this could be the front/rear torque-split clutch? I can posit a reasonable theory that a downshift at high speed could alter the trans fluid pressure, which could cause a tightening/loosening of the AWD clutch, but since its on dry pavement I can't really spin that into something that'll cause a clink. Dave
-
Dang, thought I put that stuff in. 2003 H6 OBW 63,000 miles, the dealer was *supposed* to do the 60K service pre-purchase, I've had the car since 55K miles. Everything seems to function normally, AWD gets tested regularly in the snow around here, only happens on the 4-3 shift at above 70 or so. Dave
-
Sometimes when I'm on the highway, doing 70+, and the car downshifts because I'm going up a hill (or because I'm stomping on it), the downshift has a delayed clunk. It goes like this- lockup converter already disengaged hill gets steep, car downshifts tach goes up and stabilizes 1/4 second or so later, "clunk" that feels like its coming from the middle of the car, or slightly to the rear. In fact, it feels and sounds a lot like the clunk when the front spins, and the front-rear clutch goes "50/50", except the downshift clunk is a lot louder. What's oddest is the way the clunk comes after the downshift is finished. I can feel a seat-of-the-pants jolt when it happens, so I'm sure its in the driveline, and not something like the muffler bouncing around. Dave
-
When I reach the point it needs a timing chain, I guess I'll open 'er up and see which of those parts it actually needs- you might not get 150,000 out of the 2nd set that way, but unless there's a good body of evidence that all those parts are toast... Hmmm, but what a great excuse to buy a 6 from a wreck when the car hits 100,000 and slowly do a rebuild, and have a new hi-po engine ready to go right then... Dave
-
Well, a possible fly in the ointment- with the throttle open, the engine will be moving a significant amount of air through the intake and exhaust valves, and moving the air through those small orfices will take some work. Also, since the intake/exhaust timing isn't symmetric, I think there may not be as much 'air-spring' effect as you might otherwise get. For example, the ex valve is going to open before BDC, wasting some of the air-spring's energy. It will be interesting to see what difference you notice. Dave
-
"I'm making a dual exhaust for my rally car and need a template"... I have to assume you could bolt in a (or a pair of) "generic" converters, if you can still get 'em. Getting that 2nd O2 sensor to 'read right' might be a trick, though. No way I could drop 2300, or even a grand, on a converter. Couldn't swing it at this point. How much should it cost, really? Dave
-
Technically speaking, if you had 2 tires of diameter "A", and 2 of diameter "B", and put AB on the front, and AB (or BA) on the rear, the front and rear drivelines would be 'matched', and you'd be safe from torque bind, BUT... As stated, it'd be hard on a limited-slip differential (if equipped), and also it indicates someone thought little enough of the car to 'take a chance' on causing a problem. Also, if someone was willing to do that, what are the chances they took care to match the diameters of the similar tires? Also, if someone made sure the circumference of the A tires was exactly the same as the B tires, that doesn't mean the actual rolling circumference would match (The A tires might 'squish' more). Dave
-
Maybe I'll do this the easy way- turkey-baster out most of the fluid in the master cylinder, add fresh, then just open the bleeders one by one. In fact, maybe I'll push back all the calipers first. Not sure about ABS equipped vehicles, but every other car I've owned if you just crack bleeders, fluid will flow and there's no tendency to suck air in. You know, if you sucked the MC fluid pretty much out, retracted the calipers, sucked out the fluid again, then added fresh and pumped the brakes, you'd have at least 75-85% replacement. Do it twice and you'd be at 90%+ I bet. Actually, I just need to make sure the dealer did this as part of the 60K service they said they'd do before I bought the car. Dave
-
Given my finances, and my penchant for trouble I need a more durable lower engine cover. Looks to be $215-230 from get primitive, assuming their model fits the H6, a good deal just for a piece of 3/16 aluminum that size, but out of my range at the moment. Anyone know of a cheaper tougher lower cover? I have some Al sheet, might not be large enough or thick enough, I have plenty of 16 guage mild steel but it'll rust no matter what I do to it. Speaking of primitive's stuff, are the 4-cyl lower covers a flat piece (as shown there), or do they turn up at the sides like the H6 cover? My cover seems to be more suared off at the rear than the primitive covers, but maybe that's just my crappy memory talkin'. Dave
-
Yes, but if the traction-control braking cycle time was fast enough (faster than it would have to be for ABS, I'm guessing) it could pulse the brakes at just the right intensity/cadence to make the braked wheel spin at any desired rate- the desired rate would be whatever the wheel with traction was doing (or match actual vehicle speed measured some other way). The cycle times would have to be shorter, because the control-loop feedback would be faster, because the effective inertia of the braked wheel would be much less (as you say) but there's no technological issue, just perhaps a cost issue. It would be almost like a stepper motor control, but doing the opposite, of course. This'd prob. be more useful for going slow over slick/ugly stuff rather than saving your butt if you're going too fast over slick stuff. Now 'could be done' is a lot different than 'anyone has' or 'its paractical to do', I know. Dave
-
I don't know if they do this, but they could use the ABS in reverse (so to speak) to allow the braked wheels to spin exactly as fast as the unbraked wheel(s) by pulsing the brakes juuuuust right. That'd be a lot more effective than just clamping on the braked wheels a specified amount, and would be the only way to be sure the braked wheels weren't holding the car back. Dave
-
I'd warrant that the clutches are supplying no power to the rear tires under normal conditions, not the claimed 10%. Either that, or maybe the clutch-pack is filled with goo, so when its 100% 'released' the goo acts like a viscous coupling, giving the 10% to the rear. Damn, gotto go see if that's patented! Dave