View Single Post
  #46   Report Post  
Old October 27th 14, 07:39 AM posted to uk.transport.london
Recliner[_3_] Recliner[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,990
Default TfL to possibly buy 200 extra New Bus for London

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at 16:30:11 on Sun, 26 Oct 2014, Recliner remarked:
Independently and momentarily applying the individual brakes probably is
more effective for regaining traction than locking the diff, not that many
two-wheel drive cars have locking diffs.

Not permanently locked ones, but a brake in the diff (rather that at the wheel).


A permanently locked differential isn't a differential at all, but a solid
axle.


Tell that to people with manual diff-locks on their Land Rovers (or don't
you count that as "permanent" - it is rather because you have to stop to disengage it)?

A locking diff is one where there is resistance to the turning of one
wheel vis a vis the other, which can be either mechanically or electrically
controlled. But ASC (including traction control) are much more capable and
sophisticated, which is one reason why so few two-wheel drive cars now have
locking diffs.


I'm still not convinced that ASC is the same as traction control. It
sounds to me more like a variant of ABS (in other words it controls
stopping rather than "going").


ASC supersedes simple traction control, though it's sometimes called
traction control (that was the name used when I first got it, many years
ago, before the more sophisticated ASC superseded it). It reduces the
torque going to a wheel without traction, and hence controls traction. ASC
gets ever more sophisticated, and in some cars now includes torque
vectoring as well.