Transverse AWD

>>16681107

I can't remember exactly what years it was, but I think 2004/2005 STI's were already a 35/65 split, so i'd assume the show is just referencing some part swapping from a different model.

>>16681171
They were longitudinal with a centre differential. The shaft(s) to the rear wheels weren't daisychained to the front transaxle which is my understanding of how AWD works connected to a transverse mounted engine

File: 1485068100066.jpg (1MB, 3504x2336px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3504x2336px

>>16681107
Suzuki did it on the SX4. In Auto mode, it could send more than 50% of power to the rear wheels, as much as 90% IIRC. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

>>16681171
But Subarus use a longitudinal AWD system

>>16681171
STIs default to a 35/65 split without the diff controller actively vectoring torque because that's the mechanical setup but it can send power to whichever set the computer thinks is correct up to a full 100% if necessary.

>>16681200
The EVO was limited to only sending 50% of the power to the rear wheels. It might be possible to send more power than that to the rear wheels in a transversely mounted engine but not with Mitsubishi's system which is the only transverse AWD system I'm vaguely familiar with.

File: 2008-road-race-motorsports-suzuki-sx4t-photo-240425-s-1280x782.jpg (176KB, 1280x782px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1280x782px

>>16681232
>Suzuki did it on the SX4.
Speaking of the SX4, I feel this thing gets overlooked a lot when people want a sporty hatch. The AWD was available with a manual no matter the year, it has a racing pedigree in the WRC, and the car was styled by Giugiaro in Italy. it's exactly what we want. Italian style with Japanese ingenuity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPE6OrXuqE

And Road Race Motorsports offers a turbo kit to bump power to 220 HP making it a wannabe WRX. The kits were even offered at Suzuki dealerships without voiding the warranty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhPeG-6ujGE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD2ZgHrFLCw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkytX2A1bO0

>>16681107

Yes it is you fucking meme mongering faggot. There are fucking MR cars with transverse engines.

>>16681107
it literally just comes down to gearing and differential setups. Thats it. Theoretically you could set up a 3 differential system so that it only drove 1 wheel at a time, if you wanted.

>>16681107
Yes. You can do it with planetary gear sets or different prop shaft sizes.

File: turp_0902_06_z+2010_acura_tl_mitsubishi_evo_x_news+acura_tl_sh_awd[1].jpg (53KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 480x640px

>>16681984

SH-AWD uses clutches for that

>>16682008
Thanks Honda, for unnecessary wear-and-tear.

File: car-photo-white-1996-mitsubishi-3000gt-vr4.jpg (119KB, 580x435px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 580x435px

>>16681107
3000GT VR4s are 50/50 by default and can go up to 80/20 either front or back when slippage occurs. I think 1g/2g Eclipses are the same way.

File: Rarry Cerica.jpg (1MB, 2376x1584px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2376x1584px

>>16681276
As far as I understand, and this is something I read several times from people who wanted to "clarify" the issue, what the Subaru does isn't vary the distribution of torque between the front and rear axles, but rather it varies the percentage of lock there is between them, by means of an actuated clutch in the center diff

That is unless Subaru now runs a torque vectoring technology in their cars, which was unheard of to me

For the Evo I believe it's the same, only a 50/50 torks distribution front to rear. there was an (OS Giken, I think?) center diff that was for tarmac only, that sent something like 66% of the torque to the rear wheels, but it being a rare, expensive item, and not very liked by those who had it anyways, there wasn't much info out there that I could find

Please correct me if I am a dumbass and fucked everything up, since I'm doing this by memory

>>16681330
Why is Suzuki so based?

>>16682225
>That is unless Subaru now runs a torque vectoring technology in their cars
They started in 2015 but it uses braking force with mechanical front and rear differentials in addition to their DCCD which is similar to Mitsubishi's current system.

>there was an (OS Giken, I think?)
Apparently it was a Cusco diff that would only work on earlier Evos that lacked the ACD system and instead used a viscous coupling center differential that would lock to a 50/50 split much like the standard WRX. If the Evo in question is a 6 or earlier then yeah there is (or was) an aftermarket differential to replace the 50/50 torque split with a 35/65.

File: Love me some more classic EVO.jpg (59KB, 960x634px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 960x634px

>>16682473
Oh, I see. That's interesting, will look into that later. Thanks for clarifying

>Mitsubishi's current system.
>current

Not anymore
;_________;7

File: 1451685797659.jpg (44KB, 539x264px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 539x264px

>>16682608
Yeah RIP.

>>16681330
I once drove fwd sx4 for maybe10 minutes and I really-really didn't like in terms of comfort.
I don't have anything against simple interior, but I'm tall and sitting wasn't comfortable, steering wheel was extremely slippery etc

maybe I should try it again some time, bc on paper awd manuel SX4 sounds fucking perfect