Equal Length Drive Shaft For 2.2
#1
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:21 PM
Bought myself a Vectra C 2.2 SRI 52 plate equal length shaft in the hope it would fit was only £25 delivered so worth the risk.
Split it down and was happy the bracket fitted up fine
Checked the length against a spare vectra b shaft I had laying around and it was the same so all good, however the outer CV is larger splined on the vectra C one so whipped that off and was happy to fine the inner diameter of the cv was the same so just a straight swap
So whipped the CV off the vectra b shaft, removing the abs ring and re fitted to C shaft and job done. Nice cheap mod and will help with torque steer for supercharged cars.
#2
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:29 PM
Nice..
I wondered if there was some compatiblity with the supported shaft set-up as attached to other F23 gearboxes..
So, its a Vectra C supported shaft with VX220 outer CV, basically (or Vectra B?)?
#3
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:31 PM
does the original short shaft have a counterweight on it?
#4
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:34 PM
This should also work for Z20LET boat-anchor's if there's a similar supported set-up combining them to a F23? From an Astra GSI or something..?
#5
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:40 PM
#6
Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:44 PM
No counter weights on the vectra c shaftdoes the original short shaft have a counterweight on it?
#7
Posted 29 October 2014 - 04:19 PM
#8
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:01 PM
#9
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:03 PM
whats the benefit? i had no idea there was a problem with the vx driveshafts?
#10
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:12 PM
#11
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:14 PM
From what I've read, on a relatively low-torque engine on a road set-up suspension, probably not noticable, but higher torque engines with stiff suspension may be more inclined to some torque-induced effects..
"Have both driveshafts of the equal length by using an intermediate shaft (or "lay shaft") on one side of the transmission. This is already implemented on most modern cars.[3] When the driveshafts have different length and excessive torque is applied, the longer half shaft flexes more than the shorter one. However, this is a short term transient effect. To avoid fatigue failure, the amount of drive shaft torsional deflection must necessarily be small. Effects due to one wheel spinning more slowly than the other are usually negligible. Equal lengths of the driveshafts, in the case of no asymmetric suspension deflection due to roll or bump, keep the drive shaft angles equal. The main component of torque steer occurs when the torques in the driveshaft and the hub are summed vectorially, giving a resultant torque vector around the steering pivot axis (kingpin). These torques can be substantial, and in the case of shafts making equal angles to the hub shafts, will oppose one another at the steering rack, and so will cancel. These torques are strongly influenced by the position of the driveshaft universal joint (CV joint) in relation to the steering axis, however due to other requirements such as achieving a small or negative scrub radius an optimum solution is not generally possible with simple suspension configurations such as Macpherson strut."
"Rear-wheel-drive vehicles still are affected by torque steer in the sense that any of the above situations will still apply a steering moment to the car (though from the rear wheels instead of the front). However, the torque-steer effect at the rear wheels will not send any torque response back through the steering column, so the driver will not have to fight the steering wheel."
#12
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:19 PM
think of the drive shaft as a torsion bar, and the torque windup is different side to side
#13
Posted 29 October 2014 - 05:24 PM
Fine, if everything is solid but isn't that the whole purpose of the wonder that is a CV joint? Still don't see how making one side artificially longer helps in the real world, if the outputs from the diff aren't on or equidistant from the centre line of the car.think of the drive shaft as a torsion bar
#14
Posted 29 October 2014 - 06:34 PM
#15
Posted 29 October 2014 - 06:38 PM
Edited by CHILL Gone DUTCH, 29 October 2014 - 06:39 PM.
#16
Posted 29 October 2014 - 06:45 PM
#17
Posted 29 October 2014 - 10:45 PM
#18
Posted 30 October 2014 - 08:27 AM
as already asked, why on earth would you do this?
it's only relevant to FWD cars and torque steer, makes zero odds to a mid-engined layout and just adds weight.
(when doing the EP Sequential, we actually removed the inter-shaft and went with long/short shafts.)
#19
Posted 30 October 2014 - 08:34 AM
But the outputs of the diff are in effect equidistant in a supported shaft set up.. It's almost like extending the diff bearing out to one side. The two half shafts should be the same length, meaning the is no torque induced bias.. Could be talking poop however..
Assuming the extended shaft does not twist..... oh hang on
It still doesnt fix it in FWD cars either, its merely a sticky plaster to help mask some of the issue.
#20
Posted 30 October 2014 - 10:18 AM
But the outputs of the diff are in effect equidistant in a supported shaft set up.. It's almost like extending the diff bearing out to one side. The two half shafts should be the same length, meaning the is no torque induced bias.. Could be talking poop however..
Assuming the extended shaft does not twist..... oh hang on
It still doesnt fix it in FWD cars either, its merely a sticky plaster to help mask some of the issue.
correct, it resolves the angular loadings imbalance, but does nothing to deal with the differing twist angles of the respective sides.
all that said, it's pretty much irrelevant on a mid-engined setup as there is no steering to apply unequal loads too.
might make some odds if you ran a spool diff (as in no diff) but then again, the twist of the inter-shaft will screw that too, ie, makes zero difference unless you can move the diff to the centre of the car.
on the other side, the longer the drive-shaft the less stress on the joints.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users