The system with a viscous coupling for the AWD will allow the viscous dif to slip for the front at a different percentage to the slip for the rear.I also had a 1990 Ford Laser TX3 4WD turbo (front wheel drive based with PTU) and that was supposed to have a 45:55 torque split front to rear with a viscous 4WD system. It certainly drove like it was rear biased. Like this Ford Laser TX3 Turbo 4WD - Buyer's Guide - but there's nothing mentioned about the torque split in that article. Perhaps it was done with different diff ratios like in the RS???
It's all very confusing!
Hi, LAND ROVER Discovery2 had the ABS derived 4 wheel drive system, applying the brake to any spinning wheel, had one !If the fronts are spinning, its not for long, the front brakes are applied (for a split second) to divert torque to the rear.
The system uses the brake system instead of a limited slip diff. (Landrover experimented with it in the 90's)
I had the fronts on wet grass, rears on tarmac, and what happened was as per above. Similar turning on my steep drive full of compact snow.
I would like mediaman to try and see what happens.
Beginning to think the iAWD readout is just a volt meter reading just telling us the signal to 'how tight' the magnetic clutch is being told to do. Not a torque read out. Sit at the lights, put in neutral and blip the throttle, the iAWD display 'revs' up even though no wheels turning. Hmm!
Should they not have called it the Freeloader as when buying one it passed the problem onto the consumer haha.I believe the prototype of the Landy is in the vehicle museum, it looks like a shrunk 90 defender.
Wanted a lighter, more economical 4x4 for family use. Shelved it as SUV's wouldn't catch on.
Then brought out the Freelander 1! Not great.
A lot of newer AWD systems employ that techique. It appears to be happening on the Kuga/ Escape Youtube video I posted on the first page.Hi, LAND ROVER Discovery2 had the ABS derived 4 wheel drive system, applying the brake to any spinning wheel, had one !
I've worked it out- you get 100% torque to the rear when the front wheels have no traction!I agree what you're saying David. However as it's basically a FWD transmission with a PTU bolted to it, there is no way for the front drive to be reduce, only increase on the torque sent to the rear.
Thats sounds plausible, but when I saw it on mine it was a lovely dry sunny day and it appeared for the few seconds I moved, but I definitely saw just rear wheel drive indication so I guess it was a gremlin as I certainly didn't spin then wheels. (the slow traffic was caused by a Mini running into the rear of a 5 series which had 4 burly far eastern guys in, well they were stood outside actually, I remember it well)I've have mentioned this before, when I was stuck in very slow/stop start moving traffic on a motorway feeling slightly bored, I flicked the AWD display on and for a short while as I moved off very slowly I noticed only torque to the rear wheels, was it a gremlin?
I was hoping it was some kind of torque sensor on the rear output shaft rather than just a calculated representation of torque proportional to the pressure applied to the wet plates.
My guess is that indicates it's sending the maximum torque it can to the rear by locking the clutch 100%. So that would be 50% actual torque- unless you've completely lost traction in the front end when the torque transfer can get up to 100% if the rear wheels have traction. That's my understanding of it.So the 100% to rear (or the graphic showing only RWD) appears if the front wheels are spinning.