Comments by "Golden Croc" (@GoldenCroc) on "Is The V10 TDI Touareg as Disastrously Unreliable as Everyone Says? Let's Find Out!" video.
-
3
-
3
-
@noahmcdaniel4920 As an owner of multiple Cayennes, and have driven multiple Touregs, I am pretty well suited to answer this.
If you want a "can do it all" car with no asterisk after, better than almost anything else, even new cars, you need the air suspension. Especially if you got a cayenne. And live with the headaches that may come. You also, if you got a mk2 cayenne that is supposed to "do it all" need the active anti roll bars. Big difference in corners when at high speed, and they presumably can disconnect the sway sway bars in terrain mode as well. Cant say how good it works in terrain, havent really tried it much. Another system that is potentially a huge headache, but makes a big difference for some uses when it works.
Toureg has visually more ground clearance, certainly the air sprung version does. Also higher nose and rear, which should mean better angles.
It is also softer sprung than a cayenne, no matter air or steel springs. Some of that difference is because of the ride height difference in the different modes, adjust the air ssupension so the have the same wheel travel, and it would be very close, I bet.
Personally, I could afford a newer car, but I purposly bought a mk2 (facelift) cayenne in good condition (knock on wood), because I have yet to find a new car at any price that can do the same things it can.
If you can accept some small compromises in overall ability, and dont want to spend a lot for maintenance, then by god dont get anything else but a steel sprung V6 touareg or cayenne. Or another car entirely.
2
-
2
-
1
-
@KTMcaptain Eh, dont know if I misunderstand you, but a locker will not send torque to the wheels with most traction. If it does, its not a locker. You might be thinking of some sort of "smart diff" such as a torsen, or a what might be called a "diff brake" which comes in numerous flavors. None of those are lockers, per se. A locker, locks the rotation of a an axle together, thus the name "locker"
Now open diffs, can be made to work like a smart diff or even a locker. Its all a matter of what software and how great your mechanical modulation of the brakes are. Theoretically, its very possible. That being said most cars are very far from it. On that we agree. But as far as software solutions go, the Touaregs system is one of the best, for sure, even if that may not say much. All a matter of perspective. I think its ok, but no more than that. A true locking diff would be much better sometimes.
1
-
1
-
@KTMcaptain I will start from the beginning of your post and adress your points in order:
The word I was opposed to is "sending". A locker doesnt send anything, anywhere. saying it send something somewhere make it sound like it actively is doing something. Its not, it just locks an axle together. Splitting hairs maybe, but that is the difference between a locker and a smart diff, where the later one is active and the former is just an on/off thing.
Again, a bit of hair splitting but if one want to get really technical, a unloaded wheel can develop torque, by virtue of the inertia it takes to spin up/down.
You absolutely can simulate a locker perfectly with the brakes, in theory. The physics are identical if you have an advanced enough system. No car does, but it is possible. I dont see how the braking can have a negative effect when it can be regulated perfectly, in fact one could even theorise that an open diff could possibly be even better than a locker depending on the material/ground the tire interfaces with, as far as I can see. Non-newtonian friction and all that. Dont know, have to think a bit more about it to be sure.
I know how a torsen works, thats why I asked if that was what you were referreing to when you said it "sends". But it was not, it seems.
But ok, all this post is arguing over semantics it seems, which isnt that helpful really.
1
-
@KTMcaptain Now now, it wasnt my intention to be petty at all, sorry if it came across that way.
Thats why I wrote "hairsplitting" about my own comment which is a self deprecating remark. Getting bogged down in semantics is not much fun, the technical details on the other hand is more fun to discuss.
Yes of course my comment presupposes everything works mechannically perfectly, snapping an axle shaft is not one of the cases I had in mind.
Annyway, there seems to be somewhat of a misunderstanding here. I dont disagree that lockers are much better for terrain driving than a software solution for every car ever made so far, including the one I got. I would much rather have a locking rear diff than the software I got today. No ifs and buts about it.
But I found it interesting to discuss if a brake derived solution can match a locker. Theoretically*, I think it can. Or maybe even better, I am not sure, because in that case the wheels doesnt necessarily rotate at the same rate as they have to do with a locker. As for if/when that might be an advantage, I am not sure. I will state again: *This is a theoretical thought experiment about if software using brakes ever could match lockers, which presupposes a lot of computer power, very fast reaction speed of the brakes, much engine power, very good granularity in brake modulation etc. Not a real world availibility of such a thing at all
I hope I have made myself sufficiently clear.
In any case, the whole reason I replied to your first post, was because the way I read what you had written, I thought that you maybe didnt fully know what a mechanical locker was. I hought that might be the case, because there are a lot of people out there who dont, and mix them up with other forms off smart diffs, e-diffs etc. But it is clear to me now that you do know what a locker is, and how it works mechanically.
That is all I wanted assure myself of, grounded in the desire to help increase knowledge if you didnt know. But as I said, it is now clear that you do. Sorry for "butting in" but I cant help myself sometimes, please believe me when I said I did because of well meaning.
Anyway, on another note you may be interested to hear that I, on top of my personal car, have driven a lot of all terrain military trucks in my day. Some of which had a sytem fitted that might be called "terrain brake". This is a system where you got an extra pedal on the floor. It is similar in function to "ride" the brakes and is calibrated to make sure the vehicle never moves, no matter how steeply it slopes up or down. Then it is just a matter of using the accelerator pedal to overcome the brakes and you got an easy way to crawl over rocks without jerky motion. OF course you can perform the same function just by kkeping your foot slightly on the brake pedal at all times while crawling, but this takes the modulation out of the equation, since its already pre-set. I think its pretty neat, dont think any street vehicle has a similar function, closest would maybe be the "hill descent control" of many vehicles, but its not really the same in what it can do.
Anyway, thats it. Cheers.
1
-
@KTMcaptain No, I am the one who should apologize, my wording in my previous posts was sorely lacking any finesse, and can absolutely come across as rude and condescending. Its a failure on my part because it was lazily written.
In any case, as I said earlier, the "open diff" software and hardware solutions trying to emulate a locker of todays production vehicles are very much lacking compared to a real locker for terrain driving. But could that change? Theoretically, I think so, but its probably more likely we will be all electric first, as you hinted at.
I also agree it uses more power, since one is effectively using engine power heating the brakes, rather than rotating the wheels... though I dont think that is all that much if an issue really with todays engines. I am more concerned my rear e-diff is wearing out my brakes when track driving.
Long story short, seems like we agree on just about everyrthing, as far as I can see. Thats nice. Cheers.
1
-
@chir0pter Hate to butt in in this fight, but we have to be fair here. I own several cayennes, so I know a bit about them. It can go offroad, and quite well at that. But that doesnt mean a touareg cant be better in some ways however small.
Firstly, do you have any data for approach/departure angles of the cars? As far as I know, the Tourag has a bit more ground clearance, though not by much, less than an inch. This would mean a little bit better angles as well, unless the cayenne is designed with shorter overhangs. I find that hard to believe, the touareg looks visually shorter. Nah, dont believe it, I think the Touareg wins that one.
Secondly, when it comes to air sprung cars, which is what I have I can with certainty say the Touareg has more clearance when in highest mode, for sure. It can easily be seen with the naked eye.
NOW, as I said there are other factors to consider, such as disconnecatable swaybars which I dont think the old toureg ever got? But if we are talking just ground clearance/approch angles, I am pretty sure the toureg is better.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chir0pter Firstly, I used the common British terminology of giving a car an increase in "mark numbers" even for a facelift. Thats why the facelift may be called mk 2, depending on your outlook. However, I see you are familiar with the internal code names, so I will use them going forward.
I currently own a 957 and a 955. I am also pretty familar with Touaregs of the same years, the later ones dont interest me.
I can see you are very loyal to your cayenne, and that is all very good, but we have to be honest and admit there are some things a Touareg might do differently or better, even if only marginally, just as there are things a cayenne might do better. Its only fair.
I looked at several Touaregs as a possible alternative before I bought my cayennes, and I inspected them thoroughly, including the tires sizes. So, the tire size isnt a factor in the percieved height. But for further clarification, I brought out the spec sheet. I have the Cayenne serivice manual and spec sheet on my computer and have now downloaded the same for the Touareg.
With air suspension, the factory spec is:
Touareg max ground clearence: 11.8 inch
Cayenne max ground clearence: 10.6 inch.
so about an inch, as I said.
Touareg max front angle: 33 degress
Cayenne max front angle: 31.8 degrees.
Considering the height, maybe the geometry of the front is about the same?
Didnt find any rear angles as of now when skimming through.
The Touaregs with air suspension has the exact same damper stiffness modes as the cayenne does.
In the end, a cayenne can easily be raised to the same height as a touareg if modified, and the 957 can be had with active anti roll bars, something I dont think the tuareg got, as I said earlier. It is also availible with more powerful engines, and has a bit better/more fun tarmac handling. Thats why I got 2 cayennes in the end.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1