>
> > Your comments about the rotoflex couplings on the GT6 Mk.2 and early
> > Mk.3 were surprising to me. In all the things I've heard and read about
> > the GT6, these were never mentioned as a problem. In fact, that particular
> > ...
>
> Similar joints were used in my foster father's Lotus 23 race car with
> no problems. Since I have never owned a GT6 with them, I cannot speak
> ...
While my GT6 experence is too limited to comment on the RotoFlex joints
themselves, the basic design is quite sound for dealing with limited
angularity differences and small maounts of plunge. In addition to Lotus,
a lot of Contenental cars used them; Jaguar, Mercedes, BMW, Alfa, Fiat, etc.
But, unlike Lotus and the GT6, these cats only used them in the driveshaft, with
irs. Thus, the joints only have to deal with the small relative movements of
the engine/trans and diff. They are not dealing with the high angles and plunge
found in halfshaft applications. Hmmmm, come to think of it, I do have to
change the joints in my friends Elan +2S quite regularly...
> from personal experience. I have met many owners of such cars,
> however, and every one griped about those joints. One told of having
I never pay this any mind. When the Rotoflex' aren't the current topic, these
people are bitching at Lucas 'cause their Clearhooter light switch failed
again. :>
But if you want, tell these guys they're lucky. They could have a Alfa
Milano or GTV6. These cars use three "rotoflex's" (the Yurrupians call them
Geebo joints) in the drive shaft. Big whoop you say? Well, these cars use a
DeDion suspension, with a rear mounted transaxle. And, the clutch is in the
transaxle! Those three friggin Geebos are spinning at engine speed, all the
time. Imagine a very heavy steel shaft, suspended in rubber, spinning at
7000 rpm one foot southeast of your butt. :>
Randy
randy@taylor.wyvern.com
|