Along this same line of reasoning, any torque biasing
differential could be considered traction control.
Anybody willing to give up their Quaif diffs?
John Goodman
--- Dave Dahlgren <ddahlgren@snet.net> wrote:
> It is just another example of large organizations
> trying to police what can
> not be done. It is silly and self serving at best at
> worst it is draconian..
> Consider endlessly being accused of something
> because Mr. or Ms. Secondplace
> starts accusing every that beats them of cheating..
> The winner has the
> stigma of being a cheater and the Second Placer is
> redeemed. Worst yet no
> one knows who is right. It might be time to grow up
> and realize both
> personal and organizational limitations and just
> make it another tool in the
> toolbox. With multiple millions at their disposable
> NASCAR,CART,IRL and F1
> cannot police this issue. What in the world would
> make anyone think that
> SCTA/BNI can?
>
> As an aside to this it is still not traction
> control. It is tongue limiting
> and while it helps control traction it is still not
> traction control as it
> would be obvious to every one that there are
> electronic devices connected to
> the braking system. What it actually has to be is a
> slew rate rev limiter
> using timing control to keep the engine accel rate
> balanced.
>
> Dave
__________________________________
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
|