網路上對quattro系統的解說看半天還是不太懂,不知站內有無高手能細說此次新款rs3與s3 quattro 的差異性?
aling5270 wrote:
那再請教kcnhc...(恕刪)
2012年以後VAG 橫置引擎 就開始用Haldex V
事實上從2006年Land rover 的Haldex III 就已經是"proactive"
類似2010年Audi的TORQUE vectoring 樣把sensor 整合進ESP
當g力改變 方向盤舵角 車速改變 就會適時的把扭力從前輪傳向後輪 所以和前驅車是不樣的
audi quattro 在2010年以前還是機械式四駆 沒辦法全鎖定 所以後輪最多85%動力 是道地的全時四駆
而haldex在後差旁裝了個ecu 利用電子四駆完全鎖定 扭力可以在100/0~0/100之間跑 這點就比audi quattro 還強
之前有人就拿S5 and TTS拿來實測 測試結果認為TTS 操控更甚籌
audi quattro and Haldex 到底孰優孰劣 很難蓋而論 關鍵還是車廠的調教
不論怎樣 開S3 OR RS3 別想太多 定讓你滿意
lacuna0517 wrote:
當g力改變 方向盤舵角 車速改變 就會適時的把扭力從前輪傳向後輪 所以和前驅車是不樣的
audi quattro 在2010年以前還是機械式四駆 沒辦法全鎖定 所以後輪最多85%動力 是道地的全時四駆
而haldex在後差旁裝了個ecu 利用電子四駆完全鎖定 扭力可以在100/0~0/100之間跑 這點就比audi quattro 還強
之前有人就拿S5 and TTS拿來實測 測試結果認為TTS 操控更甚籌
audi quattro and Haldex 到底孰優孰劣 很難蓋而論 關鍵還是車廠的調教
不論怎樣 開S3 OR RS3 別想太多 定讓你滿意 ...(恕刪)
您是拿對岸的舊資訊嗎?
Audi 原汁原味的 Torsen / Crown Center >> Haldex 唷
這Torsen / Crown Center也有電子控制幫助分配
而且新的Crown體積重量小,只有一小具就可以做好分配,傳動直接,流失少,是新世代高效能的機械+電子(真)四驅系統
更因為主要在後輪,所以操作和反應更佳良好
fatlee3 wrote:
您是拿對岸的舊資訊...(恕刪)
補充一下
10年以前的 Torsen vs Haldex 就是Torsen 比較好操控,A5 Quattro 尾部容易出去滑動幫助轉向,只要控制油門即可,而TTS的 Haldex 則會掉入前驅的轉向不足問題,必須利用特殊方式或是拉手煞車.... 簡單的說 Torsen(包含新一代的Crown式Torsen) 的Quattro 是像後驅結合四驅的感覺。 而 Haldex 5 則利用新的程式設定搭配 LSD 來實現 轉向中性 的效果。
以下是09 A5 Quattro vs TTS 國外試車的感想
Under normal conditions – for example, city driving – one can’t feel the difference between Haldex and Torsen. Both Audi TTS and A5 accelerate well on compacted snow and slush. But if the car with an electronic clutch behaves like a front-wheel drive, accelerating without unnecessary tail happiness, the A5 has a strong rear wheel drive character, and keeps trying to go sideways. The ESP system allows some gliding and the driver has to compensate these movements by short steering wheel movements.
But when one goes on a twisty winter road, the differences in the all wheel drive design are more notable. If you accelerate out of a curve on Audi TTS with Haldex, the car understeers and does not let the driver to use thrust to skid the tail. The best this Coupe can do is to slide sideways, still missing the apex, but more often it understeers like a front wheel drive vehicle.
Therefore, we try to go through the same curve in another way... Our task is to make the rear axle slide in advance, by zig-zagging or using the handbrake. As soon as the car reacts to your actions and attempts to go into a drift – press the accelerator and try to draw an arc with the skidding of all four wheels by controlling the angle of skid by steering and accelerator. And you must be firm - to lock the coupling, you have to give the wheels more power than they can accept, causing them to slip. And if you do not, then the electronics will "help" you pull the car from skidding and puts more power to the front axle.
The TTS driver must constantly "play" with the gas pedal, causing wheel slip, and not allowing the car to become front-wheel drive once again.
Audi A5 with assymetrical "Torsen" behaves differently in a similar situation. Due to the fact that 60 percent of engine power goes to the rear axle, it is much easier to turn the car into the corner - you just need to press the gas pedal a bit harder. If the grip the front wheels had not yet been exhausted, the car immediately starts to drift. And to go in the "rally-style", you should only slightly reduce the fuel supply by releasing the gas pedal, and a little bit – but not completely – adjust the drifting by steering. Pure, mechanical happines!
But when under the wheels of the vehicle is compacted snow or ice, A5 with "Torsen" can behave just like his younger brother, TTS - in response to throttle the front wheels lose grip, and the car goes past the turn. In addition, A5 is heavier than TTS, so that all phases of sliding last longer and it does not respond as quickly as we would like to the actions of the driver.
If the car understeers, and the car stubbornly refuses to turn into a corner, then the driver has only one solution - almost completely let go of the gas, put the steering wheel straight and wait until the front wheels get grip. Once this happens - the rear axle will go a little further, triggering a light drift, and the car can be turned into the corner by using the accelerator.
But the main thing is - Audi A5 reacts even to the slightest change in the positon of the throttle, allowing to control the car very precisely, with the throttle, rather than the steering wheel. Haldex on TTS behaves quite differently – you don’t have to be sentimental with the gas. The higher the thrust, the clearer the car behaves. But in this case the ride turns into a struggle of human and the car’s electronic brain.
But most drivers are likely to find the behavior of Haldex TTS more familiar and safer than the habits of the car with "Torsen". This was confirmed by my colleagues, who drove both cars on snow-covered ground. According to them, TTS, in contrast to the A5, does not scare the driver off with a sudden drift in response to a throttle increase, and in order to cause a skid of the rear axle, it was much easier to "pull the handbrake," than to make themselves hit the gas pedal.
But I personally find myself closer to the mechanical "Torsen" - it has a character! It is interactive and involves the driver deeper in the process of driving. Yes, it requires attention to the slightest nuances in the behavior of the car and more accurate work with the gas pedal. But it is the character that we love in cars.
fatlee3 wrote:
您是拿對岸的舊資訊...(恕刪)
Quattro and Haldex 的優劣在世界各論壇都討論過了
你拿其中一篇測試更證明兩個系統各有好壞 你認為quattro 好 但是有人認為Haldex好
個人認為跟車型配重和駕駛習慣有關 沒有絕對誰比較好
當然堅持quattro比較好的大多都是vag支持者 因為VW只有haldex沒有QUATTRO
AUDI 又把HALDEX用在入門車上 所以會有偏見
事實上 quattro系統是vag特有的 全世界多數的四驅車用的是haldex or haldex like 系統
包括BMW M.B. Land Rover Ford GM Volvo Saab 都是用haldex or haldex like 系統
就連Lamborghini Aventador LP-700 4 都是用Haldex !!!!
目前AUDI 好像還沒有一台可以跟LP-700跑吧 原因呢? 想想看?
要搞清楚 還是得回到原來的討論 要討論 先釐清一些事情
Crown gear 是quattro VI 的重要改變 事實上 最大的好處只是輕量化跟增加反應 對quattro本質是沒有啥幫助的
對前後軸輪配扭力也沒有幫助 所以不用特別去宣稱crown gear有啥了不起
為啥audi要特別強調 主要是電子整合torque vectoring 的推出
而2012年以前的quattro V 用的是傳統torsen 中差 沒有crown gear 是機械式四驅
Haldex 自2006年三代推出就提出proactive + 電子四驅的概念 之後只是更精進而已
電子式四驅的缺點就是可能因為系統誤判造成操控困擾 有點像你要甩尾 但是esp卻幫你減速一樣那種感覺
這時AUDI 還是用傳統機械四驅 好處是不需要仰賴電子運算 作動直接 沒有上述困擾 所以深得操控迷的喜愛
audi於是打響quattro 似乎和01的後驅迷一樣的概念
但是quattro機械四驅因為是靠阻力油壓作動 所以有兩個關鍵的缺點
1. 因為沒辦法完全鎖定中差(除非加按鈕)所以沒辦法坐到全前驅或全後驅 目前最大只能15/85
2. 當一軸完全失去抓地力(空轉) 因為中差也打滑 沒辦法帶動油壓 所以四驅無法作動
也就是說當你行駛雪地或極濕滑地面 前軸一空轉 中差就會維持進入時的前後軸比例 無法調整了
這也是為啥當你開quattro進入水窪會覺得動力變小 QUATTRO失去作用的感覺
電子四驅除非四輪全部泡在水裡 不然會把動力全部傳到前軸或後軸 這就是QUATTRO的弱點
有雪地的國家 車廠都會出四驅車型 大部分都選擇haldex這種電子四驅系統 而不是quattro
2012年以後AUDI 大量使用電子系統 加入torque vectoring 但還是保留機械中差
這種堅持有點向BMW後驅一樣 對車迷可能是好的 但是對安全至上的買家可能電子四驅會更好
個人覺得quattro和Haldex 不同情況下 不同車型和駕駛習慣下 各有好壞
只有最適合你的車 沒有最好的車 你說是嗎?
lacuna0517 wrote:
Quattro and Haldex 的優劣在世界各論壇都討論過了
你拿其中一篇測試更證明兩個系統各有好壞 你認為quattro 好 但是有人認為Haldex好
個人認為跟車型配重和駕駛習慣有關 沒有絕對誰比較好...(恕刪)
個人覺得quattro和Haldex 不同情況下 不同車型和駕駛習慣下 各有好壞
只有最適合你的車 沒有最好的車 你說是嗎?
我覺得你說的很清楚也都是事實
我很認同不同技術的駕駛,和不同環境使用下,選擇不同的車輛或是設定
並不是每個駕駛都應該開一台跑車上下班
或是適合操作後驅,甚至是難以操控的中置後驅跑車
只是 Torsen/Crown 也有電腦可以配到前後100%
而且以性能和操控來說 Quattro 的 Torsen/Crown 以後驅為主,輕鬆就可以達到利用尾部的滑動來轉向
相較於體質上是前驅,而且還會 under 的 Quattro (haldex),這個系統主要就是給一般駕駛方便及安全上手設定
再加上 $成本 與體質 (縱置與橫置的差異,及其性能的效果)
因此我才會說 Quattro (Torsen/Crown) >> Quattro (haldex)
並不是說 Quattro (haldex) 不好,Quattro 的 haldex 的確是比其他車廠的 Haldex 設定和調教要好的
而且性能也是非常的好
我覺得這可以以 Nissan 的 ATTESA 來比喻
ATTESA ETS-Pro 是 R35 GTR 使用的 liquid / multiplated 電子控制 center differential, 前後,和左右扭力可變,類似Quattro (Crown)(及您提到的Torque vectoring)的效果,而一般的 Nissan 車款不會用到 ATTESA ETS-PRO, 只會用到 ATTESA 而已,不會去控制其他這些,也不需要
因此還是回到您前面論述的,我修改一下,依據Purpose,來選擇效能及特性,才是最好的車



























































































