Instead of removing VCU

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.

deangermouse

Active Member
Posts
255
Location
Newton Stewart, SW Scotland
Just a thought but instead of removing the vcu and prop shafts when the vcu fails, can you not just drill a hole in the case and drain out the liquid? At least it would look OK even if it wouldn't drive the back wheels. Like I said "just a thought "
 
If you want to lay your car up for 2 weeks while it drains - or splatter silicon fluid all around your neighbourhood to speed things up. Then it won't all drain. But it would free it up probably, but then there's not enough fluid in there, the thing would probably overheat.

Easiest and more reliable to remove props or remove the pinion gear in the IRD.
 
If the fluid comes out having drilled a hole in it then the vcu will stop working. Hence no resistance across it, and therefore no drive. It's ok to do if you really want to and the easy option for some. But not good for the environment by leaking fluid on the road. Personally I'd remove the props/vcu instead.
 
Without any fluid, I wonder whether the driven discs inside the VCU would rattle against each other to make an all mighty racket???
 
Without any fluid, I wonder whether the driven discs inside the VCU would rattle against each other to make an all mighty racket???

In normal driving. The plates on the front and rear turn almost the same speed. So I doubt the plates will rattle or generate any heat from friction.
 
The rear will over drive the front by a small amount (0.8% iirc) with 4 new tyres, driving in a straight line. As the front tyres wear, the difference between front and rear reduces.
As the vehicle negotiates a gentle corner, the rotational difference reduces.
This rotational difference continues to reduce as the corner sharpens. At some point the front and rear will rotate at the same speed. Tuning sharper still will start the front shaft spinning faster than the rear. So there's a rotation speed reversal, once the equilibrium is exceeded.
The greatest difference in speed is when reversing at full lock, VCU issues show up first. Hills are irrelevant unless the front wheels are spinning on a low friction surface.
At no point in the operating cycle would the VCU spin fast enough to cause friction damage. Unless spinning the front wheels. I can't imagine the plates are loose enough to rattle either. But that would need to be tried.
 
I say that cos dfossil put counters on his props and found they spun at different rates going up a hill.

Taking Hippo's calculations...

edit: just seen the /h - sorry

At 60mph the rear wheels are turning at 96.56km
That's 96,560 meters per hour
Divide by the typical circumference of a tyre at approx 2.15meter = 44,912 approx
44,912 is the revs of the rear drive shaft per hour at 60mph (assume driving in a straight line)
44,912 x rear diff ratio of (45 / 14) = 144,360
144,360 is the revs of the rear prop per hour at 60mph
Divide by 60 give revs per minute = 2406
Divide again by 60 gives revs per second = 40.1

The props are turning at 2,400 RPM. If there is a 0.8% difference, they are slipping at 20 RPM. I'd have thought that's more than enough to create noise, heat and damage.

In reality I don't think they slip that much, dfossil found it negligible, but if it is negligible in a straight line, then that increases it when turning.

So what ever happens, I can't see "nothing" happening, surely there would be trouble.
 
I say that cos dfossil put counters on his props and found they spun at different rates going up a hill.

Taking Hippo's calculations...



The props are turning at 2,400 RPM. If there is a 0.8% difference, they are slipping at 20 RPM. I'd have thought that's more than enough to create noise, heat and damage.

In reality I don't think they slip that much, dfossil found it negligible, but if it is negligible in a straight line, then that increases it when turning.

So what ever happens, I can't see "nothing" happening, surely there would be trouble.
I suspect something detrimental would happen if used without fluid for any length of time. I wouldn't want to try it myself. I think in the sort term, it would get the owner out of a tight spot. Removing the props would be a far safer way to protect the the IRD.
 
I only measured a very small prop speed difference in normal hills and bends - like one or two rpm - see pics - but if leaving the drained prop on why not flush and refill with oil?
 

Attachments

  • 2015 12 05 Tachos (10).JPG
    2015 12 05 Tachos (10).JPG
    192.5 KB · Views: 127
  • 2015 12 05 Tachos (10).JPG
    2015 12 05 Tachos (10).JPG
    192.5 KB · Views: 150
  • 2015 12 05 Tachos (11).JPG
    2015 12 05 Tachos (11).JPG
    223.6 KB · Views: 182
  • 2015 12 Tachos 020.JPG
    2015 12 Tachos 020.JPG
    233.4 KB · Views: 139
I only measured a very small prop speed difference in normal hills and bends - like one or two rpm - see pics - but if leaving the drained prop on why not flush and refill with oil?
Just as a matter of interest, when I brought my FL to Spain, I had removed the drive shaft. When I went to the IVA (MOT) they would not pass it, as it was not to Manu. Spec. I ordered a s/hand shaft from UK and job done no problem, very strict. Malcolm.
 
Just as a matter of interest, when I brought my FL to Spain, I had removed the drive shaft. When I went to the IVA (MOT) they would not pass it, as it was not to Manu. Spec. I ordered a s/hand shaft from UK and job done no problem, very strict. Malcolm.
Its the same here, a change as substantial as removing prop shafts and converting from 4WD to 2WD needs to be "certified". I removed the pinion gear from the IRD (which was like me in the tooth dept. - a bit 'gappy') and continued running with props.
 
Its the same here, a change as substantial as removing prop shafts and converting from 4WD to 2WD needs to be "certified". I removed the pinion gear from the IRD (which was like me in the tooth dept. - a bit 'gappy') and continued running with props.
Last time I MOT'd my car the MOT guy asked me if it had the propshaft. I asked him why and he said it wouldn't be a problem if it didn't have the propshaft but the brake test was different.
Apparently when they test the brakes on a complete 4WD car the machine rotates the wheels in opposite directions to avoid problems with the 4WD system.
 
Last time I MOT'd my car the MOT guy asked me if it had the propshaft. I asked him why and he said it wouldn't be a problem if it didn't have the propshaft but the brake test was different.
Apparently when they test the brakes on a complete 4WD car the machine rotates the wheels in opposite directions to avoid problems with the 4WD system.
That would work with disc brakes, but not drums. Drums are handed and so only work at optimum performance when rotating in the correct direction. Unless they only measure one wheel at a time, letting the other side freewheel?

My MOT tester uses a Tapley Gauge if I present my FL1 with the props in place. Or just puts it on the normal rollers if they are removed.
 
That would work with disc brakes, but not drums. Drums are handed and so only work at optimum performance when rotating in the correct direction. Unless they only measure one wheel at a time, letting the other side freewheel?

My MOT tester uses a Tapley Gauge if I present my FL1 with the props in place. Or just puts it on the normal rollers if they are removed.
Well spotted Nodge, I think he said they test one wheel at a time.
 
Back
Top