# MQB quattro system photos



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

I've done some searching on the google and on here...can't find many press photos (or other) of the haldex/quattro system on the MQB A3. I've found these, but that's about it: 


















Anyone find anything else yet? Looks like heavily carried over from the mk6 platform, with Gen5 Haldex.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

not much pictures, but Gen V seems to be a disappointment, with the main emphasis being reduced weight at the cost of performance. Components were removed resulting in the slowdown of clutch engagement. I thought they would at least have what the Mini's Getrag twinster has, which is a rear biased AWD system (which uses permanently driven rear axle and two sets of clutches for the front left/right wheels).


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

There was a great thread about the Haldex here : 
http://forums.fourtitude.com/showthread.php?5867257-New-RS-3-Due-in-Early-2014 

I agree would like to know more about what to expect in the A3 / S3 at the very least...of course too if there is any information now that the S3 is out in Europe. 

See if there is a big difference so can weigh the A3 S-Line vs S3


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

the torque-vectoring rear differential from the saab would be nice


----------



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

LWNY said:


> not much pictures, but Gen V seems to be a disappointment, with the main emphasis being reduced weight at the cost of performance. Components were removed resulting in the slowdown of clutch engagement. I thought they would at least have what the Mini's Getrag twinster has, which is a rear biased AWD system (which uses permanently driven rear axle and two sets of clutches for the front left/right wheels).


 What Mini uses the twinster? The only unit that I've seen it out of the Countryman and it appears to be a pretty standard transverse awd rear diff. 



mookieblaylock said:


> the torque-vectoring rear differential from the saab would be nice


 It's not torque vectoring...really just a fancy LSD...but yeah, would be nice to have.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

jetta9103 said:


> What Mini uses the twinster? The only unit that I've seen it out of the Countryman and it appears to be a pretty standard transverse awd rear diff.


 maybe next generation's mini? Anyway, the cat's out of the bag. The getrag twinster seems to be light years ahead of the haldex. torque vectoring front axle, no rear clutchpack...and all fits within the confines of a standard PTU. The MB's A45 supposedly has a rear biased AWD. Haven't hear the details on them, so can't comment on it. 

Plus, all the volvo guys don't seem to have much positive to say about the Gen V Haldex.


----------



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

LWNY said:


> maybe next generation's mini? Anyway, the cat's out of the bag. The getrag twinster seems to be light years ahead of the haldex. torque vectoring front axle, no rear clutchpack...and all fits within the confines of a standard PTU. The MB's A45 supposedly has a rear biased AWD. Haven't hear the details on them, so can't comment on it.
> 
> Plus, all the volvo guys don't seem to have much positive to say about the Gen V Haldex.


 I heard the MB A45 will also be Haldex. Wonder how it will be different. Rear-biased is interesting. 

fwiw, haldex really only does the front-to-rear clutch pack on MQB (and predecessors). VW & Magna (who made the rear diff & PTU, up until MQB; now it's Linamar) did most of the integration work. As goes with all of the other OEM's. Will be paying attention to see how Mini & Mercedes deal w/ their FWD-based AWD's going forward..


----------



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

Apparently Mercedes has already answer the question about the CLA 4matic system... 

Sounds pretty front-biased...operation sounds very similar to the VW/Audi MQB system. PTU in the front, clutch pack in the rear for the front/rear torque split. However, the rear diff photos seems to show an electrical connector on the LH side cover...do I spy an eLSD? 


















http://www.ausmotive.com/2012/12/13/mercedes-promoting-4matic-for-the-people.html


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

jetta9103 said:


> Apparently Mercedes has already answer the question about the CLA 4matic system...
> 
> Sounds pretty front-biased...operation sounds very similar to the VW/Audi MQB system. PTU in the front, clutch pack in the rear for the front/rear torque split. However, the rear diff photos seems to show an electrical connector on the LH side cover...do I spy an eLSD?


 Seems more like a Haldex Gen II, with the differential pump. Don't see any clutchpack on the rear diff to indicate locking diff. 

The CLA 45 AMG is supposedly rear biased. Although not sure if the stability control is rear biased or the AWD. 

Audi's MQB platform's quattro seems to be not progressing. Their MLB cars have moved to crown diff, and torque vectoring rear diff. The MQB is going to a less responsive system just to reduce weight. Maybe they could cut some weight by using alum for their engine crankcase.


----------



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

LWNY said:


> Seems more like a Haldex Gen II, with the differential pump. Don't see any clutchpack on the rear diff to indicate locking diff.


 I was looking at the black part right to the left of the words "Rear left drive shaft." What else would that be for? That cover is pretty thick if it's only retaining the ring gear/diff case. I bet there's a clutch pack on the LH output shaft. 



LWNY said:


> The CLA 45 AMG is supposedly rear biased. Although not sure if the stability control is rear biased or the AWD.


 Gotcha. 



LWNY said:


> Audi's MQB platform's quattro seems to be not progressing. Their MLB cars have moved to crown diff, and torque vectoring rear diff. The MQB is going to a less responsive system just to reduce weight. Maybe they could cut some weight by using alum for their engine crankcase.


 I'm sure money's tight for everyone right now, especially in Europe. If they have to invest in one of their main AWD systems, it makes sense to improve on the MLB more.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

LWNY said:


> Audi's MQB platform's quattro seems to be not progressing. Their MLB cars have moved to crown diff, and torque vectoring rear diff. The MQB is going to a less responsive system just to reduce weight. Maybe they could cut some weight by using alum for their engine crankcase.


so they spend the money on all those oh so useful electronic gizmos and ignore the actual fundamental part? wtg


----------



## jetta9103 (Sep 21, 2003)

well, i guess this is pretty detailed










http://www.vwvortex.com/news/volkswagen-news/golf-7-4motion-announced-in-europe/


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

LWNY said:


> The CLA 45 AMG is supposedly rear biased. Although not sure if the stability control is rear biased or the AWD.


the introduction of the CLA 45 in the geneva auto show had more detail of its AWD system. Sounds like generic haldex. What they were boasting was the PTU being integrated with the transmission.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Has there ever been an AWD version of a FWD car that was RWD biased? Seems like if they start with a FWD car (or engine sitting transverse) and add AWD as an option then you get part time AWD with it being FWD about 95% of the time.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

dmorrow said:


> Has there ever been an AWD version of a FWD car that was RWD biased? Seems like if they start with a FWD car (or engine sitting transverse) and add AWD as an option then you get part time AWD with it being FWD about 95% of the time.


The Getrag's twinster on the mini was a RWD biased AWD car. It had a permanent link to the real axle, while the front axle don't use differentials, but instead, has a clutchpack for each wheel.


----------



## velocipedio (Apr 26, 2006)

dmorrow said:


> Has there ever been an AWD version of a FWD car that was RWD biased? Seems like if they start with a FWD car (or engine sitting transverse) and add AWD as an option then you get part time AWD with it being FWD about 95% of the time.


 Stock Haldex Audis are 85/15 in default cruising mode. When one considers that there is always some form of axle slip going on, or other sensory input that affects the computer's response and torque output, there the AWD is always going to be engaged to a greater degree than the default level -- certainly less so at cruising speeds, but in any kind of performance driving, this changes fast. 

For a road car that occasionally sees the track, Haldex is more than adequate. If the set up was so poor, they wouldn't bother with it on the S and RS cars, and Mercedes certainly wouldn't bother with the production costs involved with creating a low-volume seller like the A45 AMG, with a completely overhauled engine and chassis. Most of this nitpicking comes from people who wouldn't ever be able to tell the difference anyways, and none of the systems on the market are without compromise.


----------



## cyberpmg (Nov 27, 2001)

This may be a tangent thought..... 

Since the size of the A3 is reaching the size of a B5 A4, why stick with a transverse engine and Haldex AWD when you could go for a longitudinal engine with Torsen? With the Torsen that exists on my B6 A4, my center differential was upgraded to a 4:1 ratio to give it a 40/60 power (more rear wheel bias). 

Is it the design of the MQB chassis that only allows room for a transverse engine which would then dictate the Haldex transmission setup?


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

cyberpmg said:


> This may be a tangent thought.....
> 
> Since the size of the A3 is reaching the size of a B5 A4, why stick with a transverse engine and Haldex AWD when you could go for a longitudinal engine with Torsen? With the Torsen that exists on my B6 A4, my center differential was upgraded to a 4:1 ratio to give it a 40/60 power (more rear wheel bias).
> 
> Is it the design of the MQB chassis that only allows room for a transverse engine which would then dictate the Haldex transmission setup?


 The longitudal engine layout results in a much longer hood, thus much less interior space. I don't think Audi would want to have the new A3 being smaller on the inside than their previous model. 

The MQB, being what looks like infinitely flexible, does not allow for flexibility in engine layout mounting. Even if they did, it would not fit any of the Audi engines, even if they could stuff one in, they would have to redesign those engines given the front axle would go right thru the engine block.


----------



## icjefferys (Oct 15, 2005)

velocipedio said:


> For a road car that occasionally sees the track, Haldex is more than adequate. If the set up was so poor, they wouldn't bother with it on the S and RS cars, and Mercedes certainly wouldn't bother with the production costs involved with creating a low-volume seller like the A45 AMG, with a completely overhauled engine and chassis. Most of this nitpicking comes from people who wouldn't ever be able to tell the difference anyways, and none of the systems on the market are without compromise.









I like the look of the S3 sedan, and I've wished for smaller Euro sport sedans for a long time now. But driving dynamics are also very important to me. I would like for the new S3, or even new A3, to be what I'm looking for. If the car handles in the AWD golf platform tradition, though, I won't be interested.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

icjefferys said:


> I like the look of the S3 sedan, and I've wished for smaller Euro sport sedans for a long time now. But driving dynamics are also very important to me. I would like for the new S3, or even new A3, to be what I'm looking for. If the car handles in the AWD golf platform tradition, though, I won't be interested.


a completely biased video. He knew which one he likes and then creates a test that will favor the winner.


----------



## icjefferys (Oct 15, 2005)

LWNY said:


> a completely biased video. He knew which one he likes and then creates a test that will favor the winner.


Where does he exhibit bias? And what test did he create to favor the BMW? Driving around a track? Driving in a spirited manner? 

Chris's opinions also echo the general press consensus that the S3, TT's and Golf R are all less dynamic drives than one would hope for. I own a GTI and used to lust after the Golf R. My interest cooled when the press consensus reported that it's just not that much fun to drive at the limit, which is one of the attributes of a car I care about.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

icjefferys said:


> Where does he exhibit bias? And what test did he create to favor the BMW? Driving around a track? Driving in a spirited manner?
> 
> Chris's opinions also echo the general press consensus that the S3, TT's and Golf R are all less dynamic drives than one would hope for. I own a GTI and used to lust after the Golf R. My interest cooled when the press consensus reported that it's just not that much fun to drive at the limit, which is one of the attributes of a car I care about.


Chris and the enthusiast press in general don't like FWD or front biased AWD. They go gaga over RWD since they luuuuv to bring the tail out just to have fun, even though it is always slower.

Saying it is faster than the RS3, which has been tested to go to 60 in 3.7 sec, vs 4.9 (or tested 4.5) for the M135i).

There are plenty of racing classes where cars are FWD, you don't see drivers running into walls. If fact, in many of the mixed classes races, many of those FWD dominates. How come he didn't put too much throttle in the M135i and take the tail out the way he push the RS3 into understeer? There is mention of the RS3 having inferior Continental tires, but that was never mentioned again.

They pipe in the engine sound for the M135i run around the track, while mutes it on the RS3's run...but then he complains about the RS3's boomy sound in sport mode.

And all the blabbering of him thinking the M135i would be faster, but ends up being around 1 sec slower on a small track...then he changes his mind that it didnt matter.

The final drag race, they obviously didn't try to get the most out of the RS3, given his acceleration numbers for the M135i is right up there for the best tested, while the RS3's is not even close to the numbers out there (0-100 10.73 vs 9.9). And to drive it to such high speed where it is obvious one car has reached its governed top speed is pretty much intentional bias.

The fasted tested 0-200kph for the M135i is 19.1 sec, while for the RS3 is 15.7 sec. So 0-124mph is not even close.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

LWNY said:


> Chris and the enthusiast press in general don't like FWD or front biased AWD. They go gaga over RWD since they luuuuv to bring the tail out just to have fun, even though it is always slower.
> 
> Saying it is faster than the RS3, which has been tested to go to 60 in 3.7 sec, vs 4.9 (or tested 4.5) for the M135i).
> 
> ...


His opinion is he doesn't like the driving dynamics of the car because of excessive understeer. He says the BMW is more neutral, probably because there isn't nearly as much weight on the front axle. 

Your only argument seems to be that many race classes have FWD cars that are faster and the RS3 is faster. He also found the RS3 to be faster but didn't like it as much. He is biased because the timed tests say the RS3 is faster but he doesn't like it as much?

With two relatively fast cars, I care more about the feel, steering and overall drive of a car over being a second faster around a track.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

dmorrow said:


> His opinion is he doesn't like the driving dynamics of the car because of excessive understeer. He says the BMW is more neutral, probably because there isn't nearly as much weight on the front axle.
> 
> Your only argument seems to be that many race classes have FWD cars that are faster and the RS3 is faster. He also found the RS3 to be faster but didn't like it as much. He is biased because the timed tests say the RS3 is faster but he doesn't like it as much?
> 
> With two relatively fast cars, I care more about the feel, steering and overall drive of a car over being a second faster around a track.


I am saying one has to know how to drive the car, RWD, FWD or AWD. Haldex drivers knows that when going around the track, they should get on the throttle ever so slightly once they hit the apex and then after that, they can go full out. What many of these enthusiast journalists wants to do is steer out of the corner with the throttle, which they can't in a FWD car and don't know how to do with haldex based cars. You give the RWD car to any avg person on the track, it will be guranteed that they will all spin the car out.


----------



## icjefferys (Oct 15, 2005)

Since Chris got a better time in the RS3 around the track than in the M135i, I'm guessing he does know how to drive a FWD car quickly. His conclusion was just that he had way more fun driving the BMW. After listening to him and most other journalists, I think I'd have way more fun driving the BMW, too. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the new S3 is a more neutral handling car than past versions.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

icjefferys said:


> Since Chris got a better time in the RS3 around the track than in the M135i, I'm guessing he does know how to drive a FWD car quickly. His conclusion was just that he had way more fun driving the BMW. After listening to him and most other journalists, I think I'd have way more fun driving the BMW, too. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the new S3 is a more neutral handling car than past versions.


the RS3 is not a fwd, thus it is not his skill that is making it go faster. Being able to put power into 4 wheels is what is making the car faster. You can see, he is not doing what he calls 'stupid driving' (drifting) on the M135i, thus he is only putting enough throttle on the car to accelerate out of the corner. If he wants to bring the tail out of a FWD based car, you do what all the race car drives do on fwd cars, which is to twitch the car into the turn. You can do that too on a haldex based car, or do the post apex throttle application.

Look how all the enthusiast journalist loves the AMG cars, which are notorious for swinging its tail out. Those cars seems to be made for them, instead of someone who wants to do spirited or fast driving either on the road or track.


----------



## velocipedio (Apr 26, 2006)

LWNY said:


> a completely biased video. He knew which one he likes and then creates a test that will favor the winner.


 Exactly. I really like Chris Harris, but this review was a joke. Strangely enough, he rates the TTS quite highly.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

LWNY said:


> Chris and the enthusiast press in general don't like FWD


 FWIW, Chris has said that if there was one car out of all the ones he has driven that best distills the fun of driving and that he could take to his grave, it would be a Renault Clio RS200 Cup, which is a FWD car. He obviously enjoys tail out driving and oversteer hooliganism, but he certainly doesn't dislike FWD or AWD (and in fact he just bought an S4 Avant for a personal car) at all. He is also an exellent, extremely well practiced driver, and knows what he's doing. 

-Tim


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> FWIW, Chris has said that if there was one car out of all the ones he has driven that best distills the fun of driving and that he could take to his grave, it would be a Renault Clio RS200 Cup, which is a FWD car. He obviously enjoys tail out driving and oversteer hooliganism, but he certainly doesn't dislike FWD or AWD (and in fact he just bought an S4 Avant for a personal car) at all. He is also an exellent, extremely well practiced driver, and knows what he's doing.
> 
> -Tim


 His review of the Cilo RS200 Cup rest on the fact that seems to be extremely positive given that he has to tap the brakes in mid corner or pull the handbrakes in order to bring its tail out. He is very forgiving on its 'understeering' and not critical at all of all the cheezy gadgets or simulated engine/exhaust sound of variet of cars onboard. 

Obviously he had different criterias for the RS3 and RS200, given both are hot hatches, but at the 2 extreme ends. But the criteria almost seem to be whether he can throw the tail around, as one can see with pretty much every shot of the Clio going around turns. 

If the RS3 had 50 less hp or ft-lb of torque, it obviously would have understeered less, maybe he would have like it better.


----------

