DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey all, I know you all hate me or the old timers do for harsh things I've said but I've grown up since then and apologized for them all. Anyway, a friend an I got into a discussion about FWD engines somehow and I said "Whats really weird is that the LH cars from Chrysler have longitudical engines and are still FWD." He didn't believe even though I said I've owned one blah blah.

I think the LH cars are the only ones that have a longitudical engine and are still FWD. How did chrysler rig that setup?

Also, easy to see how our Grand Prix has traction control from the transverse mounted engine, I guess GM put a similar posi type differential in the front. How does Dodges traction control work? Stop one will by applying the brake thus transferring it over?

Pictures or explanations please. I want to prove my friend wrong.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,574 Posts
Positraction is not the same thing as traction control, and the torque convertor has nothing to do with it.

The traction control system on the LH works be engaging the brake on the slipping wheel, and in severe cases, cutting engine power. (At least I have noticed the latter.)

The LH isn't the only car to use a longitudnal FWD layout, the Eagle Premier did as well, and I know there are more out there, but the brands and models elude me at the moment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,427 Posts
I think some caddies have the same engine setup as our LH platforms do.

How did they rig it?
Look at any RWD vehicle.. the tranny sits behind the engine.. under the car, with the end of it leading to the driveshaft.. connecting to the Diff in the back.. driving the wheels.

Now, imagine, instead of the tranny leading to a drive shaft, it leads to a Chain that connects to a drive shaft that goes FORWARD to in FRONT of the whole transmission itself. Now you can put the differential there, under the engine and tranny, and have it drive the wheels from there.

(it is VERY similar to the front part of a 4 wheel drive system on a truck.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks LHSer for the clarification. The Grand Prix has the same method of traction control.

Lafrad-thanks that was exactly what I was looking for. Why would the engineers choose this over the typical way of doing a FWD drive car? I know the LH cars are known for drivetrain loss, I guess thats why a 250hp rated car doesn't really run the 1/4 that fast. Would also seem like it would be easy to malfunction?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,574 Posts
Starscream said:
Why would the engineers choose this over the typical way of doing a FWD drive car? I know the LH cars are known for drivetrain loss, I guess thats why a 250hp rated car doesn't really run the 1/4 that fast. Would also seem like it would be easy to malfunction?
Mounting the engine in the traditional way (logitudnal) allows the engine to sit lower in the chassis, which in turn allows for a lower cowl and hood, which leads to higher levels of interior space and lower coeffiecient of drag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,427 Posts
Starscream said:
Thanks LHSer for the clarification. The Grand Prix has the same method of traction control.

Lafrad-thanks that was exactly what I was looking for. Why would the engineers choose this over the typical way of doing a FWD drive car? I know the LH cars are known for drivetrain loss, I guess thats why a 250hp rated car doesn't really run the 1/4 that fast. Would also seem like it would be easy to malfunction?
THe drivetrain loss isn't because of the way it was mounted. It is because the transmission used has a very large amount of weight and fluid in motion at all times, and acts like a big "brake" when acceleration. The chain system used is atually very efficient.. loosing *at most* 5% of the power... but I would assume it is more like 1 or 2%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
456 Posts
I thought our Traction Control was simply done by modulating the brakes using the ABS hardware. No engine cut back occurs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
How many quarts does the LH tranny hold? Around 8 quarts? I know the 4t65-e in our GP held 7.5 quarts! My 700-R4 only holds 4.5 quarts and the pan overall is bigger.:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
407 Posts
1. There's no chain in an LH tranny. The torque converter is splined to the tranny input shaft and is bolted to the flywheel. The differential is incorporated in the same housing with a driveshaft out each side.

2."No engine cut back occurs." Yes it does. Next time you get wheelspin, floor it and you'll find it limits engine rpm to 3500.

3. The factory tranny fill is 8.4 litres.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,427 Posts
wire2 said:
1. There's no chain in an LH tranny. The torque converter is splined to the tranny input shaft and is bolted to the flywheel. The differential is incorporated in the same housing with a driveshaft out each side.

2."No engine cut back occurs." Yes it does. Next time you get wheelspin, floor it and you'll find it limits engine rpm to 3500.

3. The factory tranny fill is 8.4 litres.
geeze.. you need to look at your information a bit better. I personally have CHANGED the chain, along with all the guys on the prowler boards, ACR, Turbo, and many others.

so first gen trannys have a chain, second gen trannies have the SAME chain, What gen intrepid do you have?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Lafrad, if I remember correctly, aren't you the member who works at the LH plant in Canada or was that Rapidtransit? Don't remember.:)

8.3 litres is approx. what? 2.5 gallons?
 

·
.
Joined
·
9,861 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,427 Posts
nope. i am a student at a university in wisconsin.

YB normal and.. umm.. somone else.... (that you didn't mention) works with/for Daimlerchrysler/dodge/blah.

I dunno. my fill says 9.9 Quarts.. which should be the same for the 2nd gen trannies too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,278 Posts
wire2 said:
2."No engine cut back occurs." Yes it does. Next time you get wheelspin, floor it and you'll find it limits engine rpm to 3500.
I have to disagree here, I wasn't sure so I tested it on my drive in this morning, light rain, uphill on-ramp, matted it and watched the TRAC CTRL light come on and stay on while the wheels screamed away and the tach went past 5500RPM
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,574 Posts
JoeKD said:
I have to disagree here, I wasn't sure so I tested it on my drive in this morning, light rain, uphill on-ramp, matted it and watched the TRAC CTRL light come on and stay on while the wheels screamed away and the tach went past 5500RPM
Last winter I left the traction control on, and leaving a red light I hit a patch of ice, the TRAC light came on, and the engine would not rev past 3,500RPM.

Maybe something changed from 1st to 2nd gens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
There most definately is a chain to drive the differential.

I have no rev limiter to hold back engine power while the traction control is working.
If you can't get your rpm over 3500 it's probably because the power available can't overcome the traction of the tires AND brakes being applied.
IMHO it's a pretty stupid system. Useless at the drag strip, I've confirmed this. Also very annoying in the rain to have the front brakes engaging after the trac control system senses the slightest amount of wheel spin.
If you are stuck or almost stuck on ice or in snow it might offer a slight advantage but I live in southern Ontario and it has not helped me out once.
I usually disengage trac control after I start the car.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top