<VV> Corvair half shafts...

[JVHRoberts@aol.com]

Simple, the engineers learned better. That's why torque tubes are no longer 
in use. Although GM did resurrect the idea in a different form, first with the 
Cosworth Vegas and the Chevy RH bodies, and finally the F bodies with a 
conventional driveshaft with a torque arm alongside. This did away with some of the 
ugly problems of a torque tube, like side to side deflection weakening 
everything. The torque arm setup used a pair of trailing links to replace the 
triangular braces of the torque tube, and a panhard rod. The arm is allowed to flex 
laterally, but not up and down. 
Modern torque tubes, like the Corvette and others, have no joints in them at 
all, effectively bolting the engine rigidly to the transaxle. No reaction 
torque at all is transmitted to the structure, and the ability to prevent the 
transaxle from nosing up and down has been effectively eliminated. Porsche 924, 
944, 968, and 928s all used them, as well as some Alfas, and even the 61-63 
Pontiac Tempests used a torque channel to accomplish this. 


In a message dated 10/31/2004 2:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
YENBAT@aol.com writes:
The  physics is what it is all about.  The VAST amount of the torque is  
transmitted along the outside of any shaft.  The center of a solid  shaft 
transmits 
zero torque.  This is why driveshafts have been  hollow tubes since the early 
days of automobiles.


Then how do you explaiin the torque tube drives that GM (and others)  used up 
until the 60s?

They seemed to work pretty well.

Tim  Abney