Talk:Torque tube

Suggestions
Current article states "not that of the driveshaft, along the axis of the car". Add a paragraph that illustrates this with the driveshaft of the front-engine, rear-wheel-drive Porsche 928. Also industrial examples and diagrams from mechanical engineering and classical mechanics. e.g. a torque tube to allign parts of a hinge operated by two hydraulic cylinders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.57.60 (talk) 14:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Diagrams
Can anyone find a picture of this? I'm having a very hard time picturing what this would look like...70.157.134.125 01:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Accuracy
This page is not really accurate. Cars like the STS, Corvette, etc. have independent rear suspensions, and the torque tube is not used to transmit acceleration forces in these vehicles. Rather, it is because they have trans-axles in the rear of the car and it connects the trans-axle with the engine in the front. However, I am not enough of an expert on the subject to write a clear and well-written clarification so I have just added some templates to the top of the page. --Ozziegt (talk) 21:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Corvette since at least 1988 doesn't have a torque tube (unless they put one in later), and apart from the Miata I'm hard pushed to think of an IRS that uses one. I agree, this article is pretty horrid, it needs a rewrite rather than refs. Greglocock (talk) 11:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Corvettes since the late 90's do indeed have torque tubes, of the same type that the Porsche 924/944/928 etc use. All the mentioned Porsches are IRS and use a torque tube.  Part of the probem with this article is that it lumps very diverse systems together;  the early Ford systems are completely different from the Corvette/Porsche systems.  Both are classified as torque tubes, but the article does not focus on the essence of a TT, which is the use of a smaller torque-transmitting element inside a carrier. The carrier may or may not be static and may or may not be carrying driveline forces (like the Fords). 52FordF-1 (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup my bad, 2005 Corvette (as a random example) uses a transaxle and a torque tube. Note that the Corvette system is different to the Peugoet one, as the latter includes an articulating joint at the front whereas the Corvette system does not. This is a big deal, to a driveline engineer at least.Greglocock (talk) 23:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The article as written is essentially BS. A torque tube fundamentally counteracts the torque of the driveshaft; the alternative is that the torque is counteracted by the torsional rigidity of the frame (the net torque must, obviously, be zero otherwise the rear of the car would rotate). The torque tube often does transfer forward wheel force to the front of the car, but this is not inherent in the mere fact of having a torque tube: there must still be a mechanism locating the wheels longitudinally relative to the diff/transaxle. This is analogous to the usual need to locate the wheels relative to the frame (most simply, with leaf springs) in order to move the car forward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.57.184 (talk) 05:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

simple definition?
It has been my understanding from looking through service manuals and talking to mechanics that the corvette style torque tubes are just an enclosed driveshaft that connects a front mounted engine to the rear mounted transmission (with fully independent rear suspension)

I guess it's not simply called a 'driveshaft' in a classical sense since it doesn't connect a front mounted transmission to the rear differential —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.87.173 (talk) 20:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Non-automotive uses
Torque tubes appear to be something different in aviation, and possibly other fields. Acknowledging this, or covering these other forms would be nice. 174.168.158.48 (talk) 21:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)