Freelander 1 HCU - Hippo Coupling Unit (TM)

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Mad Hat Man said:
It's identical to an ABS monitoring system...


Did they have ABS?
Click to expand...

Is it? The speed differences wouldn't be big enough! Abs relies on a significant speed difference to work, every component of the 4x4 system can be driven by the road or the gear box so if you have a failed vcu it won't show? You would need to measure the wind up using strain gauges or similar?!
 
Plus they don't actually seize so there will still be a speed difference, just with a lot of stress! Or if it's open it'll spin perfectly and show no fault!?;)
And, if you go off road it'll throw a fit:)
 
The speed difference would be a a function of the pulse rate - easy to adjust.

Open Circuit would give you a near constant difference betwen input and output and, therefore an easily identifyible fault condition.
As for normal use - there would be a variable range which should be acceptable and therefore an identifyable fault condition if there was less than expected variation.

with all the electronics currently on board, it would be easy to have a differential feed from the ABS sensor circuit to act as a reference signal.

Not insurmountable problems. :)
 
That's a normal speed difference of cornering etc which the vcu allows for! Soo you'd pick that up! False alarm! For seized you'd be looking for front and rear to have a speed difference which you'd measure at the wheels! because of the ird gearing! But that doesn't happen cos the road forces the wheels to do whatever speed they must. If the vcu was seized solid the rear would go a different speed to the front destroying the tyres. That doesn't happen. So you'd need to measure either side of the vcu which under normal driving in a straight line will be going at different speeds that's dictated by the gearing and the tyre grip. That doesn't change even when it's semi seized! You just get wind up not speed differences unless you're on a slippery surface in which case the vcu may make the rear go at a different speed to the front!
 
Hippo said:
It's not ****e, it's just perceived to be ****e. The VCU dates back to a time when e-diffs were a thing of the future. Many cars have used vcu’s ok. The problem with Freelanders may be down to a wider limit of variations when in use, which causes the vcu more stress than it should (effectively looks up sooner than it should), as opposed to the ideal variation of limits during normal use which shouldn’t stress the vcu so much (activate it as much). Like dodgy tyre size and tread patterns causing issues. Differing prop speed ration is thought to be a problem also. The fact the vcu automatically “activate/locks” when needed to operate is quite good. The theory works ok. It’s also good how it can pass a certain amount of torque across it during normal conditions. The big problem we have with it is we don’t actually know the true facts of what a new vcu is like, as a comparison to an old one. So we don’t know the effects over time other than they tend to seize (can also go open circuit especially if it’s a BSVCU as they’re open circuit to begin with). We can’t confirm if a reconditioned vcu is the same as a new one as we don’t have a new one and know ones bought one new from GKN direct. More often than not we don’t know the state of a failed vcu as it never gets tested. Hence why peeps say they’re ****e as we don’t have all the facts and struggle to obtain them. We have collectively managed to pull together loads of info but the proof is in the pu… shorry, testing. If we were to prove tyres were the direct cause of early vcu failure then the vcu would be seen in a betterer light. Well thats what I think anyway.
Click to expand...

Exactly - and thats why they are de facto ****e! We will all either go back to LRs with diff locks or forward to Haldex depending on preferences and budget. Just my opinion!
 
Diesel Do said:
That's a normal speed difference of cornering etc which the vcu allows for! Soo you'd pick that up! False alarm! For seized you'd be looking for front and rear to have a speed difference which you'd measure at the wheels! because of the ird gearing! But that doesn't happen cos the road forces the wheels to do whatever speed they must. If the vcu was seized solid the rear would go a different speed to the front destroying the tyres. That doesn't happen. So you'd need to measure either side of the vcu which under normal driving in a straight line will be going at different speeds that's dictated by the gearing and the tyre grip. That doesn't change even when it's semi seized! You just get wind up not speed differences unless you're on a slippery surface in which case the vcu may make the rear go at a different speed to the front!
Click to expand...


Tiz a question of tolerances - all identifiable and capable of being programmed into a system. Dont be a Luddite. In this day n age, tiz a relatively easy job to compare LF/LR,RF/RR and VCUF & VCUR rotational speeds and come up with values for acceptable and not acceptable figures. For example if a wheel spins, you would expect the Rotational speed on that wheel to increase significantly, with a sharp spike in the VCUF/VCUR difference, closely followed by a VCUF/VCUR diffential of ) as the VCU locks up. Simple example, but it shows would could be anticipated to happen. If there is a large VCU change then the VCU is not locking up (ie Open Circuit), or if the VCU speed doesnt increase at all, then the VCU is siezed. Between those two variations are a range of acceptable/ Unacceptable figures.
I am not saying it is easy, just that it isnt outside the realms of an electronic designer with a small PIC chip. Even if it was only used in a known state (Wheel spin), it could be a useful test circuit.
 
Diesel Do said:
My point is that in most circumstances you don't get any variations!
Click to expand...


If you dont get any variations, explain how the VCU increases in temperature? This is caused totally by heat generated by internal friction between the contra-rotating plates. This suggests, to me at least, that there must be some difference between input and output shaft speeds, otherwise the VCU would stay at ambient temperature.

Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of Hippo, myself & others, we still seem to be "****ing into the wind" as far as knowledge on the VCU and its usual operating parameters are concerned.
 
Last edited:
The Mad Hat Man said:
If you dont get any variations, explain how the VCU increases in temperature? This is caused totally by heat generated by internal friction between the contra-rotating plates. This suggests, to me at least, that there must be some difference between input and output shaft speeds, otherwise the VCU would stay at ambient temperature.

Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of Hippo, myself & others, we still seem to be "****ing into the wind" as far as knowledge on the VCU and its usual operating parameters are concerned.
Click to expand...

Its a crude device that does a job for the most part. I'm no fan of gizmos and such on cars but in this area, the technology has moved on for the better. I suspect that you chaps know more about VCU's than LR ever did:)
 
Last edited:
DD3 said:
Its a crude device that does a job for the most part.
Click to expand...


Like most things on LRs - when it works, it works Ok. Its major drawback is that if (when) it fails, it can be catastrophic. All it would have needed was a shear pin (or similar) built in to it, so that instead of winding up the complete transmission, the weak point was easily identified and gave warning first. Unfortunately for us - it is "our " problem as it happens out of warranty. LR arent concerned.
 
Did LR come up with their own version of the Haldex the result being the VCU and IRD in the FL1???.......

That would explain why they went down the Haldex route with the FL2

Nothing wrong with the concept just the execution.................

IMHO

Sending the right amount of drive to the right wheel in all circumstances is only really doable with computer controlled drive, which as I can see at the moment is only going to be achieved with an electric motor at each wheel ;)

I dont even want to go there!! :rolleyes:
 
Bromsgrove Defender said:
Did LR come up with their own version of the Haldex the result being the VCU and IRD in the FL1???.......

That would explain why they went down the Haldex route with the FL2

Nothing wrong with the concept just the execution.................

IMHO

Sending the right amount of drive to the right wheel in all circumstances is only really doable with computer controlled drive, which as I can see at the moment is only going to be achieved with an electric motor at each wheel ;)

I dont even want to go there!! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


The Nissan Juke 4x4 Auto - individual wheel speed control - supposed to be awesome (but in a bad way) - uses Torque Vectoring!! :eek: :faint2:.

Lateral torque vectoring capability. This not only splits torque between front and rear axles, but from side-to-side across the rear axle as well. The system counts wheel speed, steering angle, yaw rate and lateral G to distribute torque, and is effective in reducing understeer. In total, up to 50% of total available engine torque can be sent to either rear wheel. The rear axle incorporates electric couplings at either end plus a new final-drive.
 
Last edited:
The Mad Hat Man said:
The Nissan Juke 4x4 Auto - individual wheel speed control - supposed to be awesome (but in a bad way) - uses Torque Vectoring!! :eek: :faint2:.

Lateral torque vectoring capability. This not only splits torque between front and rear axles, but from side-to-side across the rear axle as well. The system counts wheel speed, steering angle, yaw rate and lateral G to distribute torque, and is effective in reducing understeer. In total, up to 50% of total available engine torque can be sent to either rear wheel. The rear axle incorporates electric couplings at either end plus a new final-drive.
Click to expand...

Ok not electrically powered but electrically controlled :rolleyes: Still wouldn't want to go there :p
 
The Mad Hat Man said:
Disagree with you there. The VCU is a poor design because it isn't fail-safe. I.e. it can fail and destroy the complete drive train.
Shirley it ain't too difficult to arrange a small PCB that compares pulses derived from input and output shafts and compares the resultant. If there is no difference then the unit is siezed, and displays some form of error light?

Even LR could do that?
Click to expand...
I guess the big problem we have is not it going wrong over time (because we can spot that if we test regular and know average test results) it's the peeps who don't test or don't know there could be a problem. They find out when something eggspensive snaps. So your right there isn't a fail safe option like going open circuit if too hot or too much torque. Hence no fail safe protection from the major cause of eggpensive things snapping.

I agree with the other stuff you said about electrical monitoring of wheels. ABS and TC was an option on FL1 when new. Became standard fit in 2001 model year (started late 2000). That uses electronics to monitor wheels turning. The monitoring process you mention above could easily be done by LR or an after market company who could supply a solution. They would then be able to call themselves true tranmissions eggspurts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MollyNomad
Freelander 1 Hahaha… Not very funny
Replies
3
Views
644
GrumpyGel
GrumpyGel
J
Land Rover series 3, intermittent 4x4 issue
Replies
15
Views
1K
steve2286w
steve2286w
B
vibration under load.
Replies
1
Views
154
andyfreelandy
andyfreelandy
S
Freelander 2 replacement engine
Replies
1
Views
198
GrumpyGel
GrumpyGel
I
Proposals for Freelander 1 EV
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
kernowsvenski
kernowsvenski
Back
Top