Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:51:32 -0500
Reply-To:     Karin Baker & Raymond Paquette <raymondpaquette@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Karin Baker & Raymond Paquette <raymondpaquette@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Thompson Coupling
In-Reply-To:  <20071205133210.7B9C71165C7@hamburg.alientech.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I still can't really tell what the Thompson is.  Looks like a U joint with
some extra bits that I can't decipher.  That photo of all the pieces just
looks like a lot of pieces to me, I can't see how they go together.

Anyone able to describe it simply?

Raymond

On Dec 5, 2007 8:32 AM, Mike S <mikes@flatsurface.com> wrote:

> At 07:39 AM 12/5/2007, Justin Mayrand wrote...
> >Well, I can think of a few areas that this would improve on the CV
> >joint - 4x4 trucks being one. Independent suspensions are nice for
> >better traction, but they are not as strong as a solid axle because
> >of the CVs failing at high angles (they bind).
>
> According to this article:
> http://www.ferret.com.au/articles/z1/view.asp?id=96607 , "the Thompson
> Coupling['s]... maximum design angle [is] 20 degrees." They also claim
> "no previous coupling has been able to run under load at angles up to
> 20 degrees," but our _stock_ CV joint will work under load at 20
> degrees, and a 930 CV joint is good for 24 or more. Additionally, the
> stock and 930 joints are "plunge type," so can accommodate some change
> in drive axle length (caused by articulation). I see nothing in the
> Thompson design which provides that ability.
>