Thread: Why isn't Eaton torque biassing diff more popular

Originally Posted by PhilipA

Actually the bloke who was the LR development manager who writes for LRO tested Torque biasing diffs many years ago for Defender.

There were some photos of I think the trutrack blokes and him testing them on two defenders.

Apparently it was a NIH decision by LR engineers, the same ones who would not pay for plastic sound deadening on 200Tdi.
Regards PhilipA

That doesn't surprise me.
I've mentioned before one of my old mates who I worked with and for for a couple of years (motor racing) was an ex-LRA engineer.
The battles Australia had with Soluhull were silly and very much a NIH situation.

Originally Posted by rick130

NIH

Whats the acronym NIH? I feel like I'm missing out on the secret handshake here. Not invented here?

NOT INVENTED HERE
Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Whats the acronym NIH? I feel like I'm missing out on the secret handshake here. 2: Not invented here?

Pedro, yes from new, but the NIH raised its ugly head, according to the wise feloows here. I mean the things are out of patent. just redesign it.

Originally Posted by rick130

That doesn't surprise me.
I've mentioned before one of my old mates who I worked with and for for a couple of years (motor racing) was an ex-LRA engineer.
The battles Australia had with Soluhull were silly and very much a NIH situation.

As many of you know I worked at Leyland Truck & Bus when T&B were the LR/RR distributors. Our people agitated for years to get the poms to put some engine into the LR/RR product. Same in trucks. Leyland was dropping heavy truck market dramatically. We told the poms that we needed a 400 hp prime mover capable of hauling a tri-axle semi-trailer at 60 mph cruising speed and we needed it right now not in 10 years. The amazing reply was that no-one needed a 400 hp prime mover.

The poms thought dumb colonials had no idea of what was needed. We were patronised or ignored.

They could have made that Buick engine into the base model at 3.5 litres and offered an option of 5 litres (the Buick 300) and had a LR with decent performance and cruising speed which is what our customers wanted and bought Toyota to get it.

Originally Posted by Bigbjorn

As many of you know I worked at Leyland Truck & Bus when T&B were the LR/RR distributors. Our people agitated for years to get the poms to put some engine into the LR/RR product. Same in trucks. Leyland was dropping heavy truck market dramatically. We told the poms that we needed a 400 hp prime mover capable of hauling a tri-axle semi-trailer at 60 mph cruising speed and we needed it right now not in 10 years. The poms thought dumb colonials had no idea of what was needed. We were patronised or ignored.

They could have made that Buick engine into the base model at 3.5 litres and offered an option of 5 litres (the Buick 300) and had a LR with decent performance and cruising speed which is what our customers wanted and bought Toyota to get it.

Brian, it extended to silly things like the lack of weather sealing in the 110, (what size nozzles, number and pressure in your spray rig, the 110 made to spec leaks like a sieve. "What water spray rig?" ) and the stupid spaghetti sized tie rod and drag link (the LRA built Perentie had 32mm versions) the weak lower rear trailing arms on Tdi on 90/110's and even into the late 90's/2000's when Mark was employed as a consultant and made the TD5 electrically quiet to replace the 4BD1 in the Perentie for the ADF (which didn't happen because of the Ford/PAG takeover) the Poms wouldn't believe it could be done as they'd already spent several hundred thousand pounds trying and failed, so he had to fly to the UK with the new loom in the briefcase to prove it

Originally Posted by rick130

Brian, it extended to silly things like the lack of weather sealing in the 110, (what size nozzles, number and pressure in your spray rig, the 110 made to spec leaks like a sieve. "What water spray rig?" ) and the stupid spaghetti sized tie rod and drag link (the LRA built Perentie had 32mm versions) the weak lower rear trailing arms on Tdi on 90/110's and even into the late 90's/2000's when Mark was employed as a consultant and made the TD5 electrically quiet to replace the 4BD1 in the Perentie for the ADF (which didn't happen because of the Ford/PAG takeover) the Poms wouldn't believe it could be done as they'd already spent several hundred thousand pounds trying and failed, so he had to fly to the UK with the new loom in the briefcase to prove it

Ego=NIH

Change in production = Not desirable = Too much work for someone and something could go wrong then I’ll be blamed (risk with a down side and no reward for the person taking the risk)

Cost??? No one wants to eat into the budget.

That is why engineers are prepared to consider “improvements” that is what they live for. Management is about minimising change, staying on time and on budget. Changes are made in development. Once in production Managers see change as a chance for failure.