This is exactly how the GM/Delphi system works.

 

I wont miss it. I saw seveal reviews in magazine complaing about Ford not coming out with a quadrasteer, I think Ford did the smart thing by not doing it. I would never buy the thing anyway, so you can turn the rear wheels, big deal it makes the truck look weird anyway because of the flared fenders.

 

In itself, the honda 4ws (only available on Prelude Si's) worked great, on dry pavement. It's only short coming was it was not able to be shut off. In wet/icey conditions, on a wrong wheel drive vehicle, the rear wheels turning either with or against the fronts, caused them to loose lateral grip, and the rear passed the front.

The GM system was the first I've seen, that could be shut off when not appropriate. Would have been a great boon, had it been properly developed/marketed.

 

Does anyone know if the QS fails..... does it fail in the safe mode...i.e. the rear wheels stright.

 

I've read it has a large spring on each side, that push a collar out, and hold the wheels straight when not activated, or if the control system fails.

 

"Excuse me, I thought we were talking about vehicles with 4 wheel steering that were made within our lifetime. Wonder how you would classify the Ukes that are used on construction sites that are simply hinged in the middle?"

i see nothing about anyones LIFETIME?
what i did read was -- "I think Honda did it first"
in which i corrected!
therefore i'm not concerned with construction equiptment.

 

That's my understanding, too. At any rate, the default for any error in the system is 2ws.

 

My John Deere 455 garden tractor has quad steer and will turn in a 25 inch circle. Great for cutting around obstacles. Should be good for lane changes in 5 0'clock rush hour traffic too. Maybe Ford will re-develope it?

 

We've got AWS on our JD X485, too. Much cruder system, of course, but it only leaves a 6" circle with the 62C deck. Awesome for trimming around all our trees. We really like it.

 

GM should have known it would be a bust. They already tried it on the Camaro in the 80's and it never even made it into production. Nobody was willing to spend that kind of money for the modest improvement in handling it provided.

There's another possible reason it was only offered on the 1/2 ton trucks and that's the proverbial "Soccer Mom". Trucks are cool, mini vans are goofy. The average everyday driver can't navigate a truck down a city street, never mind a cramped parking lot. I think QS was developed to target the people that wanted the coolness of a truck, but weren't able to park the thing. I don't think it had anything to do with trailer towing, I think it was just supposed to be a crutch for people who can't drive. Ironically, I watched a lady in a QS equipped truck take 4 tries to park the thing at the grocery store the other day.

 

I think one thing for sure is that it will be back.
When we have our cars powered by fuel cells, and miniture electrical motors at each wheel, it will be so easy to create 4WS that the benefits will outweigh the costs, while we still use internal combustion engines and axles/halfshafts etc. it is just too costly to engineer and develop for a mass market vehicle.

 

Who knows? We can speculate to death as to why it didn't make it but it all comes down to just opinions or speculation. It's true that it makes tight manuvering a breeze but it's also true that it makes towing a trailer safer/more stable and easier.

From all the mis-starts over the years with the AWS systems in one vehicle or another, it just does not seem to be an idea that appeals to the masses.

 

The company I work for also makes QS. If the system fails, it fails with the wheels straight. I would never past the FEA (Fundamental engineering analysis...study of each part and its failure mode and the risks with it) if it had a chance to fail with the wheels turned at 60+.

A lot of cars even today have a passive 4 wheel steering where the suspension geometry exerts a force during corning on a bushing. As the bushing moves, or complies, the wheels alignment (and sometimes caliber) changes. It's intentionally designed in though it's not to dramatic, until the bushing gets worn out. Then the car feels like the rear is sliding, when it's really just turning to much.

QS was also a saftey tool, since all wheels turned in the same direction at highway speed the vehicle exhibts less body roll.

I don't think there is really any duribility issue with QS, and I highly doubt that 4 of 5 are bought back...I would have definately heard about a warrenty issue of that magnitude. I think the main thing is the GM packaging of the option compounded with the fact that vehicle sales are down. Add to this the incentives that GM was giving at and it's tough to make money on this option. I bet you will see it again though.

 

That's the reason it's not going to stay around, appealing to the masses is what counts to automakers these days, not catering to the people who really want this and catering to the masses, if it's not being mass produced, then it isn't as profitable as it could be, and that's a big no-no in business...