Talk:Drive shaft

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Drive shaft article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Redirections

All those pages link to Driveshaft, and we delete a new article on the subject and refer our readers to a non-existing Wiktionary article. |l'KF'l| 20:05, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Difference between a keyed shaft and a splined shaft

Could someone add some information (if possible with pictures), on the difference between a keyed shaft and a splined shaft? Wiki-uk 12:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bicycle driveshaft

I just removed "*Loss of power" from the bicycle driveshaft list of disadvantages, since this makes no logical sense. There are already several statistics listed, and 94% efficiency vs. 75-97% efficiency is not a consistent loss, comparatively, using these numbers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.6.72.92 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 7 May 2007.

The disadvantages are actually just the advantages to the Chain, not the actual disadvantages of the driveshaft. Looks like someone was biased to the chain.--201.132.16.215 (talk) 17:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Connection between a gearbox and drive shaft

Could someone add some picture on connection between a gearbox and drive shaft? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mnajib (talk • contribs) 20:31, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Driveshaft material and manufacturing process

What materials are used to make a driveshaft? What manufacturing processes are used to fabricate driveshafts?

Drive shaft is two words

This article needs to be moved to correct the title spelling. Webster's, Funk & Wagnalls, and The American Heritage dictionaries all agree that drive shaft is two words, and the plural is drive shafts. The body text of this article needs to agree. Occurrences of halfshaft and halfshafts in the body text should also be corrected to half shaft and half shafts and be made to link to the (already correctly spelled) Wikipedia Half shaft article.

The redirect from Drive shaft to Driveshaft needs to be reversed once this article is moved.

Another Stickler (talk) 19:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I have fixed the body text, but I'm asking for help from someone more experienced to move the article name from "Driveshaft" to "Drive shaft, and fix the redirect. It's currently redirecting from "Drive shaft" to "Driveshaft". It should instead redirect "Driveshaft" to "Drive shaft" and might need a disambiguation for the fictional band name "DriveSHAFT". -- Another Stickler (talk) 17:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All done. The article's spelling is fixed thanks to help from Gtstricky and KieferSkunk who moved it and changed the redirect. I have not changed the bad spelling on this talk page since it is historical commentary and not part of the living article. -- Another Stickler (talk)

Car-like handling???

The article states: "This is a favoured design where the torque is biased to the front wheels to give car-like handling..." And when you channel more torque to the rear wheels you get what? Boat-like?--Psirus1988 (talk) 16:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between input torque and load?

I don't get the description: "Drive shafts are carriers of torque: they are subject to torsion and shear stress, equivalent to the difference between the input torque and the load." Am I missing something, or isn't the input torque equal to the load (except for very minor losses in the universal joints)? The input torque IS the torque in the shaft - isn't it? Mfhall (talk) 21:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only under static conditions, however, the driveshaft is more often in a dynamic state then a static state. Wizard191 (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prop shaft

At Automobile layout we have a difference of opinion about whether a prop shaft or drive shaft connects the engine to the rear wheels in a RWD car. The difference of opinion seems to be based on these two sentences in this article (my underlining):

In British English, the term "drive shaft" is restricted to a transverse shaft that transmits power to the wheels, especially the front wheels. A drive shaft connecting the gearbox to a rear differential is called a propeller shaft, or prop-shaft.

I would like clarification of a few things:

Does "In British English" apply to both sentences or only the first.
Can we say that a prop shaft can connect a front engine to a rear transaxle (ie is the term prop shaft strictly tied to gearboxes at the engine end). Thanks. Stepho talk 07:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

British English use is that the longitudinal shaft is called the propeller shaft, not a drive shaft. This applies for RWD, rear transaxles or even for 4WD vehicles. In some 4WD cases there could be two propeller shafts from a transfer box to each axle. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:30, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motorcycle driveshaft

O.k, three are not necessary. But how about just one showing beautifully an exposed shaft on one of the "best known brand." Or am missing the point. Is it that a photo took and uploaded should be deleted just because I took it? If that is it, just let me know and I will stop trying to contribute excellent and appropriate photos to Wikipedia. Jeffrey M Dean (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Excellent and appropriate" is subjective and is exactly why you shouldn't be pushing your own images on Wikipedia. Please let others decide whether your images should be added to an article. I removed three images of motorcycles and replaced them with a single that shows a closeup of a motorcycle shaft drive. I am very happy to enter into discussion with you and other editors on what images should be used in this section of the article. Your BMW picture - hardly the best known brand - is again a picture of a bike not of a drive shaft i.e. it doesn't give enough focus on the shaft itself as I think it should. But Wikipedia is based on consensus so let's see what others think. --Biker Biker (talk) 13:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've already replaced the BMW picture, precisely because it is a picture of a bike, rather than a driveshaft in isolation. It's also one of the few where the drive shaft is visible. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe uncounted thousands of photographs on Wikipedia have been uploaded by a person who then inserted them into an article. Is there a rule about this? If so, please give us all the citation. I do not think this is the issue at all. What we have here is Biker-Biker Photo Rule for Jeff Dean. It is apparently your intent to continue your ancient vendetta against me and prevent me from uploading fine photos and adding them to articles. I assume you must have some sort of "tracker" on me to alert you of my (rare) activities so you can undo them.

As you know I have withdrawn my activity on Wikipedia for a long time because the sort of thing you have done to me. To make you happier, I will continue my absence.

BTW, there are hundreds of other photos I uploaded an "pushed" (your word, not mine) into articles. It should give you hours of amusement to chase them all down and delete them. Please, be my guest. I just wonder where you find the time to do all that you do on Wikipedia.

Finally,the photo I "pushed" into this article is absolutely perfect for it, considering the context of the article. For those who have not seen the photo that so offened Biker Biker, here it is. It looks like Andy reinserted it (thank you Andy). Biker Biker will have to get busy again; it is still my photo. Jeffrey M Dean (talk) 13:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient vendetta? See WP:AGF. As for the photo in question I found an even better one of an R32 which shows more of the exposed shaft drive. I still think we should show one picture, in which case I'd be happy to see the CARC photo dropped. What do others think? --Biker Biker (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing the lengths B-B will go to eliminate a photo of mine. Search for another one to replace it! Which is the better and clearer photo? The one that shows clearly where the driveshaft comes from and goes to. You folks decide. Which is the better and cleaner photo as a photo? I am done with this. Jeffrey M Dean (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with two images, if there's a contrast between them. A BMW bike and the opened-upp drive shaft seem to both add something. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:53, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any mention of motorcycle drive-shafts should keep in mind the drive-train fundamental of motorcycles: depending on the model of motorcycle, there will be one of three possibilities: Drive belt; Drive chain; and Drive shaft. Per some info I was reading, the shaft results in reduced power. The drive belt on a motorcycle is refered to as the final drive-belt. The primary belt is the belt which runs from a crank shaft to the gearbox. Final drive belt connects the gearbox to the wheel.206.192.35.125 (talk) 18:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be clarified that Vespa scooters of the manual geared variety are not drive shafted as is hinted at here, they are a constant mesh crankshaft/clutch to cush drive to gearshaft which the wheel is attached to, the inference here is that Vespa's are shafted a la BMW per se which is certainly not the case, its a tricky term to define because technically it is 100% correct whilst being 100% incorrect at the same time, ratio of power is changed by a cruciform which moves up and down the rear gearshaft engaging on the relevant gear cog which in turn directly connects it to the "christmas tree" layshaft governed by power cutting in and out simple wet clutch on the cush drive. Lambretta's are chain driven but only in as far as to elongate the almost identical Vespa system to allow Lambretta engines to have long, smaller footprints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.64.33 (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to Shaft (mechanical engineering)

Could someone explain in the article what is the relationship between 'Drive shaft' and the presumably more general 'Shaft'? I haven't been able to discern the difference from comparing the two. Crom daba (talk) 17:26, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shaft covers the physical principle, as an idealised and simplified structure in mechanics. Drive shaft covers the physical device, with the additional engineering needed to make it useful in practical machines and vehicles.

Shafts cover the physical and mechanical principles of torque, inertia, stiffness and balancing. Drive shafts have to adapt for varying position in installation and in service. They need joints and sliding splines, sometimes also vibration dampers.

There are also articles, and articles needed, on quill drive, quill shaft, lineshaft, jackshaft, jackshaft (locomotive), layshaft, countershaft and PTO shaft. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete

Suggest we remove Crompton from History. Autocar did first drive shaft in an auto in 1901. By 1903 was old news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sedimentary (talk • contribs) 21:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With that line of reasoning, 'drive shaft' was first mentioned in 1861, so we may as well delete everything after that. The early 1900s were a time of flux, with many competing terms for almost everything as inventors literally making things up as they went without reference to each other. It took a while for things to settle down to the terms we use today. Stepho talk 22:59, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]