Althought most of the relies were unfavorable to the Thompson Coupling, I
would think, it is better than the CV as we know it.  The CV does need
precision work to be good quality, though the balls are made cheap.  In out
times, when the CNC will spit out highly accurately machined items, such
thing as the Thompson Coupling is not a difficult thing to be had.  There
maybe a real factor about gaining some horse power or saving some gas with
it.
I would not be surprised if some of the newer and more sophisticated cars
would start using it.  It might even be a better way to transfer energy.
Yes, a little like improving on the "wheel".
We will see what comes of it.
Zoltan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Old Volks Home" <oldvolkshome@GMAIL.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: The Thompson Coupling

> Looks and sounds like someone's trying to re-invent the wheel again.  And
> just because my last name is Thompson, I can assure all that I have had
> absolutely nothing to do with it.
>
> Now, about that better mousetrap......;-)
> --
> Jim Thompson
> 84 GL 1.9 "Gloria"
> 84 Westfalia 2.1 "Ole Putt"
> 73 K Ghia Coupe "Denise"
> 72 411 Station Wagon "Pug"
> oldvolkshome@gmail.com
> http://www.oldvolkshome.com
> ***********************************
> On Dec 3, 2007 9:14 PM, Loren Busch <starwagen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> For all the reasons Mike mentions and some others this seems to fall
>> under
>> the heading of "Elegant Solution to a non existent problem".  Cost of
>> manufacturing will limit the market to very special applications, it
>> isn't
>> going to replace the CV joint as we know it today. It almost meets the
>> criteria to be qualify for "Just because it can be done doesn't mean it
>> should be done".
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.13/1167 - Release Date:
> 12/3/2007 12:20 PM
>
>