|
1
2
[Last >>]
|
|
|
|
|
Post #1 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
shadowboy
New Member - 12
 |
ok, i am now going to dispell many, many myths and half-truths in this thread (there is more misinformation here than fact)
ok
fact 1: AWD understeers worse than FWD
reason: weight transfer and traction circle. with a FWD car when you step on the gas, weight shifts to the rear (dont forget, the rear tires don't do anything), limiting your front tire's traction and its ability to accelerate (and corner). with an AWD system there is another variable: torque bias. when you step on the gas an AWD system transfers torque to the axle that isnt slipping as much.. what happens is as the weight transfers to the rear, the center differential sets the torque split further to the rear, allowing more acceleration. as a result the front wheels are MORE offloaded than the FWD example, on top of they those tires are being asked to turn AND drive, rather than just turn in the case of RWD. AWD really comes into play in poor conditions (wet, gravel, snow, etc) where traction NEEDS to be maximized.
fact 2: RWD vehicles understeer under throttle too. gradual throttle will cause this, sudden throttle (with a powerful enough engine) will cause oversteer, by giving the rear wheels enough torque to break the tires loose before the weight can shift. with gradual throttle application you gradually give the rear wheels more torque as you load them with rearward weight shift, hence gradually unloading the front tires
fact 3: weight doesnt just shift rearward, try lifting the throttle or braking sometime. drag racing isnt the only motorsport in the world.
fact 4: FWD does not exist mainly for cost OR tractability reasons.. FWD exists for PACKAGING reasons. someone on this thread said its easier to pull a car than push it. when it comes to moving a car the car doesnt care if you push or pull it. the reason why a weaker engine can move a FWD car better than a RWD car is because a FWD car has less frictional losses in the driveline (due to less moving mass). allowing more of the engine's power to get to the wheels... THAT is why FWD economy cars can move better with weaker engines than RWD ones.
the reason why PACKAGING is the reason for FWD cars is because of the interior & trunk space it allows by putting all the drive line stuff up front. it has little to do with economy/cost (FWD has fewer parts, generally, but it is also more expensive to engineer than RWD). cadillacs are neither economical, nor cheap, and they are FWD.
oh, and FWD has more directional stability than RWD, but it has LESS tractability. in other words a RWD will go up a hill in snow easier than a FWD car. it will simply be harder to keep the RWD vehicle pointing straight ahead.
fact 5: FWD can be made to handle, watch the speed touring car challenge sometime, you will almost always see an integra type R near the front also go to the grand-am web site and check out the manufacturer's standing in the STI class (the acura integra type R is the only FWD car in the class, and its the only acura in the class as well). they are #2 in manufacturer standing.. and won the class for 2001 and 2000. not only are they FWD but they have LESS power than most of their competition.
Shawn
-----
1979 Porsche 924 w/M471 Option
1987 Honda CRX HF
1989 Acura Integra LS
|
|
Post #2 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
SeansVette
LOL - 17389
 |
There is NO performance advantage to a FWD set up at all.
That's about as clear as it gets.
Lil' Bush: "We can't have a black man in the Whitehouse begging for change!"
|
|
Post #3 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
beliveinfiction
Supercar Guru - 527
 |
Allow me to give a breif history of FWD:
Its was created in the mid 1970's when gas was expensive and in short supply. It is slightly more efficent to pull a car than to push it so therefore it went into use. It is still used today 1. for effiencentcy and 2. Because it is better in Ice and Snow, NOT becasue it out preforms anything!
Why do people race FWD? Because a bunch of stupid kids started doing it no other reason.
Asside from torque steer and axle hopping FWD struggles to preform because of weight transfer issues. When a car accelerates (as we have all seen) Weight is transfered to the rear as the front of the car rises and the rear sinks. This would leave a FWD cars sturggling for traction and a RWD car getting excessive grip.
my anti-honda site: www.geocities.com/gohomerice/honda.html
|
|
Post #4 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
SuprJames
Supercar Messiah - 9915
 |
FWD cars are cheaper. Only reason street racers use them. Only reason to use them. Car companies use them because it allows more room in the cabin because there is no center console. I think FWD cars are easier to drive and make for easy recoveries if you lose control. Found this out when I turned my gf's Grand AM sideways in the rain. Just turned the wheels the direction of the road and accelerated and it straightened right up. If I were to do that with a RWD car, the rear wheels would push me the direction the car was facing.
FWD cars are for people who don't know how to drive or don't care about performance. They're a trend among street racers right now, and one that will pass when they grow up and begin making enough money to buy real performance cars. Till then, I guess I'll have to put up with the steroid-using-lawnmower sounds up and down the streets all night.
450+ HP fuel injected '82 Vette. New Project: '72 Stingray, all new suspension, blown LS1, six speed T56, sidepipes, and fender flares. Goal: 500 RWHP and 3,100 lb. race weight
|
|
Post #5 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Injected
Member - 67
|
ok there are a few reasons FWD is seriously handicapped. One of them is the fact that weight transfer ALWAYS shifts weight to the rear of the car, thereby weight is coming off the drive wheels, reducing traction. THAT is one of the main reasons to why FWD have bad launches. This can be countered by a very good suspension setup.
In RWD cars, weight transfer again goes to the back, but this time because the drive wheels are in the back, traction is increased thereby producing a better launch. the more power, the stronger the weight transfer, thereby the reason for wheelies.
to every1 on the board, as Johnny Lombardi used to say: dont talk alot, and say nothing, but try to talk a little, and say alot.
Basically quality not quantity. Peace.
|
|
Post #6 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Injected
Member - 67
|
ok there are a few reasons FWD is seriously handicapped. One of them is the fact that weight transfer ALWAYS shifts weight to the rear of the car, thereby weight is coming off the drive wheels, reducing traction. THAT is one of the main reasons to why FWD have bad launches. This can be countered by a very good suspension setup.
In RWD cars, weight transfer again goes to the back, but this time because the drive wheels are in the back, traction is increased thereby producing a better launch. the more power, the stronger the weight transfer, thereby the reason for wheelies.
to every1 on the board, as Johnny Lombardi used to say: dont talk alot, and say nothing, but try to talk a little, and say alot.
Basically quality not quantity. Peace.
|
|
Post #7 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Honda rulez
Supercar Messiah - 2019
|
FWD drive has its advantages, it's economic, easier to drive with in the snow, etc.
10 cars that I THINK are good( not in order): Honda NSX, Chevrolet Corvette, Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda S2000, Nissan Skyline GT-R, Honda Dualnote, Honda Odessy, Honda Integra, Acura TL.
10 cars that I think are bad: Chevy Camaro, Pontiac Firebird, Pontiac Sunfire, Dodge Viper, Ford Mustang, Chevy Malibu, Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, Toyota MR-2 (SW20), Dodge Neon.
|
|
Post #8 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
"i think fwd is a new perspective. they do have better tracton. they are affordable and fast. those punk ass rich boys could buy rwd and talk shit but many fwd cars can rip rwd cars."
-turkish speed.
did you read any of the shit that i posted. it does not have more traction. all right xebec perhaps i misunderstood your post. but in any case i dont believe drive wheels affect fuel economy. fuel economy is determined by mainly the engine. i really dont know if its harder to push or pull, that's pretty subjective isn't it? but again like someone else said its because it can be fit into a more compact space. someone actually pointed out to me that fwd is simply more compact that's why it is on these vehicles.
and addressing turkish speed, there are rwd vehicles that aren't expensive. i drive a nissan 240sx. i assure you that it is pretty cheap. the toyota mr-s isn't that expensive. audis go down in price pretty quickly. the lotus 340R in britain is sold for i think 18k?
|
|
Post #9 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
turkish speed
New Member - 47
|
i think fwd is a new perspective. they do have better tracton. they are affordable and fast. those punk ass rich boys could buy rwd and talk shit but many fwd cars can rip rwd cars.
Life goes by fast,so should your car!!:)
|
|
Post #10 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
sniyper
New Member - 3
|
blaze4eva
someone wanted a cheap rwd vehicle. i own a used nissan 240sx that i have modified using a sr20engine. i can tell you that it is fairly cheap, although i dont think its really a compact vehicle, its fun to drive.
mitsubishi gs-x that's awd and pretty cheap..
nissan 240 sx rwd and cheap
audi TT quattro (they go down in price pretty quickly, you can find one in the early 20k range now) same with a4's
---------------------------------------------------------------------
the answer is no, blaze. Audi is like Subarau. only AWD on all their cars. a cheap RWD vehicle would be an MR2, or a Miata, or an S2000
front wheel drive is horrible. why? ask yourslef: is it easier to pull 2200 lbs or Push 2200 lbs? you tell me. I know, I know. it doesn't weigh 2200lbs... but hell, it's a comparison.
546te34
|
|
Post #11 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Honda rulez
Supercar Messiah - 2019
|
Quote from Puro_malvagio
Can someone name me a new, compact rwd car? Name me one of the most recent CHEAP rwd hatchback? The only one that comes to mind right now that the America's get, is the BMW M Coupe...but it fails because it is not ceap at all.
Older RWD cars like the Ford Pinto and Chevy Chevette has certain...stains: Pinto's are good for pyromaniacs though...
Oddly though, you can put an array of different engines into a Chevette, and it will handle about the same...Hell, if you got a Caddy Northstar V8...it would add mere POUNDS over the stock Chevette's 300 pound cast iron four banger.
One of the Chevette's main disadvantages as a "performance" car however, is that 300 pound iron lump of scrap metal, and its positively wussy read end. In all truth however, Chevettes can be made to handle well...quite well.
Well, I'll stop ranting...
§cotty
The Nissan S15 Silvia Turbo, costs about $2300000 yen, or about $23000 USD.
10 cars that I THINK are good( not in order): Honda NSX, Chevrolet Corvette, Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda S2000, Nissan Skyline GT-R, Honda Dualnote, Honda Odessy, Honda Integra, Acura TL.
10 cars that I think are bad: Chevy Camaro, Pontiac Firebird, Pontiac Sunfire, Dodge Viper, Ford Mustang, Chevy Malibu, Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, Toyota MR-2 (SW20), Dodge Neon.
|
|
Post #12 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
someone wanted a cheap rwd vehicle. i own a used nissan 240sx that i have modified using a sr20engine. i can tell you that it is fairly cheap, although i dont think its really a compact vehicle, its fun to drive.
mitsubishi gs-x that's awd and pretty cheap..
nissan 240 sx rwd and cheap
audi TT quattro (they go down in price pretty quickly, you can find one in the early 20k range now) same with a4's.
|
|
Post #13 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
xebec
Member - 141
|
Quote from sniyper
the name's SNIYPER, son. get it right.
i don't give a damn what your name is. point is you're wrong. and please don't try to gain respect by calling me "son". actually i might have even valued your opinion if your name was spyder, but sniyper? i think not.
"i wish i was in ozma"
|
|
Post #14 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
LAMBOlover
Senior Member - 749
|
The main reason why most of the street racers use FWD vehicles is simply because they are cheaper to buy and to put performance mods on but still get the same performance as a RWD car would put out
Racist people suck
Co-Owner of No Dice Clothing Company
Phoenix, Arizona
|
|
Post #15 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
they wouldn't get the same performance as a rwd vehicle. did you read anything. its just cuz its more compact.
anyways the main reason that deterred me from purchasing a fwd vehicle is that you can't drift! rwd is just more fun. well you can kinda drift in a fwd vehicle, but its more like ass dragging than anything else.
|
|
Post #16 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
yeh i know i posted this in the very beginning. i've heard in fwd drag racing they place extremely stiff springs out back and raise up the back so that this transfer is less. i think they try on making the front downfoce better as well.
|
|
Post #17 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
xebec
Member - 141
|
Quote from blaze4eva
no your logic is off. awd systems are better than fwd systems that is why i mentioned them. the quattro system is basically the same as the porsche psk system, rwd drive until loss of traction is sensed.
it is a widely acknowledged truth that rwd has better traction in launches. if you do not believe me you can reference any magazine. my source is sport compact car magazine 2000 issue in a comparison between rwd, fwd, and awd.
acceleration results in a force going backwards therefore the front drive wheels do not have optimum contact with the ground, causing a loss of traction.
why is it that all real sports cars use awd or rwd?
why is it that drag cars use rwd (excluding pro fwd imports of course)
but of course you seem to disregard actual proven information as faulty logic.
first of all, i was responding to spyder. he just asked if it is easier to pull or push 2200 lbs. secondly, i know RWD grants much more traction than FWD. i do not deny that at all. and i know AWD allows for the most traction due to maximum surface area of rubber on the road for the driving wheels. i'm not that dumb. i was merely remarking as to why ECONOMY, COMPACT cars use FWD instead of RWD. so don't flame me till you know what to flame.
"i wish i was in ozma"
|
|
Post #18 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Honda rulez
Supercar Messiah - 2019
|
Quote from SupraTT
Quote from Honda rulez
FWD's nature is not supposed to be for racing. But with accurate suspenion tuning, u can get rid of torque steer, u can also get the car to have great handling. It's all about how u tune the suspenions.
True... very true. But there are FWD cars that handle great with stock suspension too. The Accord Type R(or Euro R) and the Primera GT for example. The Accord handles like a racecar and so does the GT.
Yep, experts say the primera actually drives like a FR car.
10 cars that I THINK are good( not in order): Honda NSX, Chevrolet Corvette, Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda S2000, Nissan Skyline GT-R, Honda Dualnote, Honda Odessy, Honda Integra, Acura TL.
10 cars that I think are bad: Chevy Camaro, Pontiac Firebird, Pontiac Sunfire, Dodge Viper, Ford Mustang, Chevy Malibu, Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, Toyota MR-2 (SW20), Dodge Neon.
|
|
Post #19 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
SupraTT
Member - 330
|
Quote from Honda rulez
FWD's nature is not supposed to be for racing. But with accurate suspenion tuning, u can get rid of torque steer, u can also get the car to have great handling. It's all about how u tune the suspenions.
True... very true. But there are FWD cars that handle great with stock suspension too. The Accord Type R(or Euro R) and the Primera GT for example. The Accord handles like a racecar and so does the GT.
I'm confused now...I NEED the Hamann E65 V12.
|
|
Post #20 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
Honda rulez
Supercar Messiah - 2019
|
FWD's nature is not supposed to be for racing. But with accurate suspenion tuning, u can get rid of torque steer, u can also get the car to have great handling. It's all about how u tune the suspenions.
10 cars that I THINK are good( not in order): Honda NSX, Chevrolet Corvette, Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda S2000, Nissan Skyline GT-R, Honda Dualnote, Honda Odessy, Honda Integra, Acura TL.
10 cars that I think are bad: Chevy Camaro, Pontiac Firebird, Pontiac Sunfire, Dodge Viper, Ford Mustang, Chevy Malibu, Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, Toyota MR-2 (SW20), Dodge Neon.
|
|
Post #21 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
that's an interesting anti-honda site. i dont own a honda or anything, but i think the s2000 is a pretty good car as well. they handle well and have good horsepower, lacking at hte bottom end, but its a good performer nevertheless.
i will agree with you that people that think honda civics are godly cars are idiots and should be flogged, but i dont think there's anything wrong with modifying a civic. if that's what the person owns (since the civic is a very popular car) i doubt they'd want to keep it stock, so they modify it.
mustangs and many other pony cars were essentially repackaged commuters' cars 40 years ago were they not? they gained popularity because of their good build, sporty looks, and economical value 40 years ago. that's why people hot rodded them. same thing today. people hot rod things that are popular and cheap.
well some peoplemight say why not buy a a old 60's car and modify it that's super cheap!
not everyone enjoys the looks of cars 40 years ago and people do enjoy new cars after all.
in fwd drag racing there are some very quick vehicles (stephan papadakis runs a 8.2 sec quarter mile). and V-TEC although not godly, was an innovative technology when it debuted in the nsx. it is the first production car ever to use a variable cam technology. i have heard some american msucle fans talk about some sort of vaccum assist thing, i have no idea how THAT works, but i'm pretty sure that the working of V-TEC was an innovative thing. it is nothing too special as many car companies employ similar systems however.
in respects hondas engines are more advanced than old american muscle car's engines. this is to be said true, because otherwise tehcnology has not advanced anywhere in 40 years and there would be no point to new car technology. people often bash on hondas for their lack of low end torque, but V-TEC does in fact boost low end torque vs. a car that doesw not vary its cam timing. its low end torque is less because of its engine size and the fact that they're tuned for top end horsepower (which i personally enjoy more) i enjoyed your site rather well however and it is a good sign for ricing idiots out there who think that honda makes the best cars in the world.
and no i do not own a honda.
|
|
Post #22 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
actually i think that fwd drag racing is pretty cool since its an innovative way to drag racing. for once you can see some fast times being posted by cars that are naturally disabled. they mark some pretty impressive times. in no way streetable, but it is most defintlely cool to watch.
in any point, fwd cars can be made to handle well, although personally i don't like them. look at JAS engineering's BTCC cars. SUPER TOURING baby!
|
|
Post #23 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
no your logic is off. awd systems are better than fwd systems that is why i mentioned them. the quattro system is basically the same as the porsche psk system, rwd drive until loss of traction is sensed.
it is a widely acknowledged truth that rwd has better traction in launches. if you do not believe me you can reference any magazine. my source is sport compact car magazine 2000 issue in a comparison between rwd, fwd, and awd.
acceleration results in a force going backwards therefore the front drive wheels do not have optimum contact with the ground, causing a loss of traction.
why is it that all real sports cars use awd or rwd?
why is it that drag cars use rwd (excluding pro fwd imports of course)
but of course you seem to disregard actual proven information as faulty logic.
|
|
Post #24 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
xebec
Member - 141
|
Quote from sniyper
blaze4eva
someone wanted a cheap rwd vehicle. i own a used nissan 240sx that i have modified using a sr20engine. i can tell you that it is fairly cheap, although i dont think its really a compact vehicle, its fun to drive.
mitsubishi gs-x that's awd and pretty cheap..
nissan 240 sx rwd and cheap
audi TT quattro (they go down in price pretty quickly, you can find one in the early 20k range now) same with a4's
---------------------------------------------------------------------
the answer is no, blaze. Audi is like Subarau. only AWD on all their cars. a cheap RWD vehicle would be an MR2, or a Miata, or an S2000
front wheel drive is horrible. why? ask yourslef: is it easier to pull 2200 lbs or Push 2200 lbs? you tell me. I know, I know. it doesn't weigh 2200lbs... but hell, it's a comparison.
i'd say it's significantly easier to pull 2200 lbs. you just have a mechanical advantage that way. your logic is off. that is why economy cars, with weaker engines, employ FWD (easier to pull). on the other hand, it is harder to direct something while pulling it, so "handling" is worse than if it were pushed. so cars with enough hp to allow RWD to be efficient use it for the handling advantages. remember that variables such as traction don't play a big part with economy cars, but they do with sports cars.
"i wish i was in ozma"
|
|
Post #25 Fri, Aug 9, 9:43 PM |
|
blaze4eva
Supercar Guru - 898
|
sebring your example bears zero meaning. you could rebadge something akin to a ford pinto call it a 1945 ferrari or something and some idiot with a lot of money would buy it. anything that bears a ferrari sign is going to cost a lot of money you dolt. it should be pretty obvious that a technology that is older can be more easily produced. it is the same thing with pushrod engines is it not. after all the world's top two most profitable car companies (porsche and bmw) employ rwd on all of their vehicles.
i find the reason of compactability in which i was not aware of with fwd to be much more plausible as another person mentioned.
|
|
Posted: Today |
|
Superbot
|
|
|
Posted: Today |
|
Superbot
|
|
| All Forums > 2003 Acura RSX Type-S Performace Package > Re: FWD > Post Reply |
|
1
2
[Newer >>]
|
|
|
|
