RE: Why we love rear-wheel drive
Discussion
Black S2K said:
RobM77 said:
his is a major factor to me; I also love light short wheelbase responsive cars, but it's really hard to get that with RWD, especially with practicality. I've had two Caterhams (believe it or not, a Caterham is shorter than a Metro..), an Elise and a 2-Eleven, which satisfy this nicely with RWD; but as you say, one normally needs a practical car as well if you own something like that. So RWD isn't perfect for a daily driver due to this issue, but on balance no matter how much I love cars like the 106 GTi, Citroen AX GT, Peugeot 205 GTi etc I'm actually happier in a heavier and longer wheelbase car that has RWD. It's worth pointing out this compromise though and I also suppose that it highlights just how important RWD is for me that I'm willing to sacrifice two major requirements (weight and agility) to get it.
Indeed; for an everyday car, whatever-wheel-drive via torque-vectored AWD is simply staggering in its ability. RWD for that exquisitely balanced sports car (or two) in the garage.
I was saying that although I love small lightweight cars like the 106 GTi, 205 GTi, Clio Cup etc, my preference for RWD is so strong that I'd rather drive a longer heavier RWD car everyday than a shorter lighter FWD car. With regard to 4WD, I'm afraid I've never got on with it. I've owned one 4WD car, a Celica Carlos Sainz, and driven several of various types and sizes and it's just not for me, regardless of weather and conditions. I think the reason for my dislike of 4WD is what you say about "ability"; the only ability I want from my car is to get me to my destination; traction is of very little interest to me, provided I can get moving. I live amongst muddy C roads that aren't gritted or cleared in winter and to date I've never got stuck, so that satisfies me and I'll continue with RWD until that changes, because I much prefer it through corners.Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 7th January 13:24
is1 said:
Perhaps a nice way of summing this up is that in relation to the oft-cited "best front-wheel drive car ever" (ITR DC2):
(a) it was remarkably focused and in that sense is hardly typical of front-wheel drive; and
(b) it was praised by many road testers for its party trick - feeling like a rear-driven car(!).
Perhaps (b) above sums the FWD/RWD debate up nicely.
It's possible to have extremely effective examples of both but I assume the laws of physics would dictate it's better to be pushed from the rear spreading the forces over all 4 wheels, rotation control from the rear and non-driven steered wheels.
I have a DC2 (it's an incredible bit of work) and hope to add a GT86/BRZ or 911 to the fleet to have the best of both worlds.
Whats the torque steer like when you nail the DC2? Thats the biggest difference for me if you are not pushing a car round a corner.(a) it was remarkably focused and in that sense is hardly typical of front-wheel drive; and
(b) it was praised by many road testers for its party trick - feeling like a rear-driven car(!).
Perhaps (b) above sums the FWD/RWD debate up nicely.
It's possible to have extremely effective examples of both but I assume the laws of physics would dictate it's better to be pushed from the rear spreading the forces over all 4 wheels, rotation control from the rear and non-driven steered wheels.
I have a DC2 (it's an incredible bit of work) and hope to add a GT86/BRZ or 911 to the fleet to have the best of both worlds.
Alex said:
The DC2 has a mechanical helical diff. As you apply power when exiting a corner, you can feel it working and the car tightens its line (no understeer), but there is very little torque "steer".
It is also quite light on torque and has relatively narrow tyres unlike the modern much heavier and powerful hatches. I'd always driven FWD cars until I bought my MX5 5 years ago. Minis and Golfs got tracked over the years but the first trackday in the MX5 was an eye opener. Back then in standard trim it would have been slower on a lap than both my old modified Golfs and Minis but it was an order of magnitude more fun.
Untitled by Nicholas Horne, on Flickr
Untitled by Nicholas Horne, on FlickrBatfink said:
Whats the torque steer like when you nail the DC2? Thats the biggest difference for me if you are not pushing a car round a corner.
Very little torque steer as a result of the points raised by Alex and yonex.yonex is spot on in that being relatively torque light means you don't trouble the narrow (195) front tyres so much and acceleration builds to a crescendo, there is no sudden dump of torque/power.
It is also why when pottering around, it can be left standing by a (dare I say it) 320d!
However, I had a 120d as a company car and it wasn't a patch on the Integra.
RossP said:
Impasse said:
Just for clarity, things like the Clio 182 and Civic Type R are hopeless machines, yet a Morris Marina is motoring nirvana simply due to the powertrain layout.
Car nerds are funny.
I'm pretty sure nobody is saying that! I loved my Accord and Civic Type Rs, loved my S2000 more... Whereas the short amount of time I spent in a friend's Marina was a hateful experience!Car nerds are funny.
I usually ended up being dispatched on my 'missions' in either a Mk.1 Ford Escort 1100cc van or a 1300cc Morris Marina van (both painted in lurid yellow and white with SUNBLEST painted down either side in large red letters) and, surprisingly, there was more fun to be had in the Marina van than in the Escort van.
The Marina van had a much bigger load carrying capacity and so the rear suspension had been massively beefed up to cope when fully laden. The downside was that, when empty, the rear end was so light and stuck so high up in the air that you could, on wet roads, down-change from speed into second gear (even third sometimes) under braking and effortlessly lock the differential.
The result was long, lurid straight-line slides which you could then use to set the car up by tweaking the steering wheel left or right (depending on the forthcoming bend!) before getting back on the power (?) and sliding your way through. Fantastic fun and when I say 'from speed' I'm talking anything from 20 MPH to an eye-watering 40 MPH - believe me that feels quick in a Morris Marina van on four and a half inch rims (and probably crossplies too).
The Escort van was simply too well sorted by Ford for any such shenanigans.
Also, and this was a big surprise to me, the Marina's 1300cc engine was MUCH freer-revving and gutsier than the 1100cc Escort's lump which seemed pretty asthmatic by comparison.
All in all, a great summer was had - especially when it rained!
It's worth pointing out that RWD is not a magic bullet, so if a car has it then it's automatically great, but many people see RWD as a very important ingredient for a good driver's car, so if everything else is in place, RWD tops it off.
So, for example the Integra Type R is a great car, better than many RWD cars of course. However, if the Integra had RWD then I'm certain it would be a better car to drive. I can't think of a single RWD driver's car which would be better if it was FWD.
So, for example the Integra Type R is a great car, better than many RWD cars of course. However, if the Integra had RWD then I'm certain it would be a better car to drive. I can't think of a single RWD driver's car which would be better if it was FWD.
RobM77 said:
if the Integra had RWD then I'm certain it would be a better car to drive. I can't think of a single RWD driver's car which would be better if it was FWD.
Very odd statement which you certainly can't qualify. Which wheels are driven do not indicate what car is better. We can't all go around driving 320d's
rb5er said:
RobM77 said:
if the Integra had RWD then I'm certain it would be a better car to drive. I can't think of a single RWD driver's car which would be better if it was FWD.
Very odd statement which you certainly can't qualify. Which wheels are driven do not indicate what car is better. We can't all go around driving 320d's
Regarding the 320d, yes, I'd far rather drive a 320d than any FWD diesel I've driven, because the 3 series has a good RWD chassis; I don't see what's amusing about that?! I buy cars based on their chassis and I like FE/RWD. The reason not everyone drives them is simply because not everyone has the same priorities, either in chassis and layout or something different entirely.
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 7th January 19:40
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 7th January 20:16
rb5er said:
RobM77 said:
if the Integra had RWD then I'm certain it would be a better car to drive. I can't think of a single RWD driver's car which would be better if it was FWD.
Very odd statement which you certainly can't qualify. Which wheels are driven do not indicate what car is better. We can't all go around driving 320d's
Regarding the 320d, yes, I'd far rather drive a 320d than any FWD diesel I've driven, because the 3 series has a good RWD chassis; I don't see what's amusing about that?! I buy cars based on their chassis and I like FE/RWD. The reason not everyone drives them is simply because not everyone has the same priorities, either in chassis and layout or something different entirely.
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 7th January 19:40
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 7th January 23:36
SonicShadow said:
Stick an SR20DET in the front and that would make a fine dorifto car I reckon!
Dare I say (with 1150kg & 135hp) it's already a drifter, especially in wet..
However, with the Argenta Volumex being as rare as living dinasours, it is tempting to go another route - the Fiat Coupe 20VTurbo 220hp 5-cyl fits bolt on my gearbox...
Although the torque would probably twist the floorpan a few turns!
Edited by Pereldh on Thursday 7th January 18:58
Pereldh said:
Dare I say (with 1150kg & 135hp) it's already a drifter, especially in wet..
However, with the Argenta Volumex being as rare as living dinasours, it is tempting to go another route - the Fiat Coupe 20VTurbo 220hp 5-cyl fits bolt on my gearbox...
Although the torque would probably twist the floorpan a few turns!
Edited by Pereldh on Thursday 7th January 18:58
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff