How much power can a FWD car have?

[AntiguaBill]

kiseca said:

If you have to use partial throttle to avoid spinning the wheels, that's admitting that the car has more power than it can manage.

When the driver then spins the wheels, it means that the driver is failing to compensate for a limitation of the car. It doesn't mean that the car's limitation no longer exists.

Surely the same thing would happen in a 360hp /1200kg rwd car if you stamp the gas off the line?

[Evoluzione]

I managed just over 500bhp, it's good on the motorway....
What you need is gear related boost control to make the best of it, otherwise you're going to get beaten by a 1 litre Micra trying to pull away from the lights in damp conditions.

[kiseca]

AntiguaBill said:

kiseca said:

If you have to use partial throttle to avoid spinning the wheels, that's admitting that the car has more power than it can manage.

When the driver then spins the wheels, it means that the driver is failing to compensate for a limitation of the car. It doesn't mean that the car's limitation no longer exists.

Surely the same thing would happen in a 360hp /1200kg rwd car if you stamp the gas off the line?

Yes, I believe that is true. And again, it means the car has more power than it can deploy. It's a limitation. Just, in RWD at least, not an annoying one.

[theboss]

AntiguaBill said:

kiseca said:

If you have to use partial throttle to avoid spinning the wheels, that's admitting that the car has more power than it can manage.

When the driver then spins the wheels, it means that the driver is failing to compensate for a limitation of the car. It doesn't mean that the car's limitation no longer exists.

Surely the same thing would happen in a 360hp /1200kg rwd car if you stamp the gas off the line?

I should think the same could happen in a 120bhp / 1200kg car if you were aggressive enough. The notion that the mere ability to spin its wheels is a limitation of the car, is ridiculous.

[StottyEvo]

If you want traction then not much it does depend on the car though. I had my 106 GTI spinning well in excess of 80mph on a greasy road and a very very slight corner, with only 175hp. The entirety of second gear is spent managing wheelspin, it gets tiresome. For something more planted like a Mk1 Cupra R I think the limit I would go to is 280hp.

I expect it would take something special to make a FWD grip confidently with over 300hp and if its raining I expect it's near impossible.

I speak from experience of Focus RS mk2, Leon Cupra R, Astra Van with 300hp, Astra Coupe with 500hp, Astra VXR (with lsd still spun endlessly in the wet) Comparatively I can't get my Evo to wheelspin in first gear in the soaking wet.

[aeropilot]

CoolFool said:

At some point this year I will be buying a Saab 9-5 HOT estate. I know they come with a nice amount of power as standard, but I want something more. So I thought remap. But how much power can a FWD car have?

300-320 is the sweet spot for a 9-5 Aero, but not with a standard chassis, they really need a few decent chassis tweeks to handle that.
My old 9-5 Aero had all the official Saab Hirsch Performance bits on it, and that was 'just right'.
But, there are quite a few 9-5 Aero's running around in various parts of the world with in excess of 500hp/600Nm driving through the front wheels

[Buff Mchugelarge]

I knew there'd be Saabs in this thread

I'm selling off the fleet to fund another 9-5 Aero estate, Petrol head motoring disguised as a sensible family car!

[McSam]

Repent said:

About 1250bhp if you ask Nissan...



Although without a team of engineers and a couple of million spare this might be difficult

I know I'm going back to the start of the thread here, but this one is coming out a lot lately and bugs me because a) it's four-wheel-drive, and b) we have no idea whether or not it works properly..

theboss said:

The notion that the mere ability to spin its wheels is a limitation of the car, is ridiculous.

Really? The limit of adhesion is somehow not a limitation of the car's performance? Of course it is.

[RobM77]

It depends on the car and the way it's been engineered. Twenty years ago 200bhp in a front wheel drive car was seen as a bit daft and not very driveable, but now that's normal for lots of cars and some hot hatches have up to 300bhp (Focus RS for example). I think engineering will just keep improving as the years go on - for example, fully drive by wire steering could eliminate torque steer all together!

Naturally, the improvements that make more power possible open up FWD to a greater variety of cars and make the question of what handling you actually prefer from your drivetrain choice more relevant.

[ZiggyNiva]

There is a 9-5 with over 800HP, so I would make that your goal

[RobM77]

McSam said:

theboss said:

The notion that the mere ability to spin its wheels is a limitation of the car, is ridiculous.

Really? The limit of adhesion is somehow not a limitation of the car's performance? Of course it is.

It is in certain conditions at certain speeds, but I think what boss meant was that it wasn't really a significant or notable limitation of the car. For example, a FWD car that spins its wheels at full throttle under 30mph may deliver its power just fine above 30mph - the same in fact will be true of many RWD cars, it's just that they'll need more power to do it. For road driving, which I think applies to the majority of us, I think the choice of drivetrain is more down to handling than loss of traction at low speeds, which for me at least, is completely insignificant.

[Esseesse]

I think it does depend on the car. A VW Touran 2.0 TDI with ~140bhp seems to spin the wheels far more easily than my old 3.0 GTV with ~220bhp used to, despite being much slower.

[theboss]

RobM77 said:

McSam said:

theboss said:

The notion that the mere ability to spin its wheels is a limitation of the car, is ridiculous.

Really? The limit of adhesion is somehow not a limitation of the car's performance? Of course it is.

It is in certain conditions at certain speeds, but I think what boss meant was that it wasn't really a significant or notable limitation of the car. For example, a FWD car that spins its wheels at full throttle under 30mph may deliver its power just fine above 30mph - the same in fact will be true of many RWD cars, it's just that they'll need more power to do it. For road driving, which I think applies to the majority of us, I think the choice of drivetrain is more down to handling than loss of traction at low speeds, which for me at least, is completely insignificant.

Thankyou Rob, that is exactly what I meant. The words limit and limitation are not synonymous.

[McSam]

RobM77 said:

McSam said:

theboss said:

The notion that the mere ability to spin its wheels is a limitation of the car, is ridiculous.

Really? The limit of adhesion is somehow not a limitation of the car's performance? Of course it is.

It is in certain conditions at certain speeds, but I think what boss meant was that it wasn't really a significant or notable limitation of the car. For example, a FWD car that spins its wheels at full throttle under 30mph may deliver its power just fine above 30mph - the same in fact will be true of many RWD cars, it's just that they'll need more power to do it. For road driving, which I think applies to the majority of us, I think the choice of drivetrain is more down to handling than loss of traction at low speeds, which for me at least, is completely insignificant.

You have to be careful with this sort of thing, and not just consider whether or not the wheels spin in a straight line on a given road. The car's propensity to spin up in normal acceleration is a marker for how much of the available grip it has to use to deploy its power. This then moves into handling.

If we have two cars which are completely similar apart from which wheels they drive, and the FWD car spins its wheels more readily in straightline acceleration, that car will also be far more limited in attempting to put power down while cornering. A tyre generates a finite amount of grip and it can't give you maximum lateral force at the same time as maximum longitudinal force, so when you're using up some of its capability while cornering, you'd best hope you weren't going to need all of it to try and accelerate or it'll be overwhelmed when you do.

I agree that simply spinning up when you try heroics in first gear isn't a problem, but it is a measure of problems - real performance limitations - you'll run into in normal handling scenarios.

[kiseca]

theboss said:

Thankyou Rob, that is exactly what I meant. The words limit and limitation are not synonymous.

They're not synonymous? Now you've got my interest. Explain the difference between limit and limitation. I'm particularly interested in the bit where a limit does not present a limitation.

[KingNothing]

I have 300 at the minute, planning on taking it up to 420 at least, that should do me for the minute

[RizzoTheRat]

Isn't it something that's going to constantly evolve as suspension/diffs/tyres get better?

I remember when the FTO came out (early 90's?) that people reckoned the 200bhp version was about as much as you could sensibly put through the front wheels. Now you can get a Focus with nearly twice that out of the box and people are tuning them for more.

[AH33]

My EP3 Civic Type R with 197 bhp and no LSD or even traction control is "interesting" (read - "awful") in anything apart from bone dry conditions. Trying to get away from the lights cleanly if there is one molecule of water on the road is a chore. Even in the dry, it can spin in 2nd when it hits 6k rpm. This is on Togo Proxes T1R's.

[theboss]

kiseca said:

theboss said:

Thankyou Rob, that is exactly what I meant. The words limit and limitation are not synonymous.

They're not synonymous? Now you've got my interest. Explain the difference between limit and limitation. I'm particularly interested in the bit where a limit does not present a limitation.

The two words have subtly different meanings and cannot be unused interchangeably - as you apparently understand yourself in posing the above question. I'm not going to argue or explain this point further.

I disagreed that the ability or propensity of a car to overcome its limits of traction should not be construed as a general limitation of the car - though of course this presents a literal limitation in its ability to accelerate in those circumstances. Maybe I have misinterpreted the point you were asserting here.

If a car is constantly overcoming traction limits then it could be argued that the limitation is of the tyres (fit better ones), the road surface (find a dryer/stickier one) or the driver (learn to regulate throttle input). It's only a limitation of the car if you consider it to be generally overpowered or underwheeled. But my point is that a 1.0 Micra could spin its wheels when leaving an Aldi carpark, and it cannot reasonably be argued that such a car is limited by virtue of being being overpowered or underwheeled.

Personally I would be inclined to believe the opposite point - that the *inability* of a car to overcome limits of traction in any circumstances, is a limitation of the car. It's not fking powerful enough.

Sorry if I'm not making any sense to anyone.

Edited by theboss on Tuesday 28th April 11:57

[Aids0G]

Quick question with a modestly powerful FWD car, traction control on off the line does the pulsing of brakes to quell wheelspin have any negative effect on the differential/driveshafts? Im talking about a GTC astra 165 Cdti so not a rocket ship but enough go to spin the wheels. Also usually if im planning a full bore start traction control is off!

Thanks

AG