RE: Why we love rear-wheel drive

[bencollins]

ORD said:

Agree completely.

I would say, though, that the 911 layout isnt bizarre. It has been increasingly mid-engined for years and handles very similarly to a Cayman (which everyone accepts is a near-perfect layout) except for turning in a bit less eagerly and being slightly more tail happy.

911 Increasingly mid engined? How? Sounds like bks.
The engine has got bigger and heavier every year of production. Great characterful car but it needs steamroller 300mm+ tyres to make it work. Was delicately balanced in 1965 as a four or small six cylinder, not anymore.

[blearyeyedboy]

bencollins said:

911 Increasingly mid engined? How? Sounds like bks.

It really isn't bull. It's true.

The 991's wheelbase is longer than the 997, and the engine is therefore relatively further forward in comparison to the rear wheels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_991 briefly explains it, second paragraph.

[otolith]

ORD said:

As for wanting all cars to drive well, I largely agree (which is why I eventually persuaded my wife to stop looking at bloody SUVs and test drive a 3er Touring with the adaptive suspension and a tolerable manual box). It still has a bloody turbo engine, though Hard to avoid these days.

I'm willing to be pragmatic for utility cars. I've got my Elise, my wife has her Z4M, and for all of the stuff we can't do with those for lack of space, we have an old Saab 9-5 Aero estate. It's front drive, four cylinders, and very turbocharged so it doesn't drive the way I would like, but it is also very cheap, massive, comfortable, decently economical, quick enough, refined enough, well equipped and relaxing to drive or be driven in. It fits the brief very well, and if it died tomorrow I'd go looking for another one. But it's just a tool, not a toy.

[Coatesy351]

RobM77 said:

Fastdruid said:

RobM77 said:

For me, if two cars are identical, but one is FWD and one RWD I would always prefer the RWD one. I don't think that's an odd statement at all, given that I have a strong preference for RWD.

Oh I'd agree if they are identical. But then I'd rather a good FWD than an Ok or poor RWD.

Yes, of course, I hope I didn't infer otherwise. I'd rather drive an Integra Type R than a Ford Granada

I wouldn't, well if its a v8 Granada but bigger..... oh wait that what i have.

[GravelBen]

Fastdruid said:

But this to me is why handling is far more important than which wheels are driven.

That argument leads you in a circle though, because the driven wheels have a major and unavoidable impact on the physical drivetrain layout and balance of the car (and therefore how it handles).

[ORD]

GravelBen said:

Fastdruid said:

But this to me is why handling is far more important than which wheels are driven.

That argument leads you in a circle though, because the driven wheels have a major and unavoidable impact on the physical drivetrain layout and balance of the car (and therefore how it handles).

Very true. But it's not the be all and end all. The FWD could be much lighter, have better feel, etc.

I imagine (but don't know) that I would prefer an excellent FWD hot hatch (if such a thing still exists) to a 1700kg RWD super saloon. I think I need to drive more of the extremes from each layout, to be honest, as I have never driven a FE/RWD car with more than 400bhp; nor have I driven anything FWD with more than about 200bhp (which a lot of people seem to think is not that far from the sensible limit for a FWD car before torque steer cocks it up).

As I think Rob said once on here, you can make a FWD car handle very nicely indeed, but it's just a bit harder to get right. And there's also the point that FWD cars normally aren't made with handling primarily in mind (or they wouldn't be FWD). It's a bit of a 'Well, I wouldn't start here...'.

[Fastdruid]

GravelBen said:

Fastdruid said:

But this to me is why handling is far more important than which wheels are driven.

That argument leads you in a circle though, because the driven wheels have a major and unavoidable impact on the physical drivetrain layout and balance of the car (and therefore how it handles).

Which inevitably leads us here.



Because apparently that is a better handling car than say this.



Purely because of which wheels are driven.

RobM77 said:

Fastdruid said:

RobM77 said:

For me, if two cars are identical, but one is FWD and one RWD I would always prefer the RWD one. I don't think that's an odd statement at all, given that I have a strong preference for RWD.

Oh I'd agree if they are identical. But then I'd rather a good FWD than an Ok or poor RWD.

Yes, of course, I hope I didn't infer otherwise. I'd rather drive an Integra Type R than a Ford Granada

Nope, frankly the way you carry on I'd expect you to be fighting for the keys to the Rodius rather than the Mondeo as well.

[RobM77]

Fastdruid: I think you might have mis-understood the conversation a little!

[ORD]

A Mondeo estate handles well?! I would be amazed.

There comes a point when both cars are so hateful to drive that I would throw up my hands and just get whichever is more comfortable.

[GreenArrow]

This article strikes a chord with me, because in early October I bought my first RWD car for 20 years, a MK2 MX-5. At first when the weather turned wet, I was wary about driving it with vigour on wet roads, but now I absolutely love taking it out in this cold wet weather. All you need for driving pleasure in this weather is a fairly modestly tyred and nimble RWD car, I really have had some of my best drives in recent weeks in the little MX-5 and none of it at high speed either, which is a bonus on our speed camera infested roads. So for me, the GT86 would be an ideal car as it is basically an MX-5 with a bit more power, similar grip levels I suspect on standard tyres and a proper roof and boot. The M4 sounds great, but can you really get it to play at 1) non license losing speeds, 2) if you don't have the skills of Chris Harris or the Stig or someone similar? Sometimes simple really is best.

[RobM77]

ORD said:

A Mondeo estate handles well?! I would be amazed.

There comes a point when both cars are so hateful to drive that I would throw up my hands and just get whichever is more comfortable.

I've not driven that specific model, no, but I suspect it handles ok at best, yes. It was more the structure of the argument I was criticising! We've just spent the last two pages agreeing on that common misunderstanding and there it is again! It's like saying 'I only like blondes' and then someone assuming you'll like a complete munter just because she's blonde

[Fastdruid]

ORD said:

A Mondeo estate handles well?! I would be amazed.

Mondeo lap times are few and far between and the estates even rarer but I did once stumble upon this:

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/autozeitung-test-tra...

Number 361, near as dammit exactly the same (0.1s faster) than an E90 325i saloon (which is within 2hp of the same power) because obviously it doesn't handle or go round corners and the lighter weight (by 200kg!) and RWD makes the 3-series handle much much better.

[GravelBen]

ORD said:

GravelBen said:

Fastdruid said:

But this to me is why handling is far more important than which wheels are driven.

That argument leads you in a circle though, because the driven wheels have a major and unavoidable impact on the physical drivetrain layout and balance of the car (and therefore how it handles).

Very true. But it's not the be all and end all. The FWD could be much lighter, have better feel, etc.

...

As I think Rob said once on here, you can make a FWD car handle very nicely indeed, but it's just a bit harder to get right. And there's also the point that FWD cars normally aren't made with handling primarily in mind (or they wouldn't be FWD). It's a bit of a 'Well, I wouldn't start here...'.

Certainly its not the only factor, and I agree that a Fwd can handle well in its own way - but it will still feel fundamentally different to how it would if it was Rwd (with associated differences in weight distribution etc).

I think thats what some posters here seem to be misunderstanding, 'how' a car handles and 'how well' a car handles are not the same thing.

To exaggerate the differences - I have a hammer, its reasonably balanced and nice to hit things with. But no matter how good it is at being a hammer, if the tool I want is a knife the hammer is going to feel pretty compromised (even when compared to a bad knife).

[RobM77]

very well put Ben, I agree entirely.

Note that this is also somewhat contextual. I have a lot more time for FWD on track and 4WD on the loose.

[VeeFource]

Fastdruid said:

ORD said:

A Mondeo estate handles well?! I would be amazed.

Mondeo lap times are few and far between and the estates even rarer but I did once stumble upon this:

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/autozeitung-test-tra...

Number 361, near as dammit exactly the same (0.1s faster) than an E90 325i saloon (which is within 2hp of the same power) because obviously it doesn't handle or go round corners and the lighter weight (by 200kg!) and RWD makes the 3-series handle much much better.

I would have thought any pher worth their salt would know nearly all sporty Ford's of the last decade handle well. They have some of the best chassis engineers of any mainstream manufacturer.

[RobM77]

Fastdruid said:

ORD said:

A Mondeo estate handles well?! I would be amazed.

Mondeo lap times are few and far between and the estates even rarer but I did once stumble upon this:

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/autozeitung-test-tra...

Number 361, near as dammit exactly the same (0.1s faster) than an E90 325i saloon (which is within 2hp of the same power) because obviously it doesn't handle or go round corners and the lighter weight (by 200kg!) and RWD makes the 3-series handle much much better.

That's performance. We were talking about handling Different thing entirely.

[Max Cat 300]

Please don't write off the Caterham as 'just a track day' car. With leather seats, weather gear and a 'soft bits for sevens' boot bag and sensible packing, they make a great adventurous touring vehicle. We completed a trip through Europe down to Northern Italy in 2011 and in June/July 2015 a drive down through France to the Picos De Europa National Park in our R300 Superlight (SV) in fantastic comfort (honest), covering between 2-300 miles per day on superbly surfaced, empty roads.

[ORD]

Handling isnt about lap times. If it were, we would all want AWD cars with torque vectoring and all that bks.

Nonetheless, that is pretty impressive. I would expect to be much faster in the 3er, though, so I expect a fair bit of that is down to driver / conditions / tyres. 200kg lighter at the same power should be quite a lot faster.

[Max Cat 300]

En route to the Picos De Europa National Park, Northern Spain, June 2015.
Picos De Europa National Park, Northern Spain.

[RobM77]

ORD said:

Handling isnt about lap times. If it were, we would all want AWD cars with torque vectoring and all that bks.

Nonetheless, that is pretty impressive. I would expect to be much faster in the 3er, though, so I expect a fair bit of that is down to driver / conditions / tyres. 200kg lighter at the same power should be quite a lot faster.

To be fair we don't know that the BMW's time wasn't in the wet, but yes, handling is different to performance. An RS4 would be quicker than both but I'd fall asleep through boredom.

Edited by RobM77 on Saturday 9th January 09:02