RWD - FWD - LSD - No of Cyls. Can You Really Tell?
Discussion
As an enthusiast I am pretty sure I can tell 90% of engine configs from sound alone esp under acceleration from low speed.
I would say the most tricky to tell is high reving v8s vs high output 4 cyl as sometimes they sound very similar. Thinking 458 as an example.
However as soon as you hear the valves open or the gearbox shift it would give the game away - but if you just had a pull from say 6 to 9 with nothing else it might get tricky on a few cars.
Newer turbo motors can get a bit tricky too, as they are quiet and sometimes sound a bit 6 cyl ish.
Flat 4 and flat 6 can be a little tricky to tell esp if the headers are equal length on both.
As for FWD vs RWD that's pretty easy once behind the wheel. 10mph, lock on, nail it. RWD the back end comes round, FWD you keep going forward!
LSD.. now that one is tricky as quite a few cars fake LSD these days with brake technology.
As for your average Joe in the street, I doubt they will even know the difference between a V8 or a V12 and I doubt any will even know such a thing as boxer engines exist let alone things like flat plane crank!
I would say the most tricky to tell is high reving v8s vs high output 4 cyl as sometimes they sound very similar. Thinking 458 as an example.
However as soon as you hear the valves open or the gearbox shift it would give the game away - but if you just had a pull from say 6 to 9 with nothing else it might get tricky on a few cars.
Newer turbo motors can get a bit tricky too, as they are quiet and sometimes sound a bit 6 cyl ish.
Flat 4 and flat 6 can be a little tricky to tell esp if the headers are equal length on both.
As for FWD vs RWD that's pretty easy once behind the wheel. 10mph, lock on, nail it. RWD the back end comes round, FWD you keep going forward!
LSD.. now that one is tricky as quite a few cars fake LSD these days with brake technology.
As for your average Joe in the street, I doubt they will even know the difference between a V8 or a V12 and I doubt any will even know such a thing as boxer engines exist let alone things like flat plane crank!
Jonno02 said:
I had this from my boss recently. I decided to switch from a Diesel Leon FR+ (I used to drive 100 miles a day, 6 days a week) to a Leon Cupra 290 Black (as I now drive 6 miles a day). So fancied something a little brisk, a step up in performance if you will, without breaking the bank and I could take out for an enjoyable drive at the weekend.
She asked what MPG I'd get from it. I said around 20-30. She was absolutely horrified. And I mean gobsmacked. She is absolutely adamant that she sees 120MPG from her A-class diesel. I tried to explain to her that she cannot be getting anywhere near 120MPG and she replied with "I put £50 in and that's done me 600 miles so far and I'm on half a tank." I tried to keep my laughter in.
To her, the enjoyment of driving a faster car or the reason that I wanted something to throw about for a few years because I like my cars didn't matter. It isn't a 1.6 eco-diesel, so I was an idiot for changing car.
She'll be paying more for her A class no doubt, someone I work with is leasing a 180d for £260 pm.She asked what MPG I'd get from it. I said around 20-30. She was absolutely horrified. And I mean gobsmacked. She is absolutely adamant that she sees 120MPG from her A-class diesel. I tried to explain to her that she cannot be getting anywhere near 120MPG and she replied with "I put £50 in and that's done me 600 miles so far and I'm on half a tank." I tried to keep my laughter in.
To her, the enjoyment of driving a faster car or the reason that I wanted something to throw about for a few years because I like my cars didn't matter. It isn't a 1.6 eco-diesel, so I was an idiot for changing car.
rxe said:
Problem is, you're describing situations that most drivers don't ever get into, or want to get into. Most people get in to their little box, and drive to the shops or work. They probably use about 40% of the car's capabilites, these features only become apparent when using the other 60%.
RWD vs FWD. On a typical school run, the only way I can differentiate between RWD (Jag) and FWD (Alfa 156 V6) is that the Jag lights up inner back wheel as I pull out of the lane. For the rest of the 7, boring, prawn infested miles, no difference.
I'm so glad you said this, I keep reading comments that its obvious from the first movement of a car. When I drive sedately (the commute type drive - small throttle openings, careful clutch in a manual - basically avoiding any wheel spin, opportunity for torque steer, cornering attitude affected by throttle), I'm pretty sure I don't reveal what wheels are driven. Having said that, I'm sure most of us never / very rarely drive a car without knowing what wheels are driven before we get in so I've never tested the theory.RWD vs FWD. On a typical school run, the only way I can differentiate between RWD (Jag) and FWD (Alfa 156 V6) is that the Jag lights up inner back wheel as I pull out of the lane. For the rest of the 7, boring, prawn infested miles, no difference.
I'd agree that its very easy to spot if you're look for it, deliberately provoke the characteristics, or drive at any more than a sedate pace.
General public wise I doubt most of them could tell you anything except for the fuel economy or how much the car costs and most wont care about anything else.
I think a fair few enthusiasts know less than they think too.
I think a lot of people are biased in that their experience of FWD will be their crappy first car or a cheap daily etc but their RWD car will be of the faster sporty variety. So they think its the RWD making the drive better but in reality its because they are in a car set up to be sporty.
I think a fair few enthusiasts know less than they think too.
I think a lot of people are biased in that their experience of FWD will be their crappy first car or a cheap daily etc but their RWD car will be of the faster sporty variety. So they think its the RWD making the drive better but in reality its because they are in a car set up to be sporty.
Hungrymc said:
rxe said:
Problem is, you're describing situations that most drivers don't ever get into, or want to get into. Most people get in to their little box, and drive to the shops or work. They probably use about 40% of the car's capabilites, these features only become apparent when using the other 60%.
RWD vs FWD. On a typical school run, the only way I can differentiate between RWD (Jag) and FWD (Alfa 156 V6) is that the Jag lights up inner back wheel as I pull out of the lane. For the rest of the 7, boring, prawn infested miles, no difference.
I'm so glad you said this, I keep reading comments that its obvious from the first movement of a car. When I drive sedately (the commute type drive - small throttle openings, careful clutch in a manual - basically avoiding any wheel spin, opportunity for torque steer, cornering attitude affected by throttle), I'm pretty sure I don't reveal what wheels are driven. Having said that, I'm sure most of us never / very rarely drive a car without knowing what wheels are driven before we get in so I've never tested the theory.RWD vs FWD. On a typical school run, the only way I can differentiate between RWD (Jag) and FWD (Alfa 156 V6) is that the Jag lights up inner back wheel as I pull out of the lane. For the rest of the 7, boring, prawn infested miles, no difference.
I'd agree that its very easy to spot if you're look for it, deliberately provoke the characteristics, or drive at any more than a sedate pace.
RobM77 said:
You don't need to be honing down such roads to tell, but if you take a corner at 35-40mph+ then the balance and effects of RWD are obvious, so obvious in fact that I refuse to own a FWD car - I can't stand the things.
My FWD car is better balanced and more neutral than my RWD M135i on M4 LCAs with 2neg of camber. I can only imagine how balanced a 320d must be...nickfrog said:
RobM77 said:
You don't need to be honing down such roads to tell, but if you take a corner at 35-40mph+ then the balance and effects of RWD are obvious, so obvious in fact that I refuse to own a FWD car - I can't stand the things.
My FWD car is better balanced and more neutral than my RWD M135i on M4 LCAs with 2neg of camber. I can only imagine how balanced a 320d must be...I do Rob, My working week drives tend to be short journeys on busy roads. And I'm sure this, and the approach that I take to these journeys (mainly wanting to be smooth and un-stressed), make the difference.
You have me reflecting on what FWD cars I have enjoyed, there are a few, but topic for another thread.
You have me reflecting on what FWD cars I have enjoyed, there are a few, but topic for another thread.
rallycross said:
nickfrog said:
RobM77 said:
You don't need to be honing down such roads to tell, but if you take a corner at 35-40mph+ then the balance and effects of RWD are obvious, so obvious in fact that I refuse to own a FWD car - I can't stand the things.
My FWD car is better balanced and more neutral than my RWD M135i on M4 LCAs with 2neg of camber. I can only imagine how balanced a 320d must be...The term 'balance' is a very broad term and can be broken down into three key areas:
Firstly, the static balance in terms of static weight distribution. This will always be nose heavy with a front wheel drive car - a FE/RWD car like the 135i or 320d mentioned above will have close to 50/50 weight distribution due to the engine being longitudinal and tucked under the scuttle, the gearbox being between the occupants and the prop running to the diff and driveshafts at the back. In a FE/FWD car all of the above are slung out over the front axle. This is not 'balanced'. A 3 series or 1 series has an innate balance through corners that make them a joy to drive. An ITR doesn't.
Secondly, the setup and the dynamic balance achieved by it. FWD racing cars are well known for running very odd setups, which makes them tricky to drive. BTCC drivers often complain of this if you ask them about touring cars vs sports or single seaters. For example, it's actually common to set your cambers using the standard pyrometer method, as per FE/RWD, and then deliberately reduce grip at the rear! I did this by reducing camber below ideal levels and it was the key change that resulted in the car's success from '03 to '06. That's not a balanced car when you have to do things like that.
Thirdly, the driving. FWD cars require quite a specific technique where you create the car's neutrality on turn-in, for example by using the brakes. I used to actually aim for a slight amount of oversteer, so I could put the power on more than if I was neutral. This sort of turn-in commitment is only safe on a track, and not on the road. Once you do come onto the power, the power doesn't maintain the stance, like in a RWD car, it creates understeer. You can drive around it, but it's not a natural technique and certainly not suitable for the public road.
I'd race another FWD car in a heartbeat. For road use though? no.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 17th October 15:24
RobM77 said:
Wordy but insightful post
So you prefer an inherently better layout that is lazily set up to a more compromised layout with a superb road set up that results in a better balance overall (like a DC2 or a Meg Cup)?That’s fair enough and totally consistent with your preference for the far superior throttle response of a 4-pot diesel
.nickfrog said:
RobM77 said:
Wordy but insightful post
So you prefer an inherently better layout that is lazily set up to a more compromised layout with a superb road set up that results in a better balance overall (like a DC2 or a Meg Cup)?That’s fair enough and totally consistent with your preference for the far superior throttle response of a 4-pot diesel.
If it's a trackday or race though, I'd probably be happier with the more responsive chassis setup of something like an ITR or Meg Cup if the RWD car wasn't anything special.
As you touch on at the end though, all of this joy is removed in an instant for me if there's a snappy or laggy throttle response. My wife's 2007 Civic Type R for example - I'd always prefer my 320d to that due to its annoying throttle response, unless I was limited to straight lines!
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 17th October 15:55
rxe said:
Problem is, you're describing situations that most drivers don't ever get into, or want to get into. Most people get in to their little box, and drive to the shops or work. They probably use about 40% of the car's capabilites, these features only become apparent when using the other 60%.
Without wanting to sound like an arse, but I thought I was on Pistonheads. I would pretty much expect most people on here to have even a slight interest in driving and/or cars.If the same post had been made on a non enthusiast site, then I would agree.
rallycross said:
Rob you used to race a Metro surely you would agree a front wheel drive car can be nicely balanced, take a Dc2 round somewhere like Cadwell or Brands nothing wrong with the balance there, near perfect in fact.
I have to admit, I agree with the DC2, I had one for nearly three years, and always found it surprisingly well balanced for a FFWD car. There were certainly ways you could expose its FWD layout, but only deliberately and even then it didn't disgrace itself. Superb car.My new car is FWD with LSD I felt like I could feel an LSD but half of me felt it was just a placebo, yesterday the heavens opened and that's when I realised that I definitely could tell an LSD was fitted I could just apply power all the time. Other cars without I'd have been loosing traction the whole journey.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff