Discussion
I preferred tootling about in my friends M135i for a few days around town, overall nice package. But for flinging it around country roads and pushing it in the corners, I prefer FWD.
There's no absolute answer on this. Most people will give an answer based on what they currently drive.
There's no absolute answer on this. Most people will give an answer based on what they currently drive.
aka_kerrly said:
Monkeylegend said:
FWD is for girls.
Utter nonsense
Loyly said:
The driven wheels are less important than the quality of the drive overall, for me. I'll take a Megane RS over a 318i any day!
Exactly that. I have had some of the great front and rear drivers and I personally do prefer RWD, particularly in a fun car. I wouldn't run just one car which was FWD, but as part of a "fleet", it can make sense.
I recently had to decide whether to modify my E36 328 or buy a Megane. Stuck with the BMW as I know it will be the more fun and focused car.
I've had 5 FWD, 5 RWD, 2 rear bias full-time AWD and a part time (normally RWD) 4x4.
I liked them all (or wouldn't have bought them). I agree with the posters that observed that a well executed anything is better than a badly executed something else.
If forced to choose, it would be (front engine) rear wheel drive for me. I prefer the attributes they often end up with (nicer balance, more honest steering etc) and furthermore find that all my instincts work better for rear wheel drive. I find FWD and some AWD techniques a bit counter intuitive when driving fast and as such, when driving about 7/10ths, AWD and FWD tend to scare me a bit whereas I find (a decently set up) RWD the most intuitive.
Part of it might just be the car types. I've never really seen the appeal of hot hatches personally and everything else FWD tends to be set up for mass market white-goods buyers. I like a car that tends to understeer on over run and oversteer under power, but does it consistently.
I liked them all (or wouldn't have bought them). I agree with the posters that observed that a well executed anything is better than a badly executed something else.
If forced to choose, it would be (front engine) rear wheel drive for me. I prefer the attributes they often end up with (nicer balance, more honest steering etc) and furthermore find that all my instincts work better for rear wheel drive. I find FWD and some AWD techniques a bit counter intuitive when driving fast and as such, when driving about 7/10ths, AWD and FWD tend to scare me a bit whereas I find (a decently set up) RWD the most intuitive.
Part of it might just be the car types. I've never really seen the appeal of hot hatches personally and everything else FWD tends to be set up for mass market white-goods buyers. I like a car that tends to understeer on over run and oversteer under power, but does it consistently.
I've owned and driven all three basic layouts and prefer RWD. For the public road, RWD is a must, I wouldn't even consider a FWD or 4WD car. For the track, I would consider FWD, but prefer RWD. I've not driven 4WD on track.
I too would be interested in the split. My prediction would be that the greatest number of people would be in the 'don't mind' camp, with then the rest showing a bias to RWD over FWD, perhaps 70:30 split.
I too would be interested in the split. My prediction would be that the greatest number of people would be in the 'don't mind' camp, with then the rest showing a bias to RWD over FWD, perhaps 70:30 split.
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 8th December 08:57
For me, one of FWD's greatest assets and greatest flaws is that it's dynamically simpler than RWD. A FWD chassis will always transition continuously from over- to under-steer as the throttle opens - turn in hard on the throttle and it's going to under-steer, turn in on the brakes or under heavy engine braking and it's going to over-steer, somewhere between the two is a balance point (how accessible that balance point is obviously depends on how good the chassis is). The result of this is that decreasing throttle will, under all circumstances, push the car towards over-steer and vice versa.
RWD cars have the same transition from lift-off over-steer through mild power under-steer but then transition back to over-steer as you open the throttle further (assuming you have enough power to overcome traction). This adds an extra dimension to the way RWD cars drive.
I'm sure in most circumstances I'd be faster in a FWD car than an equivalent RWD one but this is precisely why I generally prefer RWD.
RWD cars have the same transition from lift-off over-steer through mild power under-steer but then transition back to over-steer as you open the throttle further (assuming you have enough power to overcome traction). This adds an extra dimension to the way RWD cars drive.
I'm sure in most circumstances I'd be faster in a FWD car than an equivalent RWD one but this is precisely why I generally prefer RWD.
kambites said:
For me, one of FWD's greatest assets and greatest flaws is that it's dynamically simpler than RWD. A FWD chassis will always transition continuously from over- to under-steer as the throttle opens - turn in hard on the throttle and it's going to under-steer, turn in on the brakes or under heavy engine braking and it's going to over-steer, somewhere between the two is a balance point (how accessible that balance point is obviously depends on how good the chassis is). The result of this is that decreasing throttle will, under all circumstances, push the car towards over-steer and vice versa.
RWD cars have the same transition from lift-off over-steer through mild power under-steer but then transition back to over-steer as you open the throttle further (assuming you have enough power to overcome traction). This adds an extra dimension to the way RWD cars drive.
I'm sure in most circumstances I'd be faster in a FWD car than an equivalent RWD one but this is precisely why I generally prefer RWD.
RWD cars have the same transition from lift-off over-steer through mild power under-steer but then transition back to over-steer as you open the throttle further (assuming you have enough power to overcome traction). This adds an extra dimension to the way RWD cars drive.
I'm sure in most circumstances I'd be faster in a FWD car than an equivalent RWD one but this is precisely why I generally prefer RWD.
It's certainly a massive advantage to FWD and it's generally what makes them feel so 'chuckable' (at least for me), because it's so much harder to spin one (ie get into unrecoverable oversteer).I like your last statement
Same for manual gearboxes, no DSC, ABS etc.DoubleD said:
Mr Tidy said:
Loyly said:
The driven wheels are less important than the quality of the drive overall, for me. I'll take a Megane RS over a 318i any day!
Maybe, but I'd take a BMW 130i/135i/140i over any Megane!
I can't think of anything remotely entertaining about any Megane (or any French car for that matter outside of a few iconic classics like a 205T16E2, Citroen DS & Traction Avant, Facel Vegas, some pre-war Delahaye's etc)
Have you actually driven anything created by Renault Sport? I find it hard to understand how anyone who has any interest in driving could fail to see the appeal. Despite being a huge fan of RWD inherently, I'd certainly take an RS Meganne over any 1-series with the possible exception of the 1M and I'm not even sure about that.
Totally depends on the car for me. Small little hot hatches with pin sharp handling and a revvy engine have to be FWD really. I have a Twingo 133 and have owned a number of FWD hot hatches (up to 260bhp) and they were extremely capable, fun and lightweight. Anyone who says that a FWD car can't be a drivers car probably hasn't been in a Megane R26.R or similar because they are hugely engaging.
My other mindset is that big German tanks should be RWD. I'm not entirely sure why really but in my mind they just should be! Admittedly my CLS would struggle putting power through the front so it makes sense in that respect but the power from my E320 isn't such that it would matter if it was front or rear wheel drive.
So for me it depends on a few factors as to which I prefer but I've got nothing against either.
My other mindset is that big German tanks should be RWD. I'm not entirely sure why really but in my mind they just should be! Admittedly my CLS would struggle putting power through the front so it makes sense in that respect but the power from my E320 isn't such that it would matter if it was front or rear wheel drive.
So for me it depends on a few factors as to which I prefer but I've got nothing against either.
jamieduff1981 said:
Part of it might just be the car types. I've never really seen the appeal of hot hatches personally and everything else FWD tends to be set up for mass market white-goods buyers.
My view as well.I've owned 8 x FWD and 9 x RWD, and the FWD cars with one exception have been 'transport'.....good transport, but just that. Bought because they had traits needed that suited other things in life at the time.
With the sole exception of a 1275 Cooper S, only two other fwd cars have put a grin on my face (and the S was the only one that had a transverse engine layout) the other two were inline fwd, the Saab 900T and a few drives long ago in a few AlfaSud Ti's, which was the closest thing to a 'hot hatch' that I've ever got to buying or been interested in buying.
kambites said:
I think you've probably got your cause and effect back-to-front there.
Mmm no, I meant exactly what I wrote. Nobody wants to admit they prefer the opposite of what they currently drive. I await the "I prefer RWD and I drive FWD" posts, when in reality, the person owns a RWD car. And vice versa. Jonno02 said:
kambites said:
I think you've probably got your cause and effect back-to-front there.
Mmm no, I meant exactly what I wrote. Nobody wants to admit they prefer the opposite of what they currently drive. I await the "I prefer RWD and I drive FWD" posts, when in reality, the person owns a RWD car. And vice versa. I had a FWD daily driver for a while and had anyone asked me I would have said I preferred RWD; so I swapped back to RWD. If anything, owning a FWD daily driver (even a very good one like the Corrado) cemented my preference for RWD - the more I drove it, the more one-dimensional I found the chassis.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 8th December 09:41
aeropilot said:
DoubleD said:
Mr Tidy said:
Loyly said:
The driven wheels are less important than the quality of the drive overall, for me. I'll take a Megane RS over a 318i any day!
Maybe, but I'd take a BMW 130i/135i/140i over any Megane!I can't think of anything remotely entertaining about any Megane (or any French car for that matter outside of a few iconic classics like a 205T16E2, Citroen DS & Traction Avant, Facel Vegas, some pre-war Delahaye's etc)
Jonno02 said:
kambites said:
I think you've probably got your cause and effect back-to-front there.
Mmm no, I meant exactly what I wrote. Nobody wants to admit they prefer the opposite of what they currently drive. I await the "I prefer RWD and I drive FWD" posts, when in reality, the person owns a RWD car. And vice versa. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff