FWD or RWD?

[Kawasicki]

Flibble said:

Nanook said:

Grip round a corner isn't dependant on power, what do you think happens when you're loading the tyre up to the edge of it's grip circle in turning, then apply more power?

Not sure where this thread is up to (getting hard to follow) but my car (RWD) at the limit of grip will slide into understeer if you're gentle on the throttle. I have tested this on a skidpan. If you boot it of course the back end will spin round like a top.

if the car is at the absolute grip limit and that is because the front axle is the limiting factor, then yes you are correct. i have also tested this on a skidpan

[RobM77]

Flibble said:

Nanook said:

Grip round a corner isn't dependant on power, what do you think happens when you're loading the tyre up to the edge of it's grip circle in turning, then apply more power?

Not sure where this thread is up to (getting hard to follow) but my car (RWD) at the limit of grip will slide into understeer if you're gentle on the throttle.

That's just weight transfer, which is independent of which wheels are driven. One thing that makes FWD so dull is that the power effects only add to this, whereas with RWD they do the opposite, so you've got something to work with. This does make correcting oversteer much harder in a RWD car than a FWD car though (with FWD you always accelerate, whereas with RWD it's more complicated). However, I maintain that a major contributor is the weight distribution of the car in question: lumping everything over the front axle in a front drive car is always going to have a huge effect on handling, even if you use trick geo to try and overcome these effects, you can't argue with basic physics and the weight distribution will always make itself known. Adding power as well to the front only compounds these effects.

At the end of the day, this entire thread comes down to the fact that you can't describe handling in terms of good and bad and ignore the drivetrain. RWD and FWD are just too different to ignore, and as long as they're different you're going to get people who prefer one or the other. Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

And yes, all of the above are apparent at low speed on the road. You don't have to be at optimum slip on track to feel understeer or oversteer effects.

Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 21st December 10:03

[s m]

RobM77 said:

Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

Nice!

[Leins]

s m said:

RobM77 said:

Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

Nice!

Ain't jazz BRILLIANT!!!

[heebeegeetee]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

I can see the schools are out.

I meant what I meant in the context of hoons on the pubic roads. You can take it out of context and tell your school chums you beat some bloke with words on the internet.

You were right and I was wrong in the absolute sense, meanwhile is it ok with you if I return to the chat with adults?

[Kawasicki]

RobM77 said:

That's just weight transfer, which is independent of which wheels are driven. One thing that makes FWD so dull is that the power effects only add to this, whereas with RWD they do the opposite, so you've got something to work with. This does make correcting oversteer much harder in a RWD car than a FWD car though (with FWD you always accelerate, whereas with RWD it's more complicated). I maintain that a major contributor though is the weight distribution of the car in question: lumping everything over the front axle in a front drive car is always going to have a huge effect on handling, even if you use trick geo to try and overcome these effects, you can't argue with basic physics and the weight distribution will always make itself known. Adding power as well to the front only compounds these effects.

At the end of the day, this entire thread comes down to the fact that you can't describe handling in terms of good and bad and ignore the drivetrain. RWD and FWD are just too different to ignore, and as long as they're different you're going to get people who prefer one or the other. Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

And yes, all of the above are apparent at low speed on the road. You don't have to be at optimum slip on track to feel understeer or oversteer effects.

Good post. I've had a keen driver as a passenger, at exactly the moment I thought the car was showing fun handling he commented "ooh, I don't like that handling".

[Monkeylegend]

Will this be resolved by Christmas though?

[heebeegeetee]

RobM77 said:

That's just weight transfer, which is independent of which wheels are driven. One thing that makes FWD so dull is that the power effects only add to this, whereas with RWD they do the opposite, so you've got something to work with. This does make correcting oversteer much harder in a RWD car than a FWD car though (with FWD you always accelerate, whereas with RWD it's more complicated). However, I maintain that a major contributor is the weight distribution of the car in question: lumping everything over the front axle in a front drive car is always going to have a huge effect on handling, even if you use trick geo to try and overcome these effects, you can't argue with basic physics and the weight distribution will always make itself known. Adding power as well to the front only compounds these effects.

At the end of the day, this entire thread comes down to the fact that you can't describe handling in terms of good and bad and ignore the drivetrain. RWD and FWD are just too different to ignore, and as long as they're different you're going to get people who prefer one or the other. Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

And yes, all of the above are apparent at low speed on the road. You don't have to be at optimum slip on track to feel understeer or oversteer effects.

That's very good. For me the problems arise when people start that jazz musicians aren't very good, or that the basis of jazz is all wrong or they're not proper musicians or even jazz fans aren't real men.

Anyway, here's some entirely gratuitous footage of fwd disputing physics innit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvUQ3Jkwpeo

Or 1290cc fwd v 7 litre rwd
https://youtu.be/bZZ-gLgRDrw?t=8m18s

Edited by heebeegeetee on Wednesday 21st December 13:14

[CABC]

heebeegeetee said:

Or 1290cc fwd v 7 litre rwd https://youtu.be/bZZ-gLgRDrw

that battle is about weight though.
Never driven one, but i can't imagine the galaxie is the epitome of rwd fun.

[anonymous-user]

Getting back in my car after 10 days of rental cars I pulled out onto the main road and the rear wheels lost grip, slid and we performed a tidy arc before continuing on the journey. What's not to like

[RobM77]

heebeegeetee said:

RobM77 said:

That's just weight transfer, which is independent of which wheels are driven. One thing that makes FWD so dull is that the power effects only add to this, whereas with RWD they do the opposite, so you've got something to work with. This does make correcting oversteer much harder in a RWD car than a FWD car though (with FWD you always accelerate, whereas with RWD it's more complicated). However, I maintain that a major contributor is the weight distribution of the car in question: lumping everything over the front axle in a front drive car is always going to have a huge effect on handling, even if you use trick geo to try and overcome these effects, you can't argue with basic physics and the weight distribution will always make itself known. Adding power as well to the front only compounds these effects.

At the end of the day, this entire thread comes down to the fact that you can't describe handling in terms of good and bad and ignore the drivetrain. RWD and FWD are just too different to ignore, and as long as they're different you're going to get people who prefer one or the other. Telling a RWD fan that cars like the Integra or Clio Sport are good is like telling someone who hates jazz how good this or that jazz album is - if they hate jazz you're just missing the point!

And yes, all of the above are apparent at low speed on the road. You don't have to be at optimum slip on track to feel understeer or oversteer effects.

That's very good. For me the problems arise when people start that jazz musicians aren't very good, or that the basis of jazz is all wrong or they're not proper musicians or even jazz fans aren't real men.

Yes, most of that is just nonsense. However, the analogy isn't perfect because from an objective dynamic point of view FWD actually makes no sense at all, it's only from a subjective dynamic standpoint (i.e. bringing the human control and enjoyment element in) that FWD can ever make logical sense; or of course the practical advantages, which is the only real reason that FWD cars exist in the first place...

We all have a right to our preferences though, and I don't like being told I'm wrong for preferring the handling of a good RWD chassis to a FWD hot hatch chassis (I say chassis because the engine is irrelevant) - the truth is I drive a RWD BMW 3 series daily and my wife's FWD Honda Civic Type R reasonably regularly and it's a very clear cut thing for me. Personal preference - simply that.

[nickfrog]

heebeegeetee said:

That's very good. For me the problems arise when people start that jazz musicians aren't very good, or that the basis of jazz is all wrong or they're not proper musicians or even jazz fans aren't real men.

Anyway, here's some entirely gratuitous footage of fwd disputing physics innit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvUQ3Jkwpeo

Or 1290cc fwd v 7 litre rwd
https://youtu.be/bZZ-gLgRDrw?t=8m18s

So much understeer... whatever that means this week.

[Kawasicki]

nickfrog said:

heebeegeetee said:

That's very good. For me the problems arise when people start that jazz musicians aren't very good, or that the basis of jazz is all wrong or they're not proper musicians or even jazz fans aren't real men.

Anyway, here's some entirely gratuitous footage of fwd disputing physics innit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvUQ3Jkwpeo

Or 1290cc fwd v 7 litre rwd
https://youtu.be/bZZ-gLgRDrw?t=8m18s

So much understeer... whatever that means this week.

That mini is a very neutral car, that tends to understeer under power, like every fwd vehicle ever built.

[Toltec]

Given that even fans of RWD cannot agree if the best layout is FR, MR or RR this thread can never be answered.

The relevance of the above?

The engineering that has gone into the 911 has made a layout that is dynamically flawed in some respects work exceedingly well most of the time, the same can be said for some FWD cars too. You could almost say RR and FF are polar opposites, pun intended. There was a thread a while ago which brought up the subject of mid engine front drive, when you think about it front engined is better in the same way as RR when it comes to traction. While a mid front might handle better you would limit the power that could be applied so it would lose out in the FWD, hot hatch, top trumps, figures and never sell.

[Kawasicki]

Toltec said:

Given that even fans of RWD cannot agree if the best layout is FR, MR or RR this thread can never be answered.

The relevance of the above?

The engineering that has gone into the 911 has made a layout that is dynamically flawed in some respects work exceedingly well most of the time, the same can be said for some FWD cars too. You could almost say RR and FF are polar opposites, pun intended. There was a thread a while ago which brought up the subject of mid engine front drive, when you think about it front engined is better in the same way as RR when it comes to traction. While a mid front might handle better you would limit the power that could be applied so it would lose out in the FWD, hot hatch, top trumps, figures and never sell.

The location of the engine is a different level discussion than fwd vs. rwd.

And on that point there isn't really that much debate about the location of the engine in rwd cars. I think most engineers see RR as a layout that is dynamically flawed in some respects, so that is not really relevant. Between FR and MR there are lots of compromises to be made with corresponding advantages.

[RobM77]

Toltec said:

Given that even fans of RWD cannot agree if the best layout is FR, MR or RR this thread can never be answered.

The relevance of the above?

The engineering that has gone into the 911 has made a layout that is dynamically flawed in some respects work exceedingly well most of the time, the same can be said for some FWD cars too. You could almost say RR and FF are polar opposites, pun intended. There was a thread a while ago which brought up the subject of mid engine front drive, when you think about it front engined is better in the same way as RR when it comes to traction. While a mid front might handle better you would limit the power that could be applied so it would lose out in the FWD, hot hatch, top trumps, figures and never sell.

In terms of mass layout, which is of course linked to drive, all the various layouts have various pros and cons, but I don't think you'll find a single race engineer or road car R&H engineer who will stand by FE/FWD as the ideal mass layout given a clean sheet of paper. I realise that a 911 or even an Elise is effectively this layout running backwards, but the dynamics are actually very different. The discussions will come between ME/RWD, RE/RWD, FE/RWD, FE/RWD transaxle etc - FE/FWD is not even in the running. Yesm you can get round the shortcomings with good engineering, but that's like saying a 5' tall tennis player could be better than most 6'4" players with a lot of training - he's still 5' however good he gets!

[Flibble]

RobM77 said:

In terms of mass layout, which is of course linked to drive, all the various layouts have various pros and cons, but I don't think you'll find a single race engineer or road car R&H engineer who will stand by FE/FWD as the ideal mass layout given a clean sheet of paper. I realise that a 911 or even an Elise is effectively this layout running backwards, but the dynamics are actually very different. The discussions will come between ME/RWD, RE/RWD, FE/RWD, FE/RWD transaxle etc - FE/FWD is not even in the running. Yesm you can get round the shortcomings with good engineering, but that's like saying a 5' tall tennis player could be better than most 6'4" players with a lot of training - he's still 5' however good he gets!

Good analogy. The 5' player may well be better than most 6'4 players, but given equal skill he'll get beaten every time. Likewise a good FWD car can be better than a lot of RWD cars, but it will never be better than the best RWD cars.

[Toltec]

Excellent responses, btw have you seen what is in my garage?

[Olivera]

Flibble said:

Good analogy. The 5' player may well be better than most 6'4 players, but given equal skill he'll get beaten every time. Likewise a good FWD car can be better than a lot of RWD cars, but it will never be better than the best RWD cars.

For what it's worth, Evo COTY rated the Golf Clubsport S better than all RWD cars this year, 911R apart.

[RobM77]

Olivera said:

Flibble said:

Good analogy. The 5' player may well be better than most 6'4 players, but given equal skill he'll get beaten every time. Likewise a good FWD car can be better than a lot of RWD cars, but it will never be better than the best RWD cars.

For what it's worth, Evo COTY rated the Golf Clubsport S better than all RWD cars this year, 911R apart.

It will always be a matter of taste - handling is subjective and it also depends on the level of commitment from the driver and of course the road. Like Toltec, I've owned and driven a huge variety of cars, but I can't help my preferences, which are strongly towards RWD, although I don't mind FWD on track or 4WD on the loose. On that note, if I was absolutely hammering it around typical Evo roads for the weekend in a press car then I might prefer a Golf too. For my wet B road drive home tonight I'll take my FE/RWD thanks.