Do folk really perceive RWD to be dangerous?
Discussion
Spoke to friend of the woman next door and asked him about his Clio Sport. In conversation he mentioned how he would never consider a BMW down to their being RWD and inherently dangerous. He went on to describe how the rear can step out without warning, due to the poor design.
I've also noted a few posts on here, with comments that suggest semi-trailing arms to be the work of Satan, despite cars like the E30 M3 having them.
I grew up with RWD being the norm', so never really gave it a second thought, but do some folk really consider RWD to be dangerous?
I've also noted a few posts on here, with comments that suggest semi-trailing arms to be the work of Satan, despite cars like the E30 M3 having them.
I grew up with RWD being the norm', so never really gave it a second thought, but do some folk really consider RWD to be dangerous?
ESP has made a huge difference, but even without it you need to be driving like a nob to have a problem in a decent RWD car with good tyres.
Lots of people do assume that a greasy road turns a RWD car into a death trap, though. The same people have no idea which wheels drive their car or what's under the bonnet or how to drive to conditions or how to deal with oversteer, etc. Their opinions don't matter.
Lots of people do assume that a greasy road turns a RWD car into a death trap, though. The same people have no idea which wheels drive their car or what's under the bonnet or how to drive to conditions or how to deal with oversteer, etc. Their opinions don't matter.
Tribal Chestnut said:
No. Most 'folk' do not understand the difference between RWD/FWD, etc.
Most people can't drive!!! they drive and learnt to drive in abs esp equipped bland mobiles so when they encounter adverse conditions or something that needs driving its trouble
I was lucky I've done a fair bit of motor sport and learnt to drive as a kid off road in a Austin A35 personally I prefer a little oversteer but Joe average is safer with FWD IMHO.
yes, I think people do to a certain extent, well, some do, the ones that know which set of wheels moves their car, a lot for example have four wheel drives but don't actually know what that means, or, even worse think it means physics defying grip.
Back when RWD was the norm, most cars your average punter could buy were 60, 70, maybe 100 bhp, the odd exceptions were 130 - 140 bhp V6 Capris, nowadays even cooking BMW 1 series have 150 odd, ranging up to 300 ish for the 135i, power is much more accesible and I do think that without ESP there would be a lot more accidents, especially with the torquey turbodiesel engines.
I remember that a few Police forces had problems when they got the BMW 325 TDS and Sierra Cosworth, in fact I seem to remember there was a death or two, people were probably used to RWD but not that big lump of tyre unsticking grunt that a turbo brings.
Perhaps the non petrolheads arent that daft and could get used to it, but driving has changed from being a male preserve, blokes that did their own maintenance and "got" cars, a lot more people drive now than back in the seventies, a less of them are interested in it other than a means of transport.
I think like the Eurofighter wouldn't fly without the computer control, some models now wouldn't really be possible to unleash on the public without the electronics, 550 bhp SUV's driven by school run mums for example, RWD diesel BMW's with 300 bhp and 450 pounds of torque at not much above idle, a "grunty" engine back in the seventies had 100 lb/ft at 4000 rpm.
I have a 350Z and its not a complete animal but I find it pays not to subscribe too much to forum lore about how a car is forgiving, I had a 944 S2 before and that wasnt above ignoring its reputation and being a bit unruly.
I suppose now, you don't have to be "on it" quite like you used to be, due to the electronics, but they aren't infallible, I like the ones that give you a little bit of leeway, the 350Z is too vigilant.
Back when RWD was the norm, most cars your average punter could buy were 60, 70, maybe 100 bhp, the odd exceptions were 130 - 140 bhp V6 Capris, nowadays even cooking BMW 1 series have 150 odd, ranging up to 300 ish for the 135i, power is much more accesible and I do think that without ESP there would be a lot more accidents, especially with the torquey turbodiesel engines.
I remember that a few Police forces had problems when they got the BMW 325 TDS and Sierra Cosworth, in fact I seem to remember there was a death or two, people were probably used to RWD but not that big lump of tyre unsticking grunt that a turbo brings.
Perhaps the non petrolheads arent that daft and could get used to it, but driving has changed from being a male preserve, blokes that did their own maintenance and "got" cars, a lot more people drive now than back in the seventies, a less of them are interested in it other than a means of transport.
I think like the Eurofighter wouldn't fly without the computer control, some models now wouldn't really be possible to unleash on the public without the electronics, 550 bhp SUV's driven by school run mums for example, RWD diesel BMW's with 300 bhp and 450 pounds of torque at not much above idle, a "grunty" engine back in the seventies had 100 lb/ft at 4000 rpm.
I have a 350Z and its not a complete animal but I find it pays not to subscribe too much to forum lore about how a car is forgiving, I had a 944 S2 before and that wasnt above ignoring its reputation and being a bit unruly.
I suppose now, you don't have to be "on it" quite like you used to be, due to the electronics, but they aren't infallible, I like the ones that give you a little bit of leeway, the 350Z is too vigilant.
J4CKO said:
Back when RWD was the norm, most cars your average punter could buy were 60, 70, maybe 100 bhp, the odd exceptions were 130 - 140 bhp V6 Capris, nowadays even cooking BMW 1 series have 150 odd, ranging up to 300 ish for the 135i, power is much more accesible and I do think that without ESP there would be a lot more accidents, especially with the torquey turbodiesel engines.
Increases in power have been offset by increases in weight, ever wider tyres with improved compounds, larger brakes and ESP and safety systems that often require a lot of determination to turn off. I sincerely doubt there would be many more (maybe even fewer) accidents if all current cars were RWD given other advances.Bigger problem IMO is the number of distractions that drivers have to contend with these days.
I find it did more people don't come unstuck. I've had countless times when the backs stepped out on my 320d, I quite enjoy it when it does, but it's caught me out once or twice when I wasn't expecting.
I'm surprised I don't see more 320ds and 120ds bouncing off curbs
Do like rwd more than not though
I'm surprised I don't see more 320ds and 120ds bouncing off curbs
Do like rwd more than not though
While I prefer, and enjoy driving a RWD car...I'd say it probably is more dangerous. The only times I have truly spazzed out and spun a car off the road was when the classic damp road + throttle + overcorrection came into play.
You dont really get that in a FWD.
I still like the mid engine, RWD setup best though.
You dont really get that in a FWD.
I still like the mid engine, RWD setup best though.
NiceCupOfTea said:
What I've never understood:
E36 compact and z3 roadster - crap handling and rear suspension
E30 - excellent fun tail out handling
Same rear end isn't it?
That is a good point. I've always thought the snide remarks directed at the Z3's rear suspension were a bit iffy considering the E30 is a reasonable handler and the Z3 was never meant to handle with the finesse of a Boxster or whatever (it was conceived as a GT for the US market IIRC). E36 compact and z3 roadster - crap handling and rear suspension
E30 - excellent fun tail out handling
Same rear end isn't it?
Did the Z3 also have a slightly wider rear track and tyres?
Motorbikes are (almost all) rear wheel drive and most don't have traction control either...
It is obvious, but:
Rear wheel drive has a tendency to break traction at the rear on low-friction surfaces, which can result in oversteer if the car is turning. The human instinct/survival reaction is to lift-off the throttle suddenly in the event of a problem, which can exacerbate the problem.
In a FWD car the front tends to break traction which can result in understeer. Lifting-off weights the front end, which can reduce the understeer.
It is obvious, but:
Rear wheel drive has a tendency to break traction at the rear on low-friction surfaces, which can result in oversteer if the car is turning. The human instinct/survival reaction is to lift-off the throttle suddenly in the event of a problem, which can exacerbate the problem.
In a FWD car the front tends to break traction which can result in understeer. Lifting-off weights the front end, which can reduce the understeer.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff