REAR WHEEL DRIVE

[blearyeyedboy]

300bhp/ton said:

I'm still of the opinion that you are deluding yourself if you think you are safer driving unsuitably to the conditions just because you are in a fwd. Or are we talking cars with 200-300bhp/tonne power to weight ratio?

300- Just to be clear, I'm not talking about driving unsuitably to the conditions. That would make me an utter pillock and a danger on the roads whatever configuration my car is. I'm talking about the margin of safety you have when an unexpected event occurs and you're making appropriate progress.

For example, when you're making appropriate progress and not giving it the beans, is it really more likely that you'll spin an Elise by needing to come off the accelerator or brake mid corner? Both are best avoided in any car but sometimes can't be avoided.

For another example, can anyone make a BMW 3 series behave in snow? Why are BMW's said to be bad in snow, but very few people slate Mercedes or Jaguar in the same way? Is the main problem the drivers, or are decent tyres, a bag of cement in the boot and an LSD important elements to that?

I'm not saying that FWD is automatically better and I've really enjoyed driving some RWD cars- safely on a road, more ham-fistedly on airfields and tracks. What I'm trying to do is play devil's advocate and ask people to explain why they feel RWD offers similar margins of safety, to educate myself and others (hopefully).

For example, take statements like this about adjustability of RWD cars:

GravelBen said:

Personally I'd much rather have the adjustability of RWD than the threat of plough-on FWD understeer with no solution except backing off and waiting for it to stop - RWD does give more options for dealing with situations. I can only think of one occasion I've had unprovoked, unexpected oversteer (puddle while overtaking) and that was caught with a flick of the wrist.

Comments like the above are helpful. Comments saying "Real men drive RWD" or similar aren't.

Alfanatic said:

My point, the rest of the car makes more difference to how likely it is to bite you than the drivetrain configuration alone.

And that's my gut instinct too unless any of the other contributors here can convince me otherwise. But I'm definitely willing to listen. Whether it's about 450bhp Nissans or BMW 116d's!

Edited by blearyeyedboy on Wednesday 11th May 10:26

[300bhp/ton]

blearyeyedboy said:

300- Just to be clear, I'm not talking about driving unsuitably to the conditions. That would make me an utter pillock and a danger on the roads whatever configuration my car is. I'm talking about the margin of safety you have when an unexpected event occurs and you're making appropriate progress.

For example, when you're making appropriate progress and not giving it the beans, is it really more likely that you'll spin an Elise by needing to come off the accelerator or brake mid corner? Both are best avoided in any car but sometimes can't be avoided.

Can anyone make a BMW 3 series behave in snow? Are decent tyres, a bag of cement in the boot and an LSD important elements to that?

I'm not saying that FWD is automatically better. What I'm trying to do is play devil's advocate and ask people to explain why they feel RWD offers similar margins of safety, to educate myself and others (hopefully).

For example, statements like yours about adjustability of RWD cars are helpful. Comments saying "Real men drive RWD" or similar aren't.

The only time I think RWD would cause more trouble is if it's a very powerful car, and combine that with either a shed load of low end grunt or huge turbo lag, alla a modded Sierra Cosworth.

But similar levels of power and unpredictability would be just as likely to cause issues in a fwd car due to massive understeer.

Your Elise example, if you lift off the throttle, then the driven wheels have little to do with its handling. Hence why a DC2 or indeed a Pug 205 GTI will happily snap oversteer too.

In a mid mounted car this can be worse I agree, but just drive to the conditions.

In most other rwd cars, say an e36 318i for instance. It doesn't have enough power to properly power oversteer. In fact the only way to get the back out on tarmac is to drive it in a highly provocative manner unsuited to road driving.

I see no reason why such a car would be any more likely to come off the road. Even if it did oversteer, you'd still be turning and going round the corner. With fwd if you get plough on understeer at speed you are no longer turning, backing off the throttle might help, but have you enough room?

I often see where cars (yoofs) have come off the road. Right hand bends you can see what happened, going too fast, car understeers and hits verge, this slows the front of the car down, causing the back to also swing into the verge/bank. They then get an uncontrollable tank slapper the car spins and they leave the road backwards and end up in the hedge, often upside down.

I just don't see how it's safer.


I admit, fwd may appear easier in terms of flooring the throttle pedal and staying well inside the cars limits. But go to the edge of the cars limits and I don't think they are any safer at all.

[renrut]

Alfanatic said:

My point, the rest of the car makes more difference to how likely it is to bite you than the drivetrain configuration alone.

This +1.

[aka_kerrly]

renrut said:

Alfanatic said:

My point, the rest of the car makes more difference to how likely it is to bite you than the drivetrain configuration alone.

This +1.

Add, the driver's skills are far more important than the drivetrain configuration.

In a nutshell the PH view seems to be slate anything that is FWD and describe it as a shopping trolley. Whine that if you push too hard a FWD car can understeer and won't handle well, but on the other hand if you can send a RWD into oversteer that proves the car can handle and makes you a man.

[renrut]

300bhp/ton said:

Stuff

FWD is 'safer' because when it all goes understeer-death the best thing you can do to save yourself is lift off the power and onto the brakes, this is the natural reaction of most (esp younger) drivers unless trained otherwise. If you go all oversteer-death in a RWD and leap off the power and onto the brakes things just get worse.

That's the official line from most places claiming knowledge anyway.

IMO FWD is 'safer' because if the car is poorly maintained (bad tracking or semi bald tyres) a rwd car is a lot more skittish than a fwd car due to pushing rather than pulling thing. A lot of cars out there are poorly maintained. Imagine the tracking being a bit toe out on one side at the rear in a rwd compared to a fwd. The fwd will still be pulling itself forwards with a bit of a crab but the rwd car will be pushing itself into a spin.

[300bhp/ton]

renrut said:

FWD is 'safer' because when it all goes understeer-death the best thing you can do to save yourself is lift off the power and onto the brakes, this is the natural reaction of most (esp younger) drivers unless trained otherwise. If you go all oversteer-death in a RWD and leap off the power and onto the brakes things just get worse.

That's the official line from most places claiming knowledge anyway.

IMO FWD is 'safer' because if the car is poorly maintained (bad tracking or semi bald tyres) a rwd car is a lot more skittish than a fwd car due to pushing rather than pulling thing. A lot of cars out there are poorly maintained. Imagine the tracking being a bit toe out on one side at the rear in a rwd compared to a fwd. The fwd will still be pulling itself forwards with a bit of a crab but the rwd car will be pushing itself into a spin.

But that's assuming RWD with oversteer always. That just isn't true, they can and do understeer too.

Most times when the back steps out will be at lower speed and too much right foot. But low speed usually means embarrassment rather than disaster.

If the back steps out at high speed then I suggest you where simply going too fast and a FWD car would likely have fared no better.

I do concede mid/rear cars are a special case as they can bit a lot harder. But just drive to the conditions.

[130R]

RWD cars tend to have more power than FWD cars which would be the main reason people are more likely to bin them I think. If you boot the accelerator in a powerful RWD car bad things can happen very quickly.

[300bhp/ton]

130R said:

RWD cars tend to have more power than FWD cars which would be the main reason people are more likely to bin them I think. If you boot the accelerator in a powerful RWD car bad things can happen very quickly.

One of my rwd cars has 80hp, so not too sure on your claim

Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 11th May 12:21

[varsas]

First RWD when I was 21 and have had one ever since. When it came to replacing my daily driver 2 years ago I got a RWD for that too, and haven't had anything else since.

[renrut]

300bhp/ton said:

renrut said:

FWD is 'safer' because when it all goes understeer-death the best thing you can do to save yourself is lift off the power and onto the brakes, this is the natural reaction of most (esp younger) drivers unless trained otherwise. If you go all oversteer-death in a RWD and leap off the power and onto the brakes things just get worse.

That's the official line from most places claiming knowledge anyway.

IMO FWD is 'safer' because if the car is poorly maintained (bad tracking or semi bald tyres) a rwd car is a lot more skittish than a fwd car due to pushing rather than pulling thing. A lot of cars out there are poorly maintained. Imagine the tracking being a bit toe out on one side at the rear in a rwd compared to a fwd. The fwd will still be pulling itself forwards with a bit of a crab but the rwd car will be pushing itself into a spin.

But that's assuming RWD with oversteer always. That just isn't true, they can and do understeer too.

Most times when the back steps out will be at lower speed and too much right foot. But low speed usually means embarrassment rather than disaster.

If the back steps out at high speed then I suggest you where simply going too fast and a FWD car would likely have fared no better.

I do concede mid/rear cars are a special case as they can bit a lot harder. But just drive to the conditions.

I guess that's the point though, if you're driving to the conditions in a well maintained car then neither is really dangerous. Its only when you over step into the 'dangerous' territory or have a badly maintained car that one shows itself as potentially safer.

Its also the case that a lot of drivers don't know how to react to unwanted oversteer but they instinctively can resolve understeer and tbh probably don't even realise that's what's happening some of the time. This is probably where the 6'4" be-goatee'd cagefighting driving-god thing comes into it.

doogz said:

300bhp/ton said:

On of my rwd cars has 80hp, so not too sure on your claim

He does say "tend to" and he does have a point.

For modern cars there are very few rwd cars with less than 100bhp and most have 150bhp+ and once you get over 300bhp there are almost no factory fwd cars. In fact I can only think of 2 modern rwd cars that are less than 100bhp and you have one of them.

[renrut]

doogz said:

What's the other. Are you talking about the other Smart, or am i missing something?

Yeah the 2 Smarts are the only 2 I can think of in recent times (post 2000). I'd be interested if anyone knows of any others.

[GravelBen]

renrut said:

This is probably where the 6'4" be-goatee'd cagefighting driving-god thing comes into it.

Not that crap again, why should being a competent driver make you an instant target for a cliched straw-man parody? Especially on PH!

I agree that Fwd is easier for a less-skilled driver who has exceeded their limits - if you're incompetent, then go and get some more training. But either way, please give up on the boring old 'driving god' comments.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 11th May 13:40

[ajprice]

doogz said:

lesbian guide dog.

A guide dog for lesbians or a a lesbian dog?

[renrut]

doogz said:

GravelBen said:

renrut said:

This is probably where the 6'4" be-goatee'd cagefighting driving-god thing comes into it.

Not that crap again, why should being a competent driver make you an instant target for a cliched straw-man parody? Especially on PH!

I agree that Fwd is easier for a less-skilled driver who has exceeded their limits - if you're incompetent, then go and get some more training. But either way, please give up on the boring old 'driving god' comments.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 11th May 13:40

I agree with this.

God forbid you dare to discuss driving techniques on the forum, you're either a driving god, or an accident waiting to happen, spinning out of control at 100mph on a roundabout and wiping out 5 children and a lesbian guide dog.

I was pointing out where the PH cliche comes from - FWD is seen as safer (always a bad thing on PH it seems) because in extreme circumstances it can be less intuitive to control, especially by people who have only ever driven FWD cars (something even yourself admits) thus the PH typical assumption of "if you can't you're a loser and should MTFU".

So how is that a straw man? Was I not discussing driving techniques?

[renrut]

doogz said:

I wasn't having a go at you in any way.

It's just something i've noticed on here, it's been discussed before. I was really aiming that at ben, not you.

No worries.

[blearyeyedboy]

Thanks to those who answered my "devil's advocate" post in the spirit that was intended. It seems like the most useful thread I've seen for discussing the nuances of more/less power through the driven wheels, the handling qualities of any particular car and the emphasis on driver skills.

I wouldn't say the "goatee" comments are completely irrelevant- it's important to distinguish between those people who have an over-inflated opinion of their own driving skill and those who've actually gone out and worked at becoming more skilled.

"Incompetent" and "Needs a bit of polishing" aren't the same thing. I hope I'm a slightly above average driver who's taken some time to improve his skills rather than an incompetent one. But I know there are areas I need to improve. If I acknowledge that, it's not meant to take the mickey out of those of you who've already polished your own.

(Polished your own skills, that is.)

[anonymous-user]

I'm 21 and I've had two.