To RWD or not to RWD?

[LotsOfLaughs]

How many of you know the oversteer is more dangerout than understeer? And why nearly all cars, including RWD ones, are setup to understeer from factory?
(Hint : It's not because it's more difficult to correct)

It's because if you understeer into something, you crash with the front of your car, whereas if you oversteer, it could be the side of your car, where there is almost no crumple zone, and often no airbag.

So - with that in mind, I'm wondering if the figures are available for which cars have which type of crashes, and how fatal each of those is.

I'd like to try a sporty, relatively powerful RWD car (think BMW, Porsche, etc). Having owned a couple of fast Subarus and a very slow RWD car (1.6 MX5 performance), as well as plenty of relatively slow FWD cars, I can sort of imagine what such a car will be like. I drove my MX5 in winter, and sliding it around in the snow was lots of fun, and very very easy, because it happened at such low speeds. My concern is that in buying a similar handling vehicle and but with Subaru levels of speed, it's likely to get out of hand at much more dangerous and less controlable speeds, with far worse consequences.

What worries me isn't crashing, at my age and condition, I'll likely survive a frontal crash in a relatively modern car with airbags etc (obviously not at stupid speeds, or into improbable spikes etc) but crashing side-on, particularly into a tree or a post, is something I've heard of happening a few times, with graphically fatal outcomes, and it's something I'm keen to avoid.

So, is something like a BMW Z4 or a Boxster S inherantly more risky than say a Golf R (which is every bit as fast)? And as such, have they got to be driven very carefully in wet conditions? Or are the people who crash them mostly just talentless morons showing off their fancy cars?

[Super Sonic]

You sound like you want to crash.

[LotsOfLaughs]

Super Sonic said:

You sound like you want to crash.

Only when you're infront of me

[otolith]

In a modern rear drive car, with the stability systems turned on, you have to be being stupid to lose the back end. They’re no more likely to get into unintentional oversteer than a front driver under weight transfer.

[InitialDave]

LotsOfLaughs said:

So, is something like a BMW Z4 or a Boxster S inherantly more risky than say a Golf R (which is every bit as fast)? And as such, have they got to be driven very carefully in wet conditions? Or are the people who crash them mostly just talentless morons showing off their fancy cars?

A Z4 or Boxster S will be easier to lose control of than a Golf R, but Golf Rs will be more common and have a higher proportion of fkwits owning them.

So I wouldn't rely on accident stats in the slightest.

My 75 year old mother hasn't owned anything other than RWD, ever, and nothing with less than 200bhp for about 25-30 years.

Don't be a prat and you'll be fine.

[LotsOfLaughs]

otolith said:

In a modern rear drive car, with the stability systems turned on, you have to be being stupid to lose the back end. They’re no more likely to get into unintentional oversteer than a front driver under weight transfer.

And how modern is modern? Mandatory ESP came in 2013 I think, but all the old Z4s and Boxsters (at least, the ones with the biggest engines) came with some form of traction control as standard. Are those good enough? I mean obviously my old 1.6 didn't have anything, not even ABS, but I guess what I mean is, is it still a sportscar, or do I have to drive it like a granny as soon as the weather turns Welsh?

InitialDave said:

A Z4 or Boxster S will be easier to lose control of than a Golf R, but Golf Rs will be more common and have a higher proportion of fkwits owning them.

So I wouldn't rely on accident stats in the slightest.

My 75 year old mother hasn't owned anything other than RWD, ever, and nothing with less than 200bhp for about 25-30 years.

Don't be a prat and you'll be fine.

Stats have to be interpreted correctly, so obviously standardise for proportion of those cars, age of the drivers, the roads they crash on, the speeds involved, etc.

What I'd really like to know is, of the cars which crashed, how many were fatal, how many were side-on, etc.

[otolith]

My 2004 Z4M will try to kill you in the wet if you turn the DSC off and play silly games. If you leave it on, and don’t drive like a dick, it won’t.

[MikeM6]

RWD is perfectly fine, provided you have quality tyres in good condition and don't drive like a buffoon.

The vast majority of RWD cars don't crash, with a wide range of drivers operating them. Those that do most likely didn't follow one of the above points I made.

[RedWhiteMonkey]

Has the first post been put into the advanced driving section by mistake? It reads more like retarded driving, or is it simply school holidays again?

[LotsOfLaughs]

otolith said:

My 2004 Z4M will try to kill you in the wet if you turn the DSC off and play silly games. If you leave it on, and don’t drive like a dick, it won’t.

So out of interest, if you went for a spirited drive down a B-road with your mate in say a Golf GTI, obviously in the dry you'll leave him far behind, but once it starts raining, will he leave you behind, or does the gap just get smaller?

MikeM6 said:

RWD is perfectly fine, provided you have quality tyres in good condition and don't drive like a buffoon.

The vast majority of RWD cars don't crash, with a wide range of drivers operating them. Those that do most likely didn't follow one of the above points I made.

By "drive like a buffoon" do you mean try to slide it around or do you mean driving too fast?

RedWhiteMonkey said:

Has the first post been put into the advanced driving section by mistake? It reads more like retarded driving, or is it simply school holidays again?

I put it in the advanced driving section because I reckoned the advanced driving people might know where to find the relevant crash statistics

[RedWhiteMonkey]

LotsOfLaughs said:

I put it in the advanced driving section because I reckoned the advanced driving people might know where to find the relevant crash statistics

It's quite simple, you won't find the statistics that you seem to be looking for, they don't exist. No-one is compiling data of specific types of crashes by specific types of cars.

(Rant on)
Please re-read your first post and think about what you've written, how you have written it and what you appear to want to attempt to do. By all means do whatever you want on a private road or empty race track, but please don't treat the public highway as a playground. It won't end well for you and quite possibly for some innocent third party. There really isn't such a thing as a safe crash and thinking your age/condition will always be in your favour is incredibly naive.
(Rant off)

[otolith]

LotsOfLaughs said:

otolith said:

My 2004 Z4M will try to kill you in the wet if you turn the DSC off and play silly games. If you leave it on, and don’t drive like a dick, it won’t.

So out of interest, if you went for a spirited drive down a B-road with your mate in say a Golf GTI, obviously in the dry you'll leave him far behind, but once it starts raining, will he leave you behind, or does the gap just get smaller?

A Golf GTi is fast enough that your pace on the road is largely limited by legal and safety constraints. A faster car is really only going to give marginal gains in acceleration time - you need a really large gap in performance to walk away from a reasonably quick car without driving like a nutter. It’s unusual for cornering speeds to be limited by grip rather than by visibility, and in any case the end that’s driven doesn’t really alter the amount of wet grip available. A front wheel drive car would likely be more friendly under power on corner exit in the wet.

[LotsOfLaughs]

RedWhiteMonkey said:

It's quite simple, you won't find the statistics that you seem to be looking for, they don't exist. No-one is compiling data of specific types of crashes by specific types of cars.

(Rant on)
Please re-read your first post and think about what you've written, how you have written it and what you appear to want to attempt to do. By all means do whatever you want on a private road or empty race track, but please don't treat the public highway as a playground. It won't end well for you and quite possibly for some innocent third party. There really isn't such a thing as a safe crash and thinking your age/condition will always be in your favour is incredibly naive.
(Rant off)

I'd be supprised if the data doesn't exist, I'm sure the police record the nature of accidents in some detail. If that data is processed and made available to the public is of course another matter.
To answer your rant, I get your point, and I never drive in a manner that increases risk to other road users. And yes, my age and condition do act in my favour in the unlikely and unfortunate event of a crash - thinking otherwise is insanity. If you wanted to bet on which human will survive any given crash, a man in his early 20s who does contact sports and does strength training is a pretty damn good bet. Obviously I won't be young forever, but I don't think that's what you meant. And obviously I reckognise that I'm not invincible, that's almost the whole point of this post, I know if I slam my drivers door into a tree I'll die. For almost exactly the same reason, I won't ride a motorcycle, because I know I'll die WHEN I crash it.

[LotsOfLaughs]

otolith said:

A Golf GTi is fast enough that your pace on the road is largely limited by legal and safety constraints. A faster car is really only going to give marginal gains in acceleration time - you need a really large gap in performance to walk away from a reasonably quick car without driving like a nutter. It’s unusual for cornering speeds to be limited by grip rather than by visibility, and in any case the end that’s driven doesn’t really alter the amount of wet grip available. A front wheel drive car would likely be more friendly under power on corner exit in the wet.

Yes, all true, but we're always told how RWD is so much more fun, and a Golf GTI isn't particularly fun.
Cornering speeds limited by visibility vs grip - depends entirely on the road, and the weather. Sometimes its limited by the power you've got, depending on the car. My current car, a quick Subaru, is almost never limited by grip, even in the wet. That makes it extreamly fast, but it hasn't got me grinning like a child. I suppose what I'm after is something nearly as fast, but a lot more fun, and yet I'm not willing to take a significantly higher risk of a fatal crash.

[ScoobyChris]

I've found powerful RWD cars (and even a moderately powerful one like my old M140i) can be driven quickly but they require smooth inputs and controlled weight transitions to maximise the available grip or they can bite. They are definitely not "chuckable" as you would a FWD or point and squirt like an AWD, but as a result can be more rewarding to drive.

Mine was a daily driver and I ran winters through the wetter/colder months and my wife (who has no interest in cars or driving) happily used it to commute.

Chris

[RedWhiteMonkey]

LotsOfLaughs said:

I'd be supprised if the data doesn't exist, I'm sure the police record the nature of accidents in some detail. If that data is processed and made available to the public is of course another matter.
To answer your rant, I get your point, and I never drive in a manner that increases risk to other road users. And yes, my age and condition do act in my favour in the unlikely and unfortunate event of a crash - thinking otherwise is insanity. If you wanted to bet on which human will survive any given crash, a man in his early 20s who does contact sports and does strength training is a pretty damn good bet. Obviously I won't be young forever, but I don't think that's what you meant. And obviously I reckognise that I'm not invincible, that's almost the whole point of this post, I know if I slam my drivers door into a tree I'll die. For almost exactly the same reason, I won't ride a motorcycle, because I know I'll die WHEN I crash it.

Ok, I can see you are pretty fixed in your viewpoint, I'll put that down to the exuberance of youth and move on. Please be safe out there.

Ps. thanks for the offer but I'd rather not bet on people surviving car crashes, too morbid for me.

[AndyJWB]

You're overthinking it. Buy a RWD car, learn to drive it properly and enjoy.

[LotsOfLaughs]

ScoobyChris said:

I've found powerful RWD cars (and even a moderately powerful one like my old M140i) can be driven quickly but they require smooth inputs and controlled weight transitions to maximise the available grip or they can bite. They are definitely not "chuckable" as you would a FWD or point and squirt like an AWD, but as a result can be more rewarding to drive.

Mine was a daily driver and I ran winters through the wetter/colder months and my wife (who has no interest in cars or driving) happily used it to commute.

Chris

Every car benefits from smooth inputs, certainly on the steering at least. Out of interest, did you use summer tyres all year round? I run Pilot Sports on my Subaru and never have any issues with grip, even when driving rather quickly. Obviously when there is actually snow on the ground I've got to be very careful, but even then it still moves forwards, which I imagine a RWD car, particularly if it isn't midengined, wont.
Id be looking at something around the 250hp mark, 3.0 Z4 or 3.2 Boxster are the current candidates, or perhaps the newer Z4 with the folding hardtop and the 35i engine, but that's getting a bit heavy for a sportscar in my opinion. Could I keep one of those on summer tyres all year round, or does driving that sort of thing in the wet on summer tyres become a bit like driving my Subaru on the snow with summer tyres?

AndyJWB said:

You're overthinking it. Buy a RWD car, learn to drive it properly and enjoy.

That's the sort of thing I'm sure many a motorcycle enthusiast would say. I'd rather overthink and miss out on a bit of fun than not overthink, jump into a car and die crashing it.

[ScoobyChris]

LotsOfLaughs said:

Every car benefits from smooth inputs, certainly on the steering at least.

Benefits yes, but you can get away with a lot more on FWD and AWD.

LotsOfLaughs said:

Out of interest, did you use summer tyres all year round? I run Pilot Sports on my Subaru and never have any issues with grip, even when driving rather quickly. Obviously when there is actually snow on the ground I've got to be very careful, but even then it still moves forwards, which I imagine a RWD car, particularly if it isn't midengined, wont.

The car came with MPSS summers which were not very good in the rain so for colder/wetter months I ran winters. The Pilot 4's I replaced the MPSS with were significantly better in that respect. Never really had any issue with traction, even in the snow and icy weather, and every drive I managed to enjoy the performance of the car.

Chris

[AndyJWB]

LotsOfLaughs said:

That's the sort of thing I'm sure many a motorcycle enthusiast would say. I'd rather overthink and miss out on a bit of fun than not overthink, jump into a car and die crashing it.

Alright. Stick with FWD cars then