FWD v. RWD...and some AWD stuff too - Page 3

**B+O** · 06-08-07, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pito11213

Yo Bang I did and Bentley can testify for me as he was there. I know how to hit the apex of a turn, I know when to accelerate and deccelerate. I tend to not use my brakes so much while doing agressive cornering as I like to use the combo of the gas pedal and downshifting.

I feel you. Try it in the rain next time using the same techniques. don't adjust anything for the ground conditions, and if you car has Traction Control, make sure to turn it completely off...you'll see what happens when the Physics of Motion catch up with you....

NOTE NOTE NOTE

I DO NOT WANT YOU TO TRY IT!!!!!

that could be bad. With better tires on my current car than my Legend, i can't take some corners NEARLY as fast as i could with my Legend. I even staggered the tires on my current car to get better traction, but it's definitely tail happy on throttle and and drop throttle oversteer isn't as easy to control with this car.

BTW i have a Limited Slip Differential too.

Pito11213 · 06-08-07, 11:35 AM

Dont get me wrong doggie, I been in two slides with Bentley too, but I recovered on the second one, first one almost did but didnt have any room and it was icey so....

I know you was just joking, up top. That would be suicide. We already established that in poor weather FWD will be better, but dry pavement from my experience is home for RWD.

legendtype2 · 06-08-07, 01:42 PM

Yes I agree... I'd rather have fwd on wet or icy pavement. Maybe I should buy AWD so I don't need to worry about it

ALoneR · 06-11-07, 03:30 AM

the problem is;
once you break 200whp on most FWD cars, wheel hop and traction become serious issues.

there's a reason why a Turbo B16 Civic can't take an SVT Cobra from a dead stop, but from a 60mph roll, it has a fighting chance...and that reason is...once the wheels are in motion, all the power can be utilized, but off the line, most FWD set ups can't handle much more than 200whp, if that.

that's where RWD beats FWD...because usually there is more room in the wheel well of RWD cars, allowing them to put wider rims + wider tires on to get more traction. Most FWD cars are gonna be in the 195-230 tire range (im not even sure if any get up to 230)...but RWD will have tires that are damn near 300.

put a RWD and an FWD car on a dragstrip, each with 350whp and relatively the same weight, suspension etc etc...and see which one makes it down the strip faster.

as for handling....there is so much more behind handling than the drivetrain. the suspension, weight, weight distrobution and height of the car are wayyy more important. both FWD and RWD have their weaknesses in the turns. FWD is prone to understeer, and RWD is prone to oversteer. The difference is that oversteer can be controlled and utilized to your advantage [aka "drifting"], where as understeer will only slow you down.

what about the AE86, arguably the most popular drift-car of all time, and is also RWD. Does it handle poorly? No, it handles amazingly, but the real reason why the AE86 is successful is because of it's amazing weight distrobution. With enough chassis bars, weight redistrobution and a stiff enough suspension, a FWD or a RWD car can be amazing in the twisties.

I think drivetrain has very little to do with handling and FWD and RWD can both be successful as race cars, if prepared correctly.

Double Glow · 06-11-07, 03:40 AM

^ i think the real reason the AE86 is popular is because of Initial D...

the_invisible · 06-11-07, 04:05 AM

Funny that no one mentions torque steer. Among many points discussed, this discussion is heavily biased towards FWD cars. I wonder why, hmmm.

But then, using youtube videos for analytic purposes doesn't make a strong argument. Many of the videos being used for demonstrations here are of people with lack of common sense and driving skills.

the_invisible · 06-11-07, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double Glow

^ i think the real reason the AE86 is popular is because of Initial D...

You are taking the discussion out of context.

Other than the AE86, the Nissan 240sx and an array of Japanese RWD cars are popular for their out-of-the-box balancedness. These cars are not only popular in drifting, but also in roadraces nationwide on speedways.

The FWD vs RWD topic has been beaten to death all over the internet. I never imagined it'd pop up here. Even many of the TL owners acknowledge that the RWD layout is optimum to their transverse layout.

FF Drifter · 06-11-07, 05:59 AM

Obviously the solution is a FWD that has oversteering tendencies

the handling and the grip will be there but once the car oversteers around curves the driver can, at will, bring the car back in line. Vavoom!

**B+O** · 06-11-07, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALoneR

I think drivetrain has very little to do with handling and FWD and RWD can both be successful as race cars, if prepared correctly.

That's been my argument the whole time.

The Common thought is that "RWD PwNs AllLL!!one!" when in acutality, drive wheels play a small part in the overall balance of a car. and when conditions get slippery, the ability to control a RWD car then becomes ALL up to the ability of the driver since you're starting to fight against natural laws.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the invisible

You are taking the discussion out of context.

Other than the AE86, the Nissan 240sx and an array of Japanese RWD cars are popular for their out-of-the-box balancedness. These cars are not only popular in drifting, but also in roadraces nationwide on speedways.

The FWD vs RWD topic has been beaten to death all over the internet. I never imagined it'd pop up here. Even many of the TL owners acknowledge that the RWD layout is optimum to their transverse layout.

Apparently you didn't get what the point of the videos were. They were to demonstrate the NATURAL CHARACTERISTICS, WITHOUT INVOLVING DRIVER SENSE. You can be a great driver and make a car with any layout handle the way you want it, that's not a question. The question here was the use of drive wheels at their extremes.

At NO time in just about all of the F v. R drive videos did the drivers display common sense. but the results were WORLDS apart.

TL's transverse setup is the most popular style of front drive but it's not the optimum for weight distribution. Audi/VW, Chrysler, Honda, and Cadillac (at one point) had the FWD setup correct (though cadillac didn't do it for weight balance). The engine laid out front to back giving the best weght distribution possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AloneR

put a RWD and an FWD car on a dragstrip, each with 350whp and relatively the same weight, suspension etc etc...and see which one makes it down the strip faster.

yea, i addressed this in the beginning of the original post.

and to add to the original Post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by B+O

also, to make it a little easier to understand for those not understanding center of gravity, made it more about inertial rotation about drive wheels. Wrong? partially (there's more to it than just that particular influence), but try and tell me a wheelie is caused solely by the a car rotating on its center of gravity and i'll have to look at you a little funny.

Just incase you were wondering.

EDIT:

by the way, it's not uncommon for a lot of FWD vehicles to fit upwards of 255 sized tires. I've seen it on several occasions. that said, it is also not uncommon for many RWD cars to be limited to that same range.

legendtype2 · 06-11-07, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALoneR

the problem is;
once you break 200whp on most FWD cars, wheel hop and traction become serious issues.

there's a reason why a Turbo B16 Civic can't take an SVT Cobra from a dead stop, but from a 60mph roll, it has a fighting chance...and that reason is...once the wheels are in motion, all the power can be utilized, but off the line, most FWD set ups can't handle much more than 200whp, if that.

that's where RWD beats FWD...because usually there is more room in the wheel well of RWD cars, allowing them to put wider rims + wider tires on to get more traction. Most FWD cars are gonna be in the 195-230 tire range (im not even sure if any get up to 230)...but RWD will have tires that are damn near 300.

put a RWD and an FWD car on a dragstrip, each with 350whp and relatively the same weight, suspension etc etc...and see which one makes it down the strip faster.

as for handling....there is so much more behind handling than the drivetrain. the suspension, weight, weight distrobution and height of the car are wayyy more important. both FWD and RWD have their weaknesses in the turns. FWD is prone to understeer, and RWD is prone to oversteer. The difference is that oversteer can be controlled and utilized to your advantage [aka "drifting"], where as understeer will only slow you down.

what about the AE86, arguably the most popular drift-car of all time, and is also RWD. Does it handle poorly? No, it handles amazingly, but the real reason why the AE86 is successful is because of it's amazing weight distrobution. With enough chassis bars, weight redistrobution and a stiff enough suspension, a FWD or a RWD car can be amazing in the twisties.

I think drivetrain has very little to do with handling and FWD and RWD can both be successful as race cars, if prepared correctly.

This is the exact point I was trying to make here. FWD are good but it's got weaknesses as with RWD. When I had my S14 I almost lost control on wet pavement but I was able to take control back. With FWD you rarely have to worry about losing traction. But if you're a good driver or professional driver RWD is the way to go. Even when I drive our c230 I love the way it drives. No torque steer hand it handles better than my legend. I hate it because it's been giving us alot of problems. Right after I drive the c230 and jump back into my legend I can immediately feel the torque steer. I have to work harder to turn my legend than my c230. These cars are similar in weight and hp.

slartibartfast · 06-12-07, 03:43 PM

This debate can be summed up in a couple of sentences.

1) the difference between FWD and RWD is which end hits the fence when you go off the road.

2) Given a choice of road race vehicles -- a stock 100 HP NA Miata or a stock 140 HP B13 SE-R, I'll take the Miata. FWD places too much force on the front wheels.

ALoneR · 06-17-07, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B+O

That's been my argument the whole time.

the problem with your thread was that it was written for someone who has a "RWD is better" mentality, so it comes off as having a strong bias towards FWD. your post makes FWD sound superior in all aspects when that's really not true. i personally think theres a time and place for every drivetrain, but when i read a post that is clearly biased, i think its only fair to put in the other side of the argument.

**B+O** · 06-17-07, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALoneR

the problem with your thread was that it was written for someone who has a "RWD is better" mentality, so it comes off as having a strong bias towards FWD. your post makes FWD sound superior in all aspects when that's really not true. i personally think theres a time and place for every drivetrain, but when i read a post that is clearly biased, i think its only fair to put in the other side of the argument.

it was actually written like that to open up the argument. Most FWD v. RWD discussions harp on all the bad points of Front drive, and totally neglect what the benefits are. Go out on the net and read, I was departing from the norm. There's no reason to actually repeat people are saying, because they're not giving an unbiased view on the subject. Atleast not that i've read. I'd like to see the ones that are unbiased. Link me.

Wheelhop · 07-15-07, 03:30 AM

One of the HUGE disadvantages of FWD is the enormous reliance on the front tires.

Blah blah blah, weight distribution, blah blah blah, intrinsic understeer and huge front braking bias... blah blah.

This leads to the front tires being totally roasted at the end of a few hotlaps as they are depended on for everything, whereas RWD cars with their reliance on front tires for braking and some cornering, and rear tires for acceleration and some cornering have the advantage of endurance.

I wore my front tires to slicks in 4000 miles (no burnouts), and my rears still had 7 out of 8 32nds left on 'em.

Food for thought.

GreekPower · 11-16-07, 05:14 PM

Move this to its proper section in Automotive Discussion.

06-08-07, 01:42 PM	#33 (permalink)
legendtype2 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,675 Car 1: 2006 Mercedes C230 Car 2: 1991 L coupe iTrader: (3)	Yes I agree... I'd rather have fwd on wet or icy pavement. Maybe I should buy AWD so I don't need to worry about it __________________ 91 KA8 Legend Gallery

06-11-07, 03:30 AM	#34 (permalink)
ALoneR emayex.com Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,172 Car 1: 92 White Coupe iTrader: (1)	the problem is; once you break 200whp on most FWD cars, wheel hop and traction become serious issues. there's a reason why a Turbo B16 Civic can't take an SVT Cobra from a dead stop, but from a 60mph roll, it has a fighting chance...and that reason is...once the wheels are in motion, all the power can be utilized, but off the line, most FWD set ups can't handle much more than 200whp, if that. that's where RWD beats FWD...because usually there is more room in the wheel well of RWD cars, allowing them to put wider rims + wider tires on to get more traction. Most FWD cars are gonna be in the 195-230 tire range (im not even sure if any get up to 230)...but RWD will have tires that are damn near 300. put a RWD and an FWD car on a dragstrip, each with 350whp and relatively the same weight, suspension etc etc...and see which one makes it down the strip faster. as for handling....there is so much more behind handling than the drivetrain. the suspension, weight, weight distrobution and height of the car are wayyy more important. both FWD and RWD have their weaknesses in the turns. FWD is prone to understeer, and RWD is prone to oversteer. The difference is that oversteer can be controlled and utilized to your advantage [aka "drifting"], where as understeer will only slow you down. what about the AE86, arguably the most popular drift-car of all time, and is also RWD. Does it handle poorly? No, it handles amazingly, but the real reason why the AE86 is successful is because of it's amazing weight distrobution. With enough chassis bars, weight redistrobution and a stiff enough suspension, a FWD or a RWD car can be amazing in the twisties. I think drivetrain has very little to do with handling and FWD and RWD can both be successful as race cars, if prepared correctly. __________________ Heroes Get Remembered... Legends Never Die learn how to take better pictures of your car: //Part One - Part Two\\

06-11-07, 03:40 AM	#35 (permalink)
Double Glow 4 ALL UR TESTIN SUPPLIEZ Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 4,681 Car 1: 94 Legend L Sedan Car 2: 94 Honda Civic Dx Car 3: 1986 Toyota Van iTrader: (1)	^ i think the real reason the AE86 is popular is because of Initial D... __________________ "Recognition is the greatest motivator." My Myspace&My Facebook PM Me About Custom Red/Clear/Red Sedan Taillights $500, or $425 with Deposit. Parting Out 1993 L Sedan, Black - PM Me

06-11-07, 05:59 AM	#38 (permalink)
FF Drifter Yuka.Blue. Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: La Jolla, CA Posts: 2,723 Car 1: KA7 Legend sedan, 5 speed manual iTrader: (1)	Obviously the solution is a FWD that has oversteering tendencies the handling and the grip will be there but once the car oversteers around curves the driver can, at will, bring the car back in line. Vavoom! __________________ -8000K HID low-beams/PIAA Spark 8000 high-beams/PIAA Plasma GT-X corners -Type II brakes/some weight reduction/new tires every 4-6 months -NA1 NSX wheels: Kumho Ecsta SPT 225/50V-16R in front, Kumho Ecsta ASX 205/60V-15R in rear -Custom built six-puck kevlar clutch/Lightened (aluminum) pulleys -[Mugen/Showa] suspension with remote-adjustable dampers -C35A1/C32A1 hybrid swap; smog legal (by GreenLight Auto)

06-12-07, 03:43 PM	#41 (permalink)
slartibartfast Bitter Old Man Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: La Porte, Texas Posts: 687 Car 1: 1990 Legend LS sedan Car 2: 2002 Dakota SLT QC Car 3: 1998 Bandit 1200S iTrader: (0)	This debate can be summed up in a couple of sentences. 1) the difference between FWD and RWD is which end hits the fence when you go off the road. 2) Given a choice of road race vehicles -- a stock 100 HP NA Miata or a stock 140 HP B13 SE-R, I'll take the Miata. FWD places too much force on the front wheels. __________________ Bruce in Houston 2007 Mazda MX-5 Touring 2002 Dodge Dakota QC tow beast, stock! 1998 Suzuki Bandit 1200S w/ $tuff 1994 Nissan Sentra SE-R w/ $tuff converting to ITA 1990 Acura Legend LS sedan leaving the stable Last edited by slartibartfast : 06-12-07 at 03:51 PM.

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
The Acura Legend & Acura RL Forum Advertisement

06-08-07, 11:35 AM	#32 (permalink)
Pito11213 Banned Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 2,446 Car 1: 1992 Coupe LS {sold} Car 2: 1992 Lexus LS 400 iTrader: (1)	Dont get me wrong doggie, I been in two slides with Bentley too, but I recovered on the second one, first one almost did but didnt have any room and it was icey so.... I know you was just joking, up top. That would be suicide. We already established that in poor weather FWD will be better, but dry pavement from my experience is home for RWD.

06-11-07, 04:05 AM	#36 (permalink)
the_invisible legend mechanic Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: BC, Canada Posts: 169 iTrader: (5)	Funny that no one mentions torque steer. Among many points discussed, this discussion is heavily biased towards FWD cars. I wonder why, hmmm. But then, using youtube videos for analytic purposes doesn't make a strong argument. Many of the videos being used for demonstrations here are of people with lack of common sense and driving skills.

07-15-07, 03:30 AM	#44 (permalink)
Wheelhop Yes it's a Maxima. Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 569 Car 1: '97 Maxipad iTrader: (0)	One of the HUGE disadvantages of FWD is the enormous reliance on the front tires. Blah blah blah, weight distribution, blah blah blah, intrinsic understeer and huge front braking bias... blah blah. This leads to the front tires being totally roasted at the end of a few hotlaps as they are depended on for everything, whereas RWD cars with their reliance on front tires for braking and some cornering, and rear tires for acceleration and some cornering have the advantage of endurance. I wore my front tires to slicks in 4000 miles (no burnouts), and my rears still had 7 out of 8 32nds left on 'em. Food for thought.

11-16-07, 05:14 PM	#45 (permalink)
GreekPower Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 10,458 Car 1: 1992 Acura L"S" Sedan Car 2: 1991 3/S Turbo's 2x Car 3: 2005 Grand Prix iTrader: (13)	Move this to its proper section in Automotive Discussion.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: