| REFLUX |
Alright I know this is going to be a touchy subject so please try to keep it civil & mature.
Keeping this on a Road Course scenario, what do you think of the above setup for a car?
IMO, FWD = front tires have to do a lot of tasks (brake, turn, apply power) as opposed to RWD (brake & turn)
Of course it isn't ONLY the front tires that help in braking but they do a large part of it.
(The focus is on tires because worn out tires = you aren't going anywhere/you aren't going to stop nor turn.)
With so many things to do, the front tires will be excessively taxed when it has a lot of weight to shift (turn) and stop (brake). Throw in more ponies = another factor in wearing out the front tires.
So what do you think? |
|
|
| PraxRX7 |
One question I will ask.
Are there any GOOD FWD LaMans 24 Hour cars? |
|
|
| SaabKraft |
for a road course scenario, i'd have to agree. weight distribution and cornering techniques make RWD a more suitable car.
FWD has it's merits, nothing like sliding a saab around a snowy track. the engine is basically on top of the front axles, there's so much traction. rally cars could also do pretty well with FWD in their class (though 2WD of any kind is 'lower on the totem pole')
but for a serious performance road car, i think RWD is the way to go. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
quote:
Originally posted by PraxRX7
One question I will ask.
Are there any GOOD FWD LaMans 24 Hour cars?
Im not 100% sure about lemans is it a mix class race? <--- please excuse my ignorance :) if so I think I seen that before on the telly and I saw rwd and fwd minis racing along side porches and ferraris. |
|
|
| Insomniac |
FWD sucks. End of story...
Terry, why do you even need to ask?
:D |
|
|
| Nis24O |
| Just look at the Acura TL when its concared to a G35 or a BMW, the car magazines always complain about the FWD. But i have driven a ITR and it was pretty damn good car on the mountains roads of Switzerland. |
|
|
| SRBURG13 |
Yes, FWD have its advantages and fans, but the matter is, any real hardcore racing does not include FWD. LeMans, F1, Kart, etc etc.
When you're comparing the Mini's with the Ferrari's at the track, well thats a different story, they are two different classes of cars racing against each other. Guess who wins? lol. That's like GT or Touring classes. Hardcore yes, but HARDCORE (F1) no. lol. If you know what I mean.
YEs, to any of us they are just fine, just saying those WAY up there in the ranks drive RWD. |
|
|
| REFLUX |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
FWD sucks. End of story...
Terry, why do you even need to ask?
:D
hahaha just to see if there are any good arguments to support FWD :D
But I think lightweight + FWD = doable
look at ITRs, Mini Coopers, the countless civic hatches that tear it up, Celica GT-S', SRT-4, etc
Those are some great examples of fast & very trackable FWD cars, though as some of you have pointed out...FWD doesn't exist in the top echelons of motorsports racing |
|
|
| twinturbo |
quote:
Originally posted by REFLUX
FWD doesn't exist in the top echelons of motorsports racing
But it thrives in the lower slums of legal racing where budgets are the first concern of a racer or team. don't see many poor teams racing high tech. tire chewing, budget demanding, RWD's. NO, you see CRX's, civics, Integra's, etc. And I don't just mean people like you and me, I mean accual race leagues that race many times a season to rack up enough points for big money wins, and fully televised in the USA.
I think it all comes down to budget. The more money they have, the faster they want to go. So the cars evolve into more suitable platforms for their particular event, or class. |
|
|
| silvermist |
| what about the wrc focus or is that all wheel drive. if not then there is a fwd car that stacks up because I believe it has won two wrc's. |
|
|
| SRBURG13 |
Rally is a completely different ball game compared to road course racing.
That's apples to oranges.
Ya, I agree, for the budget, FWD is just fine. Hardcore top of the scale racing, RWD. It all depends on your application, budget, and personal likings.
My personal liking: I wouldn't care to drive a FWD. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
The minis werent actually racing the porches and ferraris there was 3 classes of cars , 3 races all at the same time. It looked cool while the minis got laped 2-3 times to 1 of a porches lol thats what I saw. It looked like they were goofing around.
Are there even gear boxes for fwd to travel 200+ mph? I dont recall so feel free to educate me. If there is would they be able to take a hard long steady race like F1? |
|
|
| ehos |
It's not 'flawed' design. Look outside, see that white fluffy stuff?
Engineers have to design for the real world. And the real world designers have moved away from RWD. |
|
|
| Adam |
quote:
Originally posted by Markgase2000
Are there even gear boxes for fwd to travel 200+ mph? I dont recall so feel free to educate me. If there is would they be able to take a hard long steady race like F1?
dog box |
|
|
| oldraven |
quote:
Originally posted by silvermist
what about the wrc focus or is that all wheel drive. if not then there is a fwd car that stacks up because I believe it has won two wrc's.
The Focus RS is FWD, but the WRC Focus isn't. They wouldn't have a hope in hell of winning WRC with a FWD car.
In my opinion, there's nothing worse than understeer. This is why I don't own any FWD's anymore. |
|
|
| ae1969 |
quote:
Originally posted by ehos
It's not 'flawed' design. Look outside, see that white fluffy stuff?
Engineers have to design for the real world. And the real world designers have moved away from RWD.
Very true............for the engineers of the world building your mom's grocery getter.
Not a flawed design by any means.......... if you need to build a vehicle that will get you from point A to point B and you need to build it in the most cost effective method you stick with FWD. The development of FWD was initially based on cost. No other reason.
But it can be argued that the 'real' engineers are still building race cars out of the box......(insert your favorite RWD/AWD car here) |
|
|
| twinturbo |
quote:
Originally posted by ae1969
But it can be argued that the 'real' engineers are still building race cars out of the BOX......(insert your favorite RWD/AWD car here)
Is that cereal BOX, or jack in the BOX?? |
|
|
| silvermist |
| ok then what about the 7 second ion I was reading about in the new pas mag or the 7 second ecotec cavi now I know it is not road racing but man that is some serious power from front wheel. now don't get me wrong nothing is like liting up a rwd and have the ass end pull out or doing donuts with out pulling the e-brake (that still bugs me) but I like my fwd and yeah there are times I wish it was Rwd. |
|
|
| majormojo |
I think something that gets overlooked a lot in the eternal fwd vs rwd debate is that for a lot of applications, the car's overall front/rear weight balance is more important than which wheels are being driven. The issue with most fwd cars is not really that the front wheels are "doing too much", it's that they are carrying too much weight and the car is unbalanced (typical 60/40 f/r weight balance). That's made even worse by the forward weight shift under braking. In modern fwd cars (where torque steer is not nearly what it was in earlier cars), the big challenge is getting it to handle and corner well when braking, moreso than when accelerating.
For a road course, a well-balanced fwd can certainly be a better option than a rwd that's too light in the back.
Also, chewing up front tires isn't a fwd-only problem, it can happen w/ a rwd car if you're overdriving it too. Greg Biffle did that in Atlanta last week:
"I made a run at them early and got tight coming off the corner two or three times," Biffle said. "To have the front wheels turned pretty hard -- I just burned the right-front off of it after four laps, and I was finished."
full story
Same thing for the snow argument, only tire quality plays a big role too. I'll take a well-balanced rwd with good snows over a fwd with summer tires any day.
For drag racing, it's probably a draw. RWD takes advantage of the natural rearward weight shift under acceleration and FWD has an inherent weight bias for the driving wheels. There's fast examples of both kinds of cars out there. |
|
|
| REFLUX |
Ok guys, remember, the scenario is on a ROAD COURSE!!!
NOT a dragstrip, not down the street to Safeway in winter, not driving around pylons but an actual paved road course. |
|
|
| PraxRX7 |
quote:
Originally posted by silvermist
ok then what about the 7 second ion I was reading about in the new pas mag or the 7 second ecotec cavi now I know it is not road racing but man that is some serious power from front wheel. now don't get me wrong nothing is like liting up a rwd and have the ass end pull out or doing donuts with out pulling the e-brake (that still bugs me) but I like my fwd and yeah there are times I wish it was Rwd.
You can make any car fast in a straight line.
A FWD will still be destroyed by AWD and RWD once you get into the higher classes.
At the Stock class, for example, The Integra Type-R (FWD) VS my Turbo RX-7, they are both competetive and very close in performance.
Add 200+ HP to either of those cars, the RWD will be easier to control, and again, the FWD will have major tread wear issues because of the braking/accelerating/turning that the Front wheels have to do. |
|
|
| Insomniac |
Speed Channel's touring class is a bad example, since the cars are all modified to be relatively equal. Don't forget the ultimate driving machine in that series:
Amateur road racing isn't a place for civics and integras, it's a place for sweet RWD cars like the Miata, RX-7, and even mustang.
FWD sucks sucks sucks |
|
|
| twinturbo |
What is that Japanese show where they race a whole bunch of cars on a road course all at the same time with pro drivers in stock, factory cars?
I've seen civic type R's take out evo's, RX-7's, Ferraris etc.
They had no chance against NSX-R's or Lambo's or high end RX-7 FD's, but they were beating cars with over 50% more power and AWD, RWD platforms.
I wish I could remember what the show is called...........is it BEST MOTORING ????? |
|
|
| PraxRX7 |
quote:
Originally posted by twinturbo
with pro drivers in stock, factory cars?
Yes, stock factory cars it is a very close competition. |
|
|
| REFLUX |
quote:
Originally posted by twinturbo
but they were beating cars with over 50% more power and AWD, RWD platforms
That's prbly cuz they were lightweight FWD cars.
Read the topic:
HEAVY, High HP, FWD = flawed
not LIGHTWEIGHT, High HP, FWD |
|
|
| majormojo |
quote:
Originally posted by REFLUX
That's prbly cuz they were lightweight FWD cars.
Read the topic:
HEAVY, High HP, FWD = flawed
not LIGHTWEIGHT, High HP, FWD
Your original question was:
"Keeping this on a Road Course scenario, what do you think of the above setup for a car?"
I think that any time you have a HEAVY race car you have a problem, regardless of the drivetrain layout. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
quote:
Originally posted by Adam
dog box
Whats a dog box? Sorry but for an uneducated fella like me thats pretty vague. |
|
|
| CryoSlash |
| well high hp and heavy weight isnt that bad. Lowerwieght hp cars dont get traction if you were trying to boot off 600 hp. Thats the problem with the Celica GT-S. the new one is probably one of the lightest cars we saw in the early 2000's. Heh i was just thinking, was their ever a RF? Rear wheel drive front engine. Thats would be soo cool! |
|
|
| PraxRX7 |
quote:
Originally posted by CryoSlash
well high hp and heavy weight isnt that bad. Lowerwieght hp cars dont get traction if you were trying to boot off 600 hp. Thats the problem with the Celica GT-S. the new one is probably one of the lightest cars we saw in the early 2000's. Heh i was just thinking, was their ever a RF? Rear wheel drive front engine. Thats would be soo cool!
Did you mean Rear Engine, FWD?
That would be silly, you would have no weight in the front, and get no traction ever. |
|
|
| Neo-Blue99GASE |
| Ok, heres a question, what about conditions? Ive seen quite a few road course races on TV, usually over in Europe. One thing they repeat time after time is the conditions. Make it nice and sunny and the RWD have the advantage. Make it snowy or raining and the FWD has the advantage. In most cases its true about the FWD having more wear on the fronts and thus cant last as long. Moreover, the brakes are not as effective because of the weight distribution so it will heat up more. Thats my .02 |
|
|
| Buddyworm |
Flawed, I don't really think so. It does its job quite well. Gets the car from A to B. I'm a big advocate of RWD though. I find that RWD is easier to drive in rain and snow than FWD.
B-Wurm :D |
|
|
| 2003specv |
quote:
Originally posted by REFLUX
hahaha just to see if there are any good arguments to support FWD :D
But I think lightweight + FWD = doable
look at ITRs, Mini Coopers, the countless civic hatches that tear it up, Celica GT-S', SRT-4, etc
Those are some great examples of fast & very trackable FWD cars, though as some of you have pointed out...FWD doesn't exist in the top echelons of motorsports racing
I agree Terry.
As for heavy FWD cars with big power, I cry every time I see a new Acura TL. Such a beautiful car to ruin with FWD. |
|
|
| REFLUX |
03SpecV:
Yes that is a prime example! |
|
|
| 2003specv |
quote:
Originally posted by Markgase2000
Whats a dog box? Sorry but for an uneducated fella like me thats pretty vague.
A dog box is a transmission mainly used for racing (some masochists use them on the street), that has no synchros, and uses straight cut gears. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
| Thanks man now I know. I looked up dog box on google and I got kennels? |
|
|
| PraxRX7 |
quote:
Originally posted by Markgase2000
Thanks man now I know. I looked up dog box on google and I got kennels?
yay for the internet! lol |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
I am coming into this really late.. But I would like to point out that the realtime racing TSX and RSX cars both race against BMWs and even Audis. And beat them.. a lot of the time.. But the Turner motorsports cars did take first place at the end of last season.
Turner = Blue/Yellow BMWs |
|
|
| twinturbo |
I think everyone forgot ( including me ) that this is about heavy FWD cars.
I think heavy FWD cars have no performance advantages, untill they are lightened. So I would say heavy FWD cars are only usefull for non-performance related uses, like daily commuting etc. |
|
|
| CanadianR |
| Heavy+ high HP+ FWD definately is flawed when it comes to a road course. Even a light high-powered fwd is gonna be a flawed design on the track. The only way fwd works on a road course is when it's moderately powered, lightweight, well-geared, and a well-balanced chassis. I have to agree with everyone that at the upper echelons of motorsport fwd will not exist, and there is a reason for that. You also aren't gonna see AWD at the upper echelons of road course racing. The RWD layout is lighter and less power-robbing a design than AWD for a high-powered lightweight high budget race car. That being said at the levels the people on this board compete, (grassroots level) FWD can still definately be competitive. The notion that FWD=understeer on a road course and rwd does not= understeer is simply laughable. Pretty much all production cars have a tendancy to understeer at it's limits built into them. Why? Because they are production cars and understeer at the limits is safer than oversteer. I'd rather have a car that pushes a little bit if i'm overcooking it in a high-speed sweeper than an oversteering car. |
|
|
| JustinL |
Exactly! I agree with everything CanadianR posted.
Here's some results of the open track challenge
OTC results
Just one mini cooper S as a FWD entrant. |
|
|
| ChromeDragon |
quote:
Originally posted by CanadianR
Heavy+ high HP+ FWD definately is flawed when it comes to a road course. Even a light high-powered fwd is gonna be a flawed design on the track. The only way fwd works on a road course is when it's moderately powered, lightweight, well-geared, and a well-balanced chassis. I have to agree with everyone that at the upper echelons of motorsport fwd will not exist, and there is a reason for that. You also aren't gonna see AWD at the upper echelons of road course racing. The RWD layout is lighter and less power-robbing a design than AWD for a high-powered lightweight high budget race car. That being said at the levels the people on this board compete, (grassroots level) FWD can still definately be competitive. The notion that FWD=understeer on a road course and rwd does not= understeer is simply laughable. Pretty much all production cars have a tendancy to understeer at it's limits built into them. Why? Because they are production cars and understeer at the limits is safer than oversteer. I'd rather have a car that pushes a little bit if i'm overcooking it in a high-speed sweeper than an oversteering car.
Manufacturers actually design their cars to have understeer for the reasons you've stated. Understeer is safer than oversteer.
Unfortunately, my car likes to do both on the track.....almost at random. Man I can't wait to get some suspension in it!:bthumbup: |
|
|
| Supra_devil |
fwds can be made quite fast and handle good. you have to be a better driver to go fast in a fwd.
They also tend to have smaller motors and thus less power because the motor and transmission are in the engine bay.
wouldn't fit the straight 6 in my car into my bay sideways thats for sure. |
|
|
| FocusTunerzx3 |
| To answer the specific question heavy+High HP+FWD+ Road Course= Disaster. I dont care what anyone says that is just not good for a road course car. Maybe drag car but thats not the question. Im a fan of FWD and will defend it to the end but for this very specific question its terriable; but. if you replace Heavy with lightweight then its another question all together and would probably make an amazing road course car. |
|
|
| REFLUX |
quote:
Originally posted by FocusTunerzx3
but if you replace Heavy with lightweight then its another question all together and would probably make an amazing road course car.
Agreed.
Lots of great lightweight FWD cars for the track.
Actually, I believe the fastest lap @ Race City was set by a FWD car.
Maybe a race-prep'd ITR. :dunno: |
|
|
|
