rwd vs fwd??

[DarthNacho08]

hey guys, i've been wondering this for a while now and i wanna ask you guys who know more than i do. what are the advantages of rwd to fwd, and vice versa, which one fits which applications, and why you would pick one over the other?? thanks for the help guys

[Zeus]

All you need to know is that manly men prefer rwd.

[masterofpuppets]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_layout

[DGthe3]

moved to gen auto ...

FWD is cheaper to build and more efficient to run. It is a bit lighter and allows for more compact vehicle packaging (especially for cars with inline 4 cylinder engines). In other words, from a practicality and manufacturing standpoint, it is superior.

RWD provides better handling and acceleration characteristics. So, for performance it is the better choice (and why I shake my head when I hear about "FWD performance").

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

moved to gen auto ...

FWD is cheaper to build and more efficient to run. It is a bit lighter and allows for more compact vehicle packaging (especially for cars with inline 4 cylinder engines). In other words, from a practicality and manufacturing standpoint, it is superior.

RWD provides better handling and acceleration characteristics. So, for performance it is the better choice (and why I shake my head when I hear about "FWD performance").

Are you talking about in general, such as saying that FWD Performance vehicles should be scrapped altogether because they're inferior to RWD/AWD Performance vehicles? There are some FWD Hondas running 7s, so that isn't something "shake my head" at IMO.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Are you talking about in general, such as saying that FWD Performance vehicles should be scrapped altogether because they're inferior to RWD/AWD Performance vehicles? There are some FWD Hondas running 7s, so that isn't something "shake my head" at IMO.

A crazily modified drag car doesn't make for a good argument about drive config. Its a product of ambition and the desire to be different more than an accomplishment for the vehicle. It comes down to one of favourite sayings: 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should'.

No matter what is done to a FWD car, you can't change the fact that under acceleration, weight gets transfered off the driving wheels. And outside of straight line acceleration, you are steering with the drive wheels. There is only so much grip available. Couple that with weight transfer and high powered FWD cars have serious problems on a road course.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

A crazily modified drag car doesn't make for a good argument about drive config. Its a product of ambition and the desire to be different more than an accomplishment for the vehicle. It comes down to one of favourite sayings: 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should'.

No matter what is done to a FWD car, you can't change the fact that under acceleration, weight gets transfered off the driving wheels. And outside of straight line acceleration, you are steering with the drive wheels. There is only so much grip available. Couple that with weight transfer and high powered FWD cars have serious problems on a road course.

Running 7s is an accomplishment for any vehicle, regardless of rather its AWD/RWD/FWD.

FWD performance shouldn't be looked down upon just because its inferior. The FWD Cobalt SS/TC seems to be doing quite well in defeating its competition on road courses, considering it beat AWD vehicles [such as the WRX STi, Skyline GT-R (R34), etc.] and RWD vehicles [350Z, BMW 335i, etc.] around Nordschleife. FWD vehicles, while being at a disadvantage, shouldn't be looked down upon just because there is something a little better out there.

http://www.fastestlaps.com/track2.html

[Tomash]

What DGthe3 wrote plus:

FWD have a tendency to understeer, RWD have a tendency to oversteer.

RWD is a lot more pleasant to drive and accelerate (being gently push instead of brutal pulling), but FWD is a lot more practical in winter (uphill acceleration in slippery, e.g. snowy, conditions).

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Running 7s is an accomplishment for any vehicle, regardless of rather its AWD/RWD/FWD.

FWD performance shouldn't be looked down upon just because its inferior. The FWD Cobalt SS/TC seems to be doing quite well in defeating its competition on road courses, considering it beat AWD vehicles [such as the WRX STi, Skyline GT-R (R34), etc.] and RWD vehicles [350Z, BMW 335i, etc.] around Nordschleife. FWD vehicles, while being at a disadvantage, shouldn't be looked down upon just because there is something a little better out there.

http://www.fastestlaps.com/track2.html

I never claimed that the Cobalt SS was slow. I even considered buying one. But having a handful of quick fwd cars does not make fwd cars fast. The overwhelming majority of performance cars have rwd and to my knowledge, there are significantly more 600+ hp rwd cars offered than there are 300+ hp fwd.

It comes down to sticking with what you're good at. I don't expect to see a RWD economy car cracking 40 mpg and neither do I expect to see a FWD supercar. Either one is technically possible, but it just doesn't make any sense to actually do it because of the inherent limitations of the configuration.

When I did a google search, the fastest Honda I could find was something like 8.9s and was from this past summer. Can you link to the 7.Xs car?

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I never claimed that the Cobalt SS was slow. I even considered buying one. But having a handful of quick fwd cars does not make fwd cars fast. The overwhelming majority of performance cars have rwd and to my knowledge, there are significantly more 600+ hp rwd cars offered than there are 300+ hp fwd.

It comes down to sticking with what you're good at. I don't expect to see a RWD economy car cracking 40 mpg and neither do I expect to see a FWD supercar. Either one is technically possible, but it just doesn't make any sense to actually do it because of the inherent limitations of the configuration.

When I did a google search, the fastest Honda I could find was something like 8.9s and was from this past summer. Can you link to the 7.Xs car?

Never did I imply that you thought the SS/TC was slow. It was only used as an example of a FWD vehicle beating AWD/RWD in (and above) their price range, despite the belief they are inferior vehicles based on their drivetrain configuration. That's the same idea as saying the mustang is inferior just because of it has an outdated live-axle suspension.

Quantity doesn't equal one being better than another. It only takes one FWD vehicle in order for FWD vehicles to be potentially fast, and that is the point of the argument.

Using your same argument, you would have to agree that alone, being without other variables that make a car as a whole, RWD is inferior to AWD. Even though you claim that since RWD supercars are more plentiful, RWD would have to be superior to AWD. To the contrary, we both know that just by comparing their limits, AWD is in fact better than RWD.

I'll link you too the 7s later when I get home, I'm on my iPhone lol.

[Stew]

FWD plus high power means TORQUE STEER! The issue is trying to make the front wheels do both the accelerating and the turning, this generally means understeer and torqusteer. There are ways around it with suspension tuning, tires, limited slip differentials, limiting torque in lower gears, etc, but a rwd car will generally be the easiest to get performance out of.

Just to add, also forgot the weight distibution, it is a lot easier to get closer to the ideal 50/50 weight distribution in a rwd car because all the running gear is not located over the front axle

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Never did I imply that you thought the SS/TC was slow. It was only used as an example of a FWD vehicle beating AWD/RWD in (and above) their price range, despite the belief they are inferior vehicles based on their drivetrain configuration. That's the same idea as saying the mustang is inferior just because of it has an outdated live-axle suspension.

Quantity doesn't equal one being better than another. It only takes one FWD vehicle in order for FWD vehicles to be potentially fast, and that is the point of the argument.

Using your same argument, you would have to agree that alone, being without other variables that make a car as a whole, RWD is inferior to AWD. Even though you claim that since RWD supercars are more plentiful, RWD would have to be superior to AWD. To the contrary, we both know that just by comparing their limits, AWD is in fact better than RWD.

I'll link you too the 7s later when I get home, I'm on my iPhone lol.

I don't consider AWD to be superior at all. Heavier, higher losses, and tendency towards understeer, more nose weight. Biggest advantage it has is in low speed acceleration (or other low traction situations). Beyond that, I see it as a hindrance.

Originally Posted by Stew

FWD plus high power means TORQUE STEER! The issue is trying to make the front wheels do both the accelerating and the turning, this generally means understeer and torqusteer. There are ways around it with suspension tuning, tires, limited slip differentials, limiting torque in lower gears, etc, but a rwd car will general be the easiest to get performance out of.

Just to add, also fogot the wight distibution, i is a lot easier to get closer to the ideal 50/50 weight distribution in a rwd car because all the running gear is not located over the front axle

fyi, there is an edit button ()

[Tomash]

One name for FWD sceptics/haters: Ford Focus RS

(yeah, I know, for each 300hp fwd Focus RS there are hundreds of 400+hp rwd muscle, but still -- it's possible with some good engineering)

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I don't consider AWD to be superior at all. Heavier, higher losses, and tendency towards understeer, more nose weight. Biggest advantage it has is in low speed acceleration (or other low traction situations). Beyond that, I see it as a hindrance.


fyi, there is an edit button ()

Yes it's heavier and loses a little more power, however the only situation where that loss power would be needed is usually top speed runs. On tracks, top speed isn't a number one priority because acceleration and handling come well before that worry.