Front wheel drive, rear wheel drive or all wheel drive?

[crash8168]

Originally Posted by morobas

Which do you prefer? i would go for a rear wheel drive coz i can get a nice drag on the car. All wheel drive is great for rainy and snowy conditions, but i feel it is too safe and the driver loses the pleasure and thrill of driving.

front wheel drive is safer for the average driver, rear wheel for enthusiasts, all wheel drive for massive horsepower.

[crisis]

Originally Posted by crash8168

front wheel drive is safer for the average driver, rear wheel for enthusiasts, all wheel drive for massive horsepower.

How the f@ck does all wheel drive affect horsepower other than negatively?

[fpv_gtho]

maybe he means in high horsepower applications AWD is better as it doesnt loose traction as easy

[crash8168]

Originally Posted by crisis

How the f@ck does all wheel drive affect horsepower other than negatively?

they are easier to drive fast at higher horsepower levels, and launch more effectively. and there is no reason to be rude.

[crash8168]

Originally Posted by crash8168

they are easier to drive fast at higher horsepower levels, and launch more effectively. and there is no reason to be rude.

thank you fpv

[crisis]

Originally Posted by crash8168

they are easier to drive fast at higher horsepower levels, and launch more effectively. and there is no reason to be rude.

Pardon my rudeness but there are an exhausting amount of assumptions, supppositions and half truths trotted out on this site by people at times. Sweeping generalisations will recieve no tolerance from me. A comment like " all wheel drives for massive horsepower" is a little like that. If you mean all wheel drive controls massive horsepower or something like your follow up post I may agree. But the extra drain on the motor of all of that transmition and the extra weight often counts against it. There is also the problem of no wheelspin which means the car can bog down. This has been covered before on this site some time ago. All wheel drive has its place but is somewhat of a marketing gimmick made popular by the success of the Subaru WRX which I think had as much to do with the entire package as it did with the fact that it is all whell drive. A recent review of a Porsche Carrera brought this to light. The car was anflappable but almost to the point that required no driver input of the satisfaction that comes from having to reign a certain level of control.

[ZerK]

The only vehicles I have driven in reaal life are my mountain bike and a kart, so this is going purely on a very realistic PC driving simulator (www.liveforspeed.net for more info, demo and full version download (unlock key required)).

From what I've 'driven', the power-on understeer and manic lift-off oversteer of FWD vehicles is very little fun, and the handling never really 'flows'.
With AWD, it really depends. With a 50/50 torque split, the tail is not in the least lively, and handles like a slightly less drunken-feeling FWD. But With 70/30 or something the handling is much more natural and enjoyable.
But for me, it has to be RWD. Understeer is not too excessive, and when oversteer happens it is easy to control as long as you know what you're doing. Great fun to drive, and the handling feels natural.

What would be perfect would be the ability to control the torque split from inside the car, anything from 100/0 full RWD to 0/100 full FWD, with anything in between to choose from, so you could set up the car for different conditions.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by ZerK

From what I've 'driven', the power-on understeer and manic lift-off oversteer of FWD vehicles is very little fun, and the handling never really 'flows'.

Well having rallied Mini's in all conditions, I can assure you it is LOTS of fun.
What you don't get from a sim is the seat-of-the-pants feeling.
Getting a FWD car drifting into a corner and powering out is as much fun as tail-sliding a rear. It's different though
[/QUOTE]With AWD, it really depends. With a 50/50 torque split, the tail is not in the least lively, and handles like a slightly less drunken-feeling FWD. But With 70/30 or something the handling is much more natural and enjoyable.[/QUOTE]
With AWD it becomes even more important to 'feel' the car as you need to unsteady the car in the opposite direction to a corner before you turn into the apex, this pre-loads the suspension and makes it easy toi flick it sideways and power out of the exit.

But for me, it has to be RWD. Understeer is not too excessive, and when oversteer happens it is easy to control as long as you know what you're doing. Great fun to drive, and the handling feels natural.

Well understeer CAN be a lot in the real world where most models do a got job of the 'fell' of the push out of a corner.
But it's sure the most fun on a sim.
[/QUOTE]What would be perfect would be the ability to control the torque split from inside the car, anything from 100/0 full RWD to 0/100 full FWD, with anything in between to choose from, so you could set up the car for different conditions.[/QUOTE]
Tyres and grip of each wheel also has to vary if you're going to get the best of all.
Weight balance and weight transfer under braking and acceleration are aspects of real-world-driving that sims cannot convey
Unfortunately, the reality of the car you describe would be a heavy best than any one of the options. Lightweght sportscars are a world to themselves in performance and handling and feedback and I hoep everyone at least once in their career gets a chance to drive one and experience it.
Equally, if anyone has a top-fuel dragster they'll give me a shot in I'll swap cars for the weeked
But enjoy the sim and hopefully get time on trakcs and cricuits in all kinds of vehicles and then when you get licence and road car you've a good idea of what you like and enjoy.
There are people who sit in each camp and will swear it is the most fun

[crisis]

Originally Posted by ZerK

The only vehicles I have driven in reaal life are my mountain bike and a kart, so this is going purely on a very realistic PC driving simulator (www.liveforspeed.net for more info, demo and full version download (unlock key required)).

From what I've 'driven', the power-on understeer and manic lift-off oversteer of FWD vehicles is very little fun, and the handling never really 'flows'.
With AWD, it really depends. With a 50/50 torque split, the tail is not in the least lively, and handles like a slightly less drunken-feeling FWD. But With 70/30 or something the handling is much more natural and enjoyable.
But for me, it has to be RWD. Understeer is not too excessive, and when oversteer happens it is easy to control as long as you know what you're doing. Great fun to drive, and the handling feels natural.

What would be perfect would be the ability to control the torque split from inside the car, anything from 100/0 full RWD to 0/100 full FWD, with anything in between to choose from, so you could set up the car for different conditions.

See what MAtra says. He drives and race real cars. Simulators are great fun but cannot give a fair indication of what real driving is like. Every rear wheel drive car is different. The same gos for every other configuration. Add road surface, tyres to the equation and no simulator can give you the experience of driving a real car. 10 out of 10 for your honesty though. I bet there are plenty of other people who post there experiences based on Gran Turisimo or Need For Speed without admitting it.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by crisis

10 out of 10 for your honesty though. I bet there are plenty of other people who post there experiences based on Gran Turisimo or Need For Speed without admitting it.

Yep, I agree, crisis, a pat on the back is deserved .... +1 for Zerk.

BTW, the developers of the Richard Burns Rally sim are talking that they have modelled all the parts of the suspension and engine.
So that dynamics are realistic, especially with wear and damage.
Sounds like it's going to need a powerful PC, but may be the best

[henk4]

Originally Posted by crisis

Ok , girls and Autotests then.

You know that the 2CV came in both FWD and AWD guise
I will go against the trend, in a world dominatic by economics (I happen to be an economist) the FWD concept brings the best compromise between overall space used on the road and space available for the passengers. FWD is also more stable in a straight line (important in a windy country), and traction in difficult conditions (snow, mud) is better than RWD due to the higher weight on the front wheels, this of course also in combination with a low revving diesel engine, which will greatly reduce the tendency of spinning the propelled wheels.

For sheer driving fun the old concept of rear engine RWD might be the best (just ask Ralph Nader) but the last example of that, Porsche has gone a long way to iron out all its intrinsic characteristics.

[crisis]

Ok. Front wheel drive does remove the transmission hump that , especially in small cars can take up a bit of leg room. As Im not generally interested in small cars this is of little consequence to me, but the point is sound. Straight line stability , I imagine is a lucky spin off but again is mostly relevant in smaller lighter cars. As far as traction gos I think that the weight transfer caused by inertia would result in the weight being concentrated over the rear wheels which I think aids traction for rear wheel drives. I have witnessed front wheel drives attempting to retrieve boat trailers at the boat ramp spinning their front wheels as they scramble for traction. Also the weight of most motors in front wheel drive cars would be less than the weight of a bigger cars spare tyre .The overiding justification is however, as you stated. Economic.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by crisis

Straight line stability , I imagine is a lucky spin off but again is mostly relevant in smaller lighter cars.

Alec Issigonis is doing all the spinning necessary
The safer handling characteristics of FWD has been known for over 50 years.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by crisis

Ok. Front wheel drive does remove the transmission hump that , especially in small cars can take up a bit of leg room. As Im not generally interested in small cars this is of little consequence to me, but the point is sound. Straight line stability , I imagine is a lucky spin off but again is mostly relevant in smaller lighter cars. As far as traction gos I think that the weight transfer caused by inertia would result in the weight being concentrated over the rear wheels which I think aids traction for rear wheel drives. I have witnessed front wheel drives attempting to retrieve boat trailers at the boat ramp spinning their front wheels as they scramble for traction. Also the weight of most motors in front wheel drive cars would be less than the weight of a bigger cars spare tyre .The overiding justification is however, as you stated. Economic.

Thanks, good points but I wasn't thinking about towing boat trailers, but more about slow speed traction on slippery surfaces. (Right as a write the roads in our neighbourhood are covered with 2 cm's of snow and I am glad to to have FWD, which will take me to the railway station anyway). If you talk about space I would invite you to look into a the old Citroen Traction Avant (the black gangster limo), which I can tell you is much better than in a current Mercedes S-Class.

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

It really depends on application, the type of car, chassis, weight. All these factors determine how a car handles. If the car is relatively lightweight then alot of horsepower will spin the wheels, whether it be front rear or all wheel drive. The advantages of each are simple, front wheel drive weighs far less then rear and 4wd/awd. FWD are more stable and more suited for a family car or a rally car since stability in turns is very important. RWD is more or less constricted to "perfect" roads since in general rwd cars experience massive oversteer if the driver is inexperienced. AWD theoretically is the best since it splits torque between all the wheels which enables it to take on a higher maximum power without slipping the wheels, and accelerates fast as well if coupled with locking differentials or ACD systems like mitsubishi and subaru have in their cars (lancer evo and impreza).

It is also important to understand that these are not the only drivetrains available, there are mid engine cars (front and rear), rear engine rear wheel drive, mid engine 4wd. Car manufacturers spend millions of dollars to see which type of system is best for the automobile they are creating. If it is ment to be a cheap econo car FWD is most sensible. If it's designed to go off road or areas where traction is a must AWD is best. FR and RR is probably what most people consider pure "sports car" drivetrains

In conclusion there is no BEST drivetrain. They each excel in their own areas but fail to do well in another. Personally however i prefer AWD since the benefits far outweigh the compromises