That is the dumbest thing I've read all day, and I was just looking at a Skyline thread.Originally Posted by KingNothing
Enthusiast
That is the dumbest thing I've read all day, and I was just looking at a Skyline thread.
PPC - Put a V8 in it!
Enthusiast
I'm a rear-drive man myself. All other things equal, an AWD vehicle will be slower than its RWD rival due to the extra weight; it's only when you start getting into making big power and torque numbers that the superior grip of an AWD can give it an edge (I heard a rule-of-thumb ballpark figure of 700hp once?).
Handlingwise, RWD is more agile and allows throttle steering much better than the understeer-prone AWD. It's also lighter.
Inclement weather is where the AWD has an advantage, although in day-to-day driving, an experienced driver can handle a RWD vehicle in the snow perfectly well; people did for decades before FWD was commonplace, let alone AWD, after all.
Lastly, AWD both uses more gas and has more parts that need to be maintained or have a potential to break.
RWD>AWD>FWD.
An it harm none, do as ye will
Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.
Novice
AWD will be used when there is expected to be a traction-limited situation. That can be snow, wet, gravel, massive amounts of power, etc. Also, those situations have to be expected to be frequent enough to outweigh the disadvantages of the AWD system (added weight, complexity, fuel, packaging, risk of mechanical failure, etc).
This is why we don't usually see AWD systems on most race cars. Most race cars are designed to go fast in optimal situations (dry tarmac, concrete). AWD still can give an advantage here but the power-to-weight ratio has to be very high to warrant it. Even with AWD the vehicle can't hope to get all that much accelleration from the front wheels because of the rearward weight transfer during hard accelleration. There isn't much traction left at the front to be useful for accelleration and the amount available decreases even more after it's started to be used (due to increased weight transfer).
In vehichles desinged to race in all conditions (rally in particular, and some high performance consumer vehicles) it usually has a much bigger effect. This is because in low traction situations, there is not enough traction to allow for a lot of accelleration from the rear wheels alone so, the weight transfered away from the front tires is not nearly as much as in a high traction situation. So, the front tires can contribute a lot more to acceleration.
There are other considerations (as have been stated already). Some of those are: advanced dynamic control can use AWD more effectively than it can RWD, RWD is (to most people) considered better for adjusting the attitude of a car during a turn (due to the ability to control oversteer with the throttle).
The AWD systems that are biased to provide more torque to the rear are designed to take advantage of the naturally higher traction in the rear of the vehicle. Systems that only send torque to the front (or rear in some cases) when there is a traction limited situation sensed by the vehicle are a way of trying to save fuel and tires but don't get the max traction at any time.
Yes, it's long but I think it's a good summary.
Super Moderator
agreed and welcome to UCP.
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Enthusiast
this is front wheel drive?!?!
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...5&d=1131284072
autozine.org
Furniture
AFAIK Chevrolet Cobalts are FWD... and this is one...
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Enthusiast
just the way they carried this car forward with those funny tyres on the front that look deflated
autozine.org
Enthusiast
personally i prefer RWD. it snows here but i just drive the subub in the snow and leave the camaro in the garage...and i have had to help pull a few subaru's out a couple times.
i like rwd because as someone mentioned earlier its a lot lighter than awd, and of course less stuff to break.
also i have noticed a lot of people having problem launching their AWD cars and bogging down their motors. but either way, unless youve got biiiiig power RWD is fine.
plus i figure ferarri is the benchmark and from what i know ferrari doesn't make any awd cars.
Furniture
Yup, look at those wide front tires.
Just wondering, how much heavier is an AWD car from a RWD car? Can anyone give me figures?
Like an Mercedes-Benz E350, the RWD vs. the AWD in terms of weight.
Furniture
BMW 330i --> 1555kg
BMW 330xi -> 1655kg
So 100kg more.
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Enthusiast
The tires look deflated because they're drag slicks spinning really really fast so they deform. Top Fuel tires actually expand several inches when they launch because they spin so fast.
Furniture
Wow, that's about 200 pounds of extra equipment. No wonder the performance difference.
Enthusiast
220.5 pounds, to be a little more precise.
Go n-ithe an cat thu, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat
When you go Home, Tell them for us and say 'For your tommorrow, We Gave Our Today.'
Furniture
And with modern traction control and stability program systems 4WD options of RWD are pointless in my opinion.
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Enthusiast
without active electronic devices (like active yaw control for example) do electronics have the ability to make the car handle better?, i heard they couldn't. If they are passive they cant transform a cars handling. etc./stability is more for safety and monitoring the car on the edge, therefore making you go faster in a keep yourself out the ditch/comfidence sense but not moving the carts limit of handling further..just a thought
autozine.org
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote