• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

FWDvs RWD

I think FWD cars are supposed to have better traction/handling, and RWD cars are faster......kind of a generalization of course.
 
FWD cars are easier to drive for the average person, and also cheaper to make for the auto manufacturers...

RWD drives generally has better handling if driven right... therefore it's better for racing...
 
FWD cars tend to be more stable in slippery conditions, isntead of fishtailing wildly like a RWD, they just sort slide back and forth a little bit when the drive wheels spin. I prefer RWDs myself, if only because they feel more in control, AKA, when you go over a bump at high speeds, I notice that most FWD cars shimmy a bit and the wheels may slide back and forth.
 
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.


not really, just less traction. I do prefer RWD with bigger engines simply b/c of raw torque it delivers but if you think about it, FWD , the engine sits on top of the wheels getting power so................
 
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?
 
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Care to explain? Traditionally a RWD setup lets you apply more power, and earlier, coming out of corners(in a race course) than a FWD.
 
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?

You're right, a FWD has less "mechanical loss"(due to transmission inefficiency) than a RWD. However, what I really meant was, in a race car situation(ie lap time), a RWD still lets you get on the gas earlier and harder than normally with a FWD car. This has to do with the fact a FWD is less stable at the front of the chassis when POWER is delivered thru its front wheels, and from what they say, the increased instablity(ie a "nervous chassis") makes the car slower(less traction) out of a corner or corner speed therefore a RWD has a advantage here.

The extra lost due to transmission inefficiency though is FAR made up with superior chassis balance(ie cornering speed) in a RWD.
 
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?

You're right, a FWD has less "mechanical loss"(due to transmission inefficiency) than a RWD. However, what I really meant was, in a race car situation(ie lap time), a RWD still lets you get on the gas earlier and harder than normally with a FWD car. This has to do with the fact a FWD is less stable at the front of the chassis when POWER is delivered thru its front wheels, and from what they say, the increased instablity(ie a "nervous chassis") makes the car slower(less traction) out of a corner or corner speed therefore a RWD has a advantage here.

I see, so wouldn't mid-engine, RWD be the best setup then? Because the front/rear weight ratio is better as well as the engine being pretty much on top of the driving wheels.

 
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?

You're right, a FWD has less "mechanical loss"(due to transmission inefficiency) than a RWD. However, what I really meant was, in a race car situation(ie lap time), a RWD still lets you get on the gas earlier and harder than normally with a FWD car. This has to do with the fact a FWD is less stable at the front of the chassis when POWER is delivered thru its front wheels, and from what they say, the increased instablity(ie a "nervous chassis") makes the car slower(less traction) out of a corner or corner speed therefore a RWD has a advantage here.

I see, so wouldn't mid-engine, RWD be the best setup then? Because the front/rear weight ratio is better as well as the engine being pretty much on top of the driving wheels.

Yes. But I can see you're trying to suggest something(right?).
 
I see, so wouldn't mid-engine, RWD be the best setup then? Because the front/rear weight ratio is better as well as the engine being pretty much on top of the driving wheels.
Yup! You got that right!!
Go to the head of the class.

🙂 🙂
 
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?

You're right, a FWD has less "mechanical loss"(due to transmission inefficiency) than a RWD. However, what I really meant was, in a race car situation(ie lap time), a RWD still lets you get on the gas earlier and harder than normally with a FWD car. This has to do with the fact a FWD is less stable at the front of the chassis when POWER is delivered thru its front wheels, and from what they say, the increased instablity(ie a "nervous chassis") makes the car slower(less traction) out of a corner or corner speed therefore a RWD has a advantage here.

I see, so wouldn't mid-engine, RWD be the best setup then? Because the front/rear weight ratio is better as well as the engine being pretty much on top of the driving wheels.

Yes. But I can see you're trying to suggest something(right?).

Ah, I see you've uncovered my hidden motive of proving that the Pontiac Fiero was a good car! 🙂
 
A RWD lets you apply more power earlier and harder than a FWD in a race situation, this is a pretty well known fact among race fans, so by this I am saying a RWD can deliver power better than a FWD, and we're talking 1/10s of seconds not like this will be the same under normal driving(also not refering to 1/4 drag racing either).
 
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
A RWD lets you apply more power earlier and harder than a FWD in a race situation, this is a pretty well known fact among race fans, so by this I am saying a RWD can deliver power better than a FWD, and we're talking 1/10s of seconds not like this will be the same under normal driving(also not refering to 1/4 drag racing either).

Wouldnt RWD be also better during drag racing as well? Becuz of the weight transferring from the front to the rear during launch, with a FWD this will mean lifting the drive wheels off the ground... while for a RWD drive this would actually help put more power to the ground...

 
well, i don't know about more power to the ground early on, but i think that this has more to do with torque steer and the way the car shifts it's weight during acceleration. RWD cars have no torque steer, so when you floor it the car won't pull right.

even my FWD eclipse *feels* faster with a full tank of gas than with an empty tank. i think that it's due to the car's F/R balancing.

a mid-engine car is best for acceleration, but it's also the easiest to spin out.
 
Ah, I see you've uncovered my hidden motive of proving that the Pontiac Fiero was a good car!
Heh -

The Fiero had all the necessary hardware to be a really nice small 'sports car', and Pontiac managed to fuXor it up!!
 
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
Originally posted by: SpongeBob
Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Originally posted by: CocaCola5
RWD can deliver power(of the engine) to the ground better than a FWD giving it a slightperformance advantage.
no.

Didn't make sense to me either. Wouldn't you lose more power due to losses in the transaxle and rear diff?

You're right, a FWD has less "mechanical loss"(due to transmission inefficiency) than a RWD. However, what I really meant was, in a race car situation(ie lap time), a RWD still lets you get on the gas earlier and harder than normally with a FWD car. This has to do with the fact a FWD is less stable at the front of the chassis when POWER is delivered thru its front wheels, and from what they say, the increased instablity(ie a "nervous chassis") makes the car slower(less traction) out of a corner or corner speed therefore a RWD has a advantage here.

I see, so wouldn't mid-engine, RWD be the best setup then? Because the front/rear weight ratio is better as well as the engine being pretty much on top of the driving wheels.
actually anything with a 50/50 weight balance is considered right, and i think BMWs are there.
 
Back
Top