FWD vs. RWD vs. 4WD

[youngwarrior]

yeah the only thing thats only back 4wd is racing regulations and technology at the moment. The closest thing we have seen so far to the perfect 4wd super car is the tommy kaira ZZII. Its light has ATTESA and a bootload of power and is MR.

Tommy Kaira ZZII
Engine: 2.5 inline 6 twin turbo, 550bhp
Performance: 0-60 in 3.3, top speed 210mph
Other: 220 bhp/litre

 

[patrick10]

i voted for awd but the fastest cars are definitely not awd. maybe like around auto-x where its easier for them to get their power down, but if you are talking about circuit racing, rwd has got to be the wat to go. think about it, porsche race cars use rwd when they could use the awd system from the c4s or turbo.

btw im pretty sure the zzII is a 2.6... i think its a rb26dett

 

[andyhui01]

That is an unanswerable question IMO,
FWD = good for mid-range acceleration
RWD = good for top end performance
4WD = good for 0-60 but no top speed unless it has a crap load of power

and I think all setups have the capability to handle just as well... the weight distribution is more important

Sorry Andy, but all things being equal, FWD will never handle as well as RWD due to the fact you've got one set of tyres doing both the steering and transmitting power to the ground. Speaking of weight distribution - you'll find FWD cars will generally have a much more front-biased weight distribution, whereas RWD cars will be a lot more even - another reason RWD is preferable over FWD for handling.

Sure, there's some truly excellent handling FWD cars (Clio Sport, Focus ST, Golf GTI etc), but RWD will always beat FWD for handling (a BMW 1-series will outhandle all those cars, but it gets killed on interior space).

FWD is wide-spread because it packages better (more interior room for a given exterior size), and more importantly it's cheaper to build. For a small car FWD makes sense, but for the best handling it's RWD you're after (with a rear-biased AWD setup coming second to that).

I know what you mean but I've been to some track days where a properly configured Civic beats any RWD cars in its class (even in corners), obviously I think FWD was mainly designed for more interior space, but FWD can still be decently competitive in motor racing.

And I agree with the rear-biased 4WD being best

 

[Raven18940]

That is an unanswerable question IMO,
FWD = good for mid-range acceleration
RWD = good for top end performance
4WD = good for 0-60 but no top speed unless it has a crap load of power

and I think all setups have the capability to handle just as well... the weight distribution is more important

Sorry Andy, but all things being equal, FWD will never handle as well as RWD due to the fact you've got one set of tyres doing both the steering and transmitting power to the ground. Speaking of weight distribution - you'll find FWD cars will generally have a much more front-biased weight distribution, whereas RWD cars will be a lot more even - another reason RWD is preferable over FWD for handling.

Sure, there's some truly excellent handling FWD cars (Clio Sport, Focus ST, Golf GTI etc), but RWD will always beat FWD for handling (a BMW 1-series will outhandle all those cars, but it gets killed on interior space).

FWD is wide-spread because it packages better (more interior room for a given exterior size), and more importantly it's cheaper to build. For a small car FWD makes sense, but for the best handling it's RWD you're after (with a rear-biased AWD setup coming second to that).

RWD does not handle better. Grip better maybe, exit a turn better yeah, but it doesn't out handle. My saab is an extention of my arms and legs when I drive. I know exactly how much grip each tire has, the condition of the road, how hard I can turn, how much grip is left, and when I can pick up the throttle.

There are also plenty of RWD cars that handle like crap, most of them found here in America incidently.

Anyway, you can knock FWD for lots of things, but handling isn't one of them.

 

[youngwarrior]

i voted for awd but the fastest cars are definitely not awd. maybe like around auto-x where its easier for them to get their power down, but if you are talking about circuit racing, rwd has got to be the wat to go. think about it, porsche race cars use rwd when they could use the awd system from the c4s or turbo.

btw im pretty sure the zzII is a 2.6... i think its a rb26dett

yeah that should say 2.6 person who wrote it must have made a typo.

However 4WD is faster, if the right system is used, a rear biased system, when the front only kicks in when required.

 

[patrick10]

i voted for awd but the fastest cars are definitely not awd. maybe like around auto-x where its easier for them to get their power down, but if you are talking about circuit racing, rwd has got to be the wat to go. think about it, porsche race cars use rwd when they could use the awd system from the c4s or turbo.

btw im pretty sure the zzII is a 2.6... i think its a rb26dett

yeah that should say 2.6 person who wrote it must have made a typo.

However 4WD is faster, if the right system is used, a rear biased system, when the front only kicks in when required.

yea but attesa only works good because it is basically rwd. the power only goes to the front if the driver gets a little too crazy. shit you can even powerbrake with attesa.

 

[flyingfridge]

Part I:

Not quite there patrick, ATTESA is basically rear wheel drive under normal circumstances, but it doesn't 'only' shift power to the front when the 'driver is crazy', it has excellent applications for proper spirited driving.

To explain properly, we need to examine the handling characteristics of a rear wheel drive car.

A normal, properly set up RWD car should oversteer slightly on the approach to the corner apex and then understeer slightly as the car accelerates away from the apex. Think about weight shifting, and that makes perfect sense. Now what ATTESA does, is it figures out where the driver needs the traction, i.e, it stays in RWD mode until the apex of the corner, then when the driver accelerates out, it shuffles some power forward for supreme traction on the corner exit. That's why Skylines have such a phenomenal ability to get out of a corner. So the Skyline is basically an RWD handler, what ATTESA is designed to do is to accentuate RWD characteristics.

Obviously there is a lot more shit and witchcraft related to ATTESA, but that is the simple gist of what the system is designed to do.

But then you're no mug, and you probably know such things already. So for the people who didn't know, there's some education.

Part II:

yeah the only thing thats only back 4wd is racing regulations and technology at the moment. The closest thing we have seen so far to the perfect 4wd super car is the tommy kaira ZZII. Its light has ATTESA and a bootload of power and is MR.

Tommy Kaira ZZII
Engine: 2.5 inline 6 twin turbo, 550bhp
Performance: 0-60 in 3.3, top speed 210mph
Other: 220 bhp/litre

youngwarrior, I'm just going to pick you up on a little something here. ATTESA is the Four Wheel Drive system found in the Nissan Skyline GT-R. I'm sure you already know this. MR, means Mid Mounted Engine, Rear Drive. A car cannot have ATTESA and be MR. I think what you mean is that the ZZII is Mid Mounted and has AWD. There. All Fixed.

MMM RB26DETT in sexy light ZZII body, AAAHHHH.....

 

[HondaTeamCZ]

That RB26DETT is amazing engine, we have only one skyline in czech republic but it has 750BHP from Tomei RB26DETT engine and two Garret GT30 turbos, its mega!

I like the kaira looks.it looks litle bit like Ascari KZ1.Only some details.

 

[youngwarrior]

Flying fridge your right. The car is four wheel drive though whilst being mid engined. Dont know what they call that.

 

[Z Draci]

I want a pure driving experience. My vote went to RWD because these cars handle more predictably. In other words it RWD cars behave more like real cars.

 

[fbc]

I know what you mean but I've been to some track days where a properly configured Civic beats any RWD cars in its class (even in corners), obviously I think FWD was mainly designed for more interior space, but FWD can still be decently competitive in motor racing.

True - and I'm not saying FWD can't handle well, but don't confuse outright cornering grip with handling.

And I agree with the rear-biased 4WD being best

Err I didn't say that...

RWD does not handle better. Grip better maybe, exit a turn better yeah, but it doesn't out handle. My saab is an extention of my arms and legs when I drive. I know exactly how much grip each tire has, the condition of the road, how hard I can turn, how much grip is left, and when I can pick up the throttle.

The RWD layout inherently lends itself better to handling since you have one set of tyres steering the car, and another driving it - you don't have the same tyres doing double-duty. As a result the car can be more adjustable and responsive, and things like steering feedback are more pure and undiluted (like on say a MK1 MR2 ).

Having said that FWD can handle very well (as I said earlier), and it seems you have one of the good ones

There are also plenty of RWD cars that handle like crap, most of them found here in America incidently.

I won't argue with that - RWD doesn't guarantee good handling, it can be screwed up just as well as FWD.

 

[Raven18940]

The RWD layout inherently lends itself better to handling since you have one set of tyres steering the car, and another driving it - you don't have the same tyres doing double-duty. As a result the car can be more adjustable and responsive, and things like steering feedback are more pure and undiluted (like on say a MK1 MR2 ).

Having said that FWD can handle very well (as I said earlier), and it seems you have one of the good ones

I don't know, the steering feel is pretty kick ass in my car, nice and heavy too. SAAB figured out a while ago that in order to drive a FWD car well, you needed to know exactly what's going on with the front wheels. Over 50 years if R&D have gone into the FWD setup on my car. SAAB were actually the ones who invented it, though I think that puts them on a lot of people's hate list now. :lol:

I must admit I haven't driven a MkI MR2, though it's on my to-do list.

I won't argue with that - RWD doesn't guarantee good handling, it can be screwed up just as well as FWD.

Glad to see you agree. My point was there are some very good handling FWD cars. Don't hate FWD handling cause 90% of automakers don't make an effort to sort the handling right.

 

[BlaRo]

SAAB were actually the ones who invented it, though I think that puts them on a lot of people's hate list now. :lol:

Wasn't that Citroen in 1934 with the Traction Avant? Or even earlier, with the Alvis in 1928?

I really like SAAB as well, especially since I saw the "SAAB Suite".

 

[Raven18940]

SAAB were actually the ones who invented it, though I think that puts them on a lot of people's hate list now. :lol:

Wasn't that Citroen in 1934 with the Traction Avant? Or even earlier, with the Alvis in 1928?

I really like SAAB as well, especially since I saw the "SAAB Suite".

Ah, hmmmmmmm, guess I'm wrong. Maybe it was the transversely mounted engine I was thinking of, not sure.

 

[Hatmouse]

I picked RWD, but to be honest I've only ever driven FWD in real life.

 

[fbc]

I won't argue with that - RWD doesn't guarantee good handling, it can be screwed up just as well as FWD.

Glad to see you agree. My point was there are some very good handling FWD cars. Don't hate FWD handling cause 90% of automakers don't make an effort to sort the handling right.

An entirely fair point - though I never actually disagreed about FWD cars being able to handle if sorted properly (kudos to RenaultSport, Ford ST department etc), nor do I hate FWD - though it seems there are others here who feel quite strongly about it...

My point is that the main reason manufacturers have adopted FWD is for packaging and cost, not as something that improves their vehicle's handling or grip (though I accept that in snow / ice conditions it's perhaps safer for untrained / inexperienced drivers, though you could argue that AWD is best in that situation) - that's not to say a FWD can't dance of course. For me though RWD will always rule the roost.

 

[youngwarrior]

I want a pure driving experience. My vote went to RWD because these cars handle more predictably. In other words it RWD cars behave more like real cars.

So 4wd and FWD vehicles arent real cars?

 

[wooflepoof]

Front engined, RWD with a transaxle is the perfect setup imho

 

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Front engined, RWD with a transaxle is the perfect setup imho

Why would you want a transaxle in a FR car? :? Did you mean limited-slip differential? A transaxle is used when the engine is in the same place as the drive wheels, ie FF, MR, RR setups - rarely in an FR. A transaxle is generally only used in an FR platform if the weight distribution needs evening out. I'd much rather have the transmission and diff as seperate units on an FR car.

 

[fbc]

^ It seems to work extremely well for Ferrari, Aston Martin & the Corvette...