Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:37:46 -0800 From: Justin VanAbrahams <jvanabranopsamnet> Subject: Re: 9-5 V6 is here!!
Radek =?iso-8859-2?Q?Hul=E1n?= wrote: > > Justin VanAbrahams wrote: > > > The FWD alone is a massive limitation on being able to even use > > 320hp... my SHO with a measly 220hp sometimes has trouble > > hooking up. > > IMO the FWD has one huge advantage: transfer of power to the > wheels and to the road is better, simply because of higher weight > on front of the car. Even if BMW has more hp, it cannot be really > faster at 0-60 times on a slippery road with its RWD, because it > simply cannot transfer all its power to the road. What planet do you live on? In flat-out acceleration, RWD *is* superior. There is a very specific reason why you NEVER see FWD race cars or drag cars. When the car accelerates, weight is tranferred from the front of the car to the rear. On a FWD car, that means you are *literally* lifting weight, and thus traction, off the front drive wheels. In RWD car, you are increasing weight & traction to the rear drive wheels. Check your physics before making more ridiculous claims. > Different question is drivability at high speeds (which is better > for RWD -- I owned Volvo S90 and MB 280, both being RWD cars and > more comfortable and stable on highway, anyway still being > inferior to V70R AWD with 4x4 -- this was the best), but this FWD > limitation can be cured by different electronical assistance systems > (like DSTC and STC on S80, ASR and ETC on MB, etc.). > FWD vs. RWD is also better in snow (again, both are inferior to AWD). Bullshit. Drive wheels have nothing to do with stability at speed - FWD, RWD, or AWD will produce EXACTLY the same performance at high(er) speeds given a smi-decently designed drivetrain. As far as handling, there is a great argument for sticking power at the front of the car - there is less tendency for the back end to break loose and whip the car around. The problem with FWD is if you *do* break traction in the front, not only do you lose power but you also lose steering and that can result in a serious problem. With RWD, the most you'll generally do is spin out. It's generally agreed upon that FWD is more stable that RWD for the average driver, but that there is greater potential for catastrophic attitude control loss in a FWD than a RWD car. In an AWD car, you get the benefits of both worlds in a GOOD system. But in both the Audi and Volvo implementations of AWD (unlike BMW's, in the 325ix, for example), power is biased to the front wheels and is only moved to the rear wheels when needed. That means you get none of the benefits of RWD in a drag race situation - only in a traction control loss during cornering. Subaru's system is by far and away the best, with a near 50/50 bias and the ability to transfer 95% of the power to any given wheel. In snow there are arguments for just about every drivetrain, but AWD is generally preferred. In the hands of a competant driver, you'll get the best performance out of AWD. BUT, a good snow driver can probably do just as well with a RWD car as your average joe can in an AWD car. A study was done several years ago pitting FWD vs. RWD. The study showed that despite the general public's opinion, there was no clear data to support that RWD cars do poorly in the snow. It did find, however, that FWD cars to have more head-on collisions than RWD cars do, but that RWD cars generally side swipe and spin out more than FWD. Why? For the same reason I stated above - a RWD car tends to spin out, due to power and weight bias to the rear, whereas a FWD car, if control is lost, tends to have serious problems - like plowing into oncoming traffic. Snow amplifies handling deficiencies in a car - and in it you can easily see what any given drivetrain's tendencies are. Enjoy the Volvo... -Justin
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |