I'm not saying FWD is superior. What I am saying is that limiting yourself to one type of car because it should _theoretically_ handle better is narrow minded. If that's the case, then we're all limiting ourselves by buying front engine cars, since its quite clear that rear biased mid-engined cars (F1, CART, LeMans, etc.) are quite superior - and while I don't hear anyone here saying that just yet (because we all own front engine cars maybe?) I have heard it from mid-engined car owners.

I am quite familiar with the physics of racing cars, having read the relavant texts and applied the information to both FWD and RWD cars. Injudicious throttle application in a corner will indeed cause power understeer in a FWD car. And it will also cause it in a RWD car under many circumstances - i.e. where weight is transferred off the front wheels before the back loses traction. The driver is still the most important factor.

However, with a proper limited slip differential and a proper suspension setup, careful application of throttle mid corner on a FWD car will actually pull the front toward the inside of the corner. This introduces a yawing moment on the car that can serve to move the back end out (think about where the center of mass is on a 60/40 FWD car). A similar effect can be felt when properly using a ATTS equipped Prelude (when the system is working). Of course, the key is having the car setup very neutrally so that you don't have excessive grip at the rear relative to the front - something few FWD cars are setup for from the factory (because it isn't _safe_).

In the end, I cited IT racing because here is an example where a FWD car clearly outperforms a decently designed RWD car, and it doesn't do it on power either. Or, if you like, have a look at the Speedvision cup, where ITRs are still hanging on to the championship points despite being outpowered by the RWD, bigger tires and only slightly heavier (200 lbs) BMW 328s. As for Cateham 7's, considering they weigh about half of what a CRX weighs, I'll have to find another example :-).

FWD will not limit your ability to learn how to drive correctly, it will expand your abilities. And while RWD is theoretically superior (and the S2K is in reality superior in handling to most cars), don't let that fool you into thinking that theoretically inferior cars can't handle better and impart new skills to you. Open minds folks...

UL

owner of FWD, RWD, NA and forced induction

 

Just thought I`d add this: A few months ago at Buttonwillow, the fastest lap of the day was set by a FWD CRX. If you have ever been to a SpeedTrials or Open Track event, you know what types of vehicles this CRX beat.

Ryan

 

Fuel efficient? Yes! But I wouldn't go as far as labeling a $32,000 roadster as a "Econo box"

 

well said Cosworth!

 

As long as you aren't exceeding the adhesion of any of your tires, there is no difference between any drive layouts. So obviously you can make a great handling car using FWD/RWD/AWD, or whatever. But for performance on a track there is absolutely no advantage to having FWD. I agree with most of what you are saying, and I'm not saying that FWD is that bad. Driving FWD cars in addition to RWD does help to learn more about the dynamics of cars. However in no situation is FWD superior to RWD on a dry track. In wet weather or gravel or any low traction situation, AWD is going to be better than FWD. There is no time where FWD is better. I'm not saying there aren't FWD cars that are better than lot of good RWD cars (there are), but the fact that those cars are FWD gives them absolutely no advantage over the other cars. If the ITR was RWD it would be a better car if everything else could be equal.

Off the track there are plenty of reasons to drive FWD cars: cheaper, more efficient, more reliable, safer for untrained drivers. Add a great chassis/suspension to the package and you have a good trackable daily driver.

I agree with your analogy of front engine vs. mid engine cars, and yes I do prefer mid engine to anything else. However, the difference is that each engine layout has advantages and disadvantages, unlike FWD which has no advantage. Mid engine cars have the advantage of a low polar moment and rotate more easily. However since "mid" engines are also really closer to the rear they also tend to have poor weight distribution compared to a FR car.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimate lurker
[B]However, with a proper limited slip differential and a proper suspension setup, careful application of throttle mid corner on a FWD car will actually pull the front toward the inside of the corner.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimate lurker
[B]I'm not saying FWD is superior.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by elanderholm
[B]

...I don't get the idea of building cars that look slow...just so you can go "embarass" people on the street...I dont' street race...i feel it is immature and irresponsible.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redleader
[B]

I don't care much for the import scene either.

 

elanderholm, funny that you should mention top level drivers. There happens to be a pretty interesting driving instructor that has coached drivers all the way up to the F1 level. Know what kind of car he teaches in? A FWD car. Not that I'm saying FWD is theoretically superior for a good driver in terms of lap times - I do not believe that in any way. BTW, you can read more on this fellow in RaceTech, probably about 4-5 months ago if you want to buy the back issue.

Beyond that, we'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, if we carry forward the trend started by your definition of inferior platform, we should extend it to anything that doesn't have a 60% rear weight bias, centrally located center seat and a double wishbone suspension - which might even include your shifter kart since there really is no suspension short of chassis flex, right? :-) Any production car is an inferior place to start building a race car, but we have to start somewhere. God knows I wouldn't start with my S2K either. Between the convertible top and other features, it isn't exactly a great racecar. My CRX happens to be a good bit cheaper (as you pointed out), is very light, has plentiful parts and is well sorted. And it also has a roof :-). That it is FWD is unfortunate, but liveable.

RicePimp, your points are well thought and I appreciate them. Before addressing the issue of FWD oversteer (we should probably move this to Racing and Competition now, eh? Except we don't care about FWD cars here :-), I'd like to comment on weight bias with mid engine. The preferred weight bias for any top level, purpose built race car tends to be 40F/60R, or about what the typical mid-engine car has. This moves the center of mass closer to the rear axle (which you have adroitly pointed out is about where the center of rotation is) as well as providing for much better acceleration and deceleration profiles.

That said, I have difficulty finding fault with your description of the dynamics involved in this case. There are perhaps several areas worthy of discussion. First, if a moment is applied around the center of mass, but rotation occurs about the midpoint of the rear axle, how do you resolve the kinematics involved? A torque around the center of mass pulling the front in should create a force on the rear tires toward the outer part of the turn, correct? During such behavior, the front steer angle (and therefore slip angle) must be reduced and the rear slip angle should increase, correct? Second, what is the effect of dynamic toe and/or camber changes in such a maneuver?

I am willing to admit that you may be completely correct. Perhaps my car is setup with more of a tendency toward oversteer than I think, but I only discover it when I apply throttle midcorner (i.e. I have not reached the maximum front grip laterally before I apply thrust and create the yawing moment).

UL

 

Sigh, I just don't understand. If you folks have ever met some of the hybrid honda folks here in SoCal, I think you'd change your tune about "sleeper" Civics. These folks, some of them quite well off, own various Civics, CRXs, etc. in addition to nicer cars. with much more power and handling potential vs. stock. They spend very little money on exterior accoutrements. Not necessarily because they want to be a sleeper, but because it won't make them faster and therefore isn't worth it. Don't make the mistake of thinking that a Civic that still looks stock is trying to look slow. Sure, it does look slow (because stock Civics are), but that's because the owner hasn't tried to make it look fast. There is a difference. The guy running steel wheels on the street isn't doing so to fool you, he's doing it to save his lightweight stock wheels with race tires for the track.

One of the biggest Honda track events I ever attended was a hybrid event at Willow Springs. These guys want quick cars and drag racing tends to be secondary or tertiary in their definition of fast. Sure, they enjoy suprising someone who pulls up revving on them because they think Honda drivers are all ricers, but accelerating at 0.6 g straight ahead doesn't compare to pulling 1.2 g in the corners or on the brakes. I was amazed that over 50 Hondas showed up for this event. So why do they choose Hondas instead of something more appropriate? They're fun, cheap, easy to modify and work on and pretty darn good overall cars.

So where do the "Fast and the Furious" crowd come from? They're the posers that latch onto any interesting hobby/trend. Many tend to be about looking fast rather than being fast. Don't let them fool you about where the "import scene" got started.

And one more thing and then I'm done. I don't consider a guy who spends $50k on a resto, trailers his car to Pebble and then drives it onto a platform to be more of an enthusiast than a guy who spends every weekend in his garage working on his Civic to eke out another couple of tenths of track time. It is not about which car you start with, its about what you do with it, and the guy who uses his own hands, makes his own parts and, most importantly, makes his own mistakes has my respect.

UL

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redleader
[B]

I don't care much for the import scene either.