mrdeeno

well, if you're not, please enlighten us how this is possible.

if you are, then you got me GOOD. I spent 30min actually thinking about it.

Dan Martin

mrdeeno

SHUUTT UP!!! JUST SHUT !!! YOU ALL SUCK AND I HOPE YOU ALL LOSE AN ARM AND END UP IN A WHEEL CHAIR!!!

Trophyhead

I'd love to see that drivetrain!

YOTH

Your f***g kidding right...oh I meant left! But I do notice when I drive westward I get better mileage than when I head eastward. Beo, any physics explanation for that? Does the EZPass tag have anything to do with it?

5o9

Don't have limited slip differential, so we have just one wheel drive? And thats the front inside wheel, and then traction controll puts on brakes of its choice? I think the front outside wheel would be the better, cause thats the one that is loaded. Getting practice going nowhere in dirt and snow.

I think the FWD gives us a lead over RWD. One car length. While that BMW is sorting out the tail, we're gone!

allqt

where does it say that Audi was a RWD?

I don't remember writing it..

but thanks to everyone for clearing some misconceptions... just for the record... i drive a TSX too.. but had some doubts as to whether or not it could take my friend's Lexus IS300... and no i probably will not be racing him.. but it's just good to know that I could take him if we ever decided to.

so then...what is it about a car that allows it to have faster top speeeds ? did i hear somebody mention toruqe and weight of car?

psteng19

Uhmm... check your title.

Top speed is mainly a function of horsepower, gearing and drag coefficient (weight, to a lesser degree).

Dan Martin

Drag coefficient just says how slippery a shape is. You also need to know the frontal area of the car to calculate drag.

To calculate speed you need to know:
1) the net force pushing forward
2) the net force pulling you back
3) gearing & rev limits

kyotousa

i think FWD will have more comfortable ride than RWD

grasseater

first: WHOA!
second: losing an arm probably wouldn't bind most people to a wheelchair.

but if it did i would probly get a LWD chair!

mrdeeno

Any reason for that?

I think comfort is all in the suspension tuning/wheels/tires, not with which wheels are driven.

unless it's LEFT WHEEL DRIVEN!

mrdeeno

that's why I said 'AND end up in a wheelchair'...2 separate thoughts: 1) lose arm,
2) end up in wheelchair.


1+2=left (or right...depending on what arm you have left) wheel drive.

Beoshingus

It's belt driven.

Beoshingus

That's simple. When you drive west, the earth is rotating against your directional vector, so you have to exert less effort to maintain speed. If we could reduce your inertia enough, you could jump straight up in New York and land in Lake Huron. The rotation of the earth WANTS you to go west. Go west, young man!

Beoshingus

Magic Man

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Magic Man

RWD > FWD in handling. Period.

Beoshingus

LWD>AWD>RWD>FWD

waTSX

You may want to qualify that as "all things being equal." You can't tell me a 1962 RWD Chevy Impala handles better than a 2004 FWD Acura TSX, JUST because it's a FR layout.

And all these supposed advantages RWD has over FWD probably aren't realized until you hit 8/10ths or better on the spirited driving scale.

ianS

Actually when my crescent was fully covered by snow, I need to drive my bimmer backward in order to go home & back to the garage!

Beoshingus

If you'd had LWD, you could have just turned left into the garage.

mrdeeno

Several advantages that RWD has over FWD without even having to get anywhere near 8/10ths driving:

1) weight distribution more ideal (closer to 50/50) for more neutral cornering feel vs. fwd.

2) communication between steering and driver is less "insulated" in RWD applications because...

3) torque steer is not a problem in RWD cars, so no need for complicated suspensions that causes #2 above.

4) How much torque the car can handle is limited in FWD cars because of #3 above and traction issues during hard acceleration...too much torque with weight lifting off the drive wheels is more likely to cause loss of traction in those wheels.

These are some advantages I can think of without having to get to 8/10ths driving.

mrdeeno

ENOUGH with the LWD! You guys are driving me nuts!!!!! I'm STILL trying to figure it out in my head because you guys keep on bringing it up!!!

mrdeeno

My thing is this...

sure, a FWD TSX or TL can handle better than some RWD cars.

But RWD is inherently better handling...so why take a FWD car and put all kinds of research and development dollars into it to make it handle a little better than RWD, when they could've saved all that and started with RWD instead? That being said, the BEST FWD handling vehicle will not handle than the BEST RWD vehicle. It's much easier AND cheaper to make a RWD handling vehicle handle ven better.

It's like computers...you can keep your old piece of crap 486 DX2 and spend time and money to beef it up to make it almost as fast as a pentium 3, or you can spend the same amount of money and get a computer with a pentium 4 or faster.

ianS

I agree with you but FWD has its advantage such as lower manufactuing cost, has more rear leg room, more easy to handle on snow. For normal street driving, how often I get benefit by the RWD design? but I always get benefit on the FWD design everyday.

waTSX

Yeah, dude, I know all the arguements. In case you haven't noticed, this stuff has been hammered on ad nauseum here and elsewhere. And I'm not disputing any of those points.

However, torque steer is not problem for the TSX either, regardless of its layout, and RWD reduces interior space compared to FWD.

My main point is that an unequivocal statement like "RWD handles better than FWD" is wrong. There are too many examples where that is not true.

Magic Man

dom

I see your point but obviously its easier/cheaper to make a FWD car handle within 8/10ths of a RWD car instead of developing a RWD platform. How else would you epxlain Honda's refusal to make a RWD sedan/coupe platform.

Beoshingus

^ This from the guy who was scratching his head over LWD.

mrdeeno

If that's the case, then how can YOU explain honda's development of the s2000? If it's easier/cheaper to make a FWD car handle within 8/10ths, or even better as has been proven, of a rwd car, then why didn't they just build the s2000 from a FWD platform instead of developing a new one?

mrdeeno

alright, SHUT UP ALREADY!!!

You got me good!!! I had a brain fart!!!

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Limited production model intended as a celebration of Honda's racing heritage.

Mainstream cars benefit from platform sharing, and since all of Honda's current plaforms accomodate only FWD and AWD drivetrains (the S2000 and NSX being limited production exceptions) so it doesn't make sense to develop a RWD platform for a mainstream production car unless they can spread the costs.

ianS

No doubt a pure sport car has to be a RWD so that's why S2000 & NSX are. But for TSX, TL, Accord, Civic...etc. The interior room, lower cost to manufacture and easy to handle on snow is way more benefit to common public than the cutting edge performance. Our TSX is not 100% of the time for tracking!

dom

CG was dead on, Its a Halo car. Also, the S2000 is a convertible which celebrates Honda's original convertble roadster. They didn't have an existing convertible platform to work with. And they're also not that stupid. They knew that for it to be successful, producing a FWD "roadster" based on a Civic for example would be sales suicide.

Producing FWD TL's and TSX's that handle 8/10ths as well as a RWD version is sound business, which has proven to be the right move.

mrdeeno

I agree, a blanket statement that RWD is better than FWD is wrong, but my post is in response to your post saying "all these supposed advantages RWD has over FWD probably aren't realized until you hit 8/10ths or better on the spirited driving scale."


Torque steer is not a problem for the TSX because the engine in the TSX does not approach the power/torque "limitation" of fwd cars...which is why you will never see a production version of the TSX to rival the M3.

As for the interior space/packaging, that's more of a costs savings to the manufacturer than an actual benefit to buyers, unless you're shopping the sub-compact class where space REALLY matters.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

That's not true. If you look at cars like the IS350, it has about as much interior space as a Civic, a lot of it being in part due to the exterior design, but also due to the width of the tunnel needed to house the transmission. On a FWD car like the Civic, there is no need for the transmission tunnel so you can give the front passengers more room in the footwell and in the hip area.

dom

May not have as much hip room but the Civic must have more leg room. The IS's backseat is almost unbelievably small.

mrdeeno

but you are assuming they can't spread the costs of developing a RWD car. I see MANY examples of companies with both front AND rear drive models selling successfully.

what doesn't make sense to me is why they would spend so much money to develop such a low volume rwd model that CAN'T spread the development costs, but refuse to spend money to develop a high volume rwd model that CAN spread the costs among many models?

And i'm not arguing they should've not done one but the other considering the s2000 is their anniversary present to us, but why not do BOTH?

to put it simply:
s2000 platform: single model / low volume / high cost = diffult to spread costs.
volume RWD platform: many models / high volume / high cost = very easy to spread costs.

and the rwd platform wouldn't be limited to sports cars as the market has shown that even RWD family sedans sell well.

And another benefit they would have had if they had a volume rear drive platform in their arsenal is they wouldn't be limited to offering only AWD models on higher hp cars, which they will eventually have to do as the TL and TSX continue to be developed to keep up with the competition.

dom

Its a mystery to me as well but for some reason Honda seems hellbent on avoiding RWD platforms. Even the next NSX is likely to be AWD.

Acura seems to be following the Audi plan. FWD biased AWD cars.