Rear Wheel Drive (IE Lexus, Audi) vs Front Wheel Drive (Acura)
#41
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Beoshingus
He hopes I'm kidding...
if you are, then you got me GOOD. I spent 30min actually thinking about it.
#44
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Utah
Age: 60
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Beoshingus
The fastest cars are those that are LWD (Left Wheel Drive), meaning that only the front left and back left wheels are powered. This is because of the "right hand rule" which you may remember from your physics class when you were studying torque. Unfortunately, there are very few manufacturers that are pursuing LWD vehicles at this time due to the ignorance of the public and the difficulty of explaining the LWD concept to non-technical people.
#45
Originally Posted by 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.
if you are, then you got me GOOD. I spent 30min actually thinking about it.
#46
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!
I think the FWD gives us a lead over RWD. One car length. While that BMW is sorting out the tail, we're gone!
#47
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?
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?
#48
Originally Posted by 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?
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?
Top speed is mainly a function of horsepower, gearing and drag coefficient (weight, to a lesser degree).
#49
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by psteng19
Uhmm... check your title.
Top speed is mainly a function of horsepower, gearing and drag coefficient (weight, to a lesser degree).
Top speed is mainly a function of horsepower, gearing and drag coefficient (weight, to a lesser degree).
To calculate speed you need to know:
1) the net force pushing forward
2) the net force pulling you back
3) gearing & rev limits
#51
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
SHUUTT UP!!! JUST SHUT !!! YOU ALL SUCK AND I HOPE YOU ALL LOSE AN ARM AND END UP IN A WHEEL CHAIR!!!
second: losing an arm probably wouldn't bind most people to a wheelchair.
but if it did i would probly get a LWD chair!
#52
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by kyotousa
i think FWD will have more comfortable ride than RWD
I think comfort is all in the suspension tuning/wheels/tires, not with which wheels are driven.
unless it's LEFT WHEEL DRIVEN!
#53
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by 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!
second: losing an arm probably wouldn't bind most people to a wheelchair.
but if it did i would probly get a LWD chair!
2) end up in wheelchair.
1+2=left (or right...depending on what arm you have left) wheel drive.
#55
Overlord
Originally Posted by 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?
#56
Overlord
Originally Posted by 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!
second: losing an arm probably wouldn't bind most people to a wheelchair.
but if it did i would probly get a LWD chair!
#57
Originally Posted by loulinjai
I remember quoting from someone...basically horsepower sells a car, but torque is what moves a car. you have to take into account of weight, aerodynamics, characteristics of a car and way horsepower is measured....
ie. the 400hp v8's in the 60's would not make 200hp in today's horsepower measuring standards
ie. the 400hp v8's in the 60's would not make 200hp in today's horsepower measuring standards
#60
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GodMachine
RWD > FWD in handling. Period.
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.
#61
Burning Brakes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Age: 55
Posts: 1,237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
Sometimes I wish the TSX was AWD. This RWD is killing me in the winter.
#62
Overlord
Originally Posted by 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!
#63
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
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.
#64
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Beoshingus
LWD>AWD>RWD>FWD
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!!!
#65
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
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.
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.
#66
Burning Brakes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Age: 55
Posts: 1,237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
#67
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
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.
#69
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
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?
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.
#70
Overlord
Originally Posted by 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...
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...
#71
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by 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.
#73
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by 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?
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.
#74
Burning Brakes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Age: 55
Posts: 1,237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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?
#75
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by 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?
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.
#76
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by waTSX
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.
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.
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.
#77
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
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.
#79
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 46
Posts: 5,349
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
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.
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.
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.
#80
Senior Moderator
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.
Acura seems to be following the Audi plan. FWD biased AWD cars.