Honda’s long list of affordable performance models, with the exception of its NSX, have been built exclusively on front-wheel drive platforms.

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/fwd-vs-rw...011509320.html

 

I fail to see how the RL/RLX was slighted here. They ARE built on a FWD platform, which the author of the article takes great pains to defend. NSX is essentially a RWD car with electric motors driving the front wheels (ie opposite the RLX SH). I'd say the article is a good general-knowledge article for lay people unfamiliar with why we on forums love RWD.

My only disagreement in the article is the supposition that RWD is going away as quickly as the manual transmission.

 

Hmm I didn't know s2000 was fwd.

The real issue is how they have cheapened their cars, not drive wheels.

Material and build quality is down from 80-90s. Honda/Acura used to make cars with double wishbone suspension on all 4 corners. Now their cars are mainly mac strut and torsion beam to save cost and ease packaging over handling. They now build header manifolds cast into heads because it is cheaper and lights cat faster for better cold start emissions at the expense of performance. Their cars used to come with lsd from factory. I could go on and on. Sadly most customers only know to complain why isn't every car rwd.

I autocross and track my fwd acura. My piece of shit fwd car beats c6 & c7 vettes, Porsche boxsters, cayman, and 911s, Lotus Elise & Exige, S2000s, M3s, RX8s, etc. The looks on these people's faces when I beat them in a fwd honda is priceless. You can just read the "but Jeremy Clarkson said fwd cars are garbage, how is this possible". Their poor little brains on the verge of exploding.

Even going for a weekend drive I'd choose my fwd acura over the e92 M3.

The 2 rwd cars honda has built (s2000 & NSX) both lost company money. From a profit standpoint they were failures, yet their fwd commuter cars made profits.

If acura/honda was smart they would just sell suv's. That is what muricans want and what sells.

Honda was fwd king, but not anymore. Now they are King of nothing but bean counters and hot blondes building cars.

 

So you do not consider the RL or RLX-SH AWD?
He calls out Quattrro as AWD, but not the RL.

 

^^^^
He mentioned that they are built on FWD platforms, which both these cars are. His error is in not pointing out that Audi models are also built on FWD platforms, just like the RL and RLX. That'd be appropriate to point out to the author for revision.

 

I did see that, but he did not call out that the RL was AWD albeit built on a FWD platform. He seemed to imply that all Honda products were FWD as opposed to Audi's.

In addition, his figure for RWD has the engine in the rear. How many RWD cars have that setup?

He did defend FWD to a certain degree.

 

I agree and I noticed that, too. Maybe he's a closet Porschephile, LOL! I've got a FR and a MR car in the garage, and would love to try a RR car out at some point.

RLX handles great for a car on a FF platform, and that's where Honda shines.

 

Looks like the author is an Aston guy...

https://twitter.com/milesbranman

 

Wow - how did I miss that you have the older NSX?
Have you always had that?

 

Nope. November. I'd been looking for almost a year.

https://acurazine.com/forums/first-g...-925650/page2/

 

got rid of the S200

 

With manufacturers that have both basic FWD and basic RWD platforms, I am curious what's going to happen in the future.

A big part of the idea behind the P-AWS innovation was to find a way for the FWD platforms to handle more like RWD platforms. To an extent, that was successful inasmuch as P-AWS works to reduce understeer and point the nose more like an RWD car while keeping the safety and efficiency of an FWD car.

But it's not perfect, the largest single detraction being the very minor but entirely perceivable delay between steering wheel input and rear wheel angle set.

What I can't get off my mind is that the manufacturers who have both basic RWD and FWD platforms are continuing to build the RWD platforms as entirely new vehicle designs. It makes no sense at all except for the human perception of the attitude that a car has.

P-AWS only replaces that with Honda because it is a cheap and logical solution to building an RWD platform. And even then, it's only cheap enough to show up in the high ranges, not the lower ranges like the Accord.

 

A long time ago, the same thing used to happen with me. My basically stock B18C5 DC2 ITR would get past all kinds of expensive, high HP Corvettes and Porsches for a couple of years.

But the problem is...those guys were going to learn how to drive at some point.

Those same guys with those same cars today...you wouldn't want to even pretend to try to keep up with them on a typical 2.5-3.5 mile track.

When you see them in your mirror exiting Turn 10, you just get ready to point. :-)

While they're learning to drive, however, you'll have fun getting past them in lower groups if you're learning faster than they are.

A low HP car is a good learning vehicle.

And a low HP FWD car is good, SAFE learning vehicle. If you get into trouble with a little low HP FWD car, you've got two ways out: (1)power out; (2)lift, point, power out.

With the bigger, higher HP cars (especially Porsches!!), you very often are just going to have to accept an off course incident if you don't get your entry right and judge the closeness of the other cars correctly.

I've grossly oversimplified to make a point, and please accept this gross oversimplification for the brevity of the post.

:-)

 

George, once again you have provided a learning experience via a subsequent Google Search. In case there are others who did not know what B18C5 meant (Excerpted from Wikipedia):

B18C5
VTEC
Found in: USDM/CDM DC2 Acura Integra Type-R (Integra Type-R)
1997, 1998, 2000, 2001 Integra Type-R (Note:1997-2001 CDM)
Displacement: 1,797 cc (109.7 cu in)
Compression: 10.6:1
Bore: 81 mm (3.2 in)
Stroke: 87.2 mm (3.4 in)
Rod Length: 137.9 mm (5.4 in)
Rod/Stroke Ratio: 1.58
Power: 195 hp (145 kW) @ 7800 rpm & 130 lb·ft (176 N·m) @ 7500 rpm
Redline: 8400rpm (Fuel cut-off @ 8500rpm)
VTEC Engagement @ 6000 rpm
Transmission: S80 w/LSD

 

I believe for a period this car was the reigning champion in HP/Liter for a naturally aspirated production engine.

 

Yes. It was. :-)

 

Everything you need to know about the ITR summed up in one spec - VTEC cross-over at 6K rpm. Wow!