Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Volvo XC90 vs MB M Class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX 350 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX

1323335373853

Comments

  • That is knida of silly dont you think. The F1 car dont even have windshield wipers or treads on their tires. I am sure it is for finanial reasons to race in light rain.
  • jb_shinjb_shin Posts: 357
    I am not sure what the reason is now, but is has been that way for as long as I can remember. They do use rain tires, or intermediates, but wipers are useless because 1) With no one in front, drivers don't really need one as it simply runs off their visor 2) if there is someone in front, wiper does not help at all.

    They race in light and heavy rain until most of the cars are off the track, and the marshalls some to their senses and stop the race. Still, I have not seen F1 race being stopped in recent years despite the rain, which at times were down pours.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    The only reason these cars can't run in the rain is because they have slicks. Put rain tires on them and they could.

    Hopeitsfriday, thanks for conceding to me that FWD cannot run with RWD in fair weather conditions, which is 95% of the time... you claim that FWD is safest, I say the vehicle that has the best balance and handling in emergency situations is the safest. Those vehicles are not FWD.

    The latest technology in FWD cars interferes with performance.... traction controls work by cutting power or braking when the antics start... not desirable when you want to go fast. Turn it off (if you can) and the problems inherent with FWD rear their ugly head. It's a no win situation.

    And by "hanging the rear end out", I'm referring to steering wth the throttle in fast cornering, something you can't do with FWD. It can be done safely on any on ramp.... and I wouldn't give an 18 year old the keys to any high performance vehicle.

    In places where the weather goes bad, that's when the traction and stability controls come into play, plus the high tech snow tires they make nowadays work very well. In other seasons, you turn off the gizmos and swap the snows for ultra-high performance (not all-season) rubber.
    You need only change the tires, not the whole vehicle.

    BTW, ultra-high performance tires don't work in snow, whether it's a FWD or RWD application. For maximum performance, you must do some sort of tire swap. When you're spending this kind of money on a vehicle, sacrificing any capability is unacceptable.

    A large number of people expect high performance at this price point... if they didn't BMW would be out of business. If you want to just toddle around town, you might as well save the money and go buy a FWD minivan
  • jb_shinjb_shin Posts: 357
    I have had FWD cars (various 3 Accords, 1 Integra) and when cornering on snow covered street (not on ice) and need to make a quicker turn than available traction would allow, I use the parking brake to lock up the rear and turn the tail around. Otherwise I cannot carry the speed I need to safely make the turn in the traffic and avoid plowing ahead. I did not need to do this often, but came in very handy when I needed to. I have not experienced serious winter condition yet with the new car (RWD), but it has the stability+traction control and a set of winter tires.

    BTW, in general (emphasis on this word), average Germans tend to be more disciplined and skilled drivers than average Americans due to more rigorous drivers' training. Most of them do just fine in winter/dry condition, but they also use the appropriate tires for given conditions, FWD, RWD or AWD.
  • Are you sure you are not related to Dale Earnhardt? Your fascination to take corners fast puzzles me. Just wonder how old you are and how many speeding ticket have you gotten in the past.
    I didnt conceded that FWD cannot run with RWD in fair weather conditions. Given any two 200 HP FWD and RWD, the FWD will handle just as well if not better than the RWD.
    I hope you not recommend to people to turn off their safety feature so they can do power slides. Any one that would turn off these safety features to look cool is just plain old irresponsible, unless you are a professional driver on a test track. You probably thinks that air bags and ABS brake are a bad idea too. BTW, you do know that you should not throttle thru corners, you never know what is on the other side of that corner, a old lady, a kid on a bicycle, but I am sure your father or your driving instructor told you that already.
    If you have a RWD with snow tires, doesn't the snow tires limit your speed and handling? In that case, my FWD with all season tires will out perform your RWD with snow tires on dry road.
    For maximum performance, you should have a AWD vehicle, not swap tires twice a year. You are right about the fact that when you're spending this kind of money on a vehicle, sacrificing any capability is unacceptable, and on a RWD you are sacrificing traction just for the sake of a power slide.
    A large number of people expect high performance at this price, you are right, but most people who buy expensive cars dont want to power slide. We just want some highway passing power and some good acceleration off the line. Cars like BMW and Mercedes are popular because not only for performance, they are popular because of performance, luxury, safety, high quality and engineering. If all you want do is to go fast, why dont you just buy a motorcycle or put nitric oxide in your car.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    We're seeing 320hp out of RWD high end crossovers now and that's not even the tuner versions. Bottom line is, there's only so much power practically allowed in a FWD vehicle, while RWD allows as much as a manufacturer wants to offer.

    There's an "off" switch on traction controls for a reason.... so that the vehicle's system doesn't intrude when a driver doesn't want them to, Traction controls just aren't necessary on RWD vehicles in fair weather, there's no flawed powertrain that requires controlling other than that which the driver can provide.

    Yes, I have been on the track, because I used to belong to the BMW car club.... and you don't have to be a professional, either.

    BTW, I'd prefer a Mario Andretti analogy, because the tracks are road courses and I didn't wreck myself or others like Earnhardt. I haven't had a speeding ticket in almost 20 years.... I know when to use my power, like on curvy open roads where you can see everything in front of you.

    No motorcycles... they're dangerous. Just ask Jason Williams.
  • So you think you are Mario Andretti huh.
    I dont think anybody needs 300 HP, unless your car is over 5000 lbs or if you are towing. For the 95 % of the drivers out there that dont power sliding thru corners at 80 MPH or thinks that speed is the most important factor when picking a car, the FWD is superior.
    BTW you are talking about crossovers with AWD right?
    I am sure if you ask every guy out there, they all would say they knew when to use the power, and every time they get into an accident, its always the other guys fault.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    Nobody "needs" more than 100hp, but we are indeed talking about high end crossovers and I don't think a $40K+ 100hp vehicle is going to sell too well. And, they don't necessarily have to be AWD (why would you need it in Southern California, for example), unless it's a band-aid for a FWD drivetrain that can't handle real power.

    If 95% of people don't think speed is important, just why are they building these 320hp vehicles that can go 150mph, anyway? I'll bet almost all of the buyers (the ones that actually care about driving the vehicle, not the many poseurs) consider it to be very important.
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    Boy you guys are having fun, huh?
    I will add my 2 cents then run for cover.

    Hopeitsfriday,

    For the millions of Americans who do not live in the snow belt, AWD is superfluous. It adds extra weight, lowers fuel economy and lowers acceleration.
    The only positive thing about it is that it lowers the center of gravity. Rollovers are less likely to happen in a AWD vehicle.

    I prefer RWD. I like the way it feels. I don't like how FWD affects the steering. There is nothing anachronistic about RWD.

    Also, I will have to take issue with your FWD and RWD 220 hp. cars being equal on a road course.
    Sorry. The RWD car will beat it everytime.
    I know you don't want to hear that but that is just the laws of physics.

    We can take a Formula Ford and make one FWD and the other RWD.
    Which one will be quicker?
    Or a Honda Civic and do the same. Which one will be quicker?

    You are the first person I have heard call the CTS a sales failure. Sales were up again in May.
    31,000 cars will built in less than 6 months this year.

    Also this is not the place to make value judgements about people who buy 320 hp SUVs.
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    50 saleable SRX's were produced 6/23-6/27.
    Hopefully we will see them in the dealerships soon.
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,110
    For the 95 % of the drivers out there that dont power sliding thru corners at 80 MPH...

    If 5% of the drivers out there did power slide through corners at 80 MPH we'd be in VERY serious trouble!

    tidester, host
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    About people who buy 320hp SUV's.... it's their hard earned money and they can spend it as they see fit.

    And it won't stop at 320hp. Tuner versions to come....
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    I have a 300HP 911 C4. I do NOT race. I have NO personal need to race. I just contributed a substantial $$ to Seattle Childrens Hospital To participate in a MB sponsored excutive "race" in which my corporate attorney will be the designated driver.

    MY C4 gets 25-26 MPG and goes like a bat out of $%^&! I bought it so I could be assured of comfort and safety in almost all circumstance. I also have an RX300 of which it would be much more comforting to me if it were rear wheel torque biased instead of front wheel.

    Yes, RWD is much more dynamically stable for racing, that's why so many "Stock" FWD cars are converted to RWD for racing (is that really fair?).
  • jb_shinjb_shin Posts: 357
    As much as I personally prefer the RWD over the FWD cars, expecially those seen in races, Integra Type-R, and now the RS-X has been doing quite well in the SCCA Pro Racing Speed World Challenge against RWD cars, including BMW.

    Then again, Audi with AWD was so dominating in wet and dry they were banned from the Trans Am series.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    http://members.tripod.com/~team-wreckless/rwvsfw.htm

    Note that RWD's pros are performance related and FWD's are for packaging and cost.
  • ewtewt Posts: 127
    Audis dominated the Trans Am series back it the 80s because they made a LOT more power than anybody else. Everybody likes to point to AWD, but the displacement limits for turbo/non-turbo motors at the time greatly favored turbo motors which Audi used (it wasn't widely known at the time how much power could be reliably made with small displacement turbo motors), while the other cars had non-turbocharged V8s. I've driven AWD and RWD on the track quite a bit, and would rather have AWD in the wet, but would rather have RWD in the dry. With race tires, AWD is just additional weight, and tends to make the car understeer under power.

    World Challenge isn't really a good place to compare drivetrains because the cars are handicapped with weight and allowable engine modifcations to make them equal. (Car and Driver has a good article about it this month) All else equal, RWD is faster than FWD, although not because FWD is unpredictable or hard to drive. Simple physics tells you that you want the rear wheels driven because that's where the weight transfers under acceleration.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Also tells you that dedicating just the front contact patches to both directional control and driving/compression braking forces will NEVER add up to the optimal solution.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    I'm going to go find a 1970 Super Beetle - the one I had in AK never got stuck and with the weight over the rear drive wheels, it's gotta have better physics than anything out there now.

    Everyone can trot out all the track/rally comments but, imho, FWD is more than sufficient, safe and/or fun to drive for the "normal" or "everyday" driver in North America, snow belt or not.

    Steve, Host
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    Are not ordinary transportation. More is expected.
    FWD is fine for the Camry.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    Are most of the high end (crossover/SUV) buyers getting them because they read about (or even understand) the tech info about the drivetrain? I suspect most care about the "Corinthian" leather more. Sounds like a good question for a Town Hall poll!

    I think enthusiasts like you and Willard may be the exception.

    Steve, Host
Sign In or Register to comment.