Honda Car Forum

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:28:59 +0000, dizzy wrote:

> Pszemol wrote:
>
>>"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>> jim beam wrote:
>>>
>>>>there
>>>>are many advantages to fwd for normal driving - that's why so many
>>>>vehicles use it.
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, statements like Just Me's "Unless you're into
>>> throttle steer and serious performance driving, RWD has no advantages"
>>> are NOT correct.
>>
>>Would you care to elaborate on RWD advantages over FWD in passenger cars
>>driven on a regular road?
>
> No. Educate yourself. Google my posts, if you want. Buy yourself a
> clue, while you're at it.


Dizzy! Where the hell did you get to?

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:22:00 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>still just me wrote:
>
>>RWD has a disadvantage in that the weight of the car is typically
>>displaced about 60/40 towards the front of the car.
>
>Your post was not bad, except for this bit of nonsense. It is rare
>for a modern RWD car to be worse than 55/45. Most BMW's are 50/50 or
>very close to it.
>
>(Contrast that with typical FWD car's 63/27 weight ratio - damn near
>TWICE as much weight on the front as on the rears - a major
>disadvantage for handling and performance.)

That's not typical in my experience. I would concede to the 55/45.
But, that weight is a traction advantage.

It is not a performance issue for 99.95% of drivers. A FWD car can be
made to handle very well - strict performance driving (again)
excepted.

Ad for the BMW's, congrats if they are now that close. I haven't
worked on one since the 2002 (and I don't mean model year). But, most
drivers don't drive cars designed on caliber with BMW engineering. For
most drivers, less expensively designed FWD cars fit better.

>>So, in slippery
>>conditions, RWD will lose traction sooner. Many folks with RWD put
>>sand bags in the rear of the car to add weight in the Winter just to
>>get around in the snow.
>
>Your notions are obsolete, in regards to modern cars with stability
>control systems. I will concede that RWD owners in the snow-belt
>should get real Winter tires, while most FWD cars can get-by with
>all-seasons.

They are not obsolete. Perhaps you don't live in snow country. If you
did, you could go to the hardware store and watch the bags of sand
sell. RWD cars with traction control do better. Unfortunately, John Q.
Public doesn't usually drive a car with traction control.

The tire issue is also significant - FWD drivers can drive a high
performance all season tire and enjoy very good handling year round.
Even in snowy areas, roads are clear 80% of the time. The RWD owner
has to put up with crappy handling, noisy, rough, snow tires for the
entire Winter season if he wants to be able to move when there's snow
on the ground.

on 2/20/2008 1:54 PM still just me said the following:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:22:00 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> still just me wrote:
>>
>>
>>> RWD has a disadvantage in that the weight of the car is typically
>>> displaced about 60/40 towards the front of the car.
>>>
>> Your post was not bad, except for this bit of nonsense. It is rare
>> for a modern RWD car to be worse than 55/45. Most BMW's are 50/50 or
>> very close to it.
>>
>> (Contrast that with typical FWD car's 63/27 weight ratio - damn near
>> TWICE as much weight on the front as on the rears - a major
>> disadvantage for handling and performance.)
>>
>
> That's not typical in my experience. I would concede to the 55/45.
> But, that weight is a traction advantage.
>
> It is not a performance issue for 99.95% of drivers. A FWD car can be
> made to handle very well - strict performance driving (again)
> excepted.
>
> Ad for the BMW's, congrats if they are now that close. I haven't
> worked on one since the 2002 (and I don't mean model year). But, most
> drivers don't drive cars designed on caliber with BMW engineering. For
> most drivers, less expensively designed FWD cars fit better.
>
>
>>> So, in slippery
>>> conditions, RWD will lose traction sooner. Many folks with RWD put
>>> sand bags in the rear of the car to add weight in the Winter just to
>>> get around in the snow.
>>>
>> Your notions are obsolete, in regards to modern cars with stability
>> control systems. I will concede that RWD owners in the snow-belt
>> should get real Winter tires, while most FWD cars can get-by with
>> all-seasons.
>>
>
> They are not obsolete. Perhaps you don't live in snow country. If you
> did, you could go to the hardware store and watch the bags of sand
> sell. RWD cars with traction control do better. Unfortunately, John Q.
> Public doesn't usually drive a car with traction control.
>
> The tire issue is also significant - FWD drivers can drive a high
> performance all season tire and enjoy very good handling year round.
> Even in snowy areas, roads are clear 80% of the time. The RWD owner
> has to put up with crappy handling, noisy, rough, snow tires for the
> entire Winter season if he wants to be able to move when there's snow
> on the ground.
>
>

Just to add.
How many race tracks allow FWD cars to compete, whether they are on dirt
or paved tracks?

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

In article <13rp0qohiavugf0@news.supernews.com>,
willshak <willshak@00hvc.rr.com> wrote:

> How many race tracks allow FWD cars to compete, whether they are on dirt
> or paved tracks?

Quite a few.

"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:q6tor31qr1p2i6hg8v7m7pkfiugla222jh@4ax.com...
>
> The RWD owner
> has to put up with crappy handling, noisy, rough, snow tires for the
> entire Winter season if he wants to be able to move when there's snow
> on the ground.
>

Not true at all of the V rated Dunlop Winter Sport M3s mounted on my E46 BMW
328i. For a tire that does very well in snow, both dry and wet handling are
quite amazing with a better ride than the summer Conti Sport Contacts.

You might want to investigate the current "performance" winter tires
available from a number of tire makers.

Tom K.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <13rp0qohiavugf0@news.supernews.com>,
> willshak <willshak@00hvc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> How many race tracks allow FWD cars to compete, whether they are on dirt
>> or paved tracks?
>
> Quite a few.
>

pretty much /all/ afaik. it's not the track but the type of meet that
determines what vehicles are actually on it at any given time.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:39:27 -0500, "Tom K."
<tkorth1@spamspamcomcast.net> wrote:

>Not true at all of the V rated Dunlop Winter Sport M3s mounted on my E46 BMW
>328i. For a tire that does very well in snow, both dry and wet handling are
>quite amazing with a better ride than the summer Conti Sport Contacts.

Interesting. I'll keep an eye on them.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:45:29 -0500, willshak <willshak@00hvc.rr.com> wrote:

>on 2/20/2008 1:54 PM still just me said the following:
>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:22:00 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> still just me wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> RWD has a disadvantage in that the weight of the car is typically
>>>> displaced about 60/40 towards the front of the car.
>>>>
>>> Your post was not bad, except for this bit of nonsense. It is rare
>>> for a modern RWD car to be worse than 55/45. Most BMW's are 50/50 or
>>> very close to it.
>>>
>>> (Contrast that with typical FWD car's 63/27 weight ratio - damn near
>>> TWICE as much weight on the front as on the rears - a major
>>> disadvantage for handling and performance.)
>>>
>>
>> That's not typical in my experience. I would concede to the 55/45.
>> But, that weight is a traction advantage.
>>
>> It is not a performance issue for 99.95% of drivers. A FWD car can be
>> made to handle very well - strict performance driving (again)
>> excepted.
>>
>> Ad for the BMW's, congrats if they are now that close. I haven't
>> worked on one since the 2002 (and I don't mean model year). But, most
>> drivers don't drive cars designed on caliber with BMW engineering. For
>> most drivers, less expensively designed FWD cars fit better.
>>
>>
>>>> So, in slippery
>>>> conditions, RWD will lose traction sooner. Many folks with RWD put
>>>> sand bags in the rear of the car to add weight in the Winter just to
>>>> get around in the snow.
>>>>
>>> Your notions are obsolete, in regards to modern cars with stability
>>> control systems. I will concede that RWD owners in the snow-belt
>>> should get real Winter tires, while most FWD cars can get-by with
>>> all-seasons.
>>>
>>
>> They are not obsolete. Perhaps you don't live in snow country. If you
>> did, you could go to the hardware store and watch the bags of sand
>> sell. RWD cars with traction control do better. Unfortunately, John Q.
>> Public doesn't usually drive a car with traction control.
>>
>> The tire issue is also significant - FWD drivers can drive a high
>> performance all season tire and enjoy very good handling year round.
>> Even in snowy areas, roads are clear 80% of the time. The RWD owner
>> has to put up with crappy handling, noisy, rough, snow tires for the
>> entire Winter season if he wants to be able to move when there's snow
>> on the ground.
>>
>>
>
>Just to add.
>How many race tracks allow FWD cars to compete, whether they are on dirt
>or paved tracks?


Funny you say that because many of the Euroland cars are FWD the BTCC or rather
the Touring car races have about 80% FWD with the odd BMW here and there driving
the back wheels. This used to be the The British Saloon Car Championships but
because everyone that used to buy saloons (sedan) began buying Estate cars or
wagons for their 2.5 children and 3 dogs (inc wife in many cases) it had to
renamed - even VOLVO raced an estate or a shooting brake or station wagon or
whatever - driver had to wear blinkers as do all VOLVO drivers do....

--

Sir Hugh of Bognor

The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys.

Intelligence is not knowing the answer but knowing where and how to find it!

Hugh Gundersen
hsg@h-gee.co.uk
Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:29:22 +0000, hsg@h-gee.co.uk wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:45:29 -0500, willshak <willshak@00hvc.rr.com> wrote:

>>Just to add.
>>How many race tracks allow FWD cars to compete, whether they are on dirt
>>or paved tracks?
>
>
>Funny you say that because many of the Euroland cars are FWD the BTCC or rather
>the Touring car races have about 80% FWD with the odd BMW here and there driving
>the back wheels. This used to be the The British Saloon Car Championships but
>because everyone that used to buy saloons (sedan) began buying Estate cars or
>wagons for their 2.5 children and 3 dogs (inc wife in many cases) it had to
>renamed - even VOLVO raced an estate or a shooting brake or station wagon or
>whatever - driver had to wear blinkers as do all VOLVO drivers do....

**In the US, just check out the Touring Car races like SCCA World
Challenge etc. Good stuff. FYI for those in the US: The BTCC (British
Touring Car Championship) is some of the most incredible and exciting
racing that I've ever seen. Last week, I received the 2-disc set of
the 2007 BTCC racing season from Amazon UK. Normally, SpeedTV shows
BTCC off-season but they're slowly weeding out any programming that's
even remotely entertaining in favor of brightly colored Skittles that
race around an oval for 7 hours.

kaboomie

still just me wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:22:00 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>still just me wrote:
>>
>>>RWD has a disadvantage in that the weight of the car is typically
>>>displaced about 60/40 towards the front of the car.
>>
>>Your post was not bad, except for this bit of nonsense. It is rare
>>for a modern RWD car to be worse than 55/45. Most BMW's are 50/50 or
>>very close to it.
>>
>>(Contrast that with typical FWD car's 63/27 weight ratio - damn near
>>TWICE as much weight on the front as on the rears - a major
>>disadvantage for handling and performance.)
>
>That's not typical in my experience.

Then you aren't an experienced driver.

>I would concede to the 55/45.
>But, that weight is a traction advantage.

The front-heaviness of FWD is an advantage ONLY in VERY poor-traction
situations, like snow. Otherwise, it is a SEVERE disadvantage, both
in handling AND in traction.

FACT, not opinion.

>It is not a performance issue for 99.95% of drivers.

Quit pulling ignorant bullshit out of your ass, please.

>A FWD car can be made to handle very well

FWD is inferior for handling. Period. For performance driving, it
*sucks*.

> - strict performance driving (again) excepted.

Everything but when there's snow on the streets excepted.

>Ad for the BMW's, congrats if they are now that close. I haven't
>worked on one since the 2002 (and I don't mean model year). But, most
>drivers don't drive cars designed on caliber with BMW engineering. For
>most drivers, less expensively designed FWD cars fit better.

In your opinion. At least you wrote "most drivers" this time, instead
of your 99.95% bullshit.

>>>So, in slippery
>>>conditions, RWD will lose traction sooner. Many folks with RWD put
>>>sand bags in the rear of the car to add weight in the Winter just to
>>>get around in the snow.
>>
>>Your notions are obsolete, in regards to modern cars with stability
>>control systems. I will concede that RWD owners in the snow-belt
>>should get real Winter tires, while most FWD cars can get-by with
>>all-seasons.
>
>They are not obsolete. Perhaps you don't live in snow country.

Yes, they are, and yes, I do.

> If you
>did, you could go to the hardware store and watch the bags of sand
>sell.

Maybe people with old pickups. Not modern RWD cars.

>RWD cars with traction control do better. Unfortunately, John Q.
>Public doesn't usually drive a car with traction control.

You're showing your ignorance. Traction control has been *common* on
better RWD cars for over a DECADE.

>The tire issue is also significant - FWD drivers can drive a high
>performance all season tire and enjoy very good handling year round.
>Even in snowy areas, roads are clear 80% of the time. The RWD owner
>has to put up with crappy handling, noisy, rough, snow tires for the
>entire Winter season if he wants to be able to move when there's snow
>on the ground.

You are showing your ignorance again. Modern Winter tires are not
"crappy handling", "noisy", or "rough". Do you really think people
driving RWD luxury cars would put up with that?

And, of course, you miss the other side of the coin. The Winter tires
allow clearly superior braking and handling in adverse conditions,
which means better safety. Also, the Summer months are driven on
dedicated Summer performance tires, which kick-ass on no-season
radials for handling and performance.

FWD is a cheaper "compromise" to get through life, for sure. But it's
drastically inferior to RWD. This is why all the bast cars are RWD.