bigoldalphamale

what are the key differences between fwd and rwd? performance and handling issues...i know the mechanics of the drive trains. i really just dont understand how rwd's supposedly handle better when everyone is always wrapping them around trees because they hit the gas in the middle of a turn. something that doesnt happen with fwd. anyone who experience with both, please advise on key driving differences.

stingc

People who nail the gas too much in the middle of a turn just don't know how to drive. Its not the car's fault. FWD is a nanny that keeps you from making that mistake.

First of all, most RWD cars have a much better weight distribution than FWD. This isn't a necessity of the design, but FWD cars are almost always very nose-heavy. Obviously, a car with all its weight up front isn't going to be able to turn very well.

Next, RWD allows a lot more control. Neglecting the throttle, any suspension can be set up to oversteer or understeer, but all production cars understeer a little for safety reasons. RWD effectively allows you to modify this behavior with the gas pedal. You can make precise steering corrections with your right foot. Of course you can overdo it and hit a tree . FWD cars basically go from understeer to more understeer as you press the gas.

Now think of accelerating through a turn. This causes weight to transfer to the rear wheels. Your tires get more traction if there's more weight on them, so accelerating a RWD car increases the traction on the drive wheels (to a point), whereas the opposite effect occurs for FWD. This is important for cornering, but its also the reason that FWD cars are hopeless in drag racing.

Giving a RWD car a little gas in a turn actually anchors the car to road, giving a very confident feel. FWD cars usually feel terrible in comparison.

In terms of racing, RWD has a higher performance potential, but its also much more difficult to drive at the limit. You can mess up much more seriously.

MazdaspeedZOOM

I don't agree with this, there is a greater loss of power through the drivetrain, hence the reason if you were to dyno a front wheel drive car and a rear wheel drive car of the same fly wheel horsepower, the fwd would have a greater wheel horsepower.

As far as handling goes, if your considering things like x-crossing, you'll find a majority of these vehicles are FWD due to there easier to control nature.

Most of your higher end FWD cars are excellent performance vehicles, it all depends on what your looking for out of the car. In my oipinion it's more of personal thing, I think you'll tend to find the young and dumb kids wanting rear wheel drive because they just need to show off that burn out power, hence the reason they all drive mustangs and cameros. I personally wanted somthing that handles well but still has some power to it. I have a 2003.5 Mazdaspeed Prtoege, FWD I4 turbo, considered by motortrend, sport compact car, and numerous other magazines as the best FWD car money can buy, and I'm very happy with it.

__________________
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

stingc

Yes - slightly. But FWD cars require (or at least almost all have) transverse mounted engines. You usually can't fit anything other than a 4 cylinder in that configuration. Some cars manage to squeeze in a 6 cyl. RWD cars have longitudinal engines, so you have room for whatever you want. 6 cylinders are the average, and 8's are common.

The slightly less efficient drivetrain in a RWD V8 still puts a lot more power to the ground than a FWD V6 (usually). It will also get better traction.

As you said, a lot of people use FWD in autocross because its easier to drive at the limit. 90+% of that is driver skill, so it works out alright. Professional racing uses RWD though - not that that's really relevent for what type of car to buy

shakran

the traction is the key. As you accelerate, weight shifts to the rear of the car. This is good for RWD, bad for FWD.

Peryn

There are always a few people with a FWD car, and they occasionally do very well, but they are few and far between. At least in skilled drivers. a Very large portion of auto-cross, and most any road course, are RWD. All the high end performance cars as well, if not AWD, are RWD. This is not just to show off their burnout prowess. Typically the FWD cars are driven by people that dont know their limits of driving, or of their car very well. They are easier to be consistant with and not kill yourself, but by no means are the best for the job, and here at least, they certainly aren't the majority at the autocross.

But back on topic, sting pretty much nailed it. While Slate isn't the best source of information, many people have adapted this report to put on their own pages, and its still very informative : FWD Vs. RWD article

__________________
Dont cry kid, It's not your fault you suck.

JStrider

hmmm after reading that article... i think i know why i hate driving my moms minivan so much... its front wheel drive... never really could put my finger on it...

but its front wheel drive
my dads jeep is rear wheel drive and my explorer is rear wd (unless its in 4wd)

__________________
-=JStrider=-

~Clatto Verata Nicto

Peryn

How old is the minivan? I Hated my moms old Caravan...but for more reasons than just FWD. Anyway, she recently got the Mazda MPV, and for a minivan, i love it. Handles amazingly well considering, and doesn't suffer from most of the FWD woes. Torque-steer is almost gone, doesn't feel like it plows through corners, etc. FWD has definately improved recently, but its still no match for my Jeep or brothers RX-7. RWD just feels....natural.

__________________
Dont cry kid, It's not your fault you suck.

mystix

forget fwd or rwd, get awd =D

JStrider

its a 2000 0r 2001 ford windstar minivan... cant stand to drive the thing...

__________________
-=JStrider=-

~Clatto Verata Nicto

shakran

I like how he says Acura only offers front drive sedans. Has he seen the MDX or the NSX lately?

james t kirk

Something all of you have forgotten.

In the SNOW, which we get for about 5 or 6 months of the year, you can't beat Front Wheel Drive. With the weight over the drive wheels, you will be able to get yourself in and out of the snow a whole hell of a lot better.

For the average smuck driving to and from work, FWD is superior in every way.

If you are talking all out performance, yeah, RWD gives you a better handling car with slightly better weight distribution.

But for your day to day driver, you can't beat FWD. I have to deal with snow a whole lot more than a hair pin turn on a downgrade with full throttle.

For the record, I own 2 cars, one RWD and one FWD. The FWD is my day to day driver.

Though yes, I would prefer a nice Audi A-6 AWD if given the choice. Someone lend me 60 grand please.

leftturn109

driving in the snow is an art no matter what you drive i have driven both a fwd and a rwd in the snow and have found that i can get more controll out of my 65 valiant (rwd) with a few sand bags in the trunk then my moms light ass dodge snow tracktion is less to do with wether your wheeles push or pull and more to do with wieght and tires then anything else in my opinion

bad30th

Like someone said earlier, FWD cars typically have smaller transverse engines which = less power than a RWD V6/V8.

If you want to take the hypothetical situation where a FWD and RWD car have identical flywheel power ratings, yes the FWD car MAY dyno more rear wheel power (I say "may" because I have seen a few FWD cars on the dyno with more than 25% drivetrain loss, where the norm is 12-15%), but the RWD car will still be faster, straight line and handling, due to better balance, weight transfer, etc.

I have found this to be untrue at every event I have participated in....

Those who do have FWD cars are, for the most part, in one of three categories:

1)They are young and cant afford the usually more expensive RWD vehicles (although there are a few that can be had for cheap)

2) They are into the whole "Sport Compact" scene, with giant wheels and stickers and wings that are so popular right now

3) They like to take the old family hauler out and have some fun with it. I have thought about putting some suspension under the 'ole lady's Intrigue (220 hp, DOHC, FWD V6) just to have some fun

I almost take offence to this remark. I bought my 97 Z28 because is has lots of power out of the box, the potential for plenty more, and i knew with the right suspension setup, it could be made to carve corners with the best of them. I beat Mazdaspeed Proteges on the AutoX course all day long

Dammit Peryn how is it that you almost always manage to say exactly what I am about to say

And stingc did hit the nail exactly on the head

shakran

Uhh. How?

Peryn

Im not exactly sure on the why's and hows, but the FWD drivetrain IS more efficient and does have less parasitic loss. Dont know if its the shorter transmission, lack of a long driveshaft or what...but it actually is a more efficient means of transfering power to the wheels.

I guess thats just one more reason to go with a mid-rear engined car then

__________________
Dont cry kid, It's not your fault you suck.

shakran

hehe. Take another look at the sentence:

"yes the FWD car MAY dyno more REAR WHEEL power "

just struck me as funny

leftturn109

they dyno less horse power loss at the front wheels becuase there turning less weight.

bad30th

hehe yeah shakran sorry....I mis-worded that LOL

It depends on the car and the transmission. Like I said....seen and heard about quite a few FWD cars dyno-ing with more than 25% loss to the FRONT WHEELS

So in my experience, I stand by my statement.... A an equally rated FWD car may dyno more power to the wheels, but the rear wheel drive car will still be faster.

stingc

This is part of it, but it shouldn't be. If dyno's measured things properly, the results wouldn't have anything to do with drivetrain weight. That extra inertia certainly affects the acceleration of the car, but it has nothing to do with transmitted power. Rotational inertia acts more like adding extra weight to the car (a lot more weight in lower gears), which is physically very different from power. The dyno operator could get very different readouts depending on how quickly the machine allows the engine to rev up. I'll stop ranting now

FWD is a little more efficient than RWD because they use CV joints instead of U-joints, which work slightly better. RWD cars also usually have 6 U-joints, whereas FWD has 4 CV joints. This gives maybe 1-2% efficiency.

Some differentials in FWD cars may also be more efficiently designed since they're right next to the transmission. I'm not sure though.

bad30th

what youre saying stingc is correct, but my point is that all transmissions are not designed equally....there are some VERY poorly designed FWD transaxles out there that will parasite more actual power than others.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that you cant make a blanket statement and say that Fwd transaxles are always more efficient than RWD transmissions.....it all depends on the transaxle/transmission in question.