front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive

[fillet-brazed]

ok, so me and a buddy had a disagreement. Of course we both agreed that all wheel drive is the ultimate for rally racing, but what would be faster if you could only have one end driving the car - front wheel drive or rear wheel drive?

[MrJan]

Rear wheel drive no doubt. Front wheel drive cars have a tendancy to bog down or understeer. IN any case it's the rear wheel drive which is my favourite out of all three, sideways is best :up:

[shurik]

RWD.. cuz I'm rwd junkie :p
Still though, lancia 037 and WTCC bimers prove that rwd can be really fast

[ste898]

RWD is for men.......FWD is for Girls!!!!

[MrJan]

RWD.. cuz I'm rwd junkie :p
Still though, lancia 037 and WTCC bimers prove that rwd can be really fast

Sadly back in the 90s Audi proved that 4 wheel drive can be faster still :mark:

[bennizw]

Allthough RWD is more spectacular, in modern rallying days FWD has proved the more effective drive. The last ten years there has been a focus against producing FWD cars, which means the RWD has lost out. Who knows who would be fastest in these days if the RWD would've undergone the same developement?

[Mirek]

RWD with front engine has lack of grip on the rear axle which makes not enough traction. It is oversteery. FWD has better traction but not so much, some understeering and is more stable. RWD with rear engine has huge traction but not enough weight on front wheels which gives them not enough grip in corners. Aerodynamics can solve it only in higher speed. The best is mid-engine RWD as Lotus. But those cars can't be used in rallying since they are not touring cars (somewhere they could be used as GTs).

[leno]

rwd only in case that engine is also rear. otherwise FWD no doubt faster

[urabus-denoS2000]

FWD is definetly faster in modern rally cars

[Steve Boyd]

FWD is definetly faster in modern rally cars
Nonsense - there aren't any modern RWD rally cars to compare the modern FWD cars with, if there were the RWD would be faster.

Away from International Rallying where only homologated cars are permitted & you'll find that RWD is still highly competitive, particularly in the UK & Ireland.

Look at the results of the Galway National Rally that ran in Ireland over the wekend. The first eight places were RWD, 9th was 4WD and the highest FWD was 13th. The winning National car (a Mk2 Escort) was faster than all except the top ten International cars (4 WRC, 5 N4 & 1 S2000), all 4WD.

[Donney]

I think FWD is faster when the driver is average but in the hands of a top driver, I think RWD could be faster.

[RallyCat909]

From a spectators point of view, all the rallies that I have been at, the cars that get all the "oooooohh!!' and "aaaaaahh yeah!" have been RWD cars. Sure AWD is faster, but do you see Porsche, BMW and even the occasional Ferrari on rally stages anymore like their was in the 80s?

There is no exoctica in rallying.

poop

[Magnus]

This have been discussed on some threads in the last years...
The higher the traction, the less is the difference, though FWDs generelly has the upper hand, simply because to drive with a slight understeer is generally better than to drive with oversteer.

[LeonBrooke]

With an FWD car, when you get off the throttle you push the driven front wheels into the road, increase front-end grip, cancel out understeer and tighten the car's line. Therefore in theory a FWD car is faster. Mind you, you can't really say categorically that one configuration is faster than the other - look at the WTCC, which other people have referenced, and see that the FWD cars are pretty much evenly matched with the RWD BMWs.

[AndyRAC]

From a spectators point of view, all the rallies that I have been at, the cars that get all the "oooooohh!!' and "aaaaaahh yeah!" have been RWD cars. Sure AWD is faster, but do you see Porsche, BMW and even the occasional Ferrari on rally stages anymore like their was in the 80s?

There is no exoctica in rallying.

poop

I agree, the biggest cheers are when the RWD cars are on stage - mainly Escort MkI & mK II's. Look at the success of the Roger Albert Clark Rally - nearly all RWD, fantastic stuff. I think an 'ordinary' driver can look good in a RWD car, whereas in a FWD car it's a lot harder. Remember the BRC in the F2 era, now they were fantastic looking and sounding cars - and because the drivers wrung their necks. How many road cars are RWD??? Not many, so from that point of view maybe the WRC should be FWD, personally speaking I'd like to see all 3 variants in the WRC - Let the 2WD cars have more power than 4WD (or something to level the playing field), i;e 4WD Less power,more traction - 2WD more power,less traction.

[Daniel]

With an FWD car, when you get off the throttle you push the driven front wheels into the road, increase front-end grip, cancel out understeer and tighten the car's line. Therefore in theory a FWD car is faster. Mind you, you can't really say categorically that one configuration is faster than the other - look at the WTCC, which other people have referenced, and see that the FWD cars are pretty much evenly matched with the RWD BMWs.
IIRC the RWD cars are ballasted in the WTCC.

[tmx]

On many occasions RWD can match up with AWD on fast straight tarmac rallies. I prefer driving FWD cars myself since I feel it's much easier to corner and more predictable. For WRC for twisty gravel rallies I guess they tune the card toward the FWD style.

[urabus-denoS2000]

Nonsense - there aren't any modern RWD rally cars to compare the modern FWD cars with, if there were the RWD would be faster.

Away from International Rallying where only homologated cars are permitted & you'll find that RWD is still highly competitive, particularly in the UK & Ireland.

Look at the results of the Galway National Rally that ran in Ireland over the wekend. The first eight places were RWD, 9th was 4WD and the highest FWD was 13th. The winning National car (a Mk2 Escort) was faster than all except the top ten International cars (4 WRC, 5 N4 & 1 S2000), all 4WD.

Maybe that is the case in Ireland,but we have twisty roads with little straights.That depends on the roads and drivers.FWD has a lot more traction on these twisty kinds of stages.
From a spectators point of view there is no doubt which is better.In Slovenia there is a regular zero-car,a Mazda MX-5.It is spectacular.

[Daniel]

On many occasions RWD can match up with AWD on fast straight tarmac rallies. I prefer driving FWD cars myself since I feel it's much easier to corner and more predictable. I am GUESSING that WRC for twisty rallies I guess they tune the differential and axel more toward the FWD style.

With the 306 Maxi and Xsara Kit car they had active diffs and at least one of them had a sort of traction system that cut ignition to one or more cylinders when wheelspin was detected.

Both of the cars above would absolutely murder the 4wd cars on dry tarmac.

[LeonBrooke]

IIRC the RWD cars are ballasted in the WTCC.

Yes, but as far as I'm aware this is mainly to equalise the standing starts.

[Daniel]

Yes, but as far as I'm aware this is mainly to equalise the standing starts.
Yes :) But the start is a big thing in a touring car race. A lack of traction from the start line isn't such a big problem on a rally as it is in a race :)

[Daniel]

From a spectators point of view, all the rallies that I have been at, the cars that get all the "oooooohh!!' and "aaaaaahh yeah!" have been RWD cars. Sure AWD is faster, but do you see Porsche, BMW and even the occasional Ferrari on rally stages anymore like their was in the 80s?

There is no exoctica in rallying.

poop
That has nothing to do with who's fastest though.

As for FWD not being spectacular. You obviously haven't been to the right rallies and seen the right drivers. Sure if you go to a local even and see your average joe in a Nissan Micra it's not going to look good. How about Panizzi, Delecour and Ragnotti?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bKDwvC4_AE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND6aoEPLxYU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW9dJ7-goZ8

What's even more ridiculous is Ste's "RWD is for men and FWD is for girls" statement. FWD requires much more skill and commitement to be driven fast than a RWD car does. If girls drive with more skill and commitment then I'm more than happy to watch girls drive than to watch "men" play about in old RWD cars.

RWD is far easier for your average Joe to drive fairly fast. For me driving a RWD car is fun and not too hard to get a good deal of the car's performance out of it with little effort. A FWD car is a totally different. You need to put quite a lot of effort in and be fairly commited just go get any speed out of the car in slippery conditions and that extra bit of speed on top of that requires god-like levels of car control which most of us don't have.

[jiipee64]

I'd take RWD on tarmac and gravel and FWD on snow and ice.

Love to see the BWW M3s and MKII Escorts ploughing snow though...

It is fun to drive RWD on snow but I feel- safer on FWD.

[LeonBrooke]

Yes, and I therefore think that in a rally, properly equivalent FWD cars and RWD cars would be even closer. Of course, the driver and her driving style will probably be the deciding factor as to a car's speed through a stage.

[AndyRAC]

With the 306 Maxi and Xsara Kit car they had active diffs and at least one of them had a sort of traction system that cut ignition to one or more cylinders when wheelspin was detected.

Both of the cars above would absolutely murder the 4wd cars on dry tarmac.


Which is what happened - Bugalski winning 99 Catalunya and Corsica in the Xsara Kit Car. Before that both the 306 and Xsara and challenged/got podium places in 97/98. Great sounding cars as well.

[Erki]

How did Ragnotti do it? :eek:

[jure dvorsek]

This is yust my opinion: if you look stage times of a well prepaired Porsche 911 GT3 RS on dry tarmac(Spain-Vallejo)), with a lot straight parts-in this case RWD is faster than let's say Clio R3 or even Mitsu&suby N4. But when it is wet, forget on RWD. On gravel RWD is very spectacular, but Porsche 911 can not even compete, because thay have no suspension for gravel(smaller brakes...). An old BMW M3 is spectacular on gravel, but I think stage times would be faster wit FWD.

[cut the b.s.]

Nonsense - there aren't any modern RWD rally cars to compare the modern FWD cars with, if there were the RWD would be faster.

Away from International Rallying where only homologated cars are permitted & you'll find that RWD is still highly competitive, particularly in the UK & Ireland.

Look at the results of the Galway National Rally that ran in Ireland over the wekend. The first eight places were RWD, 9th was 4WD and the highest FWD was 13th. The winning National car (a Mk2 Escort) was faster than all except the top ten International cars (4 WRC, 5 N4 & 1 S2000), all 4WD.


I know Ireland has some of the best modified RWD cars in the world, but how is it there for FWD? Are there any top competitors in them? And what spec are the top fwd cars? Are they comparable to the crazy but rather wonderful Mk2 Escorts?

[gravelman]

Sideways is not often the fastest in RWD. One of our best drivers here in a Mk2 Escort; Frank Meagher (RIP) rove an outdated car up with the best of the latest machinery, not through the usual sideways nmanner, proving that rwd cars require a more technical approach if the best is to be got out of them.

[Zico]

Great thread with many valid points offered for and against both, I know what I'd rather drive (RWD) but I dont believe the answer to the question is as black and white as many seem to believe. My thoughts...

Fwd- more stable, slightly more traction ?? loses slightly less power through the transmission than RWD ?? near unbeatable on tarmac. Front tyres are worked far harder and suffer on longer stages

Rwd- Less developed Imo, and so arguably has greater scope for improvement. Superior in theory due to the traction/steering/braking being shared more between front and rear.

Other factors which should also come under consideration should be what format can potentially handle the most power beyond 300 bhp, I'd imagine that to be rwd.
When I talk about RWD being less developed.... I remember a mid engined BMW M3 being unbeatable in ice racing many years ago.. just maybe a fully developed mid engined rwd rallycar would edge out an equally developed FWD car dynamically on events which suited it ?

I do recall Ford Australia building and rallying a RWD Focus that when it didnt break occasionally produced some respectable times.

Really difficult question to answer as we cant really compare them as equally developed modern machines. I suspect each of these formats may well be suited to certain events which favour certain driving styles.

Hmm...

[Daniel]

I do recall Ford Australia building and rallying a RWD Focus that when it didnt break occasionally produced some respectable times.

The weakest part of that car was the driver. Michael "It was the car or a polar bear or a leaf or the tyres or something other than my fault" Guest :)

[Mickey T]

there are horses for courses, of course.

on dry tarmac, you'd probably take RWD. everywhere else, front wheel drive.

the only valid comparisons being back-to-back, i can only tell you what i've found in Group N Lancer EVO VIs.

have seen them in front and rear drive, with the same driver, due to mechanical problems in the driveline.

nearly three seconds/km off the normal, front running pace in RWD, less than half a second/km in FWD.

so, on the loose, FWD would intrinsically seem faster.

[MrJan]

I'd disagree with that one Mickey. Always seems like FWD bogs down on gravel and you can use power in a RWD to get you out of trouble. On tarmac this doesn't apply and the two will be a lot closer. Of course it all comes down in the end to the driver but I'm still putting my money on RWD being better.

[Langdale Forest]

Which is what happened - Bugalski winning 99 Catalunya and Corsica in the Xsara Kit Car. Before that both the 306 and Xsara and challenged/got podium places in 97/98. Great sounding cars as well.

Does anyone still use the Citroen Xsara Kit car or the 306 Maxi?

[Tomski]

Is it me, or are people using FWD for both FRONT wheel drive & FOUR wheel drive in this thread?

FWD= Front wheel drive
4WD= Four wheel drive

[Mirek]

Langdale Forest: There are quite many 306 Maxi in France but they are not in factory F2 versions since F2 class was banned and transformed into A7VK (restrictor, no electronic traction control etc.). Maybe I'm wrong and they use different regulations in France ;) In fact they are still on top behind modern WRC cars.

One Xsara Kit Car was on sale in France...

[shurik]

Yes, but as far as I'm aware this is mainly to equalise the standing starts.
Not only standing starts, but also concerns corner exit, especially those wich lead to straight. Rear is loaded on accelration, you just ease off whe you feel that your rear is tacklin you for position. ))) And this is the way you win the races - higher exit speed - higher speed on braking. Just be very gentle on throttle and you gain advantage. Well, exept if you have a talent of Michael Schuemacher, you'd gain advantage everywhere. :D
Compare it to FWD, wich has an absolutely different situation - on acceleration it sucks bad - front is lifting, less traction, hard on throttle - more understeer.
It's like two oppsites - for RWD midcorner and exit and straight acceleration is better, while FWD has staright braking, corner entry and midcorner as an advantage.
And what is 100% true is that in the end it all depends on driver behind the wheel.. RWD is no better than FWD without the driver.. its just a drivetrain, funny shaped peices of metall

Just don't take too serious what I wrote here :D

[Daniel]

Tomski. I'm not sure what gives you the impression people are saying fwd for four wheel drive.

[urabus-denoS2000]

Tomski. I'm not sure what gives you the impression people are saying fwd for four wheel drive.

True,I am not sure that someone who doesnt understand that would write here

[LeonBrooke]

Not only standing starts, but also concerns corner exit, especially those wich lead to straight. Rear is loaded on accelration, you just ease off whe you feel that your rear is tacklin you for position. ))) And this is the way you win the races - higher exit speed - higher speed on braking. Just be very gentle on throttle and you gain advantage. Well, exept if you have a talent of Michael Schuemacher, you'd gain advantage everywhere. :D
Compare it to FWD, wich has an absolutely different situation - on acceleration it sucks bad - front is lifting, less traction, hard on throttle - more understeer.
It's like two oppsites - for RWD midcorner and exit and straight acceleration is better, while FWD has staright braking, corner entry and midcorner as an advantage.
And what is 100% true is that in the end it all depends on driver behind the wheel.. RWD is no better than FWD without the driver.. its just a drivetrain, funny shaped peices of metall

Just don't take too serious what I wrote here :D

Yes, but on a rally stage where you don't know every corner coming up, I think braking, corner entry and midcorner speed are more important. Lifting to adjust your line would be more effective in a FWD, making it faster through the corners, and faster overall.

If you took a WTCC BMW, Seat and Chevrolet and dumped them on a stage from the Tour de Corse, I think the BMW would be marginally slower because of this.

Of course, it comes down to the driver and whether her style suits a FWD or a RWD better.

[Mickey T]

I'd disagree with that one Mickey. Always seems like FWD bogs down on gravel and you can use power in a RWD to get you out of trouble. On tarmac this doesn't apply and the two will be a lot closer. Of course it all comes down in the end to the driver but I'm still putting my money on RWD being better.

then you'd be wrong.

there are very few places in a stage where you ever risk bogging down.

front drive is more stable in the front half of a corner, where you risk more.

using the power in a rear drive makes you feel better, but it's not quicker.

if an EVO with only front drive is within a second/km and the same EVO with the same driver is almost three seconds away from its 4WD times on gravel, i'd like you to demonstrate to me what rationale you're using to disagree...

[shurik]

Yes, but on a rally stage where you don't know every corner coming up, I think braking, corner entry and midcorner speed are more important. Lifting to adjust your line would be more effective in a FWD, making it faster through the corners, and faster overall.

If you took a WTCC BMW, Seat and Chevrolet and dumped them on a stage from the Tour de Corse, I think the BMW would be marginally slower because of this.

Of course, it comes down to the driver and whether her style suits a FWD or a RWD better.
agree, but it's safer to turn in slowly and drive out fast, than turn in fast. It's what I've been told and taught.. Also there's an old saying that you win the rally on straights, not in the corners. I suspect this saying is present about in any motorsport activity.. :D
Plus, it's far more harder to master good entry and evem more harder to go through midcorner properly. Some say, and some wrote this in books, that proper midcorner approach is the difference between excelent driver and top notch driver like Loeb or Schumi.
Still though, it is all about skill and taste, imo..

[Daniel]

then you'd be wrong.

there are very few places in a stage where you ever risk bogging down.

front drive is more stable in the front half of a corner, where you risk more.

using the power in a rear drive makes you feel better, but it's not quicker.

if an EVO with only front drive is within a second/km and the same EVO with the same driver is almost three seconds away from its 4WD times on gravel, i'd like you to demonstrate to me what rationale you're using to disagree...

To be fair FWD is closer to 4WD in the way the cars handle. So the driver who goes from having a 4WD car to a FWD car isn't dealing with something totally different. 4WD to RWD is something totally different. Plus you've got the way the chassis/suspension is tuned.

[sollitt]

How many times has this topic been aired over the years?
Fact is , it's impossible to answer. Engineering theory will not provide the answer.

[MrJan]

if an EVO with only front drive is within a second/km and the same EVO with the same driver is almost three seconds away from its 4WD times on gravel, i'd like you to demonstrate to me what rationale you're using to disagree...


1)The Driver - as Daniel said some people just don't like RWD as it takes more skill to be properly quick.

2) The power balance.

3) PLenty of time on stages watching FWD cars bog down ;)

[Daniel]

I'm sorry I said quite clearly that RWD takes LESS skill to be properly quick.

[Zico]

I'm sorry I said quite clearly that RWD takes LESS skill to be properly quick.

I'd agree with you if you said anyone can look quick (or spectacular at least) in a rwd car but I really struggle with your logic that quick drivers in fwd cars are somehow more skilled than their quick rwd counterparts.. its just a different discipline Imo.

Mickey T- Its a well known fact that budding WRC drivers learn their trade in FWD cars as they handle more like 4wd than rwd cars obviously do, possibly another reason besides the set-up explanation that you were quicker in FWD mode?

[Daniel]

I'd agree with you if you said anyone can look quick (or spectacular at least) in a rwd car but I really struggle with your logic that quick drivers in fwd cars are somehow more skilled than their quick rwd counterparts.. its just a different discipline Imo.

Mickey T- Its a well known fact that budding WRC drivers learn their trade in FWD cars as they handle more like 4wd than rwd cars obviously do, possibly another reason besides the set-up explanation that you were quicker in FWD mode?
OK to clarify.

To get 90% out of a RWD car. Not too difficult (comparatively)
To get 100% out of a RWD car. Pretty difficult to do
To get 90% out of a FWD car. Pretty difficult.
To get 100% out of FWD car. Really difficult.

[MrJan]

I'm sorry I said quite clearly that RWD takes LESS skill to be properly quick.

Ah, don't know where I saw that then, must have made up words in my head. Sorry for misquoting you and sorry that you're wrong :p : ;) :D

[MJW]

This isnt really answering the question but I think top drivers can drive anything. videos that come to mind are Gardemeiste in his rwd M3, even Mikko Hirvonen in his Ford Anglia, (both links available on the drivers websites) Also when you see a well driven FWD car, old F2 and now S1600, - PG in the Suzuki, Meeke, Wilks etc these FWD are spectatular. Comig back to the opening sentance about top drivers - what I dont like is to see WRC cars driven slowly. Any car with a trying driver is worth watching.

[Daniel]

Ah, don't know where I saw that then, must have made up words in my head. Sorry for misquoting you and sorry that you're wrong :p : ;) :D
Hehehe ;)

[Nenukknak]

OK to clarify.

To get 90% out of a RWD car. Not too difficult (comparatively)
To get 100% out of a RWD car. Pretty difficult to do
To get 90% out of a FWD car. Pretty difficult.
To get 100% out of FWD car. Really difficult.

It looks nice Daniel, but of course it does not make any sense. 100% out of any car is always really difficult, that's why it's 100%.

But I know what you mean, and I don't agree, don't know why yet, is your statement based on personal experience or what? Can't wait to hear your arguments.

[LeonBrooke]

I have to say that I don't really care what sort of drivetrain a car has - just so long as it's being driven by a committed driver. I don't think I'd rather see a car being driven sideways - it looks slow. The straight-driven group N Subarus and Mitsubishis of New Zealand are cool enough.

[urabus-denoS2000]

But group N cars can be driven extremelly spectacular with a right driver.Look for Gigi Gallis videos in the group N Evo 6...spectacular

[Daniel]

But group N cars can be driven extremelly spectacular with a right driver.Look for Gigi Gallis videos in the group N Evo 6...spectacular
Yes but the fastest way to drive a group N is generally not to go sideways. Too much traction/grip and too little power is the problem group N has.

[urabus-denoS2000]

Yes but the fastest way to drive a group N is generally not to go sideways. Too much traction/grip and too little power is the problem group N has.

Agree

[Daniel]

It looks nice Daniel, but of course it does not make any sense. 100% out of any car is always really difficult, that's why it's 100%.

But I know what you mean, and I don't agree, don't know why yet, is your statement based on personal experience or what? Can't wait to hear your arguments.

I'll let someone else explain. My opinions/personal experiences aren't the most popular on this forum at the moment ;)

Have you ever tried to drive a FWD car fast on gravel?

[gravelman]

More power, less weight and bigger tyres. Then sideways will be just as quick as straight on..

[Daniel]

More power, less weight and bigger tyres. Then sideways will be just as quick as straight on..

Well yes. But that has little to do with this thread.

[gravelman]

Ah yeah got a bit sidetracked!!:L:L Too much fantasy to distract me from the work!!

[Nenukknak]

I'll let someone else explain. My opinions/personal experiences aren't the most popular on this forum at the moment ;)

Have you ever tried to drive a FWD car fast on gravel?

No I haven't , but nor have I a RWD car.

In my view a rwd car is always the car to have on any kind of surface. I cannot understand the reasoning that a FWD car might be better.

As for your opinion, I cannot understand why a FWD car would be more difficult than a RWD car, it's a different way of driving for sure, but who is to say if more difficult.

[Daniel]

No I haven't , but nor have I a RWD car.

In my view a rwd car is always the car to have on any kind of surface. I cannot understand the reasoning that a FWD car might be better.

As for your opinion, I cannot understand why a FWD car would be more difficult than a RWD car, it's a different way of driving for sure, but who is to say if more difficult.
Ok think of this. If you're sideways in the RWD car and you put your foot down consider where this force is pushing you :) Think of the same thing in a FWD car :)

[Nenukknak]

Ok think of this. If you're sideways in the RWD car and you put your foot down consider where this force is pushing you :) Think of the same thing in a FWD car :)

Yeah, I'm with you so far, but finish your thought...........

[shurik]

http://www.urbanarmy.org/directorcriativo/design/bmw/serie1/frog.jpg
Totally agree here )))

[Mickey T]

1)The Driver - as Daniel said some people just don't like RWD as it takes more skill to be properly quick.

2) The power balance.

3) PLenty of time on stages watching FWD cars bog down ;)


1) A. The driver (Ed Ordynski) i'm talking about has raced rear-drive Commodores at Bathurst and won the Round Australia rally in a rear-drive car.

1) B. The driver, as far as I know, has had very little competition experience in a dedicated front-drive car.

1) C. He was chosen as my example because he's the only guy i personally know who is both a top-shelf driver (former Australian Rally Champion and multiple Rally Australia Group N winner) AND who has experienced front- rear- and all-wheel drive in the same car in the same season.

1) D. It does not take more skill to be properly quick in a rear-drive car. this is an assumption with no basis in reality. It LOOKS like it takes more skill. but all cars run out of grip at the front or the back and you fix or utilise both issues the same way.

2) Power balance? if drive is distributed to one pair of wheels or another, i don't really understand what you mean. weight distribution, perhaps? This actually favours front-drive on most loose stages, because the difference between the pros and the sharp amateurs is that they can get the maximum from the car under brakes and on turn-in. Front-drives are more stable at the front half, which is where they pick up their time.

3) most official spectator points are on junctions or tight hairpins. these would make up about 0.5 percent of the corners on most stages.

[Daniel]

Yeah, I'm with you so far, but finish your thought...........
Keep on thinking about it :)

[Zico]

Ok... in a fwd car in a slide applying the throttle would loosen the front end, induce understeer , stop you spinning the car...

Can you elaborate on your point?

[Daniel]

Ok... in a fwd car in a slide applying the throttle would loosen the front end, induce understeer , stop you spinning the car...

Can you elaborate on your point?
Think of the way the drive wheels will be pointing (and the fact that any forward motion will be applied in this direction) in an oversteer situation and the implications on this on how much of this effort goes into making the car go faster.

[Zico]

Think of the way the drive wheels will be pointing (and the fact that any forward motion will be applied in this direction) in an oversteer situation and the implications on this on how much of this effort goes into making the car go faster.

Yep.. so getting your corner entry speed and slide angle correct, applying the throttle sensitivly at the correct point for a neat corner exit, using the throttle rather than the steering to control the drift... are you suggesting that this is more difficult than the same scenario in a rwd ?

I fail to see how it is :~

[MrJan]

My opinions/personal experiences aren't the most popular on this forum at the moment ;)

I've been a member of the forum for nearly 3 years and can't remember a time when they have :p : ;) :D

[DonJippo]

Yep.. so getting your corner entry speed and slide angle correct, applying the throttle sensitivly at the correct point for a neat corner exit, using the throttle rather than the steering to control the drift... are you suggesting that this is more difficult than the same scenario in a rwd ?

I'm intrested to know how you can control the drift with throttle on FWD car? RWD car I get the idea but with FWD I'm bit confused so could you explain what you mean?

[LeonBrooke]

As far as I understand it, when you apply the throttle in a FWD, you tend to straighten up, which would make it much harder to drift a FWD, therefore it would take more skill to drive a FWD on a loose surface...

[Zico]

I'm intrested to know how you can control the drift with throttle on FWD car? RWD car I get the idea but with FWD I'm bit confused so could you explain what you mean?

I supose using the term "controlling the drift" is a bit misleading, perhaps "pulling it out of the drift" is more apt..

[Daniel]

Yep.. so getting your corner entry speed and slide angle correct, applying the throttle sensitivly at the correct point for a neat corner exit, using the throttle rather than the steering to control the drift... are you suggesting that this is more difficult than the same scenario in a rwd ?

I fail to see how it is :~

Just go out and try to do it :)

You (or at least I think it was you!) mentioned that you had a good time in your brother's Escort and managed to set some decent times. Now if someone who hasn't had much experience in a car in rallies can go and set decent times fairly quickly that does kind of show that it's not all that hard to set decent times in a RWD car. I'm not saying you're a good driver or anything like that of course :) But I challenge you to go out in good FWD car and be setting times that are as competitive as in a RWD car.

Every competitor that I've spoken to has always said that driving a RWD car fairly fast is comparitvely easy when compared to driving a FWD car fairly fast. Personally I think this is why you see a lot of RWD cars going all out and why you go to a rally and see FWD cars being driven around like the driver isn't in a hurry :)

It's not strictly true that power on in a FWD car means understeer either. Last year I put new tyres on the front of my car and had tyres which were only just a bit over legal on the back and it was quite easy to coax power on oversteer out of it in the wet on roundabouts because the front was gripping and just pulling the car through the corner while the back had no grip at all.

[DonJippo]

ILast year I put new tyres on the front of my car and had tyres which were only just a bit over legal on the back and it was quite easy to coax power on oversteer out of it in the wet on roundabouts because the front was gripping and just pulling the car through the corner while the back had no grip at all.

OT: Why? One should always put the better tyres to rear.

[Zico]

Just go out and try to do it :)

You (or at least I think it was you!) mentioned that you had a good time in your brother's Escort and managed to set some decent times. Now if someone who hasn't had much experience in a car in rallies can go and set decent times fairly quickly that does kind of show that it's not all that hard to set decent times in a RWD car. I'm not saying you're a good driver or anything like that of course :) But I challenge you to go out in good FWD car and be setting times that are as competitive as in a RWD car.

Every competitor that I've spoken to has always said that driving a RWD car fairly fast is comparitvely easy when compared to driving a FWD car fairly fast. Personally I think this is why you see a lot of RWD cars going all out and why you go to a rally and see FWD cars being driven around like the driver isn't in a hurry :)

It's not strictly true that power on in a FWD car means understeer either. Last year I put new tyres on the front of my car and had tyres which were only just a bit over legal on the back and it was quite easy to coax power on oversteer out of it in the wet on roundabouts because the front was gripping and just pulling the car through the corner while the back had no grip at all.


Maybe Im lucky to drive a very good fwd chassis (106 gti) and Im not saying Im a really talented driver but I can and do that exact thing when temptation gets the better of me... albiet not in the loose but the principle is the same. I guess its all about the car in question..

Oh and btw.. I set some times which were respectable for a 1st event.. but by no means class leading.. it takes lots of milage/experience before they start coming or you at least start getting near.

[Daniel]

OT: Why? One should always put the better tyres to rear.
Yes :)

My reasoning was that I was going to get 2 new tyres for the rear soon enough plus the fact that there is a very steep shaded hill on the way to work and if I have to stop half way up and then get going again the car might not get going again on bad tyres in the wet.

[Meeve]

I guess both FWD and RWD when are mastered technics are pretty much the same. Getting 100% out of a RWD or FWD car is probly the same work. Getting 100% out of a car always is practice hours. I gues when it's probably at the driver's preference wich one they prefer. This is why everybody will never agreed about this subject.. It is a driver's preference. There is no way to prove one being better then the other one. Car not tuned the same way, not the same driver/ or the driver being more talented in any of the too traction. After all both are two wheels making the car move isin't it?

[MrJan]

I realised yesterday that it doesn't really matter which is quicker. Watching on the Wyedean and trhe cars that people were cheering the Escorts not the FWD cars. At the end of the day do we really mind what's quicker when we can all agree that RWD is so much more fun to watch :)

[Daniel]

I realised yesterday that it doesn't really matter which is quicker. Watching on the Wyedean and trhe cars that people were cheering the Escorts not the FWD cars. At the end of the day do we really mind what's quicker when we can all agree that RWD is so much more fun to watch :)
But the OP asked which would be faster ;)

Plus as has been said it takes a lot of skill to drive a FWD car fast. Look at the footage of Panizzi or Ragnotti and you'll see that FWD can be excitiing to watch too. It just take a driver with a tremendous amount of skill to get it going fast.

[MrJan]

But after about 5 posts we already knew that the question couldn't really be answered as there a lots of variables and everyone has a different POV.

Playing snooker takes immense skill, doesn't mean I find it exciting. Yes Panizzi could go fast in a FWD car and loo k good but McRae in RWD is surely what we'd all want to watch because it looks BETTER ;) :p :

[urabus-denoS2000]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND6aoEPLxYU

I would rather watch this than any RWD with any driver!!!!

[Daniel]

But after about 5 posts we already knew that the question couldn't really be answered as there a lots of variables and everyone has a different POV.

Playing snooker takes immense skill, doesn't mean I find it exciting. Yes Panizzi could go fast in a FWD car and loo k good but McRae in RWD is surely what we'd all want to watch because it looks BETTER ;) :p :
Yes but Joe Moron can look good in a RWD car.
It takes a special driver to look good in a FWD car.

To me part of the enjoyment is knowing that I'm watching the most skillful drivers there are.

[MrJan]

I like Joe Moron more.

Good stuff with Ragnotti but I'd still rather see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cNJ2kupDfg&mode=related&search=
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbl8LgLXwRo

[Daniel]

I like Joe Moron more.

Good stuff with Ragnotti but I'd still rather see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cNJ2kupDfg&mode=related&search=
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbl8LgLXwRo
But that's personal opinion :) If you want to live in the past that's fine. Unfortunately for every Escort out there there are 10 Micra's being driven badly at a British event. I guess if you want to form your opinion on that basis that's fine :)

Yet another good show of how FWD cars don't need to be slow and boring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_4Tn_ZRGEM

[MrJan]

I think it's the way that FWD cars tend to come out of skides that I don't like. They look like a dog with long claws on a lino floor :D

Like I said before FWD can look great but as you said yourself RWD can be made to look good by lots of people which means that it's my favourite. I'd rather have everyone looking good with some fast than some fast and some looking good.

As usual I have to try to agree to disagree with someone (mainly because they're wrong :p : ;) )

[LeonBrooke]

I'd rather watch a well-driven FWD because they look fast. An old Escort (or any RWD car for that matter) looks slow when it's got its tail hanging out.

[MrJan]

Wow, didn't realise FWD had so many people liking it. Personally I prefer a RWD on the move, like in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ6lG1t0K44&feature=related

[Zico]

Wow, didn't realise FWD had so many people liking it. Personally I prefer a RWD on the move, like in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ6lG1t0K44&feature=related


Me neither, I guess I have the old skool mindset like yourself. The only thing I like about fwd cars is that they are mostly naturally aspirated screamers.. I'll concede to Daniel that in the hands of an exceptional pro like Ragnotti or Panizzi they can be very entertaining. I guess he was talking about the cream of the elite.. there doesnt seem to be a lot of people able to perform and entertain in a fwd car like they can.

I know what I'd choose every time tho.. ;)

[ShiftingGears]

I'm guessing that if an exceptional driver drives either (exceptional meaning they can balance the car and drive it as smoothly as possible) then the RWD car would be faster.

[LeonBrooke]

I think it depends on their style.

[sollitt]

I'm guessing that if an exceptional driver drives either ... then the RWD car would be faster.
In NZ this question comes up from time to time ... with the same level of debate.
We're fortunate to have had top drivers who have excelled with both setups and who have commented on this.

A 4 times National Champion, who has won in RWD, FWD & 4WD cars all over the world, once commented that " if driven correctly, FWD is faster ".

Another top local competitor who is very rarely beaten in a 2WD anywhere, and has won titles in successive years in a 2000cc FWD Corolla and an RS1800 (2 cars of relatively comparable specification) has been quoted as saying that, " whilst given differing conditions each has it's advantages, he could not determine that either is generally quicker than the other".

From personal experience, I've rallied RWD for 15 years followed by 12 or so in FWD. I certainly went a lot quicker in FWD but that was most likely due to refinements in technology, spending a bit more and having a little more experience.
I'm about to go back to RWD and I have to say, whilst I'm looking forward to it, the propect has me a little nervous.

[Daniel]

In NZ this question comes up from time to time ... with the same level of debate.
We're fortunate to have had top drivers who have excelled with both setups and who have commented on this.

A 4 times National Champion, who has won in RWD, FWD & 4WD cars all over the world, once commented that " if driven correctly, FWD is faster ".

Another top local competitor who is very rarely beaten in a 2WD anywhere, and has won titles in successive years in a 2000cc FWD Corolla and an RS1800 (2 cars of relatively comparable specification) has been quoted as saying that, " whilst given differing conditions each has it's advantages, he could not determine that either is generally quicker than the other".

From personal experience, I've rallied RWD for 15 years followed by 12 or so in FWD. I certainly went a lot quicker in FWD but that was most likely due to refinements in technology, spending a bit more and having a little more experience.
I'm about to go back to RWD and I have to say, whilst I'm looking forward to it, the propect has me a little nervous.
Who needs to talk to competitors or anything? :p Surely one can just stand at the side of the road and immediately gauge whether FWD or RWD is faster ;) That's a joke of course :)

Soliitt. Which would you say is harder to drive in general? I've always felt I could go out in a RWD car on gravel and go fairly fast but whenever I've driven a FWD car on gravel it just doesn't seem as easy even though one of the cars I drove for a short while on gravel was actually a rally car with rally tyres and so on and the other car was a much more modern car which handles quite well and has more power. I've always been told that if you want to get the most out of a FWD car you need to LFB and that's hardly the sort of thing you can learn easily.

[A.F.F.]

I'm totally lost with RWD comparing to FWD. Probably because I've almost always driven an FWD car.

Funny thing happened when me and my mates had the chance to drive on a short gravel circuit two different "rally" cars. The other one was BMW 320 RWD and the other Honda Accord 2.0 FWD. As I tried both of them, I managed to get 1,5 seconds faster time with the Honda, even it wasn't the easiest one to drive. Of course we videotaped it and surely the rounds with BMW were much stylish. But the clock said it's rude language. :mark:

But for the safety of driving, especially here in Finland where we from time to time actually have some snow, I'd go for FWD any day.

[Brother John]

I´m waiting for a SWDC, Side Way Drive Car. ;)

[Daniel]

I´m waiting for a SWDC, Side Way Drive Car. ;)
Perhaps that's what Conrad had during Sweden which was why he went off on the road? :mark:

[Brother John]

Perhaps that's what Conrad had during Sweden which was why he went off on the road? :mark:

Now that´s just a old citroën! ;)

[Zico]

I've always felt I could go out in a RWD car on gravel and go fairly fast but whenever I've driven a FWD car on gravel it just doesn't seem as easy even though one of the cars I drove for a short while on gravel was actually a rally car with rally tyres and so on and the other car was a much more modern car which handles quite well and has more power. I've always been told that if you want to get the most out of a FWD car you need to LFB and that's hardly the sort of thing you can learn easily.

A lot of it will depend on the spec and how well set-up the car is.. did the fwd car you tried have an LSD?
LFB feels near impossible to contemplate mastering at 1st in a roadcar, but it definately becomes far, far easier though when the brakes are not servo'd like in most rallycars.

If you ever come up to Scotland you are welcome to come along to the next test once the car is finished. Theres a lot of work being done to the new car including more power improved drivability thanks to increased capacity and the addition of throttlebodies, improved weight distribution and PMI. Im not sure if he would actually give you a go at driving it but with a few passenger rides I think you'd apreciate that despite rwd looking relatively easy from a spectators point of view, its a pretty hairy experience going out in a powerful well sorted rwd car on a forrest stage for the 1st time.. who knows, you might just change your mind a little ? ;)

[Daniel]

I wouldn't want to drive ;) I'd go too slow because it's not mine to crash ;)

I'd be more than happy to go along for a ride. I do realise that driving a RWD car takes skill. It's not childsplay of course. But it still wouldn't change my mind to see how difficult the car would be to drive compared to a comparable FWD car ;)

[Daniel]

Now that´s just a old citroën! ;)
Are you Citroenist? :mark: :p

[Zico]

I wouldn't want to drive ;) I'd go too slow because it's not mine to crash ;)

I'd be more than happy to go along for a ride. I do realise that driving a RWD car takes skill. It's not childsplay of course. But it still wouldn't change my mind to see how difficult the car would be to drive compared to a comparable FWD car ;)

Once its finished (hopefully around May) I'll drop you a pm once we have a test date and you can see how it fits in with your plans. Theres usually 6-7 different cars there ranging from Grp N Scoobies, evo's, mk2's, rwd mk3's to Civic Type R's, so you'd get plenty passenger rides in the various cars. We usually get about 10-12 runs depending on offs etc on a 1 mile forrest loop near St Johns town of Dalry. If anyone else fancies it let me know and I'll try and arrange something.

[sollitt]

Soliitt. Which would you say is harder to drive in general?
The 'winningist' drivers have a natural skill that they could apply equally to either setup - with similar ease I would imagine.

If I were setting out to contest a championship today, I would have more confidence in my ability to go fast from the outset in FWD. I would feel safer pushing to the limit in FWD. Very seldom did we ever run wide in a FWD car and when we did overcook it they would usually spin within their own length.
I think it's a totally different skill to drive a car, on the limit, that you are controlling from the rear - not one that I would claim to have ever really mastered.


I've always been told that if you want to get the most out of a FWD car you need to LFB and that's hardly the sort of thing you can learn easily.
Pentti is the man to talk to about LFB'ing. I think most 'younger' competitors seem to pick it up OK. Being an older bloke and set in my ways, I struggled with it for a couple of years before giving it away as a lost cause. I do believe not mastering it limited my potential for results in FWD although we have another senior competitor here who is very fast in FWD and claims to have never used LFB'ing.

Don't let anyone ever tell you that you cannot drive a FWD sideways ... or slide it using the throttle. FWD can be a lot of fun!

[Daniel]

Don't let anyone ever tell you that you cannot drive a FWD sideways ... or slide it using the throttle. FWD can be a lot of fun!

Well I've experienced power on oversteer in my car. Wet roundabout in the morning and brand new Michelin's on the back and just legal random brand tyre on the back so I thought to myself "I wonder if this is a recipe for power on oversteer?". Turned in put the power on and the front went where the wheels were pointing and the power was pushing them and the back just kept on going where it was going :) Was nice and controllable too!