| From | Message |
fastyz400
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/04/2004
01:46:45
|
 Subject: RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
GRNDSM,
Don't get me wrong. I do admire the EVO. It is a real nice piece of machinery. But, we are just comparing a stock vette, vs. modified tuner car. The Vette should have lost. Anyway, this topic was suppose to be about RWD vs. FWD. The Car & Driver Article did a nice job at how all these compare at the track. Looks like the RWD took first (Honda S2000).
How about an Lingenfelter twin turbo Vette? 0-60mph under 3 sec. Tops out 225 mph. Like to see the import tuners top that. We are not talking about drag cars either; 50state emission legal. Oh, a while back there was a shoot out between some of the top tuners with enteries such as, Viper, Supera Turbo, porsche and i forget some of the other import tuners. Lingenfelter Vette cleaned house again.
If, you wanna go all out drag, the imports can't touch the top-fuels. over 300mph in the 1/4.
So, if you want to compare modified to modified.
|
DakToBasics
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/04/2004
08:15:23
|  RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
The article had the top tuners around and they stuck an 04 Commemerative Edition Z06 just to ruffle thier feather. The Z06 beat them all , including the $68,000 Comptech S2000 with over $34000 in mods. Check it out, it was the September 03 issue of Car and Driver. It just happens to be sitting on my desk!
|
GRNDSM
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/04/2004
09:28:15
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
>The Z06 beat them all , including the $68,000 Comptech S2000 with over $34000 in mods.
That was my point! They doubled the price of the S2000, yet is still could not beat nearly stock AWD EVO! Check it out, even though EVO was faster, S2000 ended-up winning...
Leon
RR
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/04/2004
15:56:44
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Dodge was a big player in pushing the limits of FWD performance in the 1980's. Around '85-'86, the factory had two Dodge Daytonas racing in SCCA, using 2.2-based 4-cylinders. One car had front wheel drive, the other was rear drive. When engine development reached 350+hp, the rear drive car started to post better lap times. At the time, for the current tire technology, that was the limit for getting power to the ground through the front wheels in a road racing application. In hard cornering, most of the power had to reach the ground on the outside tire. Just a thought: when you cross the cornering limit in a front driver, you must back off the throttle, or go straight off course. A rear driver can use excess horsepower to steer the rear end of the vehicle. Granted, a rear driver can be set up to drift the rear with braking balance, but that is slowing down, not speeding up.
|
ricardcapecod
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/04/2004
23:15:46
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Hay 01 motorsports. If you start your turn in at the correct speed and distance from the curve, the ideal, you don`t need to induce in any oversteering. But,if you missed that point,You`re now trying to stay on the road ok? So, inducing oversteering and not loosing control is the way to go. Speed is in most cases very relative and will be directly related with the level of intimacy that you have with your skews, and with your vehicle. The rear drivers offer more after the "normal" driving and it better have LS dif.
|
01Motorsport
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/06/2004
21:59:36
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
That's right, ricardcapecod. When you are at the limit, recovery is far more predictable with rear drive. Your options with FWD are to back off or head off course.
|
RAT
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/10/2004
20:14:37
|  RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
RWD will always beat out FWD, physics controls that, not modifications. FWD can be fast and economical to the manufactures, but you wont find any Vettes with FWD. That's why all the big name street cars made for speed are almost all RWD. Then you'll see AWD, and at the bottom you'll see FWD. I'm supprised we havn't gotten into engine placments yet. No matter how advande torque controllers get you can only put 100% power to the outside wheel on a FWD and it still won't hack it when accelerating in corners. When you put it all to the outside wheel you can also get wheel spin, wich defeats it's purpose.
|
RAT
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
1/10/2004
20:27:33
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Found this kinda interesting.
http://www.sficc.net/features/feature7.html
|
FWD SUCKS
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/07/2004
22:24:37
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Dodge is switching everything except it's economy cars back to rear wheel drive. They have no choice. The automotive world has reached the mechanical limits of the front wheel drive. BMW never bought into the FWD market until they bought out the MINI. Same with MERCEDES. All of your best cars are RWD. Corvette, Viper, M3, M5, CLK500, Lamborgini, Ferrarri, Porshe, etc. etc. There's never been a FWD truck that I know of. I wonder why?
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/07/2004
22:45:09
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Wow, someone brought by thread back.
I'm pleased to see some intelligent people here who agree that RWD will always have an advantage (better) and FWD is just plain CHEAPER to build.
RWD kicks a$$ and it's not nearly as fun to do a burn out with the front wheels anyway.
I'm glad to hear Dodge is coming back out with some RWD cars. I've been ranting about that for a while now. I think the 4.7 should find it's way into a RWD car. And something more affordable than the Viper. Something to run along side the Mustang and that can be built cheap enough to stick some of these Ricers's Dikks in the dirt with!
That would be great!
|
hell no
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/08/2004
04:02:38
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
why a 4.7? put a hemi in a neon, how sweet would that be? Even a stratus!
|
Kowalski
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/08/2004
09:17:42
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
An affordable rear drive performance car is definitely something that been conspicuously absent from the mopar line up for a long time; but as to the claim that there's never been a front wheel drive truck, didn't VW make one ?
|
FWD SUCKS
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/08/2004
11:09:32
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Well, I guess you could call that a truck. Are you talking about that mid-80's thing that looked like a VW Rabbit in the front end. VW also made one back in the 60's that was RWD. It was the VW VAN with the back half chopped off. Subaru also made the Brat, although they were AWD. The chassis was originally FWD. I did put a ? on that statement. I don't recall ever seeing the little mid-80's VW PU pulling a bass boat, camper, or making any 1/4 runs. It was pretty useless.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/08/2004
22:23:44
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
This kid used to come to this shop I worked at.
They called him the "BRAT" because he drove a Subaru Brat. His whole family drove Subaru's.
He would argue on and on and on about how the Subaru's had so much more power than our V8's. (This was mostly in the 80's when this was going on). Obviously the guy must have NEVER driven a American made V8. We lived in the mountains and the kid tried to tell us his Dad's Subaru would pull a trailer BETTER than our V8's up the BIG hills. Unloaded the Brat could probably not do over 60 up this hill!
He was so full of it, he actually BELIEVED that Bullsh*t!
I do remember helping him set his rebuilt engine into his brat. Just the two of us picked it up from the work bench and set it into place!
|
WipLash
R/T
2/08/2004
22:32:51
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Graphite,
Have you ever looked at a Subaru's engine closely? It's a modern version of a VW engine. They removed the air-cooled jugs and heads off the VW block and added water-cooled heads and made the block part of the cylinders. It's basically the same engine. Not that that's a bad thing. They just weren't known for power.
|
Kowalski
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/09/2004
15:31:02
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Yeah, kind of gutless but that design keeps the weight down low. My wife had one from the last year they were made ('87), you could toss it into a corner pretty hard. Fun little rig if you kept it wound up.
|
Tnjones
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/09/2004
17:38:35
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Amen on a 4.7 in a small light RWD car! Call it a cuda or a charger or a challenger or any of the other retro lines that deserve a rebirth. I'd buy one today! Why 4.7 instead of a Hemi? The same reason the 4.7 Dak is quicker than the R/T and the same reason Mustangs don't come with big-blocks, HP/Weight ratio. When you're talking cars, the lower weight not only equals quicker, but better cornering too!
|
DakToBasics
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/09/2004
19:38:26
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
I'd love to jump on the band wagon with this one but I have lined up next to a WRX and was down by 3 car lengths by the time I hit 2nd! Subaru makes a damn good engine, I would say more of a Porsche heritage than a VW!
Those little "boxer" engines are smooth, reliable and rev like hell. Maybe Subaru will make an opposed v6, turbo charged, all wheel drive sport truck!
It's really to bad GM dropped the Typhoon and Cyclone, they would have been a force to be reconned with once the bugs got worked out.
If you ever get a chance to stop at a Mitsubishi dealership, test drive an EVO. They pull almost 1G accelerating from a stop! Put that in your pipe and smoke it!!!!
Don't get me wrong though guys, I still love my Dak. Although she is still sitting on a rack at the dealership without a drive shaft. Who knew they are so hard to find in junk yards?
|
Scoobydooo
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/09/2004
20:48:26
| RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
Nobody was bashing the Subaru. Geeeeez.. Go take a valume or something....
Porshe heritage? I think you have been smoking something. Besides, what is a Porshe? A VOLKSWAGON! Designed and built by a NAZI.
|
DakToBasics
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/09/2004
21:36:46
|  RE: RWD vs. FWD???
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm smoking something?!?!?!
If Nakajima Aircraft company, now Fuji Heavy, is run by Nazis, they need to put on sunglasses and stop squinting at the "Rising Sun"!
The last time I checked, these Subaru guys are the same ones we were shooting at in WWII. You know... the ones flying around with zeros on thier planes and Nakajima OPPOSED 14 cylinder engines.
Now go to bed and rest that brain cell you just overexerted before your scull implodes from the vacuum.
And for the record, I never accused anyone of bashing a Subaru. I was simply discussing the topic... that is what this site is for... isn't it?
|
| | <<Previous Page P 2 Next Page>> |
