FWD is better for bad weather because you have the weight of the engine over the drive wheels. The problem with the weight over the drive wheels at all other times is that it screws up the weight balance, thus handling, of the car. FWD was created to enhance manufacturing. You could put the engine and transmission into the car from the bottom all in one piece.

RWD is typically worse in bad weather because less weight is over the drive wheels and it is magnified since most RWD cars are all about performance so they have tires that are not intended for all season traction. RWD creates an evenly balanced car and allows much better steering feel because there is a sense of purity when you only having steering feedback coming through the wheel and not the additional drive feel that FWD creates.

AWD is the best in poor weather and can have good handling and weight balance. The main benefit is traction at all times. Negatives of AWD are that they are power robbing systems that kill performance after the 60' and hurt mileage.

 

RWD rocks... FWD... well... doesnt its good for economy applications... wikipedia it if u have questions

 

Oh.. that makes sense.

I didn't think RWD really evened out the weight. I figured the front would still be quite a bit more heavy.

 

FWD also has packaging advantages, and I beileve FWD cars are generally lighter than an equivalent RWD car. (no heavy driveline or rearend)

 

C6 Z06 Corvette, 1982-1992 V6 Firebird/Camaro and new Holden Commodore have 50% or more wight on their rear wheels. And you can "steer" with the rear wheels, aka over power drift.

 

FWD also has packaging advantages, and I beileve FWD cars are generally lighter than an equivalent RWD car. (no heavy driveline or rearend)

this is very true ... BMW was the only one who recently attempted RWD compact/subcompact .. the 1series, and its biggest problem is lack of space .. the RWD bits just rob the car of space.

FWD is simply for cars that are appliances. IT does not limit the usefullness of the car, it makes it more driveable when yo uare a bad driver (understeer is easier to handle than oversteer) and it makes for cheaper, more fuel efficient and more space efficient cars ... the only thing if compromises is handling ..

I am of the opinion, that while every automaker needs some RWD vehicles, these all are to be NICHE vehicles, for people that are willing to sacrificse all the thinga above: value, space, fue economy, "safety" etc for more trill in the curves ... those people exist and are still quite numerous, but are a great minority over an overwhelming people that just was to get to and from work.

I guess another analogy I would use is RWD is like manual gearbox ... FWD is slushbox and AWD is robotic gearbox like VW's DSG ...

RWD/Manual is the way enthusists who love driving will go.. FWD/Slushbox is the most conveninent for people who do not care about triving anf AWD/DSG is the new high tech, that in many senses is actually BETTER than RWD/MTX but for the diehards - there is simply something missing ..

Igor

 

Motor Trend had a comparison on AWD vs RWD vs FWD cars.

http://wheeltalk.fancal.net/?p=430

AWD cars definitely offer more foolproof performance - you can be sloppy and the car would help you out, but you also suffer from the additional weight and drivetrain power loss (though you probably get some of that back from having better traction).

RWD cars provide for the purest feel. I can steer the car with all 4 wheels (front with steering wheel, and rear with throttle) more effectively. With my old Boxster, it was just an awesome feeling watching and feeling the car rotate in slow motion (autocross time) under my complete control, something I just couldn't duplicate on most other vehicles.

 

FWD cars can suffer from torque steer during hard acceleration. Torque steer is another reason why a FWD is not used for high performance, sports or muscle cars.

 

I dislike FWD.

This drivetrain layout has a habit of causing the vehicle to suddenly swing 180 degrees out of control. I call this FWD ambush. It typically happens when one drive wheel achieves substantially greater traction than the other drive wheel. The wheel with traction pulls the whole vehicle around while the wheel without traction acts as a pivot.

I've seen this many, many times, and have experienced it myself. I often see it on a highway where one wheel is on the side of the road and slips onto the gravel, or onto ice, and ka-bang before you know what hit, you are swung backwards into the ditch. I see it most often happening to inexperienced drivers.

The only way that I know around this is Stabilitrak or other similar electronic interventions.

RWD vehicles can do other crazy things, like fish-tail (or drift if you prefer) but this behavior is slower, more predictable and therefore easier to recover from. Quality tires can make a big difference on RWD.

 

You usually get better weight distribution with RWD cars. If you haven't noticed, most cars that car makers brag about having near 50/50 distribution are RWD cars. But RWD cars are inherently heavier than the FWD counterparts because of the extra drivetrain components.

 

FWD is simply for cars that are appliances.

Igor

Sorry my friend, but neither of my STS's ('94 nd '99) were appliances. They were fast, loaded with comfort and could beat almost everyone away from a stoplight, because they underestimated how quick a Northstar FWD Caddy could be.

I drive with both feet and it's amazing to see some driver with a hot car sit and spin his wheels while I left him in the dust with my caddy..

 

I've found FWD is better for under 220HP, RWD better for over. A well sorted FWD chassis usually handles quite well (see: Mini) and has packaging advantages which allow for a roomier interior. Over 220HP (or so) though, the tasks of powering the car and steering it seem to overwhelm the vehicle and you get lots of under- and torque-steer.

Also, no matter how much power that they have, cars that aren't especially practical in the first place (2 seat roadsters, mainly) should probably be RWD.

 

BMW was the only one who recently attempted RWD compact/subcompact .. the 1series, and its biggest problem is lack of space .. the RWD bits just rob the car of space.

Hrm. Correct me if I'm wrong ... the Chevrolet Chevette (compact) was RWD. If so, then I don't quite understand your quote above, igor, regarding BMW and being the only one to attempt RWD compact/subcompact.....



Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
What's it like to buy your favorite car brand new? Wish I knew...
"Just another regret" ... All-American Rejects ... 'Dirty Little Secret'

 

Hrm. Correct me if I'm wrong ... the Chevrolet Chevette (compact) was RWD. If so, then I don't quite understand your quote above, igor, regarding BMW and being the only one to attempt RWD compact/subcompact.....

I think he said recently, and the Chevette has been dead and buried for decades now.

 

For your typical Joe Schlump driver, FWD vs. RWD will make no difference until it snows. Then FWD, given equal tire quality, will walk away from RWD.
As you can observe here, many folks have their biases: Real Men Drive RWD! Real Humans Drive FWD!
IMHO the differences would be minimized to a manageable degree if driver training were something more than an unfunny joke in this country, where folks learned vehicle control and the on-the-edge past-the-edge dynamics of both setups.
One of my fondest teen memories is doing loops on some glare ice in my folks' RWD honker for about an hour, following an inspiration speech by David E. Davis, Jr.

 

RWD:
-Performance (weight distribution, usually wont understeer)
-More fun (power oversteer baby! And who doesn't love donuts/drifting?)
-No torque steer

FWD:
-More fuel efficient
-Lighter
-Better bad-weather (slippery) driver
-Smaller middle "hump" usually

For the cons of each, basically flip those situations backwards (FWD=torque steer, RWD=worse in bad weather)

And, while we're at it...

AWD:
-Better handling
-Offers best off-the-line grip
-Best for bad-weather situations

However, AWD is also MUCH heavier than either FWD or RWD and sucks up more gas. You also can't burning out as easily, and donuts/drifting (the "fun factor" if you like playing around or love drifting) is none. And forget about laying down a blocks worth of two rubber stripes on the pavement!, something that even FWD cars can do (albeit not nearly as easily or fun as a RWD car can...)

 

I dislike FWD.

This drivetrain layout has a habit of causing the vehicle to suddenly swing 180 degrees out of control. I call this FWD ambush. It typically happens when one drive wheel achieves substantially greater traction than the other drive wheel. The wheel with traction pulls the whole vehicle around while the wheel without traction acts as a pivot.

I've seen this many, many times, and have experienced it myself. I often see it on a highway where one wheel is on the side of the road and slips onto the gravel, or onto ice, and ka-bang before you know what hit, you are swung backwards into the ditch. I see it most often happening to inexperienced drivers.

The only way that I know around this is Stabilitrak or other similar electronic interventions.

RWD vehicles can do other crazy things, like fish-tail (or drift if you prefer) but this behavior is slower, more predictable and therefore easier to recover from. Quality tires can make a big difference on RWD.

Limited Slip Differentials?

 

FWD allows for average to poor drivers the ability to navigate snow and ice covered roads with all season tires without much drama.

A person with some driving experience, and a good set of tires, can get a RWD vehicle just about anywhere in winter. It funny how well a 2wd pickup can do in winter with some nice tall, skinny, aggressive snow tires.

I drove an ElCamino and Firebird in winter, it's not rocket science folks.

Sorry my friend, but neither of my STS's ('94 nd '99) were appliances. They were fast, loaded with comfort and could beat almost everyone away from a stoplight, because they underestimated how quick a Northstar FWD Caddy could be.

Did they know you were racing?

 

here in Mn, its great fun going out on the ice or parking lot and doing...slushies, cant do that with fwd. well you can, if you have front wheel disc brakes, but its not the same as rwd

 

I think he said recently, and the Chevette has been dead and buried for decades now.

*nods*

I realize this ... it just sounded as if nobody else had done a RWD compact car ....



Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"Some things just glitter and shine" ... Confederate Railroad ... 'Daddy Never Was The Cadillac Kind'

 

RWD is definitely better handling but doesn't drive as easy in poor weather. FWD is suited to small cars which are light and can corner well and need as much space as possible. RWD is suited to larger cars and sports cars and trucks and SUV's for handling purposes. The only downsides to FWD that I know of is uneven weight balance and torque steer which affects handling. Of course, if designed well, a FWD can handle beautifully and have no torque steer, but RWD is a better choice. You can drive a RWD car in the snow and rain no problem, you just need the proper tires and know how.

 

However, AWD is also MUCH heavier than either FWD or RWD and sucks up more gas. You also can't burning out as easily, and donuts/drifting (the "fun factor" if you like playing around or love drifting) is none. And forget about laying down a blocks worth of two rubber stripes on the pavement!, something that even FWD cars can do (albeit not nearly as easily or fun as a RWD car can...)

Orly?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kBPl1-3vss

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXuzYSwa-ns

 

Sabaru has controls for power distribution along the driveline. You can have AWD, FWD and RWD. Or even more power to the outer rear wheel in a sharp curve instead of breaking the inner rear wheel. Kind of reversed Stabitrek.

 

*nods*

I realize this ... it just sounded as if nobody else had done a RWD compact car ....



Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"Some things just glitter and shine" ... Confederate Railroad ... 'Daddy Never Was The Cadillac Kind'

the Corolla was once RWD, the old Datsuns 210 and 510 was RWD too, Mazda very first GLC was RWD as well some Austins (except the Mini)

 

^^^My point was that RWD in a compact really shows how much it constricts packaging - look up any english Language review of the 1 series .. people love it, because it is RWD ... it handels great, but it is way too small and expensive ... a Non-lux RWDwould likely o away with the latter part, but having that huge tunnel in a compact is simply a problem when people know they can sacrifice a little of the FUN and be able t ofit a third person in the middle .

I rememberred Chevette and old Crollas .. but right now, there is only one RWD compacts - this was the only RWD compact since a while back (probably since Chevette went away) .. and so it is the only one I can see compared to modern competition.


And about FWD= Appliance ... it is true .. it can be done very well (heck I drive a Mazda3 and love it), but that is the mindset .... Camrys, Corolla, Lucernes, Impalas (current), Five hundred ... they all sell on EFFORTLESS driving - a car for commuters, where the best car is a car that DISAPPEARS FROM UNDER YOUR HANDS - i.e. requires no concentration when you are driving to and back from work.

There are some cars that try to negate the FWD=Appliance notion .. the CD3's and Mazda6 are a good example, and Accord is on that boat too. the Compacts have been trying to be FUN and FWD at the same time, and their nimble handling ability to seat 5 and low price sticker, managed to make them good comarison to roadsters ... the next RWD up was the 3series for 30k - quite a jump from 12k Fit, or 15k Civic/Mazda3/Focus ... or 20-23k GTI/CobaltSS/Civic Si/Mazdaspeed3

Overall, I agree with the artcile posted, above, that FWD platofrm is naturally impalanced and understerrs, and the best a good FWD chasis can do is MASK this tendency ...

Igor