The accusation, "useless thread" or "useless discussion" gets tossed around a lot in these forums when a topic is not something the majority is interested in. But then the discussion of FWD vs RWD rages on.
There is no discussion really. FWD is inferior. This is not one of those things which is a matter of opinion. It's hard science.
People who normally defend FWD are basically divided in 3 categories. People who know nothing about cars and can't even tell if the car is being pulled or pushed. Or don't even know there is actually a difference. Then we have the people who are fans of car brands which make no RWD cars or at least none they can afford, so they have to wave the FWD flag, or feel like they do. What else could they do? And lastly, we have people who wrongly think RWD is less safe or dislikes that normally RWD cars are more expensive or some reason like that which leads them to buy a FWD. Then they feel the need to justify FWD but can't get to say the right thing or the truth which is something like "even though I know RWD is better, I bought a FWD, but for a personal reason". Because if they don't know they would fall under the first category.
But there is no debate really. If FWD would be better F1 would drive backwards! FWD is not better for speed or handling. Touring cars don't count as the point is to drive "stock" cars. Neither do "experiments". F1 is the top of motor racing. If they ever move away from RWD it will be to AWD and they have been experimenting with it. And before anybody says F1 is RWD because they are rear mid-engined, If FWD was any good they would pursue that instead of bothering with AWD. And if you really want to hang on the rear mid-engine excuse, look at Nascar and the several other FR set ups in racing.
If FWD would be any real advantage for traction as well, rally cars wouldn't have massively switched to AWD and Range Rovers would be FWD.
FWD is a compromise. There is no other way to look at it. This is what it always was. FWD is basically the loser of the car world. It's not as good for traction as AWD and not as good for handling as RWD. It does nothing great! This is what a compromise is.
As for not being able to tell the difference in the day to day, I can't understand how that can be. Not from anybody who likes and understands about cars anyway. I currently drive a FWD as a daily and I'm constantly reminded of it. Any time I come out of a roundabout or bend, get into a bend, basically all the time. Unless you are driving 15mph on a dry straight line, how can somebody not notice the difference?
As for safety, I still maintain RWD is safer, specially if you can actually drive. But as they say a picture is worth a thousand words, so I got on youtube to look for tests and I knew I would find something. I wanted to find something that wasn't track related. There are several tests showing such behaviors. But for those who never got to see any, or who never had the opportunity to track a FWD, RWD and AWD to see the difference or even drive them close to the limit, I will leave this here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYUWIcw8_xgWhat I like about this test is that it is not even driving fast. It's something that can happen every day. The FWD defense front likes to use the argument that under normal conditions FWD is not inferior. It doesn't get less normal than this test. It can happen anytime. And I know Vicki said it's hard to tell the difference between FWD, RWD and AWD before you start reaching the car's limit. But I'm sure she is trying to see it from the perspective of most of her viewers as I doubt very much she can't easily tell. Sure if you don't know about cars it can be puzzling. But the thing is when it comes to safety, it normally means you HAVE reached the car's limits. And that happens in a split second.
The FWD vs RWD debate is not a Ford vs Chevy or Mac vs PC debate. The argument FWD is not inferior is like a "smoke is not bad for you" argument.
Author
Topic: Peugeot looking to buy Vauxhall and Opel! (Read 13160 times)