Is there such a thing as a FWD (front-wheel drive) sportscar?

[bhtooefr]

And this thread's clone just went WEIRD on The Car Lounge.

Someone seriously just tried to say that because the Elise is mid-engined, it's not a sports car.

Lots of people there said that the Corrado was a sports car. Damn VW leghumpers.

Right now, it's Yes 115, No 38. Many of those Yes votes aren't Elan votes.

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=2978100

Enjoy.

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by bhtooefr

And this thread's clone just went WEIRD on The Car Lounge.

Got a link?

[Elanlover]

Ok, this is good. Now we have some specific things to discuss on this issue not just gut feel. Let's look at them (me in bold)

Originally Posted by transio

Advantages

1. Lower overall weight due to fewer components
   
   Not true. The Elise weighs far less than the Elan for example. One of the things about the Elan was that the magical suspension created that eliminated FWD issues weighed a lot. Unfortunate. But, FWD cars aren't less hefty by definition. So much more than the drivetrain goes into total weight.
   
   Now, if you said that two identical cars (engines, interiors, etc.) were compared, one FWD and one RWD that would be a better place to start. But, the cars might weigh in the same as the extra weight of the advanced suspension in FWD could counterbalance the extra weight or a driveshaft for example. It would be pretty close regardless.
   
2. Greater drivetrain efficiency, meaning slightly more power to the wheels (less unsprung weight).
   
   That could be a fair one.
   
   
3. Better slippery-surface traction than RWD
   
   I'll go with that. But I'm not sure if this implies less traction than RWD on dry tracks. If so i'd be inclined to disagree.
   
   
4. More predictable handling characteristics: front-wheel drive cars, with a front weight bias, tend to understeer at the limit, which is commonly believed to be easier for novice drivers to correct than terminal oversteer, and less prone to result in fishtailing or a spin.
   
   That's dead wrong. I can tell you that in the Elan, if you lose the tail, its damn near impossible to get it back. Novice driving will get you in big trouble. But, more to the point, this depends entirely on the setup, not so much the drivetrain. The S1 Elises were prone to nasty snap understeer until adjusted. It can happen in any car that's setup to xhibit this problem. We see little if any understeer in the Elan but I don't agree that its easier to control it than oversteer. Both have techniques to manage the problem. Simply apply the right one. Ever seen terminal understeer? It often ends in a spin out to. Or a roll.
   
   But I would say that there are some advantages to FWD in the controllability area.
   
   
5. Tactile feedback via the steering wheel informing driver if a wheel is slipping.
   
   Hmm...not sure about that. If the wheels are spinning, front or back, you're not really feeling that in the steering wheel. I sense it, like I sense the rear end is about to break open but its not really directly felt in the steering wheel to be sure.
   

Disadvantages:

1. Forward weight bias, contributing to understeer.
   
   Again, this is a setup issue. RWD cars can show this too. If a RWD and FWD car is setup properly there will be little of this in either. But, I will concede that its more likely that this happens in FWD cars. I'll concede this as a possible disadvantage but then you'd have to add one more advantage to the FWD list wouldn't you?
   
   Reduced oversteer. Which kinda offsets this disadvantage. You don't get a car with no under or oversteer. You get one or the other for the most part, even if in minute amounts. Surely, we can't argue that one is a "better" or more desireable problem to have. They are both imperfect driving conditions. If you say one's better or more desireable then you're talking about persoanl prference and nothing more.
   
2. Torque steer, making the car pull to the left or right under hard acceleration.
   
   Dead wrong. This is ALL in the setup and suspension. A common misconception about FWD cars. The M100 has ZERO torque steer. Its truly amazing. So, this is not a generic disadvantage to a FWD sportscar. Only to those grocery getters that don't deal with it.
   
3. Loss of power due to weight shifting rearward under acceleration. This is most obvious in drag racers. The fastest FWDs are in the 8-second range, but the fastest RWDs are in the 4-second range.
   
   I really can't comment on this because, to be truthful, I don't understand the issue
   
4. Limited turning radius due to the driveshaft being attached to the front wheels.
   
   I've never examined the turning radius of the M100 or compared it to others. Until now.
   
   I don't know if this is good or not or how it compares to the Elise but the Elan's radius is 35 feet. Is that good? Would we consider that limited? And, if it was larger than the ELise or other RWD cars I'd ask how really important it is to shave 3 feet of the max turnng ratio?
   
   Maybe if I was doing donuts in the infield after winning a race............
   
5. No controlled oversteer, which can be beneficial at times on tight turns.

Hmm...........I'm pretty sure you can induce oversteer on the M100. Perhaps not as easily as RWD so I'll give you that.


As you can see, the advantages of FWD primarily lean towards controllability and predictability, which are beneficial in harsh driving conditions (ice, snow, rain) and for less skilled drivers.

Sure, its good in those conditions but I fail to see how predictability and controllability is not desireable on the track. Also, you seem to imply that FWD has great controllability in bad weather conditions and in "normal" driving scenarios but less in track conditions. Like no controlled oversteer, can get severe understeer, etc. (as per below) Doesn't that imply you'd have to be MORE skilled to handle these problems when pushing the car.............not less?


The primary reasons are that FWD tends to understeer under hard acceleration around a turn, whereas RWD tends to oversteer, and FWD loses traction to the driving wheels under acceleration whereas RWD gains traction to the driving wheels under acceleration.

Need to deal with less traction? Requires more skill to handle then????

Why is oversteer preferable? It's hard to explain if you haven't been on a track before. Basically, pushing to and past the limit with understeer causes your car to slide further from the apex, which always gives you a worse line, and ultimately could cause you to slide off course if you don't let off. Oversteer causes the rear of your car to swing around, which points your nose into the apex. This could also be bad if you lose control, but when done under control by an experienced driver, can improve your line, allowing you to accelerate out of the curve earlier. In simple terms, when you push FWD through a curve, it takes the curve wider. When you push RWD through a curve, it can take the curve wider OR narrower (depending on the driver's input).

Ok, I'm hapy to confess that I don't hit the track. I do understand much of the theory behind racing but I don't race. In a real sense that is. I do drive hard though which counts for something I guess. So, I'm not qualified to comment here. But, to me, what you're implying doesn't seem to sit well. I understand the point but I would think that picking and maintaining the line through the apex economically is an issue around pushing the car to its limit but not exceeding it. Exceeding it gives you over or understeer. And, again, doesn't this all imply that you'd need more skill to prevent this in a FWD car, not less? That its not easier as you've implied earlier?

Now, my knowledge of all this is admittedly less than that of many other members here, but I've read a lot on the subject and I think I covered the major points.

I think there's a lot of other major points not mentioned here at all. I can think of a few right now but we need someone with far more experience than the 2 of us to get it right I think.

[bhtooefr]

transio, I edited the post, there's a link now.

[Elanlover]

Originally Posted by transio

The "whatever reason" is that FWD cars are less capable as sports cars. End of story. Please stop posting your engineering theory. It's plain wrong, and beginning to annoy me. Stop theorizing and go read something about why race cars are the way they are. "Engineering to Win" is a good book. Start there.

Then they would be slower than they are now. That is a fact.

Read the post I made above about why FWD cars are inferior for racing. Go research the facts and learn something.

Transio, you never post facts. You post your opinions and claim them to be fact. Because you think so. I've yet to see you post an independantly verifiable by a credible, quotable source fact.

I did research some facts and posted them. Its your theory that FWD is less capable. Seems Lotus proved otherwise but you don't want to see that. Ok, we will not agree. I don't care if I'm annoying you. That's your problem, not mine. I'm being civil. And factual.

I replied to your post. Give me facts. I'm happy to be proven wrong. Most of us learn the most when we are proven wrong.

[Elanlover]

Originally Posted by bhtooefr

And this thread's clone just went WEIRD on The Car Lounge.

Someone seriously just tried to say that because the Elise is mid-engined, it's not a sports car.

Lots of people there said that the Corrado was a sports car. Damn VW leghumpers.

Right now, it's Yes 115, No 38. Many of those Yes votes aren't Elan votes.

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=2978100

Enjoy.

Dammit! Now you've done it. I'm marching off right now to the Lada forum to ask the following:

If a car doesn't burn at least 1 liter of oil every 100 miles can it still be called a sportscar?

[PhlypSide]

Originally Posted by bhtooefr

And this thread's clone just went WEIRD on The Car Lounge.

Someone seriously just tried to say that because the Elise is mid-engined, it's not a sports car.

Lots of people there said that the Corrado was a sports car. Damn VW leghumpers.

Right now, it's Yes 115, No 38. Many of those Yes votes aren't Elan votes.

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=2978100

Enjoy.

Can't say I'm surprised by the votes there, most VWs are FWD and that spot is a spinoff of VW Vortex, no? I'm fairly sure a handful of those folks "upgraded" from "Jap cars" or "rice burners" (e.g. VW is the stage after Honda Accord/Civic/DelSol/Prelude for them, as they're going more sophisticated by going "euro")

In some ways I must be related to AZGolf..... and MrTarmac is even more hardcore than I he states sportscars are not only RWD, but specifically FR only heheh.

You want to have another crazy topic.... what does "Mid-engined" mean? I'm not going there because I'm sure that there are some S2000 and RX-7 and RX-8 guys will have conniption fits, whereas some Lambo, (MR) Ferrari, (MR) Bugatti, and of course (MR) Lotus guys will effectively say: "behind the driver".

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Transio, you never post facts. You post your opinions and claim them to be fact. Because you think so. I've yet to see you post an independantly verifiable by a credible, quotable source fact.

No, I got the majority of my list from other sources, I just didn't bother posting them.

Here, read these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_wheel_drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear_wheel_drive

Originally Posted by Elanlover

I did research some facts and posted them.

No, you posted no facts proving FWD's superiority.

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Its your theory that FWD is less capable.

It is NOT my theory. It's a well-known and indisputable fact. Why are you resisting my attempt to educate you to the facts? Please, go read something and stop arguing.

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Seems Lotus proved otherwise but you don't want to see that.

They did nothing of the sort. They made the best-handling FWD ever, BUT IT'S STILL INFERIOR TO MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY RWD SPORTS CARS. This is a fact that you seem to happily ignore, and you continue to resist facts that PROVE that this is the case BECAUSE it's FWD.

Originally Posted by Elanlover

I'm being civil. And factual. I replied to your post. Give me facts. I'm happy to be proven wrong. Most of us learn the most when we are proven wrong.

You are being very civil, but you're completely ignoring all facts that prove you wrong. For this reason, it's impossible to have a civil debate with you. Are you toying with me or what?

[bhtooefr]

PhlypSide: I've even seen some anti-Fiero guys say that the Fiero is REAR-engined!

(And if that's the case, so is any transverse mid-engined car, including the Elise.)

My opinion is:

Mid-engine = longitudinal mount where the engine is ahead of and directly connected to a rear mount transmission, OR transverse mount drivetrain at the rear axle.
Rear-engine = longitudinal mount where the engine is behind and directly connected to a rear mount transmission.

Note that transverse MR cars behave more closely to longitudinal MR cars than longitudinal RR cars. Otherwise, the Elise, MR2, and Fiero would all get a reputation for being dangerously tail-happy, like the 911.

[smoseley]

Here's another article on FWD vs. RWD:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/020619.htm

Originally Posted by article

The disadvantages of FWD are mainly the decrease in vehicle handling ability. With more weight over the front of the automobile, the back end tends to become very light. Rear tire traction is decreased and the car may swap ends on icy roads easier. This has been overcome by designers somewhat by placing as much weight as possible further back in the vehicle. Ideal weight distribution is often described as 50/50 front to rear, but FWD cars seldom get near this.

Another disadvantage is the load placed on the front tires. They must transfer all acceleration, steering, cornering, and braking forces to the road. The tires have only a finite amount of grip, so using some of it for acceleration must decrease it in other areas. The rear tires have very little load on them and are basically only along for the ride. This is why accomplished FWD racers say "put the gas to the floor and steer - the rear will follow".

All the disadvantages of FWD systems are advantages of RWD vehicles. With some of the mechanical parts removed from the front and installed at the rear, vehicle balance and handling are much improved. Using the rear tires for acceleration traction takes the load off the front, so drivers accelerating out of a corner have much more lateral grip. RWD is used on all the world's fastest road course race cars and many performance production vehicles FOR THIS REASON.

[Elanlover]

Oh, by the way transio, PhlypSide and others. You guys better start being nice to all us M100 owners pretty darn fast. When we finally decide to give up our M100's it will be US who you'll be looking to sell your used Elises to..........

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Oh, by the way transio, PhlypSide and others. You guys better start being nice to all us M100 owners

I'm being nice to you. Be nice back by not completely ignoring my posts.

[PhlypSide]

Originally Posted by bhtooefr

PhlypSide: I've even seen some anti-Fiero guys say that the Fiero is REAR-engined!

(And if that's the case, so is any transverse mid-engined car, including the Elise.)

My opinion is:

Mid-engine = longitudinal mount where the engine is ahead of and directly connected to a rear mount transmission, OR transverse mount drivetrain at the rear axle.
Rear-engine = longitudinal mount where the engine is behind and directly connected to a rear mount transmission.

Note that transverse MR cars behave more closely to longitudinal MR cars than longitudinal RR cars. Otherwise, the Elise, MR2, and Fiero would all get a reputation for being dangerously tail-happy, like the 911.

For me the only RR's in the world (I'm sure there are more obscure ones, but that doesn't bug me ) are the 911s and original VW bugs. I only think of RR as having the motor extend over and past the rear axle.

Fieros, BTW, are definitely MRs to me.

[PhlypSide]

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Oh, by the way transio, PhlypSide and others. You guys better start being nice to all us M100 owners pretty darn fast. When we finally decide to give up our M100's it will be US who you'll be looking to sell your used Elises to..........

Muhahahah. Too late in transio's case. And in mine? Well I tend to collect cars and keep them for a long time, unless they're daily drivers, those are far shorter lived, but not lease-type short

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by PhlypSide

For me the only RR's in the world (I'm sure there are more obscure ones, but that doesn't bug me ) are the 911s and original VW bugs. I only think of RR as having the motor extend over and past the rear axle.

There are many RR commuter busses.

[Elanlover]

transio, no offense but you're losing it a bit I think.

Originally Posted by transio

No, I got the majority of my list from other sources, I just didn't bother posting them.

Here, read these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_wheel_drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear_wheel_drive

Wik is not a reputable source. I can go post a definition there today if I wanted. Its an open source, community dictionary. Find me an engineer please. I did that for my evidence. For all we know the guys who did Phlyp's BMW ads posted their definitions there.


No, you posted no facts proving FWD's superiority.

You're right. That's because at no time have I ever, ever, ever said its superior. I repeatedly stated throughout this thread that I don't belive its superior. You aren't reading things thoroughly. Normally, i get very angry when people put words in my mouth but I'll let it pass for now. The worst you can acuse me of is saying that there were roughly equivalent. That, I did say.

It is NOT my theory. It's a well-known and indisputable fact. Why are you resisting my attempt to educate you to the facts? Please, go read something and stop arguing.

WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS? Do they even look anything like what I posted? Who provided them? What names? What experience levels? What facts? Sheesh, even the moderator suggestesd that what you've claimed about RWD isn't fact but misconception about FWD (sorry to bring you in on that Tim).


They did nothing of the sort. They made the best-handling FWD ever, BUT IT'S STILL INFERIOR TO MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY RWD SPORTS CARS. This is a fact that you seem to happily ignore, and you continue to resist facts that PROVE that this is the case BECAUSE it's FWD.

Hey, I've NEVER said what you've just claimed I've said. Show me where I said its superior. I think I've even agreed that there are many RWD cars that are "better" than the Elan. I can think of lots. I can think of lots of RWD sportscars that the Elan is superior to as well. Another Lotus in fact according to Hethel lap times. That's never been in anything I've said. Is this your example of providing facts?


You are being very civil, but you're completely ignoring all facts that prove you wrong. For this reason, it's impossible to have a civil debate with you. Are you toying with me or what?

You haven't given any facts. Sorry you don't agree but that's the truth. When you can do what I've done - provide a reputable, named source who can comment intelligently on the issue and then quote them accurately I'll be all ears (or eyes). I'm not toying with you. I want to have a debate based on facts not gut feel. I was couteous enough to go out, get my sources in order and provide evidence in support of my claim (whihc has never been anything more than FWD cars can be sportscars and/or a drivetrain platform does not determine if a car is a sportscar).

[PhlypSide]

Originally Posted by transio

There are many RR commuter busses.

Now those would be fun to see driven to the limit on a track or something hahaha!

[Elanlover]

Thanks Gawd................evidence!

Originally Posted by transio

Here's another article on FWD vs. RWD:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/020619.htm

Now, first of all, why on earth would you believe ANYONE from Canada??? They have NO credibility in automotive deign or engineering. They all live in igloos for pete's sake. They eat back bacon, drink beer and are generally no good. They....................wait a minute. I LIVE IN CANADA!

Damn.

Actually, I know Jim Kerr. Not extremely well but I know him (we don;t go for drinks every Friday night). He's written for The Star a lot and he helped me buy my Subaru XT coupe many years ago. I know a few AJAC types. He's a fairly knowledgable journalist. Not an expert in sportscars (he sticks mostly to your average run of the mill sedan type stuff) but good enough.

Now, in general, he's right. But, he is talking about general attributes of RWD and FWD cars, not sportscars. I think you could see that by looking at his comments about an advantage of FWD cars is that you don't get bumps in your interior. Important for a sedan but not a 2 seater if you know what I mean and hardly a differentiator when we are talking about driving a car on the track. He talks about a disadvatage being handling and I know he hasn't driven an M100..............ever. And, he talks about repair costs as an advantage to RWD. Hardly a factor in determing whether one platform makes for a better sportscar.

So, he makes some points which we all know are "generally" true but perhaps not entirely applicable in a purpose built sportscar like the Elan (or any RWD or FWD sportscar), which is the type of RWD and FWD car we are talking about. He's also confesses to being a RWD fan right in his article. So, I doubt he's entirely unbiased wouldn't you agree (in fact, at the end he's practically telling everyone to buy AWD if they can - go figure).

Still, I thank you for providing facts that we can debate. I don't think what you've provided is definitive or states anything we didn't already know but its clearly a statement from a reputable, knowledgeble source that we can debate.

Now, I don't think what he's said can counter what Lotus has said about FWD sportscars from my many posts soo long ago. Do you? And, once again, i'm not saying FWD is btter than RWD as a sportscar platform (neither did Lotus). I'm maintaining that the pros and cons for each are pretty close to equal provided you build the car right.

[smoseley]

For those who may believe that 2 sources aren't enough, here's more reading material:

http://ezinearticles.com/?FWD-vs.-RW...ter?&id=168248
http://www.themsj.com/media/storage/...www.themsj.com
http://www.front-runners.net/files/m...rontvsrear.pdf
http://www.xcelco.on.ca/~stevbike/recm1.htm

Need more? Go to the bookstore and flip through a book on auto technology basics. Unfortunately, the books I have on hand ("Engineering to Win", "Race Car Aerodynamics", and "Race Car Chassis Design and Construction") don't cover such basics, so I can't provide a quote from them. FWD is briefly mentioned in "Race Car Chassis Design" only in that it popularized the IRS (because dead-axles don't make sense), which later was found to help improve the performance of RWD vehicles, and in the 70s the common solid rear axle was replaced by the IRS in RWD sports cars. FWD's significance to performance engineering is summed up in two sentences total, in three 200 page books on racing.

[Elanlover]

Originally Posted by transio

I'm being nice to you. Be nice back by not completely ignoring my posts.

Hey, I am. You're just typing too fast for me Do me a favor and get off that FWD keyboard you're using. Get back on the RWD one you had earlier so I can keep up.