Mega

After watching "Top gear" and seeing the Audi eat the BMW M3 i was wondering if any thing, front or rear wheel drive performance car could ever beat a 4-wheel drive performance car?

Or will they always be quicker?

sammyh

iTrader: (1)

A rear wheel drive car is usually the better bet, four wheel drive is a good all rounder.

Ralf

F1 logic says you steer the front wheels with the steering wheel and the rear wheels with the throttle.

After having been in the passenger seat at the Nürburgring while John Felstead passed two 300+ hp Escort Cosworths in the wet with his Impreza Sport (that's FWD and 115hp for you) I can tell you there are more things than the number of driven wheels that make a car fast.

BOB.T

4WD only comes into it's own when grip levels become an issue, you don't see many 4WD F1 cars do you!

I'm not dissing 4WD, they are good but not unbeatable

screechmr2

but on top gear the fastest cars round the track are rwd.

johnfelstead

hate to tell you this Ralf but my Impreza Sport was AWD.

No, 4WD isnt the be all and end all, like everything else car related, it depends on the circumstances and what it is your comparing.

F1 doesnt use 4WD because its banned.

Mycroft

No!

Mmmmm

4wheel drive, rear drive, front wheel drive it's all about grip.

Strange track result on the top gear test.

The mags get the M3 having more grip, it's lighter and faster, on a dry track you might have expected it to win ?

The Old RS4 380bhp although quicker in a straight line than the M3 was slower round the ring and the shorter Hockenhiem circuit
RS4 M3
Nürburgring Runde 8.25 min 8.22 min
Hockenheim Runde 1.18,2 min 1.17,6 min


Although Top Gear did get the "soft" 2wd alpina Z8 auto to go round as fast as the 4wd Lambo Muiricelo ?

jameswrx

iTrader: (4)

you can't compare different cars ie m3 vs audi

like everyone has said there are many factors..

the only way to test the difference would be (asuming fwd stands no chance)..

two cars (m3 for example), both identical apart from one being converted to 4wd, same driver, same track, same weather conditions etc, etc

Cosworth427

Unless you're at very top levels of organised motorsports, it really doesnt make a difference where the wheels are driven. Mini Coopers have been successful with FWD, The majority of touring cars are FWD and FWD Vauxhall Astras have been doing great against RWD BMWs.

AWD doesnt make a RWD car "grip" more on a track circuit, "grip" is down to tires, weight distribution and suspension geometry. AWD makes it easier to recover the car (easier to drive fast in most cases), it makes use of all available wheels when at least one wheel is no longer driving the car. AWD takes advantage by using an extra 1 or 2 driving wheels as opposed to a RWD/FWD that uses just 1 when the other driving wheel becomes "unloaded" during a corner or hard acceleration.

Most road performance cars are well sorted anyhow. Anti-roll bars, strut bracing, fully independent suspension, LSD's and decent weight distribution means FWD and RWD wheels are getting enough load and traction when cornering.

Skittles

To answer your question, please see the attcahed link http://www.track-challenge.com/main_...mparison_e.asp

It contains track times for a lot of cars for a side by side comparison.

The M3 beats the RS4, so would be surprised if it does not beat the (new) S4 around the Nuerburgring.

The M3 is 22 seconds(!) faster than the old S4 around the Nuerburgring, and 3 seconds faster then the RS4, and olnly 2 seconds slower than a RS6. ALSO, the new S4 is tested on the TRACKTEST section. Almost 2 secs a lap slower than a RWD M3.

Basically, the top gear test was one particular track, i.e. tight slow corners - 4WD has better TRACTION.

On a handling and quicker circuit the M3 should be quicker - due to a lower weight (did you see the straight line test) and better HANDLING.

Anyway I picked on those as an example as they were mentioned above. This comparison goes for a lot of other cars i.e. when comparing RWD and 4WD.



[Edited by Skittles - 5/27/2003 1:54:56 PM]

chrispy200+

iTrader: (2)

yes 4wd is beatable, a well set up RWD car will beat one if driven by a competent driver. 4wd just makes an average driver better as it is a lot easier. Nearly all sports cars are RWD, says something really

si325i

Skittle
nice link

Brun

Does anyone remember the TT thread

Audi TT / Subaru
Round Time Nuerburgring 8.49 min / 8.37 min
Round Time Hockenheim 1.20,4 min /1.19,4 min

[Edited by Brun - 5/27/2003 4:13:06 PM]

slippyr4

What about having RWD and 4WD at the same time, a la skyline GT-R? not many cars have got round the 'ring quicker.

Skittles

Brun: what was the TT/Scooby thread?

juan

not many (ie none) serious quarter mile cars bother with 4WD do they?

4WD is only quicker for the first second or two off the line. then the advantage is lost.

Brun

Here you go Skittles

Skittles

Brun: ooooooh yessss THAT thread! How could I forget!

Juan: Agreed. If the TG test track was at say Bedford (medium fast, sweeping bends), I suspect the top cars would be further ahead, and the S4 would fall back quite a bit (relatively speaking ofcourse).

Edited to say that the title of this thread holds true in the wet!



[Edited by Skittles - 5/27/2003 5:05:15 PM]

Jay m A

iTrader: (2)

If F1 were allowed AWD then they'd probably all be AWD by now. But its all about rules. If they were allowed to be as light as possable then maybe not, who knows.

I believe Audi had something to say about the AWD arguement in the BTCC a few years back, were so heavily wieght penalised they withdrew. BTW the rear drive BMW's are always penalised against the FWD racers. Thats why theres only 3 or so teams in it these days. Forgive me if I'm a tad wrong, haven't watched BTCC for years....

Paul_M

I'm sure AWD was totally banned from the BTCC a good few years back after having significant weight penalties when it was allowed.

I remember the Audis often destroyed the opposition if it was a wet race even with the extra weight penalty due to traction becoming much more of an issue. In the dry though much of the advantage was lost and the weight often made them uncompetetive. In my opinion though I reckon they'd still have performed better than the FWD/RWD cars if the weight penalty wasn't applied.

I reckon that in most cases when the front tyres aren't using all their traction for cornering and the rear tyres aren't providing so much thrust that the fronts are lifting off the ground (like most bikes will do at full throttle) then there's an advantage to be had to applying some of the power to the front wheels in proportion to the traction split (rear obviously having significantly more due to weight shifting).

It seems to me to be analogous to applying the brakes to the rear wheels with much lower force than the fronts due to the weight diving forward under braking. The bias has to be set right for the conditions and it can also affect balance in a similar way to power delivery. Which is why the best AWD systems such as the rally cars have sophisticated differential systems to maximise power distribution in various conditions.

MGJohn

I used to watch the BTCC a few years ago when the BMWs and later the AUDIs were competing. IIRC, the only time the RWD BMWs showed up well was during a relatively dry race season with few if any rain washed circuits. Anything less than dry tracks saw the BMWs struggling with plenty of 'off into the scenery' stuff. In most conditions, before they were penalised with weight and finally banned, when the Audis were competing it was no contest. Purely from an observer's standpoint, I got the impression that the AUDIs always won with a lot in hand and could have really left the opposition for dead if they so desired but that would have revealed their hand.

MGJohn

Those AUDI BTCC race cars were probably the most effective advertising that company could have wished for in the UK. Money very well spent. Prior to those impressive BTCC successes, AUDIs were nowhere near as frequent a sight on UK roads as they were following that BTCC participation. Racing successes sell cars.

Back in what was it, 1995 when the Flying Scot won the WRC in his Subaru, that marque too was a rare sight on local roads. That soon changed and now they too are almost as common as AUDIs are now locally. Even two years ago that was not the case.

Motor Racing successes sell cars!

MGJohn

I too watched the M3 -Audi thing on the box. Come to think of it, the Audi is a thoroughbred having been developed from those race car successes...

jonathanf

The BMW lost pure and simple because there track has too many slow speed corners where the M3 could not get the traction out of them in order to win.

M3 beats S4 on all normal race tracks where bends are not so slow or are combined with much higher spped ones.

As for 2wd/4wd argument in the dry a Carrera 2, beats a Carrera 4 on most tracks, so 4wd is not as invincible as some of you guys seem to think.

323GTR

Back in the days when 4wd was the current industry 'thing' to have, and manufacturers were producing 4wd versions of almost every model (I think Audi did most with 'quattro' versions of the entire range...) one of the mags (Autocar?) did a test of various 2wd cars against their 4wd versions, model for model. From what I can recall, firstly if the cars had less than 200 BHP the penalties offset the gains, and the gains were only really in low speed traction or on low grip surfaces. From memory they did various handling circuits in wet and dry, straight line performance and slaloms, and the differences between 2 and 4wd were minimal in most instances. Only powerful cars showed traction advantages on poor surfaces.

4WD is clearly the way to go on snow and gravel, and has proved in rallying to unbeatable there.

si325i

isn't the 306 (?)wrc fwd faster on tarmac than the 4WD?
a few year back.

Cosworth427

~sighs~

AGAIN! For road cars and non-top level motorsports, it doesnt matter where the damn wheels are driven!

Comparing the M3 to that S4 is like apples and oranges. You cant say "Ya, 4WD rules because the S4 beat the M3.". What made the damn difference is the work done to get as much aggregate wheel contact patch to the road and without losing the wheel specified geometry to the ground. (Control of camber and toe deviation). This is why FWD cars like Integra Type-R and Focus RS handle so well.

Some of you homologated rally car fans really need to open your minds a bit.




[Edited by Cosworth427 - 5/29/2003 1:05:04 AM]