Originally Posted by Einstein RA (Post 6862698)

Yes perhaps it was generalistic God of the Underworld but you cannot defy physics even with your immortality. A four wheel drive chassis will have inherent understeer, a rear wheel drive chassis will have inherent oversteer. This is with a good set up on both cars, which given the nature of the discussion and the cars aforementioned was obvious(:rolleyes: ). The four wheel drive will afford more grip but not necessarily better handling.

Originally Posted by hades (Post 6862811)

"4wd not necessarilly better" is a bit of a backtrack from "rwd is always better", isn't it? :lol1: ;)

Inherent understeer is only necessarily there with 4wd if too much torque bias to the front or wrong weight distribution. So whilst scoobs usually err towards inherent understeer, that's not a criticism that's often levelled at EVOs.

For ultimate handling, I'd suggest inherent neutrality is the ideal, with provokable under and oversteer to enable the better drivers to adjust the attitude as required. The laws of physics (which I never wanted to change, but I am qualified to understand) suggest that to get true neutral handling you want to distribute the power to all 4 wheels in such a manner that all are at - but not over - the limit of adhesion. This is what super-AYC etc attempt to do.



If you prefer the feel of inherent oversteer (as handling is about so much more than ultimate grip), you adjust the torque bias towards the rear so those wheels slip first. If you prefer the safety margin of understeer to protect less skilled drivers, adjust the bias to the front.

My immortality or otherwise is irrelevant. :p