AWD vs RWD
#21
trucks really ??? IMO RWD = AWD depnds on driving style gearing how the awd is implimented and traction for both lower powered and higher powered cars. there are many rwd cars that eat awd for breakfast and vice versa
#22
what kind of logical sense does the comment "AWD = RWD" make in a thread where the differences between the two are already stated and broken down laying on the table in this thread so we can talk about them?
and why not trucks? nothing in my OP says that trucks cannot be the topic... 1.5 makes a good case on the topic from a diesel standpoint
Last edited by Morbid Intentions; 08-11-2011 at 04:36 AM.
#23
It all comes down to traction right? So depending on curb weight (and where it is centered), power, and tire width and type will tell you which drivetrain would be preferred. AWD might show an advantage on stock tires, but that traction advantage could easily be matched by a stickier set of rubber.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
#24
I think this really depends on which end of the spectrum we start on.. lower powered cars/street tires and the AWD will have a traction advantage.
When you start adding sticky tires, suspension, etc to both cars you start to get into an area where neither can go any faster and the advantage seems to go away. At this point the drivetrain loss/extra weight will be what seperates the two imho.
When you start adding sticky tires, suspension, etc to both cars you start to get into an area where neither can go any faster and the advantage seems to go away. At this point the drivetrain loss/extra weight will be what seperates the two imho.
#25
It all comes down to traction right? So depending on curb weight (and where it is centered), power, and tire width and type will tell you which drivetrain would be preferred. AWD might show an advantage on stock tires, but that traction advantage could easily be matched by a stickier set of rubber.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
#26
It all comes down to traction right? So depending on curb weight (and where it is centered), power, and tire width and type will tell you which drivetrain would be preferred. AWD might show an advantage on stock tires, but that traction advantage could easily be matched by a stickier set of rubber.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
AWD only has a big advantage in low traction conditions, just watch some rally racing.
#29
AWD's biggest advantage is really in "non-standard" traction conditions, dirt, rain, snow, ice etc.
In racing RWD wins out more often than not, simply because the added drivetrain loss vs the gained traction usually results in a slight performance drop overall. Even in road racing, where AWD may make a car easier to go around a turn with(but not necessarily better handling), it chews up more power and throttle response(and tire).
Plus, in a tight turn where the front wheels are cranked over pretty good, that puts a pretty large angle into the front joints. That huge joint angle creates a ton of force vectors that rob a lot of power...which then gets into the question of whether the extra drivetrain loss of AWD is worth it, considering you're losing a lot of power just to CV joint angle alone. Is whatever power that's getting to the front tires worth all the efficiency loss?
The fastest road course cars are still almost always RWD cars. Particularly in front engine cars where the extra weight up front of additional drivetrain makes the car even more nose heavy which has a pretty huge impact and handling.
And in drag racing, it doesn't take long to get to a point where you're transferring so much load to the rear that the front wheels do little more than steer the car.
In racing RWD wins out more often than not, simply because the added drivetrain loss vs the gained traction usually results in a slight performance drop overall. Even in road racing, where AWD may make a car easier to go around a turn with(but not necessarily better handling), it chews up more power and throttle response(and tire).
Plus, in a tight turn where the front wheels are cranked over pretty good, that puts a pretty large angle into the front joints. That huge joint angle creates a ton of force vectors that rob a lot of power...which then gets into the question of whether the extra drivetrain loss of AWD is worth it, considering you're losing a lot of power just to CV joint angle alone. Is whatever power that's getting to the front tires worth all the efficiency loss?
The fastest road course cars are still almost always RWD cars. Particularly in front engine cars where the extra weight up front of additional drivetrain makes the car even more nose heavy which has a pretty huge impact and handling.
And in drag racing, it doesn't take long to get to a point where you're transferring so much load to the rear that the front wheels do little more than steer the car.
I ask because my dad has a subaru with AWD and I have noticed that thing is a piece of **** in tight turns (steering is hard, and it has a terrible radius because of it).
Good info in this thread.
#30
Depends on your diffs and how your power is being applied. On the sti for instance you have a DCCT where you can change your power balance (front/rear split), sending more power to the back will battle understeer. Your diffs (center, front, and rear) are important to grab with the right wheel to optimize traction around a corner. When you take a hard corner you are getting lateral acceleration that will shift your weight balance. If you have a real stiff suspension your weight transfer will be minimal, but with awd this is less of an issue because you still have two powered wheels on either side that will keep the car pulling.