Morbid Intentions

Just figured I would make another thread so as not to rob the spotlight from the MS6 vs. 3.7L thread

anyone ever track (1/4 mile obviously) both platforms? I'm curious as to what everyone thinks about each and the advantages and disadvantages of each in comparison... I hear a lot of different things from a lot of different people... all of which conflict with every other thing I hear

is AWD as hard to launch as people say it is? is it harder than a properly setup RWD platform? what about stock for stock?

IMO if you put a seasoned vet behind a stock AWD platform and a seasoned vet behind a stock RWD platform, the AWD platform is going to prevail on the launch... but dependent on power, weight, gearing and aero if that initial lead is going to last

however, I think that a properly setup RWD platform will outlaunch a modded AWD platform... I just think there is more traction to be had in aftermarket parts on the RWD platform

thoughts? there really is no wrong answer here... just curious and fishing for info

Stone629

I have. Had a 2006 WRX for a few months and made a few passes. The whole "it launches harder than a RWD" thing is BS. It simply gets traction better with your average Joe behind the wheel than a street tired RWD. If both are driven right, each launch just as easily as the other. In my experience, I pulled 2.1 and 2.0 60s in the WRX just like I usually did in my RWD cars. The AWD cars just use a different technique, much like launching a FWD car. In a FWD car(usually F/I small displacement) you bring the RPM up, then feather the clutch so you don't spin, or drop the RPM too low and bog. The same technique pertains to an AWD car, only its not spinning your worrying about as much as bogging. A turbo AWD 4 banger just doesn't have the power to overcome all four wheels grabbing, and will bog if dumped (excluding aftermarket turbo cars). I always had to feather the clutch in my WRX with the RPM pretty high, or it would choke down enough to ruin the launch. I would take a RWD and keep the top end Vs being able to run street tires, hook up, but sacrifice power loss through the AWD.

mrtstang

My one buddy has a stock 2006 Trail Blazer SS AWD. He was recently telling me about a buddy of his who had the same year TB (bone stock as well) but has RWD. He said from a dig he would pull him slightly, but once things got moving the RWD SS would slowly pass him everytime, and from a roll on race he would lose everytime.

My guess would be that the difference in rotational forces and whatnot made the difference.

Morbid Intentions

well that and the AWD trailblaizers are substantially heavier... combine those two issues with a stock automatic (no way to get a good AWD launch) and you have a slower truck IMO

Stone629

There's about a 400 pound difference, on top of the extra drivetrain loss.

S8ER01Z

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.

97tplsGT

400lbs?! Jeez, thats a lotta extra **** added to the drivetrain!

Good info here, I had always thought "hey, its awd, thats awesome, no spinning" etc. But a couple years ago my brother pointed out what ya'll are saying here, easier to bog down off the launch, and more drivetrain loss.

72MachOne99GT

I agree with you for ALMOST the entire thing.

However, I would imagine that UNTIL you reach a point where the rear tires are overwhelmed (which is somewhere over 6,000+ HP) a RWD set up takes full advantage of the transfer of weight.

Of course, that's no longer street car world either.

Stone629

Thats true about the weight transfer thing. A good example is the SRT-8 GC. It will/can light up one of the front tires pretty easy. Its a prime example of a lot of weight being taken off the front drive wheels on launch and being less effective. It only gets worse as the torque increases. I think they would be a hell of a lot faster if they ditched the AWD and went with a healthy set of slicks.

perfect.disguise

Sure AWD has more drivetrain loss than RWD, then again the same goes for RWD vs FWD. There might be differences in gearing, weight, powerband, etc between cars but 250whp in an Evo is still 250whp after all the loss. If I could have a choice between the same car in fwd, awd, or rwd I would have to go with AWD.