Reasons why front wheel drive sucks - FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com Message Board

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reasons why front wheel drive sucks

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    ooooh, you're my hero, not.must have taken that remidial physics class a couple of times to find all that in the book. If the front of the car caint lunge in the air, more weight stays in the font, where it benifits fwd. Deal w/it [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img]
    1978 Formula 461 in progress of being built :rock:
    2013 Ram 1500 Big Horn

    former owner of 85 bird w/ 2.8 - 3.4 - 3800 II - 5.0
    94 comero 3.4

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by KBeezy:
      As for 10 second Grand Prixs you're comparing L67s to L36s ;) Factory blown vs Factory NA. Show me L36s running 10s and 11s, haha.
      There are 3 L36s off the top of my head running 11s. Matt M runs an 11.2 in an Monte with a centrifucial and only engine mod being a cam. Turbo tim runs an 11.5 with a just 1.7 rockers and a turbo. There is another turbo car running 11s that I dont know much about. [img]smile.gif[/img]
      92 S10 3800 A4(96)<br />1/4: 14.374 @ 92.25 w/ 1.976 60\'<br />Turbo and 12\'s Coming Soon!

      Comment


      • #33
        [/qb][/QUOTE]I want to quote this post specificlly. 200HP in a 2300lb car WILL MOST CERTAINLY NOT be slow. SRT4's are perfect examples of this, they have 220HP in a 2800lb car and do low 14's stock w/ an average driver. A 2300 lbs with 200HP will actually do low 13's

        http://robrobinette.com/et.htm

        Why waste time and money into modding a V6 Fbody? Sure, you might end up with a 12 second car, but after how much money? In the end, you could do a H/C swap on a Z28 and do 11's. Not down playing you guys here, you just have no right to use the logic on "its a waste to modify a Honda" as essentially you're doing the same thing. Face it V6 fbody's aren't performance cars. They exist soley for people who want the look of a performance car, without the performance. [/QB][/QUOTE]

        I was about to bring that up myself. He was talking about 200 hp in a 2,300 lb car being slow, when some of ours came with 200 hp and weigh about half a ton more!
        2000 3.8L Firebird, Silver Metallic<br /><br />\"Yes, London. You know, fish, chips, cup o\' tea, bad food, worse weather, Mary f***in\' Poppins, London!!\"

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by KBeezy:
          Fact remains, and you cant argue with it. RWD is much more reliable than FWD.
          A transaxle is the tranny, driveshaft and rearend all in one. So add up all those failures in rwd and they probably come out very close.
          92 S10 3800 A4(96)<br />1/4: 14.374 @ 92.25 w/ 1.976 60\'<br />Turbo and 12\'s Coming Soon!

          Comment


          • #35
            the fwd setup is a little more complicated than rwd since the front wheels provide power and need to steer the vehicle. enter the cv joint. its relatively fragile typically having a rubber boot holding in the grease. it can be difficult/expensive to make repairs with fwd due to the 'complicated' setup. the differential being a sealed metal box is a little more durable.

            oversteer is bad (and quite dangerous). understeer is preferred. its always easier to turn the wheel more than "un-turn" the wheel. go read the suspension forum.

            Comment


            • #36
              have fun towing something with front wheel drive... thats so ghey
              96 Camaro M5. Dark metallic gree (?dont know the offical color name)<br />Home made Intake :: Headers, 3inch headers back to Flowmaster muffler :: spec stage 3 clutch Now installed, waiting for 3.42\'s and LSD next month<br /><a href=\"http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/RiceEatingCamaro/?action=view&current=newcar.jpg\" target=\"_blank\">My Car</a> <br /><br />Totalled Car.<br /><a href=\"http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/k/sk8er305/\" target=\"_blank\">96 CamaroRS</a>

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Tyler:
                have fun towing something with front wheel drive... thats so ghey
                I would consider anything without a frame trying to tow to be ghey. [img]smile.gif[/img]
                92 S10 3800 A4(96)<br />1/4: 14.374 @ 92.25 w/ 1.976 60\'<br />Turbo and 12\'s Coming Soon!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by nikon:
                  </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 3.4 slow to go:
                  It's obvious that you have very limited fwd experiance
                  learn to spell, and if you must know I have had my share of FWD experiance :rolleyes: fact is no matter what you do the laws of physics kicks in. weight transfers to the rear. An object in motion wants to stay in motion, object at rest wants to stay at rest. Thus being the reason the front end lunges up in the air when you accelerate. Your back wheels act as a balance point, where all the weight transfers. This putting all the traction at those rear tires. Its the laws of physics deal w/it [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]oh my god he spelled a word wrong, lets throw his whole arguement out the window and shove it in his face. :rolleyes:

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    1. its the internet, spelling is overrated.

                    2. FWD sucks b/c the engine is in the car sideways
                    RedlineVSix

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RedFrk13:
                      </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KBeezy:
                      Fact remains, and you cant argue with it. RWD is much more reliable than FWD.
                      A transaxle is the tranny, driveshaft and rearend all in one. So add up all those failures in rwd and they probably come out very close. </font>[/QUOTE]hmm. My point exactly. Much more complex, much more prone to breakage. ;) I want to see a FWD transaxle put down the same power as a Ford 9" or GM 12 bolt run for run day after day [img]smile.gif[/img]
                      Mustangs.. Come to the darkside...<br /><br />The dark side is the path to the shadow of greed. =D

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by camaro_speedemon:
                        </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BirdOfPrey01:
                        It's obvious that anyone who thinks FWD works with drag racing is a moron. It is just delt with because no other options are avaliable for the type of cars people are modifying.

                        First of all, modifying a 120 horsepower FWD economy daily driver point A to Point B car is totally a waste of money. Bolt-on's to N/A 4 cylinder car are a huge waste of time and money, anyone want to argue that? How much power can you possible summon from bolting on headers/exhuast/intake upgrades on a 1.6 - 2.4 litre 120-150 horsepower economy engine?

                        Seriously, if you can gain 50 horsepower, thats great, but for the price you pay is it worth it? A car that weighs 2300 pounds and makes 200 horsepower will still be slow. Your not going to make 13's even low 14's anytime soon thats for sure.

                        And another note for FWD debate...

                        I gaurentee that just about 99.999 percent of all Grand Prix GTP owners that modified their car for race, they all wish their car was a RWD platform.
                        If you can argue that on a performance/race subject, be my guest, be my guest put your bullsh*t to the test [img]smile.gif[/img]
                        I want to quote this post specificlly. 200HP in a 2300lb car WILL MOST CERTAINLY NOT be slow. SRT4's are perfect examples of this, they have 220HP in a 2800lb car and do low 14's stock w/ an average driver. A 2300 lbs with 200HP will actually do low 13's

                        http://robrobinette.com/et.htm

                        </font>[/QUOTE]Look at the neon srt-4 power band...

                        It's turbocharged, it makes lots of torque all around.

                        Do you think a 220 horsepower N/A 4 cylinder 2.4 litre engine VS a turbocharged 220 horsepower 2.4 litre engine will be equal?

                        Because they wont...

                        So why does the neon SRT-4 completely blow away the Acura RSX if they only a 10-15 horsepower away from eachother?

                        Because the neon makes 215+ foot pounds of torque through most of its power band and the Acura RSX struggles to make 145 foot pounds fo torque at 7500+ rpm.

                        They both roughly weigh around 3000 pounds.

                        Have you ever seen the turbocharged suzuki swifts?
                        They are 1500-1700 pounds cars that people push 250+ horsepower through and they make 12 second passes.

                        Forced induction is the only way to go, but FI on some cars is hopeless.... most honda's, 3rd gen eclipse, and so on [img]smile.gif[/img]

                        Why waste time and money into modding a V6 Fbody? Sure, you might end up with a 12 second car, but after how much money? In the end, you could do a H/C swap on a Z28 and do 11's. Not down playing you guys here, you just have no right to use the logic on "its a waste to modify a Honda" as essentially you're doing the same thing. Face it V6 fbody's aren't performance cars. They exist soley for people who want the look of a performance car, without the performance.
                        Why not? The 3800 is by far one of the best engine designs GM has ever built.

                        They make alot of torque under boost and they are not weak by any means.

                        LS1 F-bodies are not exactly cheap, and if you find a cheap one they are usually beatin up pretty good. Heads and cam swap on an LS1 is by far expensive. And if you blow up your LS1, well you are deffinately in a world of hurt. I don't know about you but the dime a dozen saying doesnt fit the LS1. The average price for a used LS1 "Short" Block is $1500.

                        I could buy almost 5 or more, 3800 v6 short blocks for that cost.

                        [ January 17, 2005, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: BirdOfPrey01 ]

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by 3.4 slow to go:
                          ooooh, you're my hero, not.must have taken that remidial physics class a couple of times to find all that in the book. If the front of the car caint lunge in the air, more weight stays in the font, where it benifits fwd. Deal w/it [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img]
                          No offense, but that is absolutely retarded.
                          Please do not attempt to argue that FWD cars launch better than RWD cars... just watch those FWD drag cars, even with giant wheelie bars planting the car on the ground they spin like crazy off the line every time. If you weren't so busy making fun of him for the "remedial physics class", if there is even such a thing, you would realize that is all you need to prove the point he is making.
                          <b><a href=\"http://members.cox.net/95batmobile/d86f.jpg\" target=\"_blank\">Sinister Six©</b></a><br /><a href=\"http://www.sounddomain.com/id/95batmobile\" target=\"_blank\">My \'95 Bird</a><br />I am not afraid of storms, for I am learning how to sail my ship.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            ricer physics class, yea...

                            Drag racing + FWD + Benfit do not match, they have no relation.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by 3.4 slow to go:
                              BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA If the front of the car caint lunge in the air, more weight stays in the font, where it benifits fwd. Deal w/it [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/slap.gif[/img]
                              Thankyou you proved my point. MORE being the operative word, IF you do your airbag setup and put all the weight in the front. yes at a standstill it may LOOK as if it were to launch better and it would if there were nor remidial laws of physics. but fact it no matter how much weight you put in the front of an object weight will ALWAYS transfer to the rear if accelerating in a forward motion. So now all that weight you put in the front just wants to go to the back. ever notice the fwd drag cars that their wheelie bars are touching the ground when they launch? they're trying to fight physics, just like your trying to fight me. They elongate the car in order to lay more weight on those front tires. It's still not perfect and not optimal. It never will be. And if you must, dont deal w/it :rolleyes: [img]graemlins/wavey.gif[/img]

                              [ January 17, 2005, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: nikon ]

                              "Money can't buy me happiness, but I'm happiest when I can buy what I want"
                              05' CTS-V
                              00' Camaro - SOLD :(

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                looks like you caint deal w/it. [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img]
                                1978 Formula 461 in progress of being built :rock:
                                2013 Ram 1500 Big Horn

                                former owner of 85 bird w/ 2.8 - 3.4 - 3800 II - 5.0
                                94 comero 3.4

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                FORUM SPONSORS

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X