I always assumed 4WD would handle better but a friend told me it's RWD and that on a track the RWD would be faster around the corners. Is this true?

Cheers benni.

 

Depends on the individual cars, but ultimately 4wd is normally an advantage.

Formula 1 cars cope ok with RWD only though!

 

I said i told him i was pretty sure 4WD was better and he said 'Why do you think all super cars are RWD' which made me wonder. lol

 

If you are talking about cars with the engine in the front, then undoubtabley 4wd is a big advantage.

 

Yes mate i'm talking about hot hatches, I told him 'I would love a 4WD focus RS' And he said 'Why when RWD handles better' And so on we have argued it ever since lol.

 

Why is the bugatti veyron 4 wheel drive then...?

 

So much more to it than just how many wheels are driven TBH

And on small cars 4wd can be quite a big weight penalty.

 

Fair enough.

 

Are you talking about handling or roadholding/grip?

Given 2 cars with the same size tyres on and all intents and purposes the same?
If the 4wd car tries to put the power on earlier out of a corner, i.e. while the tyre is still subject to lateral input or "cornering force" it's probably going to "work" it's tyres less as the longitudinal inputs or motive force is applied - the same amount of power is being dished out to four wheels so the overall forces on the driven wheels will be less. In effect, you are less likely to exceed the overall tractive forces of the tyre i.e. break traction in a lateral or forward direction.

Tyres on a car don't become blessed with more grip if they are on a 4wd car.

Handling is a bit of a different thing

 

er lamborghini gallardo,murcielago,some diablo's.bugatti veyron,porsche 911 comes in both 2wd and 4wd.there are lots.oh and lets see the rwd saff keep with the evo 6!your mate needs to have a chat with himself i think.

 

They aren't though!

All Lamborghinis are now 4wd for a start!

Porsche 911 Turbos have been 4wd for years and the 959 was 4wd.

Even Ferrari are currently testing a 4wd mule with a 612 body.

and the fastest supercar of all time, the Bugatti Veyron is 4wd!

 

I still maintain handling is different to roadholding/grip.

Handling is more difficult to "quantify" than what can pull the most 'g'.

 

Spot on Mike1

 

Once the power to weight exceeds a point where the car struggles to put this power to the ground, that is where 4wd will have an advantage (but only in exiting corners). It may not "handle" any better or worse, but it will be able to accelerate out of the corner sooner. However, once it has done that, the 2wd car may still perform better once out of the corner, due to less transmission losses, so although the entry speed is similar, and the exit speed maybe slightly higher in the 4x4, the speed by the end of the straight will probably be no different to two similar powered cars due to the transmission losses.

This is why the Skyline did so well in racing (it has the best of both worlds), it had the similar entry speed as the RS500s, similar corner speed, but could exit MUCH faster and then maintain that gap because it reverted back to 2wd until it was needed again, so no greater transmission losses than the RS500s on the straights. In the wet, the Skyline was UNBEATABLE.

 

and that is the good thing about nissan oceanliner onlu use,s 4wd when needed get that box in a cossie

 

Because it's trying to lay 1000 ponys on the tarmac and being rich enough to afford one doesn't mean you can drive

 

yep 4x4 makes a bad driver good

 

yep 4x4 makes a bad driver good

 

Twice as good?

 

only twice

 

Not trying to pick, but what has the straight line speed got to do with handling?
The Bugatti may be the fastest, but might not be the best handling.
Porsche, yes the turbo is 4wd, but forgive me if I'm wrong, the drivers cars that Porsche sell, GT3 and GT2 are both rwd???
I think mr Rainbird got it right, untill power cant be laid down, the advantage of 4wd is not significant.
And whoever it was that compared a Saff to a Evo, come on, different world of cars, not to mention the 10 or so years difference in age/technology.

 

Chunk.

that was me.and yes i know all too well the difference in years.but even so a rwd saff or 3 dr has no way of staying with an evo unless the druver is a dumbass.even the 4x4 saff has a tail happy tendency compared to an evo due to its power bias.if you want a better comparison then put a rwd against the audi quattro.saff loses full stop.

and i love my saff but facts are facts

 

Where have I mentioned handling?!?!??!

His mate said 'ALL supercars are RWD'

I was merely pointing out that they are not!

P.S you missed out the Carrera GT when talking about Porsche

 

lee mate you missed your off the end so i'll do it for you

 

Doh, I shall award myself a
My Porsche statement was simply showing that although the 911 Turbo is 4wd, the supercar version, GT2 is RWD.
Anyway enough of me digging a hole....

 

Punk lol

 

sorry matey couldnt resist.

 

2 valid cars to do this comparison with would be a std 2wd Sapphire and a std 4x4 Sapphire.

Which "handles" the best? Handling is different things to different people.
I can remember the Ford SVE guy said that although the 4wd car was a safer one for Joe Public in the wet, his chassis development engineers preferred the handling of the rwd cars. I think it was the May 1990 issue


Performance Car mag did a test like this with the 525i BMW vs 525ix some years ago - in terms of steady state lateral g there was almost no difference

 

Nothing like a few sweeping statements to liven a thread up:

The fastest track cars are RWD
The fastest 1/4 mile cars are RWD

See a pattern?





The statements above may not be true

 

Here's one for you re handling.
When they came out new, the rwd Sapphire Cosworth was compared inevitably to the E30 M3.
2 rwd saloons - both around 200bhp, both around same weight, both wearing 205 width tyres ( optional of
slightly larger on the BMW ).

Which car in std format would be quicker on a racetrack - the "better" handling one? Or the torquier one?

 

Which racetrack?

 

Castle Combe ( before it had chicanes in ), Donnington and Cadwell Park

 

rwd for racing cars

4wd for rally cars for loose surfaces etc

 

I would think the 'better handling' car would be quicker at Coombe, but slower at Donnington. Dont kno about Cadwell park to decide.

I would think that there would be very little in it though.

 

talking from experience that 4WD understeer.... RWD oversteer... im sure i know what one i prefer, oversteer.

understeer is scarier

 

cheeky dog
yep they do and i agree.but if provoked the 4x4 can do what you want,just be ready for it to snap back

 

Factory settings on a 4wd and a rwd car generally tend towards understeer. But, like most things, they can be altered. RWDs get a bad name for oversteer, but its normally down to driver error, rather than the car itself.

 

So which in your eyes, for argument's sake is the better handling one ( new standard cars compared ) out of the 2?

 

I'll play Devil's Advocate and say BMW (even though I know that the Sapphire was claimed to be better ) .

 

The Ford was quicker at all 3 tracks according to the comparisons at the time - maybe the journos got promised free press cars...