Pros and Cons: FWD, RWD and AWD
 

I was just wondering about your thoughts on what driveline do you prefer and why? And also some insight on what are the pros and cons.

I am assuming RWD is superior since almost all sports cars are RWD. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It all depends on what you plan on doing with the car. Main reason why most cars are FWD is because it's cheaper, to some extent safer and less of a loss to the wheels in concern to hp.

Go wiki wiki it.

2+2=4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_wheel_drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_wheel_drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear_wheel_drive

I was just thinking about it after looking at the coming Audi TT, sure looks nice bt its a FWD

I don't like FWD because I don't like power and steering being taken care of by the same wheels.

I don't like AWD because its dynamics often remind me of FWD, though some cars can overcome this.

I prefer RWD because I like dynamics a lot - you can bring the tail around easier and they're far less prone to understeer. Might not be the fastest around the track 100% of the time, but I think it's the most fun, and having fun is the reason I race.

I'm not sure if it is available yet but for sure the TT will be available in Quattro AWD.

I think the new TT will follow the old ones models, one model being front drive with a turbo 4 cyl, top model being the 3.2 v6 with quattro and the dual clutch transmission.

Back to topic though to each is their own when choosing power delivery. though rear drive is the basis of motor sports it does favor faster speeds (nascar, indy, drag), but for more cornering all wheel drive usually takes the cake. Anyone follow time attack racing?? its usually very close being rear drive and All drive time wise, mainly cuz i believe All drive will favor more turns.

I used to be a bit of a RWD whore. However, I have driven some blazingly fast front and all wheel drive cars. I like going blazingly fast, so I like anything that goes blazingly fast. I'm starting to get a real hard on for short wheelbase front wheel drive race cars.

They can all be quite fun, especially when setup properly. However, until the day I see RWD or FWD banned from a race series I'll stop thinking RWD is superior. ;) For fun and practicality in an area with inclement weather, for me, it just doesn't get better than AWD. Rocketing off from a stop without feeling like a jackass because you squeal your tires. If set up well you can still get it tail happy. Tons of fun in bad weather. Often higher cornering and exit speeds on a track (again, when setup well). Inspires a lot of confidence and can get you out jams that FWD and RWD wouldn't be able to.

The cons of AWD: higher drivetrain loss, more parts to break and often more wear and tear on the tranny and clutch if not driven well. If not set up properly can be understeery. No big smokey burnouts of you like that sorta thing.

FWD is always a handicap if big power is your goal. There are some amazingly agile FWD cars (Integra Type R, SRT-4 ACR, Mazdaspeed 3, Cobalt SS, Mini Cooper S, Alfa Romeo 147 GTA, etc) but inherently there are traction issues when the tires you use to steer are also powering the vehicle. I've never owned a truly agile RWD car like the RX-8 or M3 but rear wheel drive is the traditonal favorite going back 75 years. The weight is distributed better and a well designed RWD sports car is very tossable and neutral. It's a great platform in the hands of an experienced driver. AWD (not to be confused with 4WD) is sorta like the new kid on the block. I'm not going to write a paragraph about how great I think my own AWD car is, but I will mention that it'll take one helluvan RWD car to replace the AWD platform in my car buying future. As metalurgy and electronic drivetrain technology improves I think we'll see a day when ALL car models are offered in an AWD trim. Manufacturers are constantly developing ways to reduce drivetrain loss through better engineering and lightweight alloys. Keep an eye on the forthcoming Nissan Skyline GT-R. The previous generation GT-R's ATTESA AWD system was on the cutting edge of technolgy. It has a rear bias setup so the car really found a following with the more traditional RWD driving purists. Nissan will surely have something amazing up their sleeves for the new model. I'm already planning to sell a kidney and half of my liver for a down payment if need be. ;)

I love RWD and told my friend who used to had AWD,
he buys a RWD but paranoid about tailspin,
sold the RWD got a FWD,
he managed to spin the FWD too,
now thinking of getting AWD again.

I think he sucks in driving but in his mind he says he'd been there done that kinda of thing.

Bottomline: Don't matter which is better, the most important part is the driver

I'd have to vote for AWD (especially if it has a RWD bias) or RWD but it is up to the driver. All of the instructs at the Skip Barber school run SRT4's. They will out run faster AWD and RWD cars because the guy or gal behind the wheel only thinks they now what they are doing.

I know I don't know what I'm doing that is why I purchase cars and used to purchase bikes that were forgiving of the less skilled.

apparently its easier to make a FWD into AWD bt RWD to AWD is more difficult. Someone correct me if I am wrong

Its an endless debate, especially with ever increasing tire technology and electronic aids that complicate it, which is part of the reason why RWD seem to be making a comeback.

From a practical point of view? FWD has obvious cost advantages, fewer parts to break, many packaging advantages and weight advantages – a clear winner!

But from a performance POV, I’d only consider AWD and RWD. Comparing the two, RWD is most likely to be lighter, usually with better weight distribution, and better natural lateral grip (with less load on the fronts). AWD has obvious poor weather advantages, and even in the dry it has traction advantages at low speeds or in low speed corners. So no clear winner when talking street cars.

But where it counts most to me is in feel, especially at 10/10ths. This is why I prefer RWD and its inherent qualities that translate into a more predictable response, better steering feel, better transient behavior, a more toss-able nature. AWD’s have always felt like FWD to me, with the same predominate understeer followed by snap oversteer characteristics that I never enjoyed. That said, I've only drove two makes of AWD cars - Audi's and Subaru's - which plow big time. Yes, tuning can always make a FWD/AWD/RWD exhibit driving characteristics that is less natural to them, but in a convincing manner?

I hope this does not swell Ike's head but...
(AWD + PDC) > *

FWD is for Soccer Mom's and cheap cars.

RWD is for real drivers.

AWD is for people who want RWD but the only way they get is with an AWD option.

I think my next car will be AWD.

Advantages and disadvantages for the different drivetrains are more readily found, but can I ask a question about optimal cornering techniques for each drivetrain?

I understand that when cornering with an FWD you try to keep the weight up front when it matters, cut into the apex earlier than RWD to keep the load up front, and left-foot brake to modulate understeer if necessary. What about AWD? I'm not familiar enough with them.

Most AWD systems are either front biased or in the case of the evo completely FWD until the system senses a need to shift power. I would think if you like AWD but want more control a STI would be good since you can shift most if not all the power to the rear via the DCCD. Most times I’d think you would want the system to handle it since it will do a better job. With the DCCD once you shift it, it stays that way until you turn it off or change is yourself. The system in the G35 is nice because it carries over the characteristics of RWD with a RWD bias to begin with. I hear Audi will be or maybe has already started doing this.

There was a TopGear video that did a comparison of FWD, AWD and RWD but they took it off google video. It was a nice visual comparison. RWD is making a comeback because you now have VDC, TC, blah blah blah that limit slip and keep you from spinning out. I’ve had it pop on several times in the 8 on wet roads.

You can think that but you'd be wrong. When it comes to feel, handling, and control, the Evo is better than the STI; especially in the feel department.

I believe Ike is right on this, superimposed image of an EVO and STI on BMI taking the same corner shows that the EVO is delivering more power to the rear thus actually power sliding while STI hangs on really tight in the corner.

Just found the video you're talking about on Youtube, seems like a bunch of crap to me. Lots of their points were valid, but they gave the nod to RWD because of it's traction and stability control. I think it would have been a much more fair comparison if they had compared three cars that all had assists like the BMW.

I still agree with their decision that RWD is typically the best, but I think they went about it in a crappy way.

Here's a fun little video of a stock Evo to help support my statement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw7a9DHEtKk

There are often just as many parts to break, and since most of the early, cheap economy cars were RWD, and they were cheaper than their FWD replacements, cost really isnt' an issue. it's primarily in packaging that FWD shines. Less transmission tunnel intrusion, so you can make a larger interior in a smaller car, or a more open interior in a luxury car. Early FWD cars took maximum advantage of that,l from the FWD Cadillac Eldorados and Olds Toronados in the '60s, Citroen Traction Avants in the '30s, to the small cars like the Mini and the early Civics and Rabbits. Newer FWD cars have gotten pretty large center consoles which remove a lot of the room inside that FWD would normally give. Though hatchbacks and wagons can really benefit from not having any differential intrusion in the cargo area.



Well, regarding street cars, there really is no clear winner among all of them, as you better not be driving anywhere near the limits on the street. Suspension tuning makes more difference for performance, and overall (when you remove electronic driving aids) AWD and FWD have a clear advantage in inclement weather. For daily driving use, you often have to look at the overall picture. That being said, my daily drivers are RWD with no traction aids. I have had FWD and AWD, and in deep snow, the AWD has had an advantage in gettting going and even in low speed cornering. But that's about it.



Mid engine and rear engine cars will do that, as well. My Porsche 911's had understeer asa abasic nature, with snap (or drop throttle) oversteer as their secondary nature. But driving them with the throttle can make you realize just how effective that can be for cornering.

And actually, coming as I have from the muslcecar era, most RWD cars used to understeer heavily as their basic state, too. Musclecars and even RWD economy cars from the '50s through the '70s understeered heavily as their basic nature. In stock form, most cars will. In the case of the older cars, it was simply nose heavy weight distribution, whereas now it's mostly in suspension tuning (understeer is considered safer for the average driver, so it's built in to most cars. remember that when you discuss cars that understeer normally)

Yes. ALL driving dynamics are determined by not just weight distribution and mass, but suspension design and tuning. Most cars are tuned specifically to understeer from the factory. Front engine cars tend to understeer naturally due to weight distribution, whether they are FWD or RWD.

I suggest you drive, on the track, a car like the Integra Type R (a stock one or as close to it as you can find) and see what FWD is capable of. or an SVT Contour, or a Cooper S, or an IT Rabbit/Golf. When I drove my SVT Contour at an autocross course, people literally were asking, after watching the car, when Ford started making a RWD Contour! You drive those cars just like you drive a RWD Porsche (of which I've had many). Let me put it this way, on the track, my RWD FC RX7 Sport understeered more initially when stock than the SVT or ITR did...