A call for mod community support

[Blank_Redge]

It probably doesn't handle that well, no, but a RWD Civic wasn't going to handle that well regardless considering how short the wheelbase is and how much weight is on the front no matter what engine you have in it.

Agreed.


...AAAAAND bringing it back to the conversation at hand , just because it's *possible* to change the drivetrain layout of a car, doesn't mean that it should be taken for granted that a GT5 modified car would handle like it's theoretical real-life counterpart, if the modded car in question even *has* a real-life counterpart.

 

[seanneedscar]

It probably doesn't handle that well, no, but a RWD Civic wasn't going to handle that well regardless considering how short the wheelbase is and how much weight is on the front no matter what engine you have in it.

What are you on about

short wheelbase = better handling ... albeit less stability

Dont forget EK9 civics came with double wishbone all around and weighed as much as a pair of boots

I'm not a proponent of a rwd V8 civic I think its an abortion of a car. But the fact remains, that thing would be quite the little handler

 

[Blank_Redge]

short wheelbase = better handling ... albeit less stability

I think we're straying into the waters of "semantic arguments." It can be argued (fairly, imo) that less stability goes hand-in-hand with worse handling.

 

[Tornado]

What are you on about

short wheelbase = better handling ... albeit less stability

Longer wheelbase means more stability. Shorter wheelbase means more maneuverability. Neither one by themselves means better handling because both by themselves are just subjective handling qualities that people prefer differently. But a car with particularly bad weight distribution would suffer more from a short wheelbase than one with a long wheelbase (because the more unpredictable behavior that comes from extreme weight balances would be exacerbated by the lack of stability).

Dont forget EK9 civics came with double wishbone all around and weighed as much as a pair of boots

Double wishbones designed to carry a FWD car with most of the weight on the front. Not a RWD car that still has most of the weight on the front. Certainly not an extremely light RWD car that still has most of the weight on the front.

I'm not a proponent of a rwd V8 civic I think its an abortion of a car. But the fact remains, that thing would be quite the little handler

It would almost certainly handle far, far worse than the car would stock; even if it retained the original engine. It was designed around the front tires being the ones that make it go. Not the rears.

 

[seanneedscar]

I think we're straying into the waters of "semantic arguments." It can be argued (fairly, imo) that less stability goes hand-in-hand with worse handling.

I totally forgot that Mini Coopers, Toyota MR2's, Mazda Miatas, are ALL renowned for their bad handling because of that short wheelbase

What was I thinking?

Longer wheelbase means more stability. Shorter wheelbase means more maneuverability. Neither one by themselves means better handling because both by themselves are just subjective handling qualities that people prefer differently. But a car with particularly bad weight distribution would suffer more from a short wheelbase than one with a long wheelbase (because the more unpredictable behavior that comes from extreme weight balances would be exacerbated by the lack of stability).


Double wishbones designed to carry a FWD car with most of the weight on the front. Not a RWD car that still has most of the weight on the front. Certainly not an extremely light RWD car that still has most of the weight on the front.

The reason you are incorrect on this subject is you cannot see past this 'horrible weight distribution' that you think this car will have .. You said it yourself the v8 would only outweigh the 4banger by 160 pounds. And then the transmission, differential, "rwd swap parts" battery, fuel tank, all this crap is in the back.

We dont have a car as a reference (and as blank pointed out this is quite the semantic argument) however if one has the funds to pull off this venture its within the realm of possibility that the weight distribution of this civic would be quite neutral. It definitely would not exceed 52/48.

It would almost certainly handle far, far worse than the car would stock; even if it retained the original engine. It was designed around the front tires being the ones that make it go. Not the rears.[/QUOTE]

Handling is a relative term. Youre making blanket statements. In stock trim the Civic would weigh something of 2200 - 2300 pounds. That alone will make it 'handle' very well. However thats a car with a ton of weight up front and front drive. So it will understeer.

The v8 variant lets just call it, would weigh 500 pounds more. But would have more of the overall weight in the back, has the SUPERIOR handling characteristics of RWD

So lets go over this:

<3000 pounds
RWD, 52/48 weight distro
Double wishbone

Sound like a familiar vehicle? Ah yes, the Honda S2000 (with driver of course)

Not to compare the 2 cars as the wheelbase (LOL) is much different. But yeah, to reiterate my previous post, this car would be quite the handler.

 

[Tornado]

I totally forgot that Mini Coopers, Toyota MR2's, Mazda Miatas, are ALL renowned for their bad handling because of that short wheelbase

What was I thinking?

At this point that's actually a pretty good question. You know so little about the concepts you're throwing around that I'm almost curious how you learned them. Those cars didn't handle well because they had a short wheelbase. They handled well because they were designed to handle well; and the wheelbase was just one thing that contributed to their handling along with weight, weight distribution, suspension tuning (but not the makeup of it specifically) and tire choices; among other things.





You know what car in the 1980s was renowned for its handling? The Lotus Esprit. You know what absolutely did not handle as well as the 1980s Lotus Esprit? The Pontiac Fiero. You know what car had a considerably shorter wheelbase than the 1980s Lotus Esprit? The Pontiac Fiero. But how could that be!?
Or we could go more modern. Like, the Maserati GranTurismo surely handles awfully compared to the Alfa Romeo 8C. I mean, they are identical in drivetrain and platform, but the Alfa rides on a massive 300mm shorter wheelbase. So clearly, the Alfa would handle better, right; rather than just be a twitchy mess?

The reason you are incorrect on this subject is you cannot see past this 'horrible weight distribution' that you think this car will have .. You said it yourself the v8 would only outweigh the 4banger by 160 pounds.

160 pounds in a car that weighs little over a ton as is; and may not be able to be mounted as far back either.

We dont have a car as a reference (and as blank pointed out this is quite the semantic argument) however if one has the funds to pull off this venture its within the realm of possibility that the weight distribution of this civic would be quite neutral. It definitely would not exceed 52/48.

It wouldn't even be close to that. A stock Civic would have a weight distribution of at least 60% over the front wheels. You put a V8 in there instead, and it would deteriorate more. Even with a rear transaxle, you're not going to get nearly that much weight in the rear of the car to balance it out; and even if you could (by, say, adding ballast) you would end up with a pendulum effect as the weight is almost all concentrated on the ends rather than centrally.

Youre making blanket statements. In stock trim the Civic would weigh something of 2200 - 2300 pounds. That alone will make it 'handle' very well.

These three sentences, man...

The v8 variant lets just call it, would weigh 500 pounds more. But would have more of the overall weight in the back, has the SUPERIOR handling characteristics of RWD

It would weigh a good 500 pounds more. Much of that weight would still be in the front, only now it's on a platform and suspension not designed in the slightest for RWD applications (or 500 pounds of extra weight, for that matter); and the rest of it would be at the other extreme end of the car.


But if your entire argument boils down to a "wrong wheel drive" one, then I'm probably wasting my breath.

So lets go over this:

<3000 pounds
RWD, 52/48 weight distro
Double wishbone

Sound like a familiar vehicle? Ah yes, the Honda S2000 (with driver of course)

This almost reads like a parody now. Light weight doesn't guarantee (or even imply) good handling over a heavier car. A double wishbone suspension doesn't guarantee (or even imply) good handling over a car with struts or even a beam axle. And a hacked together RWD Honda Civic certainly is nothing at all like an S2000 just because the suspension type is the same and the weights are similar. Even in terms of chassis stiffness there would be no comparison.

Not to compare the 2 cars as the wheelbase (LOL) is much different. But yeah, to reiterate my previous post, this car would be quite the handler.

Nope. Would still handle pretty atrociously unless they turned it into some sort of tube frame racer or something to that effect. The chassis alone would probably twist so much in turns that you might not be able to open the doors.

 

[Blank_Redge]

Class is in session, and Professor Toronado is servin' up education. Get it while it's hot!