- 23,800
- Philippines
Statistically, 100% of all motorcycles involved in accidents are rear wheel drive.
Or near enough as makes no difference.
-
Are we talking front-engined, mid-engined, rear-engined or African swallow?
Conceptions/Misconceptions Over Cars
- Thread starter Grandea GTR
- 308 comments
- 17,218 views
Statistically, 100% of all motorcycles involved in accidents are rear wheel drive.
Or near enough as makes no difference.
-
Are we talking front-engined, mid-engined, rear-engined or African swallow?
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
- 5,204
- Finland
That depends on where you live. In Finland law requires you to use winter tyres in snow conditions.
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
Not every all-season tire is made equal -- the first AS tires I had on my old E30 were enormously better on snow than the set that replaced them. When I needed new tires for the Legacy, I bought the same brand/line that the BMW had first.
For my job (property assessing), I scrabble over unplowed, snow-covered grassy driveways, up icy gravel slopes, and also around muddy farmyards. My car is no truck (not even Outback suspension), but the all-seasons and viscous LSD with a 50:50 split are up to the task. As my first AWD vehicle I can attest that it makes a big difference even without winter tires.
What the general public fails to realize is that an AWD/4WD vehicle makes no difference in safe cornering speeds or braking, which is what leads to accidents. However, depending on conditions and the density of municipal snowplows in your area, you really don't need winter tires or AWD/4WD. Quality all-seasons will do what it says on the tin.
But you do need decent tires and diligence.
For my job (property assessing), I scrabble over unplowed, snow-covered grassy driveways, up icy gravel slopes, and also around muddy farmyards. My car is no truck (not even Outback suspension), but the all-seasons and viscous LSD with a 50:50 split are up to the task. As my first AWD vehicle I can attest that it makes a big difference even without winter tires.
What the general public fails to realize is that an AWD/4WD vehicle makes no difference in safe cornering speeds or braking, which is what leads to accidents. However, depending on conditions and the density of municipal snowplows in your area, you really don't need winter tires or AWD/4WD. Quality all-seasons will do what it says on the tin.
But you do need decent tires and diligence.
Last edited:
McLaren
Premium
- 45,348
- Texas
The funniest thing about this misconception is that it gets brought up by the RWD crowd in FWD arguments.
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
McLaren
Premium
- 45,348
- Texas
They like to bring it up because eventually, someone will bring up a FWD's ability in the snow compared to a RWD's & the RWD guys typically always respond with, "Well, I would just buy AWD if I have to tackle snow". They tend to ignore what an actual good tire can do for any drivetrain.
The reasoning is not word-for-word, but the misconception is still there.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
I think you would have a better chance in the snow with RWD than FWD. Plus you can hoon and drift with RWD, too me, that's way more important, lol. And I wouldn't call it super dangerous, you dont have to go incredibly fast in the snow to drift.
- 27,203
- United Kingdom
It depends what you mean by "a better chance".
A FWD car typically has more traction than a RWD, since more of its weight is over the driven wheels (Exception to that rule - old rear-engined stuff). For the average driver, understeer is also a safer grip-loss scenario than oversteer. Even if things go terribly wrong, it's going to be better understeering into a tree and having the crumple zones absorb the impact than it is going sideways into it and having your door attempt to do the same job.
A more skilled driver does perhaps have a few more options with RWD. In my old Miata, the low weight and good balance was quite handy in the snow - it was happier to turn where a FWD car would push. Though of course, if an FWD starts to push, you come back off the gas. Which gets to the root of driving in snow - slow the hell down and drive within the car's limits.
But traction in the RWD Miata did suck. I didn't have winter tyres (none of my cars ever have, so it's fairly even there) and the only ever time I got stuck was in my work's car park - I was caught between a couple of tiny ruts in the snow and the tyres just wouldn't find traction. In a similar situation in my previous, FWD car, I'd have driven straight out. Only an anecdote, but representative of the differences.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,348
- Texas
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Good point. Depends on were you live too, we get like 5 days of snow here, the rest is rain.
Like your pint about the crumple zones. If you spin out I guess you have more if a chance if writing the car off, since your less likely to hit a crumple zone.
Like your pint about the crumple zones. If you spin out I guess you have more if a chance if writing the car off, since your less likely to hit a crumple zone.
- 27,203
- United Kingdom
Well, that's part of it, but I was thinking more of the safety aspect. I do my best not to crash, but if I did I'd like to have a better chance of surviving it. Cars are typically designed to provide the best protection from the front, so that's the best bit to hit.
Obviously not all RWD crashes involve spinning into something sideways or backwards and not all FWD ones involve understeer, but I was using it as an example to highlight that RWDs can be a little less predictable for drivers unused to the extremes of their handling capabilities. And in snow or even heavy rain those limits are much lower - for most people, the predictable understeer of a FWD is the safer option.
Of course, you could make the argument that drivers with RWD cars these days tend to be more aware of their handling characteristics, since fewer mainstream cars use RWD - i.e. enthusiasts buying enthusiast cars should know what's what.
On the other hand, before FWD truly took over from the 60s to the 70s, people used to get along just fine with RWD. Though most of those were lighter than today's cars and had narrower tires which are better for cutting through to the road below. And lower limits, and softer suspension for more predictable on-the-limit behavior.
Actually, that makes me think of a misconception, and a conception that's probably true:
Misconception: Big old cars are safer in an accident than new, smaller ones.
Conception: People might drive a little slower and a little safer if cars themselves weren't so safe and cocooning.
Obviously not all RWD crashes involve spinning into something sideways or backwards and not all FWD ones involve understeer, but I was using it as an example to highlight that RWDs can be a little less predictable for drivers unused to the extremes of their handling capabilities. And in snow or even heavy rain those limits are much lower - for most people, the predictable understeer of a FWD is the safer option.
Of course, you could make the argument that drivers with RWD cars these days tend to be more aware of their handling characteristics, since fewer mainstream cars use RWD - i.e. enthusiasts buying enthusiast cars should know what's what.
On the other hand, before FWD truly took over from the 60s to the 70s, people used to get along just fine with RWD. Though most of those were lighter than today's cars and had narrower tires which are better for cutting through to the road below. And lower limits, and softer suspension for more predictable on-the-limit behavior.
Actually, that makes me think of a misconception, and a conception that's probably true:
Misconception: Big old cars are safer in an accident than new, smaller ones.
Conception: People might drive a little slower and a little safer if cars themselves weren't so safe and cocooning.
- 1,491
- Jakarta
- FOUR16_
"FF Cars are ricers."
My friend said this.
My friend said this.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Give your friend a slap for me. Some of the best, and most legendary cars are front wheel drive.
- 23,800
- Philippines
This has always bugged me about RWD vs FWD arguments. The concept that RWD can help you when you're understeering, because you can steer with the rear.
Yup. You can. You can steer so that you're pointed sideways when you go off, instead of going off nose first.
With FWD, you can quite easily steer with the rear. Very much so. And even better, steering with the rear on an FWD scrubs speed (because you get the rear out by braking or lifting) which means less drama and inertia, in the end, when you finally crumpf into something.
-
And since we're talking misconceptions, let's bring up a page that used to get brought up a lot in RWD vs FWD arguments:
Mind you, if you know anything about driving, some of the advice here is correct, some of it is horrifyingly horrifying:
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/snwvlly/fwd.html
I love the part where he asserts that when you let off the gas in slippery conditions, the engine stops spinning immediately and locks the front tires.
- 1,491
- Jakarta
- FOUR16_
THIS. THIS ONE SO MUCH.
And yes, i did slapped my friend for real. Turns out he was just a fake car guy who pretends to know everything about cars.
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
"Automatic cars don't make you a legit driver."
Was told this when I told him my 6 was a 6AT when the guy himself drives an automatic Z34.
Apparently when you have paddle shifters on your Z34, that makes it a clutchless manual.
(Nah, that still makes it an automatic)
Was told this when I told him my 6 was a 6AT when the guy himself drives an automatic Z34.
Apparently when you have paddle shifters on your Z34, that makes it a clutchless manual.
(Nah, that still makes it an automatic)
- 1,491
- Jakarta
- FOUR16_
Wow, i thought paddle shifters with no clutch pedals count as semi automatics......
Ah well.
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
The SMG gearbox in an E46 M3 is a clutchless manual, I know this.
A car with a torque converter is a slushbox.
A car with a torque converter is a slushbox.
- 31,522
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
I find calling it a clutchless manual is wrong. It does have a clutch, it just doesn't have a pedal to push.
Electrohydraulic clutch control yo.
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
Just the only thing that bugs me about the manual mode in automatics is that it sometimes just shifts the gear up or down on you without your control.
My 6 tends to automatically shift down while slowing down just at the time I grab the shifter and downshift, causing it to fall 2 gears instead of one, and rpms to sound high.
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
I've owned my 6 for about 5 months now, nothing more irritating.
- 12,389
- Betelgeuse
- Beeblebrox_237
Possibly my least favourite misconceptions about cars are that electric cars won't work in the real world (they already do), and that hydrogen cars are the future. Hydrogen is a ridiculously stupid fuel.
- 12,389
- Betelgeuse
- Beeblebrox_237
I'm guessing it's our own resident Subaru rally driver. They use automatic imprezas in WRC, right?
- 4,209
- Wasilla, AK
I think it depends on what you hit, how you hit it, and how hard you hit it. Older cars were deadly in offset collisions, but the weight of an old barge could probably give you an advantage in other types of collision, and when hitting a stationary object that can break or move. Relying on that would be pretty chancy, but remember... the 64-66 Chryslers are to this day banned from most demolition derbies for being too tough.
- 3,475
- Vilnius
...But in stock form come with no safety equipment. So a small dent on the bumper means that your neck is broken and your chest is pierced on the steering collumn laying 5m away from the car.
Similar threads
