The quickest front-wheel drive European car ever sold in the US.

[1X83Z]

The only thing we know is that volvo claims there is a significant acceleration improvement. I am saying that there are reasons why we should believe them.

Because it's a new engine, and because there's either more torque or more low-end torque. Or the same amount of torque but it comes lower.

You never stop amazing me with your knowledge in cars, but I think you may have overlooked this little Volvo http://www.roadandtrack.com/article...umber=3&preview= : )

I haven't driven an 850R in ages, but I drove the new S40 T5 a couple of weeks ago and it's unbelievably powerful and quick. I'm using the same source for all these 0-60 times (ConsumerGuide) and they have the S40 a few tenths behind the 850R, but I'd believe it's as quick. I came pretty close to buying an S40 T5 - easily one of the surprises of 2005.

How about the Saab 9-3 Viggen, VW New Beetle Turbo S, Opel/Vauxhall Astra OPC coupe, Ford Mondeo ST220, Ford Focus RS, and VW Golf GTi VR6. If I'm wrong, just forget it.

The Saab isn't as quick, nor is the New Beetle Turbo S or the Golf GTI VR6. The Opel/Vauxhall Astra OPC coupe, whatever that is, isn't sold here, and neither is the Mondeo ST220 or Focus RS.

 

[Driftster]

how many RWD cars beat FWD cars in rally situations?

 

[bengee]

rwd in rally... I would say that most rwd probably won in the past, but now with new technology, i would think that rwd cars would have a hard time keeping up with fwd cars on dirt or snow (esp the latter) especially if the driver of the ff was good.

 

[Driftster]

and the SRT-4 did 5.8 in 03 and 5.6 in 04 from 0-60...so i'm sure there's the occasional 5.3 out there with the " fluke factor"

 

[///M-Spec]

Yes. This is true; that FWD cars can face under/over steer at any moment. However, for the RWD its WAY easier to mess up on a wet track because of spins, and/or wrecks.

This simply isn't true with a properly set up race car. But you can believe what you want.

In racing, I believe even the slightest advantage matter a lot. Especially if the car are the same beside the drive train layout. Like I said if there were two car FWD and RWD with the exact spec, most know that if pushed to same the RWD will mostly win, BUT in this case, there is a SLIGHT advantage therefore making FWD's just that much better.

The scenario you describe pretty much never happens. If FWD and RWD cars are classed together in a racing series, there are a myriad other factors that need to be equalized before drivetrain layout becomes an issue. Besides which a FWD car has a practical hp limit of around 300ish hp. After that, it simply doesn't have much of a chance unless the rules hold back the RWD cars.

Think about it. Why aren't there any FWD race cars in LM GTS? Or GT500? Or SCCA GT1? Or Group B?

I do not know who will win and im not claiming that the FWD car will win, but I believe that with the FWD, you can push it just a little bit harder.

At times like this, under steer is better than over steer.

Either is slow. The 'safety net' with FWD simply wouldn't matter with a pro driver. A pro would be less concerned about spinning than he would be about being passed by a competitior.


M

 

[rollazn]

The scenario you describe pretty much never happens. If FWD and RWD cars are classed together in a racing series, there are a myriad other factors that need to be equalized before drivetrain layout becomes an issue. Besides which a FWD car has a practical hp limit of around 300ish hp. After that, it simply doesn't have much of a chance unless the rules hold back the RWD cars.

Think about it. Why aren't there any FWD race cars in LM GTS? Or GT500? Or SCCA GT1? Or Group B?

RWD is one of the best, if not the best when it comes down to racing.

//M-Spec, I should have been clearer. When I said one FWD and one RWD with the same Power to weight ratio, I did not mean racecars. Everyone knows RWD are the best drive train to use in racing. That is why the majority of them are RWD.

I was talking about low powered stock sport compact cars. I know I didn't say that at the beginning so its all my fault. In my little head I was thinking of a RWD Integra Type R vs. FWD Integra Type R on a wet race track. In addition, when it is pouring down racing, I thought that the FWD Integra would have a little more advantage then the RWD Integra. Now im not even sure, I was never sure that the FWD was going to win; I just said I felt it could be pushed harder.

We know why all racecars are all RWD. Because it is the best drive train to use. In a FWD car, if you have too much power, you would be facing a great amount of under steer. Whenever in a FWD high power car, when you gun the accelerator it would begin to under steer making it hard to control and/or handle.

Summary:

Front Wheel Drive cars serve its purpose. It may not be for racing or sport car but it is probably the best drive train out there for your average Joe. It may not be the best drive train to build a sport car out of, but it can be quick. There is no FWD exotic sports car for a reason.

In all my posts in this thread, I was never even thinking about sport cars or high-powered racecars. When I was using that example, I was thinking of a low horsepower everyday sport compact/sport car like the Integra Type R.I just thought for some reason that a FWD Integra Type R could be pushed harder than a RWD Integra Type R in the rain, because of its drive train.

When thinking of it, I think a RWD Acura TL should be able to destroy a FWD Acura TL on a race track, even if it was raining.

Once again, I am wrong. I don't know if that will make any sense what-so-ever but I try.

 

[RacyBacy]

Everyone knows RWD are the best drive train to use in racing.

I disagree:

"In 1995 Audi was barred from entering its Audi S4 into the BTCC because of its domination on the sport. The Quattro (four-wheel drive) system was banned because Audi was unbeatable in the competition."

"Audi dominated the 1996 BTCC to such end, that weight penalties were introduced."

Quattro rules.

 

[///M-Spec]

I disagree:

"In 1995 Audi was barred from entering its Audi S4 into the BTCC because of its domination on the sport. The Quattro (four-wheel drive) system was banned because Audi was unbeatable in the competition."

"Audi dominated the 1996 BTCC to such end, that weight penalties were introduced."

Quattro rules.

Then why is the R8 RWD?


M

 

[RacyBacy]

I was just proving a point. Audi used quattro in BTCC and everyone else couldn't keep up.

The R8 was rear wheel drive because Audi wanted it to be. Just the same way the new A4 DTM is rear wheel drive.

Doesn't take away the fact that Audi dominated the sport with the A4 quattro in the BTCC and with the V8 quattro in the DTM. The Audi 200 quattro also won in the American trans-am championship in 1988 and a year later the 90 quattro scored seven victories in the IMSA-GTO.

 

[///M-Spec]

I was just proving a point. Audi used quattro in BTCC and everyone else couldn't keep up.

The R8 was rear wheel drive because Audi wanted it to be. Just the same way the new A4 DTM is rear wheel drive.

You were trying to prove that AWD was the best drivetrain layout to use in racing. Yet when Audi designed a car to compete at the absolute highest level of closed wheel racing (LMP900), it designed a RWD car.

Its really an engineering choice: traction advantage vs. weight, packaging and drivetrain loss. At higher speeds (like a LeMans) the drivetrain losses seriously hurt an AWD car's chances. So much so that traction advantages are negated.


M

 

[RacyBacy]

You were trying to prove that AWD was the best drivetrain layout to use in racing.

The BTCC, SCCA and IMSA have all banned quattro all wheel drive as an unfair advantage. In this type of racing it was proven to be the best layout. Here are a few quotes for you to savour:

“The SPEED GT is one of the few race series in which all drive train concepts are still allowed, and in which our American importer can demonstrate the advantages of quattro drive,” explains Audi motorsport chief Dr Wolfgang Ullrich.​

Audi Sport North America is again involved in the GT class of the SPEED World Challenge, whose races are mainly held as part of American Le Mans Series (ALMS) support programme. Last year Randy Pobst won the championship title first time out with the new Audi RS 6 Competition and guaranteed that Audi remained unbeaten in the SPEED GT World Challenge for the last three years – last, but by no means least, thanks to the permanent all wheel drive of the quattro.​

Yet when Audi designed a car to compete at the absolute highest level of closed wheel racing (LMP900), it designed a RWD car.

You should check out the A.C.O. TECHNICAL REGULATIONS:

9.4 - Four wheel drive : not permitted.

 

[///M-Spec]

The BTCC, SCCA and IMSA have all banned quattro all wheel drive as an unfair advantage. In this type of racing it was proven to be the best layout. Here are a few quotes for you to savour:

Well if the marketers say so, they must be right, eh? :chuckle:

If the weight of an AWD car and a RWD car are equalized, then yes, it can be unfair advantage. Of course it would be. But in real life, AWD systems carry a weight penalty vs. RWD. If a team was allowed to field a car that weighed the same as a RWD competitor, yet had two extra drive wheels, it'd be unfair. Same as if one car was allowed to use wider tires, extra displacement or carry extra fuel.

But instead of playing around with the specs in order to equalize things, the rules makers simply caved into pressure from the other teams and banned it. :shrug: same thing happened to the M3 GTR. It had a V8, the Porsches didn't. Banned.

World Challenge does a LOT of playing around with specs in order to even the playing field. Usually when a new factory car is introduced, they dominate for a while until the rules get changed around and they get nerf'd. The Caddy's CTS-V is this year's RS6 Comp.

You should check out the A.C.O. TECHNICAL REGULATIONS:

9.4 - Four wheel drive : not permitted.

I thought you said Audi designed the R8 RWD because "it wanted to". And yes, I did actually know the rules. I was just busting your chops a little. That's what the smiley was for.


M

 

[RacyBacy]

I thought you said Audi designed the R8 RWD because "it wanted to".

They did want to since they had no choice! The same applies to DTM. Rear wheel drive and V8 power only.

You were testing me on my knowledge of rules and regulation even though you knew them ... Thanks for "busting my chops!"

 

[Bahbo]

plus he has NOS

Actually, he has an NX nitrous kit.

 

[speedy_2]

Actually, he has an NX nitrous kit.

haha. I think when he sais NOS he was saying NAAAWWZ like the Fast and Furious. Now ricers call any kind of Nitrous, NOS. So stupid in my opinion. And yes it's an NX kit. Only adding 25HP at the moment. I just recieved a new jet in the mail and it's good for 75HP.

 

[///M-Spec]

You were testing me on my knowledge of rules and regulation even though you knew them ... Thanks for "busting my chops!"

No, it wasn't a test. 'Busting chops' means to harass or poke fun of in a good humored sort of way.


M

 

[TheCracker]

If the weight of an AWD car and a RWD car are equalized, then yes, it can be unfair advantage. Of course it would be. But in real life, AWD systems carry a weight penalty vs. RWD. If a team was allowed to field a car that weighed the same as a RWD competitor, yet had two extra drive wheels, it'd be unfair. Same as if one car was allowed to use wider tires, extra displacement or carry extra fuel.

Not only that, but AWD can make a car 'nose-heavy' compared to a same-weight RWD car, this is probably the main reason AWD isn't widely used in motorsport. In the 90's, in the BTCC's 'hayday' Ford entered a RWD Mondeo against a field mainly made up of FWD cars, they could do this because there was a AWD Mondeo (although it sold in miniscule numbers) available in the showroom, meaning they could run it without the FWD hardware. If AWD is such an advantage, why didn't ford run a AWD mondeo instead of the RWD they did?

If you look into the set-up of most AWD circuit racers, you'll find they generally only have a small amout of the available power directed towards the front wheels of the car, meaning the car drives like a RWD anyway. In fact FWD racers are generally set up (suspension wise) to act more like RWD! - because it is universally thought of as the best way to make a car go quickest around a circuit.

AWD has been available on road cars since the sixties but they have never really made a huge impact, F1 teams toyed with the idea at around the same time, but decided it offered no advantage. The only form of motorsport AWD revolutionised was WRC (or rallying in general) even then this has mostly been on the 'loose' surfaced rallys. Up until recently the lower classed (kit-cars) 2WD Citroens have beaten the AWD WRC cars on 'tarmac' rallys because their tail-happy set-ups suit tarmac better.