Why Front Wheel Drive Sucks (And Why Rear Wheel Drive Is Coming Back)

[Thorin]

This fella manages to put into words what I've thought for a long time: http://www.slate.com/id/2081194/.  I used to drive a RWD Celica,and even though it had *less* horsepower than my current crappy little 90hp FWD, it was more fun to drive.  And if I ever buy another used Celica, it has to be one of those older turbo'd all-wheel-drive ones.

[Lazybones]

If you want to go speeding around, you bet rear is better, but if you are driving casually or in poor road conditions I still think front is better.

If I was going to get a sports car it would be rear or AWD that is for sure.

[Thorin]

Actually, the point of the article was that at regular speeds, rear-wheel drive offers a sensation that front-wheel drive simply cannot

It's pretty clear to me, after driving hundreds of different vehicles over several decades, that rear drive offers a big aesthetic advantage to ordinary drivers at ordinary speeds in ordinary conditions. Why? The lock-in effect I mentioned earlier. Suppose you go into a corner in a rear-drive car at a reasonable, safe, legal speed. Nothing's about to skid. But you can still feel the front end starting to plow wide a bit. What to do? Step on the gas! Don't stomp on it -- but add a bit of power, and a miraculous thing happens. The front end swings back in, the car tightens its line. Cornering traction seems to increase. And the car feels locked into a groove, balanced between the motive power from the rear and the turning power in the front.

You don't have to be a race driver to feel this. You can be a defensive driver and feel it. You can be driving a 1973 Ford Maverick with leaking shocks and you'll feel it. Accountants feel it on the way to the office and housewives feel it on the way to the Safeway. Even Ralph Nader probably feels it. It's a good part of what makes driving a car a sensual act. (What's happening, technically? None of the tires is at its limit of adhesion. But the added speed is making the front tires --which [since they are undriven] have plenty of surplus traction -- apply more force to the road surface to change direction. Meanwhile, the rear of the car is shifting outward, ever so slightly -- not a Bullitt-style power slide, but a subtle attitude adjustment that cancels the plowing effect. The power "helps you through the corner," as Zellner puts it.)

This doesn't happen in a front-drive car. The best an ordinary driver can hope for in a FWD car is that it "corners as if on rails" -- no slippage at all. No plowing -- but also no semi-orgasmic "lock in." More typically, if you hit the accelerator in a fast corner, things get mushy up front (as they did that evening near Jayne Mansfield's house). The lesson the FWD car seems to be teaching is: Try to go faster, and you're punished. Front-drive cars are Puritans! In a rear-drive car, you hit the accelerator and things get better! Rear-drive cars are hedonists. (This is assuming you don't hit the accelerator too hard.)

I've experienced this lock-in effect in low-powered cars driving near the speed limit on city streets - and it really does feel entirely different than driving FWD cars.

There's a nod to front-wheel-drive being better in snowy conditions, but this is an article written by someone living in California I think.  Performance in the snow is much more important here.  Which is why I wish they made the Toyota Sienna with both AWD and eight-passenger seating in the same model (you have to pick one or the other <sigh>).

[Shayne]

RWD cards do not push into corners and through corners.  Why do you think you see an extremely few (if any) FWD racing cars?

AWD is the way to go though.  My next vehicle (fall next year?) will be an AWD SUV guaranteed.

[Thorin]

RWD cards do not push into corners and through corners.  Why do you think you see an extremely few (if any) FWD racing cars?

Do you mean "understeer"?  I've never heard the terms "pushing into corners" and "pushing through corners" used when discussing vehicle handling,

I'd say be careful and research how the AWD system works in each of the vehicles you're considering.  A lot of them started off as FWD systems and then have some mechanism added that transfers some-but-never-all of the power to the rear wheels - for instance, the Ford Escape.  One of the ways to tell just how much power the designers expect at the rear wheels is to take a good look at the rear axle diameter.  On some of these cute-utes it's less than the diameter of my finger!

Do you have a particular SUV in mind already?

[Shayne]

Pushing is how NASCAR explains it to the lesser intelligent southern viewership.  It is understeer but pushing I find gives a better picture.

Leaning towards either the Kia Sorento or the Hyundai Santa Fe (same vehicle i know, but my fianc?s father owns a Kia dealership so paying dealership pricing is awfully tempting).  We will test drive everything, etc.  We got a loner Subaru Impreza wagon a few months ago for a week and loved how it drove and have a good idea of how a proper AWD vehicle should drive.

Ive driven a few RWD cars and I love how they feel but it could be just the types of cars I drove versus what I own

[Ustauk]

I have a lot of fun driving my old '85 Celica, the last rear wheel-drive model they made.  I've driven some front wheel drive vehicles before, and even given a six banger over my four banger, I prefer the feel of driving my vehicle.  Mind you, I can see the point about winter driving, as even with three sandbags in my trunk I'll still get a little fish tailing if I accelerate too quickly on slippery roads.  I'm sure my next vehicle will have to be a front wheel drive when my old one konks out, but I'll still miss driving it

[Melbosa]

I have a lot of fun driving my old '85 Celica, the last rear wheel-drive model they made.  I've driven some front wheel drive vehicles before, and even given a six banger over my four banger, I prefer the feel of driving my vehicle.  Mind you, I can see the point about winter driving, as even with three sandbags in my trunk I'll still get a little fish tailing if I accelerate too quickly on slippery roads.  I'm sure my next vehicle will have to be a front wheel drive when my old one konks out, but I'll still miss driving it

Your car also has some big tires on it Ust for winter.  Traction in winter is Weight over Surfice area (with in reason); more weight per square inch of surface area is better, so not so wide tires would give you way better traction.  My Supra I had 225 70 R15 on original Mags in the summer and 175 60 R15 on Steel Rims in the winter (granted my winter tires were also winter grips and couldn't run them in the summer).  Man did that Supra look funny during the winter months, as the wheel flares well over shot the tires.

[Melbosa]

There's a nod to front-wheel-drive being better in snowy conditions, but this is an article written by someone living in California I think.  Performance in the snow is much more important here.  Which is why I wish they made the Toyota Sienna with both AWD and eight-passenger seating in the same model (you have to pick one or the other <sigh>).

Should go back a couple of years to the Previa.  AWD, and can get Eight seaters.  Basically almost the same look as the Sienna.

[Melbosa]

My preference for winter vehicle is similar to what I drive now, or what most people have in a truck.  I want the option for 2WD and 4WD, whether it is Rear or Front.  4WD or AWD has it's advantages in snow and get up and go, but I find that cornering on ice is easier with 2WD enabled.  Granted you have options on newer vehicles that I don't on my Tercel or my old Toyota SR5, such as traction control and limited slip, but when all 4 tires start spinning and sliding on ice, cornering just isn't as simple.  Good ice grip tires can help with this as well, obviously.

As a side note, E-Brake slides are freakin hard to do in an AWD/4WD vehicle, a bit easier in a FWD, and simple in a RWD.  I like my E-Brake slides .

If I was to buy a new sports car, in this climate, my preference (although these are hard to find - may even be custom built only - I don't know - I deal in older stuff) would be one RWD with on the fly optional shifting to 4WD or AWD.  Why I am currently looking for that Toyota SR5 RWD/4WD Extended Cab 4Cyl (for gas saving and trust me enough power there, no issue) Truck.

[Ustauk]

I have a lot of fun driving my old '85 Celica, the last rear wheel-drive model they made.  I've driven some front wheel drive vehicles before, and even given a six banger over my four banger, I prefer the feel of driving my vehicle.  Mind you, I can see the point about winter driving, as even with three sandbags in my trunk I'll still get a little fish tailing if I accelerate too quickly on slippery roads.  I'm sure my next vehicle will have to be a front wheel drive when my old one konks out, but I'll still miss driving it

Your car also has some big tires on it Ust for winter.  Traction in winter is Weight over Surfice area (with in reason); more weight per square inch of surface area is better, so not so wide tires would give you way better traction.  My Supra I had 225 70 R15 on original Mags in the summer and 175 60 R15 on Steel Rims in the winter (granted my winter tires were also winter grips and couldn't run them in the summer).  Man did that Supra look funny during the winter months, as the wheel flares well over shot the tires.

The rims that came with the car were 195 70 R14, so that's what I got when I replaced the old tires on buying the vehicle, since they were nice rims and I didn't want to buy new ones.  I thought about getting a set of winter tires and rims, but I couldn't justify it given I only drive once a week or so.  I try to be more careful when I'm driving in the winter, and the sandbags do help a fair bit, plus the all seasons I did buy were the best rated on snow and ice that I could find for the tire size.  So far so good :knocks on wood:

[Shayne]

Traction control on most budget cars as far as I can tell is simply a rev limiter.  If the car detects slippage it decreases the engines rpms till the wheels get grip at lower speeds.  Exactly what I do not want.  I am very tired of car manufactures taking over the driving of the vehicle.

Alyson and I took a couple 4cyl AWD SUVs for a drive in the last month and they were horribly gutless.  The reason we wanted the 4cyl is that manufactures keep the standard transmission in them.  As soon as they go to the V6 the standard goes away, but driving a 6 compared to the 4 is night and day in terms of power AND engine quietness.

Besides fuel economy isn't that far off (depending on engine size obviously) consider the Kia Sportage engine specs:

Code Select Expand

2.0 L, In-line 4-cylinder, aluminum head (140 HP @ 6,000 rpm)
FWD:  10.6 L/100 km (city) 7.8 L/100 km (highway)
AWD: 11.2 L/100 km (city) 8.2 L/100 km (highway)

2.7 L, V6 Aluminum block and head (173 HP @ 6,000 rpm)
FWD:  12.1 L/100 km (city) 8.5 L/100 km (highway)
AWD: 12.4 L/100 km (city) 9.4 L/100 km (highway)

The FWD version is less then a liter where the AWD is slightly more.  You would be saving about $0.80 per 100Km and have significantly less horsepower.

[Lazybones]

Traction control on most budget cars as far as I can tell is simply a rev limiter.  If the car detects slippage it decreases the engines rpms till the wheels get grip at lower speeds.  Exactly what I do not want.  I am very tired of car manufactures taking over the driving of the vehicle.

Actually traction control works like ABS does. When you apply power to the wheels the car will detect if there is a free wheel spinning and begin pulsing the break to that wheel, forcing power to shift to the other wheel. I have both ABS and traction control on my car. The traction control can be disabled at the press of a button, but I never turn it off, if you are applying so much power that your wheels are spinning free you need to let up on the power, not increase it.

[Lazybones]

How Traction Control works

You could apply the peddle to the floor if you wanted to and the power would be distributed to the tires. Again this is an icy condition feature, you may want to disable it if you want to do a burnout or something.

[Thorin]

Pushing is how NASCAR explains it to the lesser intelligent southern viewership.  It is understeer but pushing I find gives a better picture.

Heh, even as I read that, "pushing" still conjures forth the image of the back wheels pushing the car whereas "pulling" conjures up the image of the front wheels pulling the car.  Guess I saw too many commercials for FWD vehicles in the 80s when they were pushing the (relatively) new idea of FWD.

Ive driven a few RWD cars and I love how they feel but it could be just the types of cars I drove versus what I own

Yeah, most people like the way RWD feels (in the summer - with a big dump of snow, everyone starts singing the FWD/AWD/4WD song).  The article I originally linked goes into some detail as to *why* most people instinctively like RWD better than FWD.

Leaning towards either the Kia Sorento or the Hyundai Santa Fe (same vehicle i know, but my fianc?s father owns a Kia dealership so paying dealership pricing is awfully tempting).  We will test drive everything, etc.  We got a loner Subaru Impreza wagon a few months ago for a week and loved how it drove and have a good idea of how a proper AWD vehicle should drive.

I think the Kia Sorento and Hyundai Santa Fe are quite different.

The Sorento (2006):
- Engine: 3.5L V6
- Transmission: 5-speed Manual or 5-speed Automatic
- Drivetrain: RWD or part-time"shift-on-demand" 4WD
- MSRP: $27,895 to $38,965
The Santa Fe (2007):
- Engine: 2.7L V6 or 3.3L V6
- Transmission: 5-speed Manual or 5-speed Automatic
- Drivetrain: FWD or AWD
- MSRP: $25,995 to $35,995

I notice neither has a low-range option for their 4WD/AWD system.  If it were me deciding, I'd avoid the Santa Fe, given its FWD roots.  But then, I don't like the Honda CR-V either, even though I've heard several older people rave about them and about how I should buy the Honda.