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

[Melbosa]

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.

Or get stuck in the snow.  Don't know how may people I have pushed out in the country, and until I figured out they left their traction control it wasn't working.

[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.

Or get stuck in the snow.  Don't know how may people I have pushed out in the country, and until I figured out they left their traction control it wasn't working.

Mined re-wording wording that? I can't tell if you implied that they had it turned off to begin with or if it was easier to push them with it off. If you are applying external force to get them out then, YES you don't want the breaks engaging any of the wheels. However if you are sitting at an icy intersection under the cars own power and want to get going or are moving through snow you want to ensure both wheels are doing some work and that one is not spinning free on the icy spot.

I have tested it on and off when my subdivision iin deep and rutted with snow, and in iced over parking lots. It was clearly easier to maintain momentum and traction with it enabled.

[Melbosa]

If you're car/truck/suv is stuck in a snow drift, and someone is pushing you out, you want those tires to be turning as much as possible.  If they are barely turning, you are just beating a dead horse.  Trust me, if your stuck, traction control is not what you want on.  If your in deep snow or on ice, that is a different story, as long as your moving your good.  Spinning tires in that case will get you stuck.

[Thorin]

I have a lot of fun driving my old '85 Celica, the last rear wheel-drive model they made.

I was going to refute this point, then realized that, yes indeed, they changed to FWD with the fourth generation in 1986.  I was thinking of the All-Trac that was offered in the fourth and fifth generations (1988-1993), but that was AWD, not RWD.

I'm sure my next vehicle will have to be a front wheel drive when my old one konks out

Not necessarily.  There's lots of RWD cars coming out these days, along with a lot of AWD (some AWD systems are a lot better than others, though).

[Thorin]

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.

Traction is a lot more than just pounds per square inch.  Wide snow tires can work wonders compared to skinny summer tires.  Tread design, tread block size, tread void (space between the tread blocks), tread block sipes, stickiness of the rubber compound at the operating temperature (summer tires get hard, winter tires stay soft, soft rubber grips better than hard rubber), and additional ingredients in the rubber compound (such as crushed almond shells in some winter tires, which works like micro-studs in the tire) all have a huge impact on your traction.  On top of that, the skinny-vs-wide debate frequently forgets that the type of snowpack influences the tire choice, as well.  Skinny tires are good when you need more weight per square inch so that you break through the upper layers of soft snowpack to get to the hard stuff underneath where you find real traction.  Skinny tires are bad when there is so much snow that your car will bottom out before reaching the hard stuff - better to go with real wide balloony tires so you can float over the top of the snowpack without bottoming out.

Adding sandbags for weight over the wheels makes quite a difference, too, as it loads the springs which in turn pushes the tires down harder on the ground which in turn provides more weight per square inch and thereby increases traction (so long as the tires can reach a hard road surface (including hardpack snow, ice, or asphalt).

As for those 225/70R15s versus the 175/60R15s, the total wheel height would've been 696mm versus 591mm - a loss of 105mm total height that would've resulted in a loss of 52.5mm of clearance.  That's 2" less clearance.  If you drove through deep snow with the bigger tires, you'd be less likely to get your undercarriage hung up on snowbanks.  This is why if you put a skinnier tire on your vehicle you should pay close attention to make sure that the wheel height is at least the same as the regular-width tire you're replacing.

Ultimately, though, the most important thing is to have tires with tread that grips in the conditions you're in.  Nearly bald tires (and I remember Ustauk asking about tread depth at one of the D&D sessions), even if they're winter tires, will probably leave you stranded one cold and snowy night.

[Thorin]

If you're car/truck/suv is stuck in a snow drift, and someone is pushing you out, you want those tires to be turning as much as possible.  If they are barely turning, you are just beating a dead horse.  Trust me, if your stuck, traction control is not what you want on.  If your in deep snow or on ice, that is a different story, as long as your moving your good.  Spinning tires in that case will get you stuck.

I pushed three separate vehicles out of snowdrifts on my street this week - one RWD truck (with large-block/large-void rear tires for decent traction) and two FWD cars.  In all three cases, the driver had gotten themselves stuck and then tried to get unstuck by flooring the accelerator.  In all three cases, all they accomplished was digging semi-circular holes through the snow; the snow around their spinning tires melted, and when they stopped accelerating the melted snow got cold and froze into extremely slippery ice.  The only way to describe this is that they made "glass potholes" for their drive-wheels.  In all three cases, two grown men (myself and a neighbour) could not push the vehicles out while the drive-wheels were frantically spinning.  In all three cases, we *did* push them out when the drivers stopped gunning the gas and kept the engine barely above idle.

The reason we could get them out is because we had *just* enough strength to push them to the edge of the "glass pothole" they made.  When they were gunning the gas, the tires were rotating so fast there was no chance they'd get any traction.  When they were basically idling the engine, the tires turned really slowly and caught just a fraction of traction, which was just enough to get them out of their ruts.  Once the vehicles were out and had traction, the drivers gave it more gas to keep the vehicle in motion until they reached the ruts where hard-packed snow provided better traction.  I'm sure that traction control would have helped prevent wheelspin which in turn would have helped them get out of their predicament earlier.

Keep in mind, the less torque applied to the wheel, the less traction the road surface needs to provide to keep the tire from spinning out of control.  This is the cornerstone to slow-and-steady 4x4 crawling.  And in the three cases this weekend, what the tires really needed to do was crawl out of the holes that they'd dug when spinning too fast.

[Thorin]

So back to the topic at hand, did anyone read the linked article?  Does the assertion that RWD is intrinsically funner and more satisfying than FWD even at regular, legal road-speeds ring true for you as it did for me?

[Melbosa]

Traction is a lot more than just pounds per square inch.  Wide snow tires can work wonders compared to skinny summer tires.  Tread design, tread block size, tread void (space between the tread blocks), tread block sipes, stickiness of the rubber compound at the operating temperature (summer tires get hard, winter tires stay soft, soft rubber grips better than hard rubber), and additional ingredients in the rubber compound (such as crushed almond shells in some winter tires, which works like micro-studs in the tire) all have a huge impact on your traction.  On top of that, the skinny-vs-wide debate frequently forgets that the type of snowpack influences the tire choice, as well.  Skinny tires are good when you need more weight per square inch so that you break through the upper layers of soft snowpack to get to the hard stuff underneath where you find real traction.  Skinny tires are bad when there is so much snow that your car will bottom out before reaching the hard stuff - better to go with real wide balloony tires so you can float over the top of the snowpack without bottoming out.

Adding sandbags for weight over the wheels makes quite a difference, too, as it loads the springs which in turn pushes the tires down harder on the ground which in turn provides more weight per square inch and thereby increases traction (so long as the tires can reach a hard road surface (including hardpack snow, ice, or asphalt).

As for those 225/70R15s versus the 175/60R15s, the total wheel height would've been 696mm versus 591mm - a loss of 105mm total height that would've resulted in a loss of 52.5mm of clearance.  That's 2" less clearance.  If you drove through deep snow with the bigger tires, you'd be less likely to get your undercarriage hung up on snowbanks.  This is why if you put a skinnier tire on your vehicle you should pay close attention to make sure that the wheel height is at least the same as the regular-width tire you're replacing.

Ultimately, though, the most important thing is to have tires with tread that grips in the conditions you're in.  Nearly bald tires (and I remember Ustauk asking about tread depth at one of the D&D sessions), even if they're winter tires, will probably leave you stranded one cold and snowy night.

Lets clarify this.  Yes Tread does make the difference, and yes I won't argue that point.  But don't discredit the smaller tire as a bad idea either.  My supra was already low to the ground, and clearance wasn't my issue.  Weight was.  Yes sand bags are a must for most RWD vehicles, and with out it, even those smaller winter grips wouldn't have helped much.  But when plowing snow, control is also a factor.  With wider tires, floating on show isn't always a good thing.  Yes at low speeds its not a factor, but at 50+km/h your control isn't as good if your floating on top, versus cutting through.  A good happy medium is best, but I will argue with you or anyone who thinks that keeping the same size tire on the car/suv/truck and just putting Winter grips is better than downsizing your width.

Side note:  Only reason I used the 2" smaller tire was that they were a way better deal at the time than anything else.  Can't go wrong with $400 Studded Winter Grips for $30 a piece.

[Melbosa]

I pushed three separate vehicles out of snowdrifts on my street this week - one RWD truck (with large-block/large-void rear tires for decent traction) and two FWD cars.  In all three cases, the driver had gotten themselves stuck and then tried to get unstuck by flooring the accelerator.  In all three cases, all they accomplished was digging semi-circular holes through the snow; the snow around their spinning tires melted, and when they stopped accelerating the melted snow got cold and froze into extremely slippery ice.  The only way to describe this is that they made "glass potholes" for their drive-wheels.  In all three cases, two grown men (myself and a neighbour) could not push the vehicles out while the drive-wheels were frantically spinning.  In all three cases, we *did* push them out when the drivers stopped gunning the gas and kept the engine barely above idle.

The reason we could get them out is because we had *just* enough strength to push them to the edge of the "glass pothole" they made.  When they were gunning the gas, the tires were rotating so fast there was no chance they'd get any traction.  When they were basically idling the engine, the tires turned really slowly and caught just a fraction of traction, which was just enough to get them out of their ruts.  Once the vehicles were out and had traction, the drivers gave it more gas to keep the vehicle in motion until they reached the ruts where hard-packed snow provided better traction.  I'm sure that traction control would have helped prevent wheelspin which in turn would have helped them get out of their predicament earlier.

Keep in mind, the less torque applied to the wheel, the less traction the road surface needs to provide to keep the tire from spinning out of control.  This is the cornerstone to slow-and-steady 4x4 crawling.  And in the three cases this weekend, what the tires really needed to do was crawl out of the holes that they'd dug when spinning too fast.

OK you took my post to the extreme other side.  Gunning it wasn't what I was getting at, but with traction control in a position you are talking about would be no help to you.  Once traction control sense slip in the tires it will limit the rotation of the tire.  Now if your only already going about 10km/h, the limit is to much and doesn't help at all.  In fact it hinders something terrible.  Obviously the opposite is true as you said, putting it to the floor causes just as much problems.

Like ABS, Like Limited Slip, and Traction Control, they all help the less experienced or panic prone or not confident driver get through life easier.  But there are situations where they aren't as useful.  ABS is something I really like for other people, but I wish I had the option to disable mine in certain situations (not that my car currently has this option) - like when your about to rear end someone, and your already to close, and its a brand new BMW and I'm driving a 20 year old rusted PoS.  All I want to do is lock up my tires, swing the butt end in to the curb, and take the hit on my rims and axel instead of taking the hit on my insurance.  I'm talking 30km/h, nothing too fast.  Or a better example, which has happened to me, of where your on a parkade ramp, on your way out, its icy and all I want to do is skid down it, letting the slid be my pace, but ABS kicks in and I come down that ramp faster (but with more control) than I want to and almost leap into traffic at the wrong time.

[Melbosa]

So back to the topic at hand, did anyone read the linked article?  Does the assertion that RWD is intrinsically funner and more satisfying than FWD even at regular, legal road-speeds ring true for you as it did for me?

Yes I did read it, and yes I did agree with it.  Just the push from behind feeling, vs the pulling from the front feeling when you gun it is enough to convince me which is more satisfying.

[Lazybones]

So back to the topic at hand, did anyone read the linked article?  Does the assertion that RWD is intrinsically funner and more satisfying than FWD even at regular, legal road-speeds ring true for you as it did for me?

At regular road speeds I can hardly tell the difference, however when trying to perform skids, burnouts, highspeed cornering, I would say RWD is a clear winner, however I don't drive like that, and I have to deal with Alberta road conditions 30% to 50% of the year, so I prefer front wheel drive, and having both traction control and ABS. I wouldn't mind AWD over traction control, but most new AWD system have it as well.

So do I agree with the article? Yes and no. I don't believe that FWD is as bad as he makes it, nor that RWD is as good as he states. They have trade offs, it is plain and simple. In city driving, in good weather without stunting, i could almost care less what my car had.

[Lazybones]

Also to clear up something about traction control and ABS.
In a regular cars axle the wheels are setup so that the easiest spinning wheel gets the power. this is done because when a four wheel vehicles turns, the outer wheels spin faster than the inner ones.

If you are in deep snow or an icy intersection, as a pro driver, the only thing you can do is let off the gas, once your wheels begin to spin, so that they slow down and gain traction again.

In a vehicles with traction control, the computer senses that one wheel is not spinning at all and the other is free spinning so it will apply the break only to the spinning wheel, this automatically transfers the remaining power back to the stationary wheel which likely has traction. I can almost guaranty that you can get moving faster or maintain traction better in a car with traction control enabled than with it disabled, it is not simply a feature for panicked drivers.

ABS however, IS a technology where a very skilled driver can out perform the system. Since ABS always assumes that locking the tires is bad, you do loose stomping distance, however this is most pronounced at very high speeds. As for rear ending cars, in theory, you should still be able to turn and go into the curb with ABS, however you would definatly not have the same control over skidding the rear of the car, unless you had a hand break. So in most cases I also prefer ABS over not having it.

[Melbosa]

In a vehicles with traction control, the computer senses that one wheel is not spinning at all and the other is free spinning so it will apply the break only to the spinning wheel, this automatically transfers the remaining power back to the stationary wheel which likely has traction. I can almost guaranty that you can get moving faster or maintain traction better in a car with traction control enabled than with it disabled, it is not simply a feature for panicked drivers.

I will give you that Traction Control is for the most part a good thing.  The only time I would disable it is when I am stuck already, and its not helping me get out (as I have already described).

If you are in deep snow or an icy intersection, as a pro driver, the only thing you can do is let off the gas, once your wheels begin to spin, so that they slow down and gain traction again.

There are more things you can do to prevent this from happening or when it happens on top of just letting off the gas. Its a matter of experience and understanding, and traction control is only there to help with part of it.
* First understanding your road conditions rather than just hoping that your car will just handle it is a must.
* Downshifting/Upshifting in an Automatic or Standard (depending on the situation).
* Breaking with the motor versus breaking with your breaks.
* Pumping the gas slightly to burn off some ice or snow just enough to catch pavement or cause a bank to push off of.

Personally I like the concept of Limited Slip better than Traction Control.  I like the idea of reduction in torque or power to a tire (and transfer of that to another) versus hindering the tire with a breaking motion.  Of course this doesn't help if all 4 tires are slipping but I guess a combination of the two would be best.

[Ustauk]

I double checked my tread with my Dad a while back, and he said it looked fine, and I'll trust his fifty years or so of driving experience on this one.  As Thorin says, the larger diameter tires do help with clearance, which I find useful when driving over freshly gravelled roads or larger drifts in the country.  In the city that wouldn't be a factor.  The downside is burning some rubber on hitting bumps when I have heavier passengers in my back seat and a full load in the trunk, though I don' thave htis problem with just sand bags. 

I'd probably like to get another Celica when mine conks out, probably a fifth generation model, which would limit me to FWD unles I coughed up the cash for an AWD model, which still cost a fairly hefty amount.  I won't be doing that until I break something too expensive to repair on my current ride, though, and I'm hoping to get a few more years out of her.  She's got over 300000 kilometres on the ticker, but my Dad told me about a rusted out one in Fort Sasksatchewan that had 500000 kms on it.  I'll probably have to give her up if the body rusts out too badly, as well, but hopefully she'll keep going for a while.

As I stated earlier, I like the feel of driving a rear wheel drive vehicle.  I especially agree with the article on the thrill of acclerating into a curve, that whole locked in thing.  Mind you, I'm probably biased since I grew up driving older trucks and cars, which were all rear wheel drive.

[Lazybones]

* First understanding your road conditions rather than just hoping that your car will just handle it is a must.
* Downshifting/Upshifting in an Automatic or Standard (depending on the situation).
* Breaking with the motor versus breaking with your breaks.
* Pumping the gas slightly to burn off some ice or snow just enough to catch pavement or cause a bank to push off of.

Personally I like the concept of Limited Slip better than Traction Control.  I like the idea of reduction in torque or power to a tire (and transfer of that to another) versus hindering the tire with a breaking motion.  Of course this doesn't help if all 4 tires are slipping but I guess a combination of the two would be best.

The first is a given, regardless of how your vehicle is equiped.
2 and 3 are both methods of slowing the wheels down, just different ways to do it
4 works sometimes, but others just polishes the spot you are on or creates a rut. Going back to point one through you can use it to your advantage.

Traction Control should be superior to common limited slip differentials. In most cases the differentials will reduce over all power to reduce wheel speed, where as Traction Control only reduces the speed of the free wheel, transferring all of the power to the other wheel. The negatives I can see for traction control are two fold as I have had a far amount of driving time on cars equipped with it. 1. It can be loud, just like some ABS systems. On my car it makes a GRRR GRRR noise when it engages. 2. It will at will at extra wear on your break system. 3. Don't try and do a burn out with it engaged.... it is counter productive.