The cars and bikes thread!

[tribe125]

You’ve got the blue gloves so you might as well carry on.

[geoffbot]

You’ve got the blue gloves so you might as well carry on.

My mentality indeed.

[Raza]

To the last line, yes. My polo was half as fast as my 328, but way more fun. I always read that fwd is bad and rwd is good buy both of our anecdotes here say otherwise.

RWD good and FWD bad is an oversimplified translation of race principles to the street—and time and again, the real world has shown that what’s good in a race isn’t necessarily good in your driveway. RWD is inherently better balanced, and all else equal, a RWD car will be a better handling car and faster around a track. But faster around a track doesn’t always mean more fun. All else equal, though, I would be RWD is more fun—but the thing is, all else is rarely equal. Fun FWD cars tend to be smaller and lighter—cars like your Polo, the Viggen, my Wolfsburg, the Mini Cooper, the GTI—they range between 2,400 and 3,000 pounds or so. Because FWD cars occupy a lower part of the market, RWD cars tend to be either entry luxury or higher, and they get weighted down with luxury features. And often, even if they’re more dedicated performance cars, they have big engines, like the Mustang, and that adds weight as well. Mustangs weigh between 3,500 and 3,800 pounds (for comparison, my old Mercedes E class, a midsize family sedan, weighed about 3,600 pounds), and the Camaro pushes up to 4,100 pounds—over two tons! That’s not to say that you can’t have fun in a heavy car, it’s just that you have to work harder, go faster, have more power, et al, because the sensation of speed gets dulled by the weight. Small FWD performance cars don’t have that issue—they’re lighter, more immediate, and ultimately, they can be more fun at road speeds.

If you ever start to lose faith in RWD, there are a few shining beacons. My Z4, for example. A bit on the heavy side at around 3,000. Then there’s the 987 Porsche Boxster, which was around 2,800 pounds (though my Z4 is more fun, I must say). Mazda MX-5 starts at around 2,300 pounds. The Lotus Elise is around 2,000. Subaru BRZ/Toyota 86 is around 2,700 pounds. The old Toyota MR2 Spyder was around 2,100 (and another example of race tech being garbage for the road—the F1 style paddle transmission was like 1.5 seconds slower to 60mph than the proper manual). There may be a few others that I’m forgetting. You give up big power to have a more fun car. For me, fun is the goal—speed is a byproduct. When a car becomes all about speed, fun can easily get lost.

I learned from driving my bog standard Passat 1.8T automatic after owning my E320 that FWD being “bad” was a myth. The Passat was slower, but handled better and was more fun than the E320, even though it too was a midsize family sedan. Each layout—RWD, FWD, and AWD—has its own benefits and its own downsides. But, the manufacturers also dictate what we get to choose from on the open market. If I were building a race car or even a fun car for the street, I would probably still look at RWD first and the car would probably end up looking a lot like an MX-5. But when I have to choose from what exists on the market, a Volkswagen GTI seems much more appealing than a BMW 320i, even before you factor in the $9,000 MSRP difference.

[mlcor]

RWD good and FWD bad is an oversimplified translation of race principles to the street—and time and again, the real world has shown that what’s good in a race isn’t necessarily good in your driveway. RWD is inherently better balanced, and all else equal, a RWD car will be a better handling car and faster around a track. But faster around a track doesn’t always mean more fun. All else equal, though, I would be RWD is more fun—but the thing is, all else is rarely equal. Fun FWD cars tend to be smaller and lighter—cars like your Polo, the Viggen, my Wolfsburg, the Mini Cooper, the GTI—they range between 2,400 and 3,000 pounds or so. Because FWD cars occupy a lower part of the market, RWD cars tend to be either entry luxury or higher, and they get weighted down with luxury features. And often, even if they’re more dedicated performance cars, they have big engines, like the Mustang, and that adds weight as well. Mustangs weigh between 3,500 and 3,800 pounds (for comparison, my old Mercedes E class, a midsize family sedan, weighed about 3,600 pounds), and the Camaro pushes up to 4,100 pounds—over two tons! That’s not to say that you can’t have fun in a heavy car, it’s just that you have to work harder, go faster, have more power, et al, because the sensation of speed gets dulled by the weight. Small FWD performance cars don’t have that issue—they’re lighter, more immediate, and ultimately, they can be more fun at road speeds.

If you ever start to lose faith in RWD, there are a few shining beacons. My Z4, for example. A bit on the heavy side at around 3,000. Then there’s the 987 Porsche Boxster, which was around 2,800 pounds (though my Z4 is more fun, I must say). Mazda MX-5 starts at around 2,300 pounds. The Lotus Elise is around 2,000. Subaru BRZ/Toyota 86 is around 2,700 pounds. The old Toyota MR2 Spyder was around 2,100 (and another example of race tech being garbage for the road—the F1 style paddle transmission was like 1.5 seconds slower to 60mph than the proper manual). There may be a few others that I’m forgetting. You give up big power to have a more fun car. For me, fun is the goal—speed is a byproduct. When a car becomes all about speed, fun can easily get lost.

I learned from driving my bog standard Passat 1.8T automatic after owning my E320 that FWD being “bad” was a myth. The Passat was slower, but handled better and was more fun than the E320, even though it too was a midsize family sedan. Each layout—RWD, FWD, and AWD—has its own benefits and its own downsides. But, the manufacturers also dictate what we get to choose from on the open market. If I were building a race car or even a fun car for the street, I would probably still look at RWD first and the car would probably end up looking a lot like an MX-5. But when I have to choose from what exists on the market, a Volkswagen GTI seems much more appealing than a BMW 320i, even before you factor in the $9,000 MSRP difference.

Having owned two of the cars you mention (Miata and Elise), I agree that RWD should be more fun on the street as well as the track, although there are plenty of fun-to-drive FWD cars. I just find the predictability of RWD, the ease with which you can let the tail hang out and pull it back in using only the throttle, much more entertaining. The Vantage has the same character traits--although it is much heavier than the Miata or Elise, at around 3600 pounds it's still pretty tossable.

[geoffbot]

I'm moving soon and the wife will have to drive so I will almost certainly actually need to get a smaller car as she won't drive the saloon. A 2014 golf gti with 35k miles on the clock would be fine - but its more expensive than my 2014 328! Which is silly.

[geoffbot]

Having owned two of the cars you mention (Miata and Elise), I agree that RWD should be more fun on the street as well as the track, although there are plenty of fun-to-drive FWD cars. I just find the predictability of RWD, the ease with which you can let the tail hang out and pull it back in using only the throttle, much more entertaining. The Vantage has the same character traits--although it is much heavier than the Miata or Elise, at around 3600 pounds it's still pretty tossable.

Aren't rwd cars much easier to spin out?

[mlcor]

Aren't rwd cars much easier to spin out?

Depends; nowadays, stability systems make it harder, and RWD cars aren't as tail happy as they used to be. Also, cars generally have much much higher cornering limits due to the safety systems, much better tires, etc. So most non-maniacs will hit their courage limits well before the car's actual limits. Of course, the maniacs are more likely to have crazy-fast cars...

[I-B]

Depends; nowadays, stability systems make it harder, and RWD cars aren't as tail happy as they used to be. Also, cars generally have much much higher cornering limits due to the safety systems, much better tires, etc. So most non-maniacs will hit their courage limits well before the car's actual limits. Of course, the maniacs are more likely to have crazy-fast cars...

my car is RWD with skinny tires but it's glued to the road thanks to all the gizmo's...I have a small BMW i3...

[I-B]

I'm moving soon and the wife will have to drive so I will almost certainly actually need to get a smaller car as she won't drive the saloon. A 2014 golf gti with 35k miles on the clock would be fine - but its more expensive than my 2014 328! Which is silly.

i owned a Golf GTD, they are better priced, more fuel economic and cheaper to buy

[Raza]

Aren't rwd cars much easier to spin out?

Yes. Even with the electronic nannies in place, spins occur much more easily in RWD cars. At the same time, FWD cars are more likely to understeer and slide off the road. I don’t find either one particularly difficult to deal with, but understeer usually happens more slowly. Of course, you can also get understeer in a RWD car, just like you can get oversteer in a FWD car.