Is Future uncertain

[ganzoom]

2 hours ago, Comedian said:

Here you go. You said (effectively) that front wheel drive cars will push from the rear.

Nonsense.

The weight transfer is true, obvious and undeniable. The push is not.

A rear wheel drive takes advantage of the weight transfer, a front wheel drive does not.

 

Have I got this right, you guys are having a serious 'debate' about RWD versus FWD given Lexus is really now only pushing hybrid units tuned for mpg??

The IS300H is probably the most beign car I've ever driven, you cannot even get it to do one complete donut in snow with the TC turned off!! 

[Guest]

There are soo many factors which can  aid in generation of grip... and not just fixed on how the vehicle is being propelled.
e.g. the over all weight of the car, the suspension type being used, the type of tyre being used, the condition of the tyre, the air density PSI of the tyre, the weather condition, the type of tarmac being accelerated from, how warm the tyres are...the factors are countless comedian and not just how the vehicle is being propelled as you keep thinking. 
and as you say the IS250 can be FWD and will still be fine for whatever is asked of it...  and there are soo many custom built 500+bhp FWD cars out there taking on exotic cars like lambos, ferraris, etc as RCF wont stand a chance against those FWD's and they beat those exotics fair and square in a rolling straight line acceleration so not sure why you ask such a question...  
 

But the point is comparing like for like surely?

So up to 300hp rwd doesn't really have much of an advantage but over 300hp it does. Roughly speaking. Assuming same conditions and tyres.

The special front wheel drive cars you speak of, for example (and there are many cars that eat an rcf for breakfast, under no illusions) would be even better with rwd. The 200bhp IS - barely makes a difference.

The bit I was disagreeing with you on was front wheel drive cars do not squat and push. They lift and slip as a general rule.

You stated 'all cars' a very broad brush. A matter of principle but you quickly resorted to specific examples to prove your general statement. Not going to work. There will always be an exceptional example that pushes limits but in general rwd is better for traction and 4wd even better. Fwd is for going shopping and going from a to b. Rwd is no better at this. It just feels more fun to be pushed a long.

When a fwd bike wins the tour de France or motogp or F1, I will give up my argument.

It's about feel not effectiveness for us road users though. You say it feels no different, I say it does. And I drive both from day to day.


Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[Guest]

Have I got this right, you guys are having a serious 'debate' about RWD versus FWD given Lexus is really now only pushing hybrid units tuned for mpg??
The IS300H is probably the most beign car I've ever driven, you cannot even get it to do one complete donut in snow with the TC turned off!! 

Yep, could be fwd with no noticeable effect on sales or performance. But rcf or LC 500 would be awful.

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[noby76]

54 minutes ago, Comedian said:

But the point is comparing like for like surely?

So up to 300hp rwd doesn't really have much of an advantage but over 300hp it does. Roughly speaking. Assuming same conditions and tyres.

The special front wheel drive cars you speak of, for example (and there are many cars that eat an rcf for breakfast, under no illusions) would be even better with rwd. The 200bhp IS - barely makes a difference.

The bit I was disagreeing with you on was front wheel drive cars do not squat and push. They lift and slip as a general rule.

You stated 'all cars' a very broad brush. A matter of principle but you quickly resorted to specific examples to prove your general statement. Not going to work. There will always be an exceptional example that pushes limits but in general rwd is better for traction and 4wd even better. Fwd is for going shopping and going from a to b. Rwd is no better at this. It just feels more fun to be pushed a long.

When a fwd bike wins the tour de France or motogp or F1, I will give up my argument.

It's about feel not effectiveness for us road users though. You say it feels no different, I say it does. And I drive both from day to day.


Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk
 

again you have completely deviated from the discussion at hand... we were talking about if all cars squat under acceleration.. which you have finally confirmed they do.. case closed...  we all know cars with BHP figures exceeding 300 wheel horse power and above makes sense to be  propelled at the rear instead of the front and i have no where in this discussion said thats not true.. all i cleared up was the notion of yourself and most here having the idea so long as a car is propelled using a RWD configuration will always translate into having grip/traction   is false as thigs like tyres and suspension plays a major role in helping it all hook together.

as i already mentioned in a previouss thread, motogp and  F1 are competition races which could be lost or won in thousands of a second so makes sense to have the front wheels only concentrating on doing the steering leaving the rears to do the propelling.. but how much of a drivers car "feel" can one get out of a measly 200bhp 1.5tone RWD IS250? don't be ridiculous.

[Guest]

12 hours ago, noby76 said:

infact all cars will distribute a higher percentage of weight to their rear wheels resulting in a push from the rear when accelerating from a stop or exiting out of a slow corner..   

 

[ganzoom]

7 hours ago, Comedian said:

Yep, could be fwd with no noticeable effect on sales or performance. But rcf or LC 500 would be awful.

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk
 

Yes the massive sales success of those two car, RCF and LC500, Lexus is fighting away the punters 😉

 

[ganzoom]

Here is actual figures of whats been 'debated' about, the IS is averaging about 500 sales per month for the WHOLE of western Europe. BMW would probably not even notice 500 3 series been misplaced for a month.

http://carsalesbase.com/european-car-sales-data/lexus/lexus-is/

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, ganzoom said:

Yes the massive sales success of those two car, RCF and LC500, Lexus is fighting away the punters 😉

 

ahhhhh damn and blast 

 

[noby76]

2 hours ago, Comedian said:

 

and i still stand by this fact that although the front wheeels in a fwd car does the pulling, does not mean 100% of the effort is solely done by the two front tires only.. although the rear wheels are not powered, the slight weight transfer which gets distributed to the rear once it squats aids it aswell so long as that wheel is in motion and this is all physics...  i will end it here by saying fact that a car is RWD does not translate to

1 being a drivers car in terms of natural 'feel'as being hailed here.  as both my old FWD ford cougar V6 and Accord drives better than both my RWD IS300 and GS430 for car and driver connection..

2. automatically have the capability to have traction when accelerating from a stop or exiting slow corner as this is also tyre and suspension dependant. 

[Linas.P]

16 hours ago, noby76 said:

care to go into details why you would think weight is never transferred to the rear of any moving car be it FWD or RWD at standstill or slow corner exit? 

Weight will be transferred, however that does not make "push" in any shape or form - not only you have some fundamental problem understanding how physics works, but you keep changing the statement you made - you clearly said there will be "push" from the rear on FWD car, which is just absurd. Now you trying to argue that weight transfer is fact .. which it is.

17 hours ago, noby76 said:

infact?!?!?!?!? all cars will distribute a higher percentage of weight to their rear wheels resulting in a push from the rear when accelerating from a stop or exiting out of a slow corner..  

In my opinion SUVs are cancer on the roads, but I start to understand why some people like them and the rest are simply forced to have them.

Some less confident drivers prefers SUV because they "feel" safer, secondly because our roads becoming really terrible and most SUV provides more acceptable ride on rough roads. Now clearly it is misconception that saloons are inferiour - SUVs are not inherently safer and it is not fault of sporty saloons that our roads are bloody broken like never before. That results in SUV being popular and the rest of the drivers of "non-SUV" have to deal with blinding lights (because SUV lights are higher), not being able to "see trough" traffic and just general feeling of being small and vulnerable.

Considering all above I am not surprised that more and more people are switching to SUV. I really hate driving SUV because of high center of gravity and body roll in the corners and I will not be switching to SUV (not to be confused with proper offroaders which have a purpose). Secondly, SUVs have a lot of cons. like increased mass, fuel consumption, aforementioned roll in corners etc. However, as I have said, I understand why people do it - that is because unless you drive SUV yourself it becomes inconvenient to drive "normal" car when there are so many SUVs around.

[Linas.P]

4 hours ago, ganzoom said:

Yes the massive sales success of those two car, RCF and LC500, Lexus is fighting away the punters 😉

We not discussing sales "success", what we are saying one is nicer to drive then another. Yes RWD cars, especially performance ones will sell in low volumes, but that doesn't mean that "we won't feel the difference between FWD and RWD". Just general lack of logic an consistence in your arguments - it is like saying "tea is hot and I have it with two spoons of sugar, > hence elephant is blue..."

there are several separate questions here:

• does RWD feels better then FWD under acceleration and cornering
• which is cheaper to make (hence higher profit margins/more competitive price)
• which sells better 

If there would be no difference how FWD and RWD handles, then we would make all cars FWD and to some extent we do where performance doesn't matter, but to say there are no difference is just incorrect.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, noby76 said:

and i still stand by this fact that although the front wheeels in a fwd car does the pulling, does not mean 100% of the effort is solely done by the two front tires only.. although the rear wheels are not powered, the slight weight transfer which gets distributed to the rear once it squats aids it aswell so long as that wheel is in motion and this is all physics...  

I've quoted it just so the genius of this can can never be lost.

You never know, one day, when they unify gravitation and quantum theory they will come back and see if they can work this out as well.

 

[Linas.P]

21 minutes ago, Comedian said:

I've quoted it just so the genius of this can can never be lost.

Same here, whenever we going to have discussion with noby re: FWD vs. RWD this evidence has to be preserved. I guess that explains why Honda Accord is such a good drive - "it is because it is FWD which pushes from the rear!".

[noby76]

2 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Weight will be transferred, however that does not make "push" in any shape or form - not only you have some fundamental problem understanding how physics works, but you keep changing the statement you made - you clearly said there will be "push" from the rear on FWD car, which is just absurd. Now you trying to argue that weight transfer is fact .. which it is.

 

ok without going too much into details let me make it very simple.. to get any of the 4 tyres to rotate in FWD car from A to B, one needs force to be applied to that tyre. force can be applied to any of the 4 tyres through having enough torque to kick start it... 

Now go to your friendly mechanics garage and get him to lift up a FWD car onto the ramp with the cars engine switched off. go over to each tyre and attempt to spin each one, you will notice each and every one of the tyres will spin freely. now get your mechanic friend to spin both front tyres whilst you spin both rear tyres as fast as you can.

quickly go over to both front tyres and stop them from spinning with your hands until there are completely stopped. have a look at the rear tyres, you will notice even though you stopped the front wheels from spining the rears are still going even with  no engine power being transferred to the rear as the engine is off..

so based  on this if we are able to spin all four wheels of this FWD car on the ramp to 30mph by hand without involving the engine or driveshaft as they are switched off and immediatley stop just the two front tyre whilst the rears are still spinning at 30mph and suddenly lower the car down to the ground we would have generated enough rotational "force" to the rear tyres which will result in a "push" at the rears to accelerate the car even though it is FWD car by design.. 

tyre manufactures are not stupid thats why they even advice to always fit brand new tyres to the rear wheels of a car even if its FWD because fact that there is no  driveshaft hooked up to the rear wheels of a FWD car does not mean the rears are not doing some "pushing" once enough  rotational force has been applied to the rear wheels aiding in having grip and being stable. 

notice i said "some pushing" not 100%  of the pushing once enough  rotational force has been applied...

[Guest]

[noby76]

any given FWD wheel with enough rotational force applied to it will result in a "push" or acceleration prove me wrong.. a spade doesn't cut it.

[Linas.P]

It keeps on giving... I am inviting my colleges to check it out, this is almost more interesting the Fifa world cup!

Especially that part where you and your mechanic frantically turns the wheels on lifted car just to realise the truth - rear weal are in no way connected to front ones!

Your hands in your comparison works as substitute for driveshaft, by turning each wheel by hand you turn it into AWD, if what you saying would be true, then turning front wheels on FWD car would make rear wheels to turn as well without touching them. When you reach some speed on FWD, you are right rear wheels will carry some mass, and because they are rotating, rotating mass = torque. But that rotating mass is dead mass as it is not connected to anything - when you start braking the rear wheels will continue to rotate, when you start accelerating they will resist acceleration - they not acting in any way to support acceleration. 

In corner the mass shift from side to side, to prevent tyres sliding you need lateral grip, better tyres on the front will grip more then rear ones resulting in tendency of car oversteer first. The reason manufacturers recommends better tyres on the rear is because it is commonly accepted that (for inexperienced driver!) understeer is safer then oversteer.

Push or pull depends where you are in regards to driving wheels, therefore FWD can only pull. If you park your FWD Accord behind my RWD IS250 and start pushing me, you car even being FWD will effectively push me, if I attach rope to your car and pull you, my car being RWD will effectively pull you.

BTW... I am actually amazed we having this conversation with adult. It almost feels to me like taking toy cars in front of 2 years old to explain what pushing and pulling means.

[noby76]

10 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

 When you reach some speed on FWD, you are right rear wheels will carry some mass, and because they are rotating, rotating mass = torque. But that rotating mass is dead mass as it is not connected to anything - when you start braking the rear wheels will continue to rotate, when you start accelerating they will resist acceleration - they not acting in any way to support acceleration. 

 

so as we can all see, I am not wrong after all... as he just confirmed FWD will still generate some acceleration at the rear so long as enough rotational force has been applied to it.  I already know the acceleration generated from the rears of FWD is dead acceleration duhh... but so long as rotational force is being applied to it regardless of if its connected to a drive shaft or not, physics still confirms it will "push" how far it pushes is debatable but the push still applies.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

this is almost more interesting the Fifa world cup!

 

I don't think the goal posts get moved as much in that 😂

[NemesisUK]

1 hour ago, noby76 said:

any given FWD wheel with enough rotational force applied to it will result in a "push" or acceleration prove me wrong.. a spade doesn't cut it.

The 'push' force you are feeling is being applied by the seat back, which in turn is being pulled forward by the only genuine motive force, that being applied to the front wheels. Those wheels are ahead of the observer, the driver (and his seat) and so commonly described as a pulling force.

But of course as we all know a true 'pulling' force is one that is applied to an object in the opposite direction to that object's direction of motion. A true pushing force is one that is applied in the same direction of that object's motion.

 So, strictly speaking a FWD car is still being 'pushed' down the road.

[NemesisUK]

12 minutes ago, NemesisUK said:

The 'push' force you are feeling is being applied by the seat back, which in turn is being pulled forward by the only genuine motive force, that being applied to the front wheels. Those wheels are ahead of the observer, the driver (and his seat) and so commonly described as a pulling force.

But of course as we all know a true 'pulling' force is one that is applied to an object in the opposite direction to that object's direction of motion. A true pushing force is one that is applied in the same direction of that object's motion.

 So, strictly speaking a FWD car is still being 'pushed' down the road.

Actually I'm not 100% sure I'm correct in the above.

Thinking more on it, the force is being applied at the tyre/road interface and in the direction towards the rear of the car, in the opposite direction to the car's motion. So, is that then more correctly termed a pulling force?

[Linas.P]

I was about to reply, but I though picture will tell 1000 words:

[dutchie01]

You guys are forgetting the most important topic in push or pull namely Headwind or Tailwind.

 

with a hurricane force tailwind blowing at the trunk one does not need to apply the gaspedal as the push effect can be enormous

 

on topic the salesfigures are not really impressive in europe are they.. the more i think about it the more it starts to make sense replace the gs and is by the es and develop more 🚙 in all sizes.

If that is what the market asks that is what it gets!

 

[Martin F]

On 6/15/2018 at 1:05 PM, noby76 said:

so as we can all see, I am not wrong after all... as he just confirmed FWD will still generate some acceleration at the rear so long as enough rotational force has been applied to it.  I already know the acceleration generated from the rears of FWD is dead acceleration duhh... but so long as rotational force is being applied to it regardless of if its connected to a drive shaft or not, physics still confirms it will "push" how far it pushes is debatable but the push still applies.

This has made for very funny lunch time reading. 

Maybe Noby you can explain the principles of 'inertia' to us uneducated ones.   

 

[noby76]

6 hours ago, Martin F said:

 

Maybe Noby you can explain the principles of 'inertia' to us uneducated ones.   

 

Martin!! I am not here to be your teacher if you need to know how inertia works i suggest you get searching on google...