FWD MX3s are great

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 12:01 am

mitmaks wrote:Please stop bs on this board, before bunch of members have you kicked off this board, you have no point to prove

Mitmaks, I started this thread myself and nobody invited you or your juvenile attitude. If anyone should leave, it should be you!! Please get lost if you can't debate intelligently!

If you don't like this debate, visit some other thread more at your level of understanding. BTW, those Youtube RWD parking demonstrations of yours are pretty lame compared to the real deal; FWD.

Why would someone with a Mustang clunker like you bother to post on a Mazda MX3 Forum and then "put down" FWD MX3s? It's weird and pathetic! If you want to debate rationally, you are welcome here, otherwise, please keep your dumb ideas to yourself.

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 17th, 2006, 12:31 am

you posted little fwd car parallel park, same vid on youtube. I posted RWD cars from youtube also which do parallel parking perfect also. You just don't any point. You're getting topics locked because youre ignorant guy. I can't debate intelligently because there's no intelligency about you, whoever you are. How's RWD lame compared to FWD.
"mustang clunker" well...it would take a real pro driver to drive my Cobra. It wouldn't be you, I can assure you that. Im not putting down mX-3 at all, its great daily driver, I HAVE ONE you moron. Why would I put it down????

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 12:54 am

Leave us alone, mitmaks! You are stifling real debate by your attacks. RWD vs FWD is an important subject and you are disrupting the debate. Please stop your intrusions!

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 17th, 2006, 1:07 am

This is a debate. You started this and nobody says who can or can't "debate" Everyone's proving you wrong and so far nobody agrees with you. Prove your point.

mr1in6billion · Post by **mr1in6billion** » December 17th, 2006, 1:20 am

Red Egg wrote:Leave us alone, mitmaks! You are stifling real debate by your attacks. RWD vs FWD is an important subject and you are disrupting the debate. Please stop your intrusions!

Stifling a debate? Let me explain how a message board is supposed to work.

People come here to learn about their car. People post information that others need, questions are asked if the information isn't enough. It is also a place for informed discussion.

You have repeatedly come on and put up your opinion and tried to sell it as fact, which is detrimental to this community as an accurate source of information. I don't care if you like fwd more that rwd, thats a prefference, which you are entiled too. But comming on here repeatedly claiming it is superior and trying to prove it by taking fragments of articles, taking them out of context to suit your needs, that I wont stand for.

For example

You state something that you know nothing about as fact

Front-wheel drive cars are also superior at parallel parking than RWD. This is a fact that cannot be denied!

You back it up with an example of a fwd car parking, which isn't proof

See this 15 second youtube clip for proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UzaahXS1ek

At which point you are proved wrong

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2nz8DZymus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCxl7kasGRY
So you cant do that in RWD car huh, dude get a life. A good driver can do tricks in any car, easier in RWD though.

To which you reply with a whine about how being proved wrong stifles your 'discussion'

Leave us alone, mitmaks! You are stifling real debate by your attacks. RWD vs FWD is an important subject and you are disrupting the debate. Please stop your intrusions!

You did the same thing when you posted the article about the daytonas; you touted how the article praised the fwd platform, completely ignoring the fact that it also praised the rwd platform, which had come out slightly on top.

You also see things for more than they are. When Mitmaks posted that

Actually oversteer is easier controlled in RWD car than FWD

You took it too mean that rwd was superior. You can't keep using one incident to prove a generalization. If I said I like peas more than I like carrots, that doesn't mean peas are my favorite food. But none of that matters since it is simply my opinion.

You like fwd. fine. we get it. now go troll somewhere else and leave the 'rwd vs fwd' alone untill you have solid proof and real world experience.

hotsiit · Post by **hotsiit** » December 17th, 2006, 4:01 am

^---

It will always be someones opinion on which is best. I like all types of platforms...I have a fwd mx3 (soon to be bpt with a t3 etc...) a rwd 1st gen rx-7, and an awd impreza. They are all fun in their own right and I myself could not say one is better then the other.

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 7:48 am

mitmaks wrote:stop bs on this board, before bunch of members have you kicked off this board, you have no point to prove

On this Forum, we all drive FWD Rice Burners, especially Tunes67 & Nd4SpdSe, so why all the FWD hate? I made it clear that we are not talking about track racing but general car ownership.

Attack the idea, not the person making the post; or better yet, let's have a civilized debate. As I said before, if you don't like the debate, you don't have to read it or post to it. I would prefer it if you would post counter arguments and new ideas. For example, I was shocked to learn about the Citroën DS being mid-engine and front wheel drive. How cool is that?!

I don't understand Tunes67's comment that I should buy a FWD Honda and sell my Mazda when I have an excellent FWD MX3 GS right now. What's the point of that comment?

As I said before, ask yourself this question, if you could own only one car, would it be a FWD or a RWD?

If they close down this thread again, I am going to start a new thread called "Anti-RWD Facts" to explore all the deficiencies of the RWD platform for the average driver. Good idea, huh?

I have some ideas for future posts on this "FWD MX3s are Great" thread, so stay "tuned"!
FWD

RWD

Post by **MX-3.com** » December 17th, 2006, 9:38 am

I am leaving this thread open, but if you guys' cannot debate with tactfulness, and appropriate language it will be closed and possibly removed.

That's my warning.

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 10:23 am

Most front-wheel drive cars use transversely-mounted engines where the crankshaft is oriented side-to-side relative to the wheels of the vehicle.

Transversely-mounted engines also allow for a compact engine that can fit into small engine bays. Such engines that fit into the MX3's tiny engine bay are the amazing K8 V6 engine, the 168 hp KLDE, and 199 hp KLZE. This would not be possible in a RWD MX3 because such RWDs need engines with a front-to-back longitudinal arrangement (they are NOT transversely mounted).

FWD transversely-mounted engines increase passenger safety by increasing crumple zones while also providing a more roomy cabin . "Because the transversely-mounted engine does not require a bevel gear to change the direction of the final drive, coast-down losses are reduced by approximately 3% of flywheel power and hence overall efficiency is higher with a FWD design." (see answers.com).

atlantamx3 · Post by **atlantamx3** » December 17th, 2006, 11:07 am

Jeff is certainly a lot more lenient than I am. If you came onto MY forum, I would have banned you long ago just because you like to start trouble.

You are a troll.

I bet you dont even OWN an MX-3!

You probably own a Mustang.

Post by **MX-3.com** » December 17th, 2006, 11:37 am

atlantamx3 wrote:Jeff is certainly a lot more lenient than I am. If you came onto MY forum, I would have banned you long ago just because you like to start trouble.

You are a troll.

I bet you dont even OWN an MX-3!

You probably own a Mustang.

atlantamx3, I tend to think that you are in the wrong on this one. I have no problem with what RedEgg has posted, and from what I have seen he is simply trying to prove on a FWD forum that FWD are better IN HIS OPINION. It's the others MitMaks included that I see as pushing too many buttons and stirring up trouble.

papa roached · Post by **papa roached** » December 17th, 2006, 11:50 am

opinions, like certine parts of the body, everyone has one and they all stink

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 11:51 am

atlantamx3 wrote:You are a troll.

Atlantamx3, who are you referring to: mitmaks and his 1995 Ford Mustang or me? Whoever you are referring to, you should not call any members of this Forum a "troll" or threaten to ban them for having a different opinion. Actually, Atlantamx3, you should be banned for calling mitmaks and me Trolls; unless you apologize.

BTW, I bought my MX3 GS brand new from the dealership in December 1991. I still own it and it's in great shape. Here is a photo:

Boris · Post by **Boris** » December 17th, 2006, 1:51 pm

I've decided to avoid posting my opinion in this thread anymore. From now on, I'll just quote other people's professional opinion.

The disadvantages of FWD are mainly the decrease in vehicle handling ability. With more weight over the front of the automobile, the back end tends to become very light. Rear tire traction is decreased and the car may swap ends on icy roads easier. This has been overcome by designers somewhat by placing as much weight as possible further back in the vehicle. Ideal weight distribution is often described as 50/50 front to rear, but FWD cars seldom get near this.

-Canadian Driver, FWD VS RWD

Another disadvantage is the load placed on the front tires. They must transfer all acceleration, steering, cornering, and braking forces to the road. The tires have only a finite amount of grip, so using some of it for acceleration must decrease it in other areas. The rear tires have very little load on them and are basically only along for the ride. This is why accomplished FWD racers say "put the gas to the floor and steer - the rear will follow"

-Canadian Driver, FWD VS RWD

I ESPECIALLY LIKE THIS ONE:

With some of the mechanical parts removed from the front and installed at the rear, vehicle balance and handling are much improved. Using the rear tires for acceleration traction takes the load off the front, so drivers accelerating out of a corner have much more lateral grip. RWD is used on all the world's fastest road course race cars and many performance production vehicles for this reason

-Canadian Driver, FWD VS RWD

http://www.sromagazine.com/boards/archi ... 74231.html

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 17th, 2006, 3:21 pm

My favourite quote is the conclusion of the "Popular Mechanics" article entitled "Comparison Test: Front-Wheel Drive vs Rear-Wheel Drive". In the article, FWD and RWD cars with 4, 6, & 8 cylinders are compared. These are controlled scientific tests done by educated professionals, and not the ramblings of a guy named Neofreak posting "FWD vs RWD" from his SRO Blog. Who is this Neofreak guy anyway? Doesn't he work the late shift at Pep Boys?

Popular Mechanics Conclusion
ALL SAID AND DONE
Neither front-wheel drive nor rear-wheel drive is really better than the other. Today's sophisticated traction and stability control systems are so good they can mask or enhance the true driving dynamics of a vehicle. That said, through most of this test we found the effectiveness of these systems had more to do with a car's performance than which wheels were actually doing the driving. Popular Mechanics (September, 2004 issue) .

"Neither front-wheel drive nor rear-wheel drive is really better than the other." Translation: Is RWD a waste of money, horsepower, and fuel efficiency?

FWD MX3s are great

Which car would you prefer to own?