FWD MX3s are great

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 2:18 pm

Since the "MX3s Can't Drift...Good!" thread was closed down by administration, I thought I would start a new thread that would discuss the advantages of front-wheel drive in a general way. It is an interesting topic that has been overlooked by the majority of import enthusiasts.

Certain individuals from the old "MX3s Can't Drift" thread, would be well advised to acquaint themselves with the Forum rules regarding abusive and slanderous comments directed at me or anyone else on this thread. If you don't like the thread, leave it alone. Also, please do not boycott this thread in the hopes that I will just go away. I enjoy this FWD debate; it's fun.

OK, I'll start where I left off on the old thread before it was shut down:

Front wheel drive car engines are positioned transversely which allows for a smaller engine compartment. However, as cars are more powerful these days, FWD becomes less attractive. Torque steer is a problem with FWD cars that exceed 250 hp. Since the MX3 GS has only 130 HP and even a KLZE-swapped MX3 has 196 hp, the car is well below the threshold of 250 hp. The Porsche 911 Turbo has 300+ hp so RWD is appropriate for that car.

Unlike RWD for winter driving, FWD allows you to apply a small amount of power to the front wheels while braking and keep the wheels turning, increasing your stopping and turning power. RWD has its place for cars with performance engines, like Cadillac, Lexus, & Mercedes.

This is a direct quote from the University of Toronto, Affinity Magazine: "FWD vehicles are also lighter, which means they tend to have better acceleration, braking, and fuel economy. And since the drive shaft doesn't need to run all the way underneath the car to reach the wheels from the engine, FWD cars can have more passenger room. FWD cars tend to have better acceleration, braking, and fuel economy."

Tiff Needel Front wheel Drive Techniques; Ford Puma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBPH94cYKO0

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 15th, 2006, 2:24 pm

Can't vote as there's no RWD mx-3. But if there was I would vote for RWD. RWD mx-3 would be so much more fun. Btw, I've sent you a pm asking you "Have you driven a modern RWD car and see how it compares to your mx-3?" Please post here if you don't mind.

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 2:56 pm

mitmaks wrote:
"Have you driven any modern RWD cars to compare to your mx3?"

I did have the opportunity to drive a used 1991 rear-wheel drive Lexus LS 400 on business. It had a 4.0 liter V8 engine with well over 250 hp. To be perfectly honest, I didn't like driving that car. I much prefer the current FWD Volvo sedan I now use for business. The Lexus RWD made winter driving difficult and I feel like my MX3 has better over-all control. The only small RWD car I drove was that old Mustang 5.0; it is not fair to compare because it was such a relic (fun to drive though). On my business trip to Germany next year, I will make an effort to rent a small sporty RWD car so I can see how RWD handles on the Autobahn.

P.S. The "RWD MX3" is hypothetical to see which you would prefer if given the choice. I have a bad feeling about FWD's chances to win that poll.

neutral · Post by **neutral** » December 15th, 2006, 3:25 pm

RWD for dry conditions and FWD for slick road conditions.
Babbling opinionated detail is below if you desire spending a minute of your life reading that you'll never get back.

For dry pavement I'd vote for the RWD MX cuz it would be closer to 50/50 wt distro. IMHO ya can't beat that aspect of well designed low-ctr-of-gravity-50/50-wt-distro-RWD for pure driving pleasure thru the twisties. My first ride was a '69 MGB roadster RWD w/~100HP and that car stuck thru turns like glue at 60-70mph. Driving the Miata reminds me of that experience.

Plus, driving is just more fun when acceleration and speed is gained thru being pushed by RWD instead of pulled by FWD.

For slick driving conditions MX-3 FWD would def be my choice. Even better - a FWD with higher center of gravity than the MX-3. Much better to be pulled by the front wheels instead of pushed by the rear ones in a front engine RWD car. In barely snowy/icy conditions in the MGB I once slid sideways off the road while STOPPED in a line of traffic at a light. Was not stopped on a hill but on a level stretch of pavement - the slight slope for drainage from centerline crown of the pavement toward the shoulder was enough that the 'B' could not stick - even standing still. That example may appear due as much to xtreme low center of grav as it being a RWD but as far as taking turns under slick conditions it wasn't safe at ANY speed. Normally great handling RWD car's wheels can skip ya off the road like a flat stone on a pond.

I have a few (non suicidal) Miata friends who would never even consider taking their Miata out on snowy/icy roads of any kind. Like the MGB the Miata has RWD, good wt distro, but a low center of gravity and can be terrifying in bad weather/road conditions where it acts like it wants to leave the road... not stay on the road... A RWD MX-3 would be similar I'd guess.

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 4:02 pm

Neutral, I know what you mean. The fun factor of RWD is an important consideration. That's why the RWD Mazda MX5 Miata is so popular. According to Tiff Needell, you can achieve a semi-power slide with the FWD MX3 if you use the "Scandinavian Flick" technique, but is seems a bit "out-of-control" for me. FWD doesn't allow "donuts" or "true power slides" so RWD wins in the fun department. However those FWD e-brake maneuvers look amazing; it's surprising those cars don't flip over doing those tricks.

Here is a great TV video from England on the 1.6 litre Suzuki Swift Sport with race-car-driver Tiff Needell. The 2-door FWD Swift has 125 hp with acceleration of 0-60 mph in 8.9 seconds which approximates the MX3 GS. It doesn't look as great as the Mazda MX3, but you should see how it handles on open and challenging roads. It shows what a experienced driver can do with an underpowered FWD "shopping car" (as he calls it) and how the problem of understeer is sometimes overstated by FWD critics.

Suzuki Swift Sport with race-car-driver Tiff Needell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMHXHPSWCik

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 5:11 pm

A RWD MX3 GS would weigh and cost more. The greater weight would result in slower acceleration, inferior braking and handling. Also, cold climate performance is severely compromised in such a RWD car.

I don't think that the RWD's ability to powerslide or make donuts in parking lots is worth it. If the hypothetical RWD MX3 is strictly a summer pleasure car, well, alright then. It would be slower, more sluggish, with worse milage, but you can perform all of the RWD maneuvers at the track. You would then need to buy a winter FWD car to get you through the winter months; perhaps a Honda Civic?

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 6:59 pm

Which car performs best in the world in all driving conditions?

Why Audi, of course! That being the case, none of Audi's performance cars have RWD. Here is why in a quote from Audi's website regarding the subject:

Front-wheel drive “pulls” the vehicle. For this reason a front-wheel-drive car is in principle more controllable and tracks better than conventional rear-wheel drive. On slippery roads in particular, the front-wheel-drive car has an advantage because the weight of the engine is over the driven wheels, thereby increasing traction. Today almost 80 percent of the world’s passenger cars have front-wheel drive. Audi’s models have either front-wheel drive or quattro® permanent all-wheel drive. (from audi.com)

See for yourself: Audi.com link:
http://www.audi.com/audi/com/en2/tools/ ... drive.html

neutral · Post by **neutral** » December 15th, 2006, 7:06 pm

All true. But just not as much fun as a well balanced RWD.

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 15th, 2006, 8:24 pm

Red Egg wrote:Which car performs best in the world in all driving conditions? Why Audi, of course! That being the case, none of Audi's performance cars have RWD. Here is why in a quote from Audi's website regarding the subject:

Front-wheel drive “pulls” the vehicle. For this reason a front-wheel-drive car is in principle more controllable and tracks better than conventional rear-wheel drive. On slippery roads in particular, the front-wheel-drive car has an advantage because the weight of the engine is over the driven wheels, thereby increasing traction. Today almost 80 percent of the world’s passenger cars have front-wheel drive. Audi’s models have either front-wheel drive or quattro® permanent all-wheel drive. (from audi.com)
See for yourself: Audi.com link:
http://www.audi.com/audi/com/en2/tools/ ... drive.html

Now you're starting to compare AWD vs FWD vs RWD. Of course AWD is best platform, RWD being second and FWD is economy cars

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 8:52 pm

mitmaks wrote: Now you're starting to compare AWD vs FWD vs RWD. Of course AWD is best platform, RWD being second and FWD is economy cars

The Audi.com website states that "Audi’s models have either front-wheel drive or quattro permanent all-wheel drive." Audi does not sell RWD for a reason; because FWD and AWD are superior. Check the link if you do not believe me.

If RWD is so great, why would Audi offer FWD and not RWD? It's because their engineers know what works best in a wide variety of driving situations. Audi, in its wisdom, has rejected the rear-wheel drive platform; that's a fact.

Nd4SpdSe · Post by **Nd4SpdSe** » December 15th, 2006, 8:56 pm

This is my only post in this thread. I'm staying out of it...

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 15th, 2006, 9:10 pm

Red Egg wrote:
mitmaks wrote: Now you're starting to compare AWD vs FWD vs RWD. Of course AWD is best platform, RWD being second and FWD is economy cars

The Audi.com website states that "Audi’s models have either front-wheel drive or quattro permanent all-wheel drive." Audi does not sell RWD for a reason; because FWD and AWD are superior. Check the link if you do not believe me.

If RWD is so great, why would Audi offer FWD and not RWD? It's because their engineers know what works best in a wide variety of driving situations. Audi, in its wisdom, has rejected the rear-wheel drive platform; that's a fact.

yet another mistake. It costs them way less to produce FWD audi than RWD audi. Makes sense?

mitmaks · Post by **mitmaks** » December 15th, 2006, 9:12 pm

http://www.lexus.com
look at their cars, most of them are RWD or AWD, only cheapest ones offer FWD.

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 15th, 2006, 9:46 pm

Mitmaks, like I said before (3rd post on this thread), I drove a used RWD Lexus LS 400 and didn't like the handling. Also, for a car that has such a huge amount of horsepower, it wasn't overly quick either.

RWD is being offered by Lexus, Mercedes, & BMW today because of the trend to make these cars with enormous amounts of horsepower. The 2007 Lexus LS460 has 380 horsepower and 367 lb-ft of torque so it needs RWD. Lexus actually offers 3 FWD vehicles which even surprised me, and the FWD Lexus ES has a 272-hp V6 engine. You may call these cars the "cheapest ones", I call them the least expensive!

Red Egg · Post by **Red Egg** » December 16th, 2006, 11:14 am

mitmaks wrote: yet another mistake. It costs them way less to produce FWD audi than RWD audi. Makes sense?

Come on! I really don't think that a luxury auto maker like Audi would use FWD on its cars simply to save money; especially when their whole reputation is build around excellent control and handling.

The 200 hp Audi A4 2.0 T Cabriolet is front-wheel drive and costs over $55,000. That's a lot of money for any car.

MX-3.com

FWD MX3s are great

Which car would you prefer to own?

FWD MX3s are great