RWD vs FWD BMW, Saab

Page 2 of 2  


Just making a point that becuase it's RWD it doesn't automatically make it "better" than a FWD.
To the other poster, heavy front weight bias isn't "intentional" on FWD cars, i.e. they don't engineer the weight bias as part of the design - it's just the way it is because everythig is up front. If manufacturers could (easily) make FWD with 50-50 they would.
I used to drive an 80's 900i on occasion and it was horrible. ..but as many would argue it was real Saab. then the next ones were based on vauxhall/GM running gear and maybe they still are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

my 77GT Celica on cornering would outdo any modern standard FWD car, i live close to the snake pass, the A57 and even with a lot less power i could leave stuff standing over the best 10 miles of bends
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did you then lose control on a roundabout and crash it?
Bam! ;-)
The trouble with racing on a public road is that generally the people you're comparing against, aren't.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

nope
never said i was racing. just that on the fast parts, people with more power and FWD couldnt overtake. its a long winding country lane type thing, used by trucks and anyone wanting between Manchester and Sheffield. i just used to drive it for the fun.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
adder1969 wrote:

Bullshit. How hard would it be to bias the weight to the rear of the car? Simple. Why would you want the weight to be 50-50 when the back wheels of the car are merely dollies. They don't drive, they don't turn, and they provide minimal braking.
The only reason the 50-50 is important to a BMWs handling is specifically *because* it is a RWD car.

Your experience with vintage Saabs is not germane to this discussion.
--
-Fred W

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred W wrote:

They can't do that. Do you know why? It does not appear so, from what you write below.

Because it would be a better-balanced car. Too bad it's not "simple".

So what? Do you think that the front-heavy nature of FWD cars helps them steer better? Hint for you - it doesn't.

So what? Do you think that the front-heavy nature of FWD cars helps them stop better? Hint for you - it's better to distribute the breaking load across all four tires, as much as possible, not load everything onto the front tires and brakes, which are already the limiting factor, due to the foward weight transfer while braking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
adder1969 wrote:

A silly point to "make".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
stinkeroo wrote:

No way is that FWD POS 53/47. Rare is the FWD car that is even as good as 60/40.

It definitely will not.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dizzy wrote:

The weight bias on front wheel drive cars is different intentionally. Since both the drive and steering are performed from the same axle the engineering goal is different than a RWD car where they are from separate axles.
As to the 9-3 being a piece of junk, have you ever actually driven a modern 9-3 Mr. Dizzy? I am talking 2003 or later. Of course you will say that you have and claim that you still think it is a POS, but it will all be meaningless since you continue to hide behind your silly nym.
Personally, I too prefer RWD cars, for strictly "sport" driving. But each design (FWD vs RWD) has pluses and minuses.
And the 9-3SS is not a POS. It handles quite well and with only a 2.0 liter engine has better performance than a 2.5 liter BMW. Sure, it does that with forced induction. What's wrong with that? Oh, and it delivers 32mpg on the highway, which no BMWs (currently sold in the US) can.
What POS...
--
-Fred W

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Have owned a number of Saabs and must state that the 9-3 is no POS - best I owned was a 9-3 Aero with Hirsch performance upgrade and she was a great 6 sec car. I will say the GM influence pushed me away and I tried Audi (A6) before moving to my current BMW (X5).
On 29/9/07 22:58, in article s9udna0kaqDhV2PbnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com,

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred W wrote:

Don't be ridiculous. It is not "different intentionally". It is an inherent aspect of the design, made yet worse by the "intentional" bits. Don't assume.
Fine if you don't regard the 9-3 as a "POS". You have a right to your opinion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dizzy wrote:

Bullshit. You are the one who is assuming. It is quite intentional, and functional as well.
And while you do have a right to an opinion, I have to tell you that yours is flawed.
--
-Fred W

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred W wrote:

Nope.
Guffaw. Yeah, they "intentionally" put the engine, tranny, and transaxle all up front, resulting in a front-heavy vehicle.

Works fine for minivans and 50HP ecnono-boxes, I'll admit...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is the case.
What they don't do is think "We need all the weight up front so lets move everything as close to the front as possible"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've owned several Saabs (two different generations of 900 turbo and 9-3) and I was very fond of those cars. This was when I lived in the Mid-Atlantic region and New England. They were very good in the snow, and, compared to the RWD cars I'd owned and driven before them, they drove very well. I did prefer the older 900 Turbo to the newer 9-3.
But since moving out to New Mexico, I definitely prefer the BMW driving experience. I haven't messed with snow tires because it just doesn't snow that much here. But in the little snow we've had, my e36 328 did OK but not great. Certainly not as good as my '87 or '93 900 Turbos. But the RWD handling in these cars (and my recently purchased '01 530i) is exceptional. Much more "cornering like on rails" and a general feeling of being in control. Not that the Saabs were shabby, but that the BMWs are truly excellent in this regard.
-Karl http://www.sandiastrings.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A 525i is a nice car, but a bit underpowered comapared with many BMW's.

With a high performance car on normal roads then rear wheel drive every time.
If you live in Scandinavia then in the winter it is probably easier to drive a FWD car in the snow and ice than a RWD one. OTOH for serious driving in these conditions a 4WD (like an Audi Quattro) is probably an even better option. Even then the more powerful the engine the greater proportion of that power needs to be delivered to the rear wheels to avoid torque steer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.