RWD

You need to go to some track days, because if you're having to use the brakes to turn in, you've got it all wrong.

Reply to
DervMan
Loading thread data ...

Aye, but 100 kg of that was me, and 500 kg was milkies...

Reply to
DervMan

Yes! An all wheel drive car on ordinary tyres will skid off the road; people just think that their Subaru / Land Rover can go anywhere because it's AWD. AWD and summer tyres is only marginally better than FWD, and no better when braking ('cos all cars have AWB). :)

Reply to
DervMan

I'll hire a Ka, you drive round to my house, and see if you can keep up with me down the road ;). I'm not talking about serious left foot braking, just trail braking into the corner to keep the nose stuck down. It's not as if there's any engine braking to do it for you.

Reply to
Doki

I'm not interested in driving like a loon on the road, that's why I use track days. :p

For the vast majority of the roads I know, you're not limited by vehicle performance, cornering grip, or traction, but by visibility. I'd probably be able to see further and faster in something like a Ford Explorer, even if I could corner quicker in something like a Ferrari.

Reply to
DervMan

And the B1225. A free track day :-)

Yep, driving a Renault Master van around narrow country lanes is great. Still, it's not the braking ability that needs to be considered, but what happens to the stuff in the back of the van as well. Driving empty cars/vans rules!

Peter

Reply to
AstraVanMan

Your name's Dervman, and you've got graphs of your car's economy. I suspect the only reason you go on track days is to decoke the engine after all your pootling around in fifth at 40mph ;).

Reply to
Doki

That's one way of looking at it.

T'other is that I'm more than happy to drive inside the speed limit during my usual commute, quite happy letting those people who want to hoon past do so, 'cos I can drive almost exactly as I want at a track day, and not have to worry about getting nicked for it...

Keep watching the consumption graph, the chart is on the rise and consumption is going down... :)

Reply to
DervMan

That's also down to the, err, crap rear suspension. Later models use a multi-link system to control the camber better. Works well, too.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

As in .... my other beemers suspension!!!

Great larf having crap rear suspension ... providing you are ready for it.

Reply to
SDD

First 9000 was 1984/85 I think. The engine in the 9k wasessentially the same as the 900 which was essentially the same as the 99, which started in the 70's and the suspension was macstruts with a solid rear axle.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.