FWD vs AWD

Me and my friend both have 1st gen eclipses (actualy he has a talon but same thing), I have a GSX AWD, he has a FWD Esi turbo (he put a 16g on it himself), and the other day we decided to race just to see who was faster.We both have about the same basic mods, 3" turboback, 16g, etc. but he has suspension and tires though and some other traction mods too.

We already knew his car was mid 12s and mine is high 12s without race gas, but from a stop, since i had AWD i thought i would jump ahead of him at first and then he might catch up by 80mph or so, but to my suprise, other than a 1/2 carlength jump i got on him off the line, he kept beside me the ENTIRE time. And by 100, he was way ahead of me and still pulling pretty hard. The next few races were from a roll and i got beat even worse that time i dont even wanna talk about it.

Anyways, ever since that day i started to in a way hate awd. it has a lot of parasidic loss, its heavier, harder on the car etc. and ive been thinking of getting a FWD turbo version of the eclipse, or just a RS/GS and turboing it like he did. It shouldnt be too hard to transfer mods from one eclipse to another and i can get a GS eclipse for like $1,000 + sell my car for more so i could maby even make some money heh.

This is a decision that ive been thinking about for a few weeks and i just wanted to see what you guys think.
thanks

slips/video. until then i will not believe your claims of your friends mid 12s and your high 12s. especially not with 2 mods.

man, some people can't appreciate what they got.

in another thread of yours you stated your best as 12.4. Why high 12s all of a sudden?

slips/video. until then i will not believe your claims of your friends mid 12s and your high 12s. especially not with 2 mods.


" We both have about the same basic mods, 3" turboback, 16g, etc. "

and plus i dont care what you believe.

And not to be rude but its not that i dont appreciate it, i just think i can do better.

in another thread of yours you stated your best as 12.4. Why high 12s all of a sudden?

well, that was with my friend driveing, plus the boost was up a little because he was useing race gas.

And i dont mean to insult or anything but the point i was trying to make is that we know his car is faster in the 1/4 mile. Im not trying to impress anyone, think it was mid 22 sec 1/4 miles if you want.

you can't drive your car. your AWD could hardly pull on a high powered FWD off the line is completely laughable. you must be a really really lousy driver. my friends AWD cars will rip even a MR off the line by around 1.5 cars. both the AWD and the MR does not even spin the tires off the line. the car just leaps off the line at 6000+ rpm which = to around 30mph. however the EVO still can outlauch my friends MR2 turbo. my friends EVO can outlaunch my RWD 240 by around 3 cars. by 60mph hes already 4-5 cars ahead of me. while i'm still spinning hes already in 2nd gear. and no i'm not a bad driver, i can out launch a type R which is as good as a FWD can get off the line.

describe to me how you launched your GSX to have such a crappy start? my friend can bog off the line and still take me by 2 cars. you must've really screwed up. here is the exact steps and how the car should behave on a nice launch

1) keep revs to 6000+ rpm

2) depending on car, either feather clutch or ease off slowly

3) if done properly, your 6000rpm rev will not drop but actually go straight to redline

4) as soon as you launch you should have to imediately have to shift to 2nd gear. that is how a perfect AWD or MR launch is suppose to be, and i will never forget how monsterous those take off's are.

a EVO and STi with a really good driver can have a 60' of 1.6 seconds stock!!! a perfect FWD can achieve a 2.0 second 60' time. even a high powered RWD car will have a hard time gettin a 2.0 second 60' with drag radials on. so given that you hardly take out a high powered FWD off the line is laughable. they usually do a 60' of mid 2's. so you should be 1 whole second faster.

if you hate your AWD sell it to someone who actually deserve it.

not that it matters much but i found this at nhraimport.com, a guy named Brad Personett in a '04 Celica (FWD), ran a 6.498 1/4 mile at 217mph, damn thats fast. Thats 2 sec faster than the fastest AWD that ive heard of!
Pretty cool

Anyways, opinions on the eclipses would still be appreciated :)

Trade ya.

brad personetts car is a RWD buddy. those cars are far from stock, its nothing more then a tube frame with a fiberglass replica body on. lisa kubo's saturn is the fastest FWD right now and was the first to hit 7's. you can't really compare street cars to race cars, their tire size, and suspension setup is beyond anything you would see on a street car. so in any case, a AWD would own anything off the line, the higher the powerlevel, the more advantage a AWD has. the GTR owns the world record for running 8's on street tires man. trust me, with your skills, why not try launching your friends fwd TSi and see how bad it is.

i know a few people with turbo honda's and their 1st and 2nd gear is useless. they just spin the power away. even for me. i have freaking 255mm wide tires in the back and if i floor it in a lower gear, i will spin 1st, then shift to 2nd gear hard, and i would wag the tail and i would spin 2nd all the way to 60mph. then finally when i hit 3rd, the car bogs hard becasue my true speed is actually 40mph. trust me high powered 2wd cars such esp FWD are no good unless you have sticky ass tires. like i said, even my wide ass 255mm have trouble with traction sometimes. ( of course my tires are kinda on really low thread )

i know SRT4 owners making close to 300whp and they refuse to race from a stop. that is becuase they know even a freaking gsr would give them a run cause they are making too much power for the front wheels to handle. not to mention when your taking a tight corner.

look FWD sucks. i would never ever buy a front wheel drive.

1) the front wheels should be steering the car and doing only that.

2) a front wheels of a FWD is over used. it has to steer, pull, and brake.

3) if you add that much power in, good luck controlling your car

4) torque steer galore with a LSD and high power on FWD

5) poorer weight distribution

fwd stands for Fucking Wrongwheel Drive.

Its true that im a crappy driver, but also i dont want to destroy my car by dumping the clutch all the time, which is one of the reasons im considering traiding. Not to mention he has suspension and tire mod. (i dont know what his 60' is but to me it seemed quicker that 2 sec)

But what you sayd i do agree with TatII.

man, sorry for these late late replies, my computer is super slow today

Like I said, I'll trade ya. :P

It was faster than 2 seconds eh? So you can notice tenths of a second difference? Wow.

I read your last post TatII, and now i understand where your comeing from. Ive never driven a high powered FWD, and im now think that it would be hard for me to do as good as i did had i been in a FWD.

Man, i feel stupid now for considering FWD :disappoin

it may not have been faster, but although im no expert, it seemed faster to me.

And no offence intended dimpachy but you seem like nothing less than a big fat smelly asshole

dinpachi = :greddy2: ?

Try to think of a nice thing to say sometime

re-read Tat II launching desription several more times. Goto DSM.org and research alot more... burn the hell out of you clutch some and figure out how to launch properly. A awd dsm can make ridiculous times with not alot of work.

I suggest you do the try and try again till you get it right theory.

DO NOT GET A FWD CAR. I dont care if we are talking about from a roll. I never lost in my gsx to srt-4's that did have pretty good mods from ANY speed.

Don't go to FWD. You are going to buy the same car but will be disappointed because it will have one less major advantage. Its believable seeing an awd car in the 12's but FWD? I know there are FWDs in the 12s but its a hell of alot harder to get there than if you had RWD or AWD. Like TAT said, with AWD you automatically have a second or two to your advantage, allowing you to compete with more powerful cars.

this is the first time I've ever heard of someone wanting to give up an awd dsm for a fwd version.
Don't do it. Go get her tuned and checked out, learn to launch her better. Parasitic loss is valid and everything but when you compare the traction gain to the so-called parasitic loss you should be overjoyed that you are driving an awd turbo dsm.

I'm guessing you didn't launch anywhere near 6,000 rpms and that since your buddy turbocharged a motor with a greater displacement he has the edge on you by a bit especially from a roll. Learn to launch, perfect your technique, see if you can get her to a dyno for some tuning and then have a rematch. If that doesn't rekindle the love for your car then you may as well just send it down to me.

Just two questions.

1. WHAT ARE YOU DOING DRIVING A 12 SECOND CAR IF YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A BAD DRIVER?

2. Do you realize that you will be exponentially faster from improving the nut behind the wheel, instead of trying to make the car faster?

^^lol...
I condisder myself a good driver with lesser experence...i wouldnt put myself in a 12 sec car for a few years...

edit:
For daily driving...at the track im all for you lending me your car :grinyes:

^^lol...
I condisder myself a good driver with lesser experence...i wouldnt put myself in a 12 sec car for a few years...

edit:
For daily driving...at the track im all for you lending me your car :grinyes:

I am sure a 12 second car would feel boring in a week or two, I mean going from 18s to 16's to 14's to 13's, Its all so gradual Its really hard to be scared when its your own car. I am sure 12's would be awesome but no different really once you got used to it

the point wasn't about being acclamated to the car... it was that it is too much power for his skill level, and thus a very dangerous thing.

Actually the difference from a low 14 sec car to a 12 sec car is very noticable, and no, it does not get boring :)

if you want a good econo car, go fwd...

if you want a good launching car, go rwd...
if you want to replace all four tires everytime u get a flat... go AWD....

i'm not a big fan of fwd or awd... i drive a rwd car, but the only reason i'd ever go to fwd would be to get a civic (40mpg is awesome)... but i'd never want to make it a fast car... leave that for your 240's, your 300zx's, foxbodys, muscles... etc.

after my friend had their horror story with their awd car.... replcing tires.. all 4 when only one was bad... i just gave up on the idea of ever owning one.

after my friend had their horror story with their awd car.... replcing tires.. all 4 when only one was bad... i just gave up on the idea of ever owning one.

What the hell does that have to do w/AWD? :screwy:

To the original flip poster...I went from a 280whp SRT-4 to a 250whp Evo in February. The Evo puts down the power so much more efficiently and handles on a totally different level. It may put less power to the wheels (for now :naughty:), but it's a much quicker car from 0-100mph. In my opinion AWD > RWD > FWD.

i'll explain


he had to replace a flat tire.... he replaces it...

light comes on.... he goes to the dealer.

"oh, you have to replace all 4 tires when one is bad... they have to be equal"

so 120 quickly becomes 480 dollars.....

it's a load of crap... i'll drive an fwd before i drive an awd

i'll explain


he had to replace a flat tire.... he replaces it...

light comes on.... he goes to the dealer.

"oh, you have to replace all 4 tires when one is bad... they have to be equal"

so 120 quickly becomes 480 dollars.....

it's a load of crap... i'll drive an fwd before i drive an awd

sounds like your friend got owned by some bullshit.

WTF............ I take a break from automotive forums, and this is what I come back too......... PLEASE SELL YOUR CAR AS SOON AS YOU CAN. You have no right to own a GSX.


Your Car's potential>>>>>>>>You.

sounds like your friend got owned by some bullshit.

more like....ownedededed (each tire)

the FWD 3800s can get 1.8-1.9s stock.
High powered ones can get 1.5-1.6 on stock suspension.
I can get 1.7s/FWD and I suck at launching.

There are +/-s to both FWD and AWD

I bet you have never even owned/raced a high powered FWD. It is different than launching a RWD/AWD but it is not something you should be afraid of TATTTT.

Yes it is possible to get a FWD in the 11s or 10s or 9s or...

I spent about $2600 in mods/labor to get an 11second FWD hard launching car that used to run 15.0@90mph. I plan on getting 1.6 60's and 4.8 330's next track trip. You guys just dont know the feeling of being pulled hard instead of pushed. It is different and just because it is unfamiliar or some bozo friend called it wack doesn't mean FWD is for the birds.

Ignorance mucho here.

unedjumacated foobar hating knuckleheads suck worse than a beesting on my ass.

Want to know why an SRT stock can take an STi from a roll?


FWD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is as if everyone thinks their specific setup is the answer to the secret of life. :uhoh: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Want to know why?

DRIVETRAIN LOSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RWD and AWD in the end drop track times.

FWD from a roll have less weight.

Want to know why?

DRIVETRAIN LOSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah because the STi has AWD not FWD like the SRT. So I guess we agree then? :rolleyes:

There actually, yes believe it or not, are good/bad things about AWD AND FWD.

WOW what a freakin concept.
:p

I dont care if we are talking about from a roll. I never lost in my gsx to srt-4's that did have pretty good mods from ANY speed.
I dont usually lose to cars that are slower than me either.
:rolleyes:

If you have the same track ET using an AWD and FWD car, generally the FWD will have a higher trap and a worse launch. The FWD will also have more power from a roll, sorry bruski. If you had compared two cars with the exact same ET then you are experimenting, if you dont know track times and just say "he had good mods" it doesn't mean SHIT.

It may put less power to the wheels (for now :naughty:), but it's a much quicker car from 0-100mph.

thats what i try to tell everybody. FUCK 0-60....it all about the 0-100 in strip/street-racing

) if you add that much power in, good luck controlling your car

4) torque steer galore with a LSD and high power on FWD
My car goes straight MUCH easier than a RWD with comparable ETs/Traps/Launches. Look at my vids , they prove it. I use a stock differential bro.

Sorry you seem to like spreading FWD hate. I have no problems with torque steer.

AWD is cool and has wonderful benefits, but then again so does wiping your ass. Is AWD really so great, that you need to bash and spread ignorance?

o given that you hardly take out a high powered FWD off the line is laughable. they usually do a 60' of mid 2's.

What is this crap? Maybe with your moms driving.
2.0-2.1 is about right for a STOCK heavy ass grand prix.
1.5-1.7 for high powered FWD cars:

http://www.3800pro.com/lists/fwdlaunch.html

ANd the same engine in RWD setups:
http://www.3800pro.com/lists/rwdlaunch.html

IGNORANCE is not always bliss TATTT

Alright I am out and my rant about FWD, AWD, RWD each having benefits/drawbacks is over...


:smokin: :grinyes: :grinyes: :grinyes: :grinyes: :smokin:

Me and my friend both have 1st gen eclipses (actualy he has a talon but same thing), I have a GSX AWD, he has a FWD Esi turbo (he put a 16g on it himself), and the other day we decided to race just to see who was faster.We both have about the same basic mods, 3" turboback, 16g, etc. but he has suspension and tires though and some other traction mods too.

We already knew his car was mid 12s and mine is high 12s without race gas, but from a stop, since i had AWD i thought i would jump ahead of him at first and then he might catch up by 80mph or so, but to my suprise, other than a 1/2 carlength jump i got on him off the line, he kept beside me the ENTIRE time. And by 100, he was way ahead of me and still pulling pretty hard. The next few races were from a roll and i got beat even worse that time i dont even wanna talk about it.

Anyways, ever since that day i started to in a way hate awd. it has a lot of parasidic loss, its heavier, harder on the car etc. and ive been thinking of getting a FWD turbo version of the eclipse, or just a RS/GS and turboing it like he did. It shouldnt be too hard to transfer mods from one eclipse to another and i can get a GS eclipse for like $1,000 + sell my car for more so i could maby even make some money heh.

This is a decision that ive been thinking about for a few weeks and i just wanted to see what you guys think.
thanks

Listen Fast and Furious wanna be 1st gen Eclispe will not pull mid 12 second 1/4 times with your basic mods... Are you sure you did not mean Mid 14 Seconds Now that could be possible. Do you even know how fast a 12 second quarter mile is... I call BULLSHIT all the way...

Listen Fast and Furious wanna be 1st gen Eclispe will not pull mid 12 second 1/4 times with your basic mods... Are you sure you did not mean Mid 14 Seconds Now that could be possible. Do you even know how fast a 12 second quarter mile is... I call BULLSHIT all the way...
not exactly. The 1st gen can be made quicker for less money. with those mods he should be able to run 13's or less if the etc. is hard ic piping, complete exhaust and k&n intake. Along with the 16g turbo. If he was a good driver, he could get low 13's high 12's just with those.

not exactly. The 1st gen can be made quicker for less money. with those mods he should be able to run 13's or less if the etc. is hard ic piping, complete exhaust and k&n intake. Along with the 16g turbo. If he was a good driver, he could get low 13's high 12's just with those.
I won't say BS I mean its possible but not that likely , Its gotta be kind of quick but I detect a slight smell of F&F wanna be without a time slip to prove it.

Want to know why an SRT stock can take an STi from a roll?


FWD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is as if everyone thinks their specific setup is the answer to the secret of life. :uhoh: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

i have never personally seen a stock STi lose to a stock SRT-4 from a roll. the SRT-4 usually loses by around 2-4 cars. the STi puts down almost 30 more hp to all 4 wheels then the SRT-4 does at 2. and yes FWD can be fast, but it requires suspension work, and requires sticky ass tires. i have already stated that. i know people with a 350whp turbo prelude only running a 13.5 but traps at 115mph, again hes running street tires and doesn't want to switch to drag radials.

and another thing even if the stock SRT4 does put down 260whp like a stock STi does, then it would still be pretty close cause they both put down 260whp. the only difference is that the STi has to make more crank hp to have 260 of its hp make it to the wheels from the engine as oppose to the SRT-4. and also the STi weights 300lbs more.

but having a high powered FWD its just not balanced anymore. to go fast into a corner, you need stiff sidewalls, so running drag radials will rule that out. so you have to change different setups to run the car differently as oppose to having a car that can practically do it all.

ask steiner he went from a SRT-4 to a EVO and he'll tell you difference is night and day in the way the car behaves. the only time the FWD will have an advantage is when your making less crank hp to achieve the same wheel hp and up top if your running drag radials or slicks.

A little off subject, but how come most awd turbo cars such as the eclipse lancer vr4 A4, can be bought with AWD or a lower FWD version? Is there a reason they don't make the lower model a rear drive car? What would be the problem with a rear drive lancer I think it would be more appealing than a civic at that point even if I couldn't afford the evo.

A little off subject, but how come most awd turbo cars such as the eclipse lancer vr4 A4, can be bought with AWD or a lower FWD version? Is there a reason they don't make the lower model a rear drive car? What would be the problem with a rear drive lancer I think it would be more appealing than a civic at that point even if I couldn't afford the evo.

Its probably cheaper. And FWD is easier for most people to drive then RWD...

but it requires suspension work, and requires sticky ass tires.

Stock suspension and no problems with FWD launches.

Stock suspension and no problems with FWD launches.

Ok but stock rubber? Plus your car is heavier up front than most. And your stock suspension isnt that bad to start with. And think about how much faster you would be if you were AWD or RWD?

the only time the FWD will have an advantage is when your making less crank hp to achieve the same wheel hp
Well I am glad we agree then.

With FWD LESS whp(crank is the only one worth talking about) is needed to accelerate as compared to an equal whp(again crank is the only one worth mentioning) AWD. This is why from a roll an EQUAL whp FWD will be faster than the AWD. Then if you can launch you are getting more from less power, that IS an advantage any way you look at it homeslice.


Thanks.

I did not get a FWD car because it is "better" than AWD or RWD.

Personally I like AWD/RWD and my next car will likely be one or the other. But it does not take away from the fact that there are benefits/downfalls to AWD/RWD/FWD.

Ok but stock rubber? Plus your car is heavier up front than most. And your stock suspension isnt that bad to start with. And think about how much faster you would be if you were AWD or RWD?


wait a beeeeeemer guy praising the pontiac suspension? Has hell freezed over? J/K :p

wait a beeeeeemer guy praising the pontiac suspension? Has hell freezed over? J/K :p


:uhoh: you didnt hear it from me. blows up computer to hide all evidence

Well I am glad we agree then.

With FWD LESS whp(crank is the only one worth talking about) is needed to accelerate as compared to an equal whp(again crank is the only one worth mentioning) AWD. This is why from a roll an EQUAL whp FWD will be faster than the AWD. Then if you can launch you are getting more from less power, that IS an advantage any way you look at it homeslice.


Thanks.

i don't agree. i believe that any car with the same whp will acelerate exactly the same reguardless of what drivetrain it is. again as i stated, a AWD needs more hp from the crank to have same whp as a FWD with less crank hp. which means that the drivetrain lose is already accounted for. there is no reason for it magically have even more drivetrain loss then it already has.

the main determining factor would have to be gearing, and aerodynamics .

A little off subject, but how come most awd turbo cars such as the eclipse lancer vr4 A4, can be bought with AWD or a lower FWD version? Is there a reason they don't make the lower model a rear drive car? What would be the problem with a rear drive lancer I think it would be more appealing than a civic at that point even if I couldn't afford the evo.

I don't know the answer to your question but I'll take guess at it. Turning an AWD platform into a FWD platform is relatively simple from an engineering and manufacturing perspective. It's actually just a process of removing parts.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/differential-awd.gif

Since the engine is already traversly mounted all you need to do is remove the rear driveshaft and rear differential (and center differential if it's a full time AWD car). The transmission is already hooked up to a front differential via a drive chain.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/four-wheel-drive-transfer.gif

Of course I'm simplifying things a little. I believe most FWD cars use a transaxle instead of a transmission, front differential and drive train chain...although I could be totally wrong.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/differential-fwd.gif

With a rear wheel drive car the engine is mounted north to south rather than east to west, so adding an additional differential to the front would involve some creativity. I believe the BMW 330xi uses this kind of setup. So in summary...here's a bunch of pictures but I'm more confused now that I was when I started this post. :eek7:

i don't agree. i believe that any car with the same whp will acelerate exactly the same reguardless of what drivetrain it is. again as i stated, a AWD needs more hp from the crank to have same whp as a FWD with less crank hp. which means that the drivetrain lose is already accounted for. there is no reason for it magically have even more drivetrain loss then it already has.

the main determining factor would have to be gearing, and aerodynamics .



STOP TWISTING everything around

YOU NEED MORE POWER bottomline. The FWD will accelerate the same with less power becasue there is LESS drivetrain loss.

THAT IS AN ADVANTAGE.

You admit there needs to be more power with an AWD versus FWD, you admit this is due to the added drivetrain loss of AWD.

Yet you cant understand why running less power to net the same results is a benefit?

Blinded much?

All other things being equal the AWD setup will need more power to match the acceleration of the FWD car when traction is not a factor.

DEAL Bruski.

that is exactly what i mean. however i don't agree with the statement that a 240whp fwd car will out acelerate a 240whp awd car.

but jeff was saying less whp is needed in the fwd car to match a awd car. which is not true because given the same wheel hp they could accelerate the same.

but jeff was saying less whp is needed in the fwd car to match a awd car. which is not true because given the same wheel hp they could accelerate the same.

I typed the wrong thing. Tat is right, I dont mean wheel horsepower, I meant the power from the engine(at the crank not the wheels). Sorry about that.

Alright! We agree! There is a benefit from running less crank hp to achieve the same results. Hooray!


:smokin: :smile: :smile: :smile:

its about TIME!

finally we agree. i was about to give up myself. but yes this is one of those super rare af moments were people actually end up agreeing.