[TRD2000]

i dunno... i think each to their own...

it's hard to make generalisations about how cars handle cause it is largely down to how they are driven...
i love getting the tail out in a RWD, balandce is all good etc. but similarly i love ripping on the handbrake of a SHORT wheelbase FWD and sliding round corners.. htere's no way i want to try that in my turbo MR2...

I never really understood the torque steer thing... thanx Moppie, aparently not all new FWD cars have it sorted though cause i have a mate with an Integra type R (current) and it swaps lanes all by itself!

Theres more than just the drive to a car as well, for example the CRX MR2 comparison... i honestly don't know how i'd go against a CRX (specially the old one) but i'd leave my g/f's FTO for dead... I don't think FWD suits heavy or long wheelbase cars... RWD is well suited to these (passenger sedan type) vehicles because the longer wheelbase makes for a more predictable drift... while it accentuates understeer in a FWD.

Weight is a good one... in the early 90's the rally scene was recovering from the loss of the Group B. the Japanese companies came out with cars like the Lancer GSR, Subaru WRX, Pulsar GTiR, Celica GT4 and the 323 GT-R. everyone should know some of them if not all. The GT4 is the most obvious... Toyota got a ban for cheating air restrictors... more weight meant they needed more power. more interestingly... only the WRX and the GSR went on to have substancial success... both the 323 and the sr20 powered GTiR had problems with understeer, they were deemed to be "front heavy". if you want to get the nose in then get the weight out of it...

i have concerns for anyone who needs the car to drive itself at high speeds...