FWD vs. RWD - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Ford Mustang | Wrenching, Care and General Topics > General Mustang Discussion



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-06-2013, 02:32 AM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
amnation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Washington
Posts: 89
FWD vs. RWD

Someone told me today that a fwd car can beat a rwd with twice the horsepower. Anybody know? This seems far fetched to me. Especially considering all "sports" cars are rwd. And NO performance vehicles are fwd. they are rwd or awd.
amnation is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-06-2013, 02:41 AM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
Venomouz831's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seaside
Region: California
Posts: 8,133
Depends on car, driver, mods ect. I know of some lightweight turbo civics that can beat some termis with 50 hp less than a some cobras
__________________
)02 Gt, Founder of WE2G
Venomouz831 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 04:20 AM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
DaBluedude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Region: Canada
Posts: 1,996
Fwd performance cars have been around for a long time. Hell right now I can think of several including the new focus St veloster turbo (very meh) and a half dozen others. Hell, I've been dusted by neon srt4 and caliber srt4s before. And built turbo civics. It's all about modification. If you think back to the supercharged pontiac Bonnieville, gran-prix those were quick vehicles. Buick riviera too. That focus St is a great car and could put a lot of mustangs to shame in the corners or the drag strip. That all said, I'm a rwd purist. Can't stand fwd unless it's a commuter. I have never owned a fwd car.
__________________
2003 Mach 1
DaBluedude is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-06-2013, 04:25 AM   #4
Moderator Emeritus
Regular
 
deadsp0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MidWorld
Region: Other
Posts: 4,786
It's easier to pull the car then it is to push it. It's just not as much fun.
__________________
That's unimpressive
deadsp0t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 08:58 AM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
thejohncarlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsp0t View Post
It's easier to pull the car then it is to push it. It's just not as much fun.
There may be some truth to this but, my last car was a Stage 1 Caliber SRT4 that had 300 hp to the front wheels and it was the hardest car to drive that I have ever owned. Launch without wheelspin was just impossible and when the torque steer kicked in it was a fight to keep in one lane.

I could keep up with 4.6 Mustangs from a stop and I think I could have kept up with a new 5.0 from a roll but, my Mustang is way easier to drive.
thejohncarlson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 01:09 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
Depack21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Flanders
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 259
The only way a fwd can beat a rwd is if you are both already rolling. From a dead stop the rwd will hook up quicker and better. With the front wheel drive you will peal out so easily and not be able to catch up.
Depack21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 09:44 PM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBluedude
Fwd performance cars have been around for a long time. Hell right now I can think of several including the new focus St veloster turbo (very meh) and a half dozen others. Hell, I've been dusted by neon srt4 and caliber srt4s before. And built turbo civics. It's all about modification. If you think back to the supercharged pontiac Bonnieville, gran-prix those were quick vehicles. Buick riviera too. That focus St is a great car and could put a lot of mustangs to shame in the corners or the drag strip. That all said, I'm a rwd purist. Can't stand fwd unless it's a commuter. I have never owned a fwd car.
Everything here makes sense, but one thing is what the car ORIGINALLY was.

Velositor was turned into an attempt at sports car
Focus is enhanced
Srts, so on.

All of them are base fronts with added power. To my knowledge, most performance cars are designed as rear or all wheel drives. Lambo, Rarri, Porsche, how many sports cars have they made that are front drive? Mustang, Camaro, challenger, all the sports/performance cars are rear wheel/awd drive.

I don't want to start an argument, but it is easier to PUSH a car, than pull. When pulling, one has to move the entire weight of the vehicle, but does not gain the traction of that weight = wheel spin. With pushing, that weight in front shifts back and forces more traction.

The, seemingly, ONLY pro of a FF over a FR would be less drivetrain loss.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 11:00 PM   #8
Moderator Emeritus
Regular
 
deadsp0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MidWorld
Region: Other
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post

Everything here makes sense, but one thing is what the car ORIGINALLY was.

Velositor was turned into an attempt at sports car
Focus is enhanced
Srts, so on.

All of them are base fronts with added power. To my knowledge, most performance cars are designed as rear or all wheel drives. Lambo, Rarri, Porsche, how many sports cars have they made that are front drive? Mustang, Camaro, challenger, all the sports/performance cars are rear wheel/awd drive.

I don't want to start an argument, but it is easier to PUSH a car, than pull. When pulling, one has to move the entire weight of the vehicle, but does not gain the traction of that weight = wheel spin. With pushing, that weight in front shifts back and forces more traction.

The, seemingly, ONLY pro of a FF over a FR would be less drivetrain loss.
It's fact, easier to pull then to push.. FWD cars all get better gas mileage, I'm speaking purely on efficiency. The most efficient cars are FWD.
If I'm not mistaken AWD cars use a FW bias, meaning more power/energy is directed at the front wheels.
__________________
That's unimpressive
deadsp0t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 09:33 AM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
[/COLOR]
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsp0t View Post
It's fact, easier to pull then to push.. FWD cars all get better gas mileage, I'm speaking purely on efficiency. The most efficient cars are FWD.
If I'm not mistaken AWD cars use a FW bias, meaning more power/energy is directed at the front wheels.
I have a few questions about this post, that I am unclear on.

When you say it's fact, would you mind providing why? You said it is a fact, but did not mention why, or how. - I don't understand this. From a physics stand point, it doesn't make sense. Especially since most fast cars are rear drive. Ferrari, drag cars, dragsters, so on.
"FFs get better gas mileage". I do not understand how this relates to pushing/pulling. The only way that would matter was if you were comparing two cars that were exactly the same, other than the drive axle. I do not know of any cars that offer a FF variation and a FR variation. Could you expand on this?
"The most efficient cars are FF." I believe it is true, as FF should have less drivetrain loss. Less drivetrain loss is NOT the question, the OP is asking if it is easier for a rear axle to push a car, or if a front axle is easier to pull a car.*

AWD is not so easy as to say uses a bias. There are thousands of AWD systems. I do not know all of them, so I cannot say more than that-it is not that easy. Again, I do not know the facts, and I won't claim to if I do not, but since awd is based off the concept of 4wd, which is almost always a Rear drive that has an option to use the front drive, I would imagine this carries over to many awd systems. In addition, advanced manufacturers, Ferrari, to the most lazy manufacturers, chrysler, make their awd systems primarily rear drive with front drive engaging when it is needed.**

**I am sure there are awd drivetrains that focus on the front, and then send power to the rear when needed. But I would only expect that on a car that is ORIGINALLY front wheel drive. So, a dodge charger-FR. give it awd, its rear drive and front kicks in. Our MKZ awd is a FF, but the rear wheels kick in for extra traction.

*The question "If a 100hp engine was put in an F 150, and made a FF, would it be faster than the EXACT same circumstance but rear drive?"
Then, you would be right, I believe. Because the FF setup has less drivetrain loss, and traction on a 7500lb vehicle on the front axle is fine with 100hp. Now, if it was a Caterham, 150hp on 900 lbs, then it could not exist as a FF- kind of why they do not make one. It's the basic principle on which all performance based vehicles work. Motorcycles, hypercars, supercars- Weight shift, gravity, and downforce all push the rear end down to give traction. FF does not offer this, which i why no one builds a sports car in this way. It is why a Mustang, Corvette, Ford GT, are all rear drive, the Focus, econo cars are all FF.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 09:53 AM   #10
Moderator Emeritus
Regular
 
deadsp0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MidWorld
Region: Other
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post

I have a few questions about this post, that I am unclear on.

When you say it's fact, would you mind providing why? You said it is a fact, but did not mention why, or how. - I don't understand this. From a physics stand point, it doesn't make sense. Especially since most fast cars are rear drive. Ferrari, drag cars, dragsters, so on.
"FFs get better gas mileage". I do not understand how this relates to pushing/pulling. The only way that would matter was if you were comparing two cars that were exactly the same, other than the drive axle. I do not know of any cars that offer a FF variation and a FR variation. Could you expand on this?
"The most efficient cars are FF." I believe it is true, as FF should have less drivetrain loss. Less drivetrain loss is NOT the question, the OP is asking if it is easier for a rear axle to push a car, or if a front axle is easier to pull a car.*

AWD is not so easy as to say uses a bias. There are thousands of AWD systems. I do not know all of them, so I cannot say more than that-it is not that easy. Again, I do not know the facts, and I won't claim to if I do not, but since awd is based off the concept of 4wd, which is almost always a Rear drive that has an option to use the front drive, I would imagine this carries over to many awd systems. In addition, advanced manufacturers, Ferrari, to the most lazy manufacturers, chrysler, make their awd systems primarily rear drive with front drive engaging when it is needed.**

**I am sure there are awd drivetrains that focus on the front, and then send power to the rear when needed. But I would only expect that on a car that is ORIGINALLY front wheel drive. So, a dodge charger-FR. give it awd, its rear drive and front kicks in. Our MKZ awd is a FF, but the rear wheels kick in for extra traction.

*The question "If a 100hp engine was put in an F 150, and made a FF, would it be faster than the EXACT same circumstance but rear drive?"
Then, you would be right, I believe. Because the FF setup has less drivetrain loss, and traction on a 7500lb vehicle on the front axle is fine with 100hp. Now, if it was a Caterham, 150hp on 900 lbs, then it could not exist as a FF- kind of why they do not make one. It's the basic principle on which all performance based vehicles work. Motorcycles, hypercars, supercars- Weight shift, gravity, and downforce all push the rear end down to give traction. FF does not offer this, which i why no one builds a sports car in this way. It is why a Mustang, Corvette, Ford GT, are all rear drive, the Focus, econo cars are all FF.
I'm no expert and never claimed to be, if you are curious I suggest doing some independent research on your own. After you questioned my point a quick google search turned up plenty of links to reputable sites with facts supporting what BOTH us are saying.

Really you've already stated the answer.
__________________
That's unimpressive
deadsp0t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 09:56 AM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
2300turboford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: london
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 2,903
There are no advantages to fwd except for traction in snow they handle like crap and plow through the corners and spin something awful off the line bc the weight is transferred away from the wheels at witch the power is delivered to
__________________
"Racing is life ,anything before or after is just waiting "-the king of cool -Steve McQueen
2300turboford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:07 AM   #12
Moderator Emeritus
Regular
 
deadsp0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MidWorld
Region: Other
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2300turboford View Post
There are no advantages to fwd except for traction in snow they handle like crap and plow through the corners and spin something awful off the line bc the weight is transferred away from the wheels at witch the power is delivered to
RWD is better for cornering, drag racing etc..
FWD is more efficient for daily driving ie; normal driving conditions and rain, snow etc for the opposite reason RWD is better for racing, because the weight of the engine is over the drive wheels, which conversely is the reason it 'torque steers' making it not the best for racing.

Just to be crystal clear..
RWD for racing for the reasons everyone has stated.
FWD for 'normal' driving, 99% of people do not drive the way Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Viper etc owners drive there cars.
With that I'll bow out of this thread, this discussion/argument is a very old one and very tired.. The facts are out there. Google, that is all.
__________________
That's unimpressive
deadsp0t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:13 AM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
2300turboford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: london
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 2,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsp0t View Post

RWD is better for cornering, drag racing etc..
FWD is more efficient for daily driving ie; normal driving conditions and rain, snow etc for the opposite reason RWD is better for racing, because the weight of the engine is over the drive wheels, which conversely is the reason it 'torque steers' making it not the best for racing.

Just to be crystal clear..
RWD for racing for the reasons everyone has stated.
FWD for 'normal' driving, 99% of people do not drive the way Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Viper etc owners drive there cars.
With that I'll bow out of this thread, this discussion/argument is a very old one and very tired.. The facts are out there. Google, that is all.
+1

---------- Post added at 11:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 AM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsp0t View Post

RWD is better for cornering, drag racing etc..
FWD is more efficient for daily driving ie; normal driving conditions and rain, snow etc for the opposite reason RWD is better for racing, because the weight of the engine is over the drive wheels, which conversely is the reason it 'torque steers' making it not the best for racing.

Just to be crystal clear..
RWD for racing for the reasons everyone has stated.
FWD for 'normal' driving, 99% of people do not drive the way Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Viper etc owners drive there cars.
With that I'll bow out of this thread, this discussion/argument is a very old one and very tired.. The facts are out there. Google, that is all.
But there also a b*tch to work on to
__________________
"Racing is life ,anything before or after is just waiting "-the king of cool -Steve McQueen
2300turboford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:59 AM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
DaBluedude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Region: Canada
Posts: 1,996
Obviously the answer to push/pull depends on weight and power of the vehicle in question. It also makes a difference in terms of balance when you talk about a true front engine or a front mid engine car. Remember that the solution to engineering questions like this often do not have a clean answer and you cannot expect one rule to work universally.
__________________
2003 Mach 1
DaBluedude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 11:56 AM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsp0t View Post
I'm no expert and never claimed to be, if you are curious I suggest doing some independent research on your own. After you questioned my point a quick google search turned up plenty of links to reputable sites with facts supporting what BOTH us are saying.

Really you've already stated the answer.
I am not really curious, from what I've learned I think I have a good idea about weight transfer. But the opposite idea was presented as a fact, and I was just asking you to back it up. I did research on Google, but most of what I found was about the human body and pushing vs pulling. Which is the opposite, as if we pull things we can create some lift and make it easier to pull(in theory not, but with momentum it would be easier-since its not being pulled flat or from underneath, it is usually being pulled from above, creating the lift), while we want to increase traction with high power applications.

I didn't mean to seem argumentative or fight, I just learned one thing- and then the opposite was presented as a fact. I was hoping to learn how. I don't mean any hostility, I genuinely want to learn-especially if I am wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2300turboford View Post
There are no advantages to fwd except for traction in snow they handle like crap and plow through the corners and spin something awful off the line bc the weight is transferred away from the wheels at witch the power is delivered to
Like deadspot mentioned, we think the engine power to wheel power is more efficient in a FF than a FR because of drivetrain loss. That seems like an advantage lol
But I agree, front wheels are for steering. (Unless it's a hybrid. Like the NSX, that'll work for me lol)
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:05 PM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
TruChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: El Paso, Tx
Region: Texas
Posts: 471
Lol
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image-2179528473.jpg
Views:	142
Size:	280.1 KB
ID:	101117  
TruChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:20 PM   #17
Moderator Emeritus
Regular
 
deadsp0t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MidWorld
Region: Other
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post

I am not really curious, from what I've learned I think I have a good idea about weight transfer. But the opposite idea was presented as a fact, and I was just asking you to back it up. I did research on Google, but most of what I found was about the human body and pushing vs pulling. Which is the opposite, as if we pull things we can create some lift and make it easier to pull(in theory not, but with momentum it would be easier-since its not being pulled flat or from underneath, it is usually being pulled from above, creating the lift), while we want to increase traction with high power applications.

I didn't mean to seem argumentative or fight, I just learned one thing- and then the opposite was presented as a fact. I was hoping to learn how. I don't mean any hostility, I genuinely want to learn-especially if I am wrong.

Like deadspot mentioned, we think the engine power to wheel power is more efficient in a FF than a FR because of drivetrain loss. That seems like an advantage lol
But I agree, front wheels are for steering. (Unless it's a hybrid. Like the NSX, that'll work for me lol)
Np @ all man, like I said in my last post it's all about application.
Just like high HP cars come RWD or AWD, high MPG cars come FWD.
__________________
That's unimpressive
deadsp0t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 02:09 PM   #18
ME Bloodhound
Staff
 
Soccerluvr4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacramento/Bay Area
Region: California
Posts: 14,672
RWD = more moving parts (driveshaft & differential ect..) which makes it less efficient.

We are all forgetting the true argument, what is more fun?? I think we can all agree RWD is a lot more fun.
__________________

Bullitt build paused pending graduation

HID end all thread
Soccerluvr4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 02:22 PM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by amnation
Someone told me today that a fwd car can beat a rwd with twice the horsepower. Anybody know? This seems far fetched to me. Especially considering all "sports" cars are rwd. And NO performance vehicles are fwd. they are rwd or awd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccerluvr4
RWD = more moving parts (driveshaft & differential ect..) which makes it less efficient.

We are all forgetting the true argument, what is more fun?? I think we can all agree RWD is a lot more fun.
I think we can all agree FR/MR/RR is more fun, and I think in most cases, a FF has less drivetrain loss than a FR, like you said, but OP wants to know about some ridiculous comment a person made. OP, they are wrong. If one had two exact same cars, except one was a FF, one was a FR, then a FF would win IF it had traction. BecAuse of less loss to wheels.

But if it had 10% or more, then the FR would win. When I test drove a Focus ST, the wheels spun with 250 hp EASY. Very little weight, low traction. I had a 97 Escort that could spin the front tires-because of low traction, NOT power. The same power on a FR would not allow the same wheel spin = more traction = better use of power = faster.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 02:28 PM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ghostedmind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Huntsville
Region: Alabama
Posts: 918
Send a message via Skype™ to Ghostedmind
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
I think we can all agree FR/MR/RR is more fun, and I think in most cases, a FF has less drivetrain loss than a FR, like you said, but OP wants to know about some ridiculous comment a person made. OP, they are wrong. If one had two exact same cars, except one was a FF, one was a FR, then a FF would win IF it had traction. BecAuse of less loss to wheels.

But if it had 10% or more, then the FR would win. When I test drove a Focus ST, the wheels spun with 250 hp EASY. Very little weight, low traction. I had a 97 Escort that could spin the front tires-because of low traction, NOT power. The same power on a FR would not allow the same wheel spin = more traction = better use of power = faster.
+1
__________________
Redfire '04 V6 - K&N CAI, Divorced duals, Bama Tune, EGR Delete, Gauge cluster LED overhaul.

LCMC Member
Ghostedmind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 02:21 AM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
amnation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: Washington
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by TruChris View Post
Lol
Saw that. Enjoyed it!
amnation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 09:04 AM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeland
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,699
Send a message via AIM to Borii
A FWD car will not beat a RWD car with twice the horsepower. Period. Whoever told you that is top 10 dumbest people alive.

If both cars have equal horsepower and equal drivers, the RWD car will win right off the bat because launching a FWD car is never done with good results and super sticky tires barely help. Only Civics pulling 1.6s are on Slicks, A RWD car will do that on a modest drag radial.

Now, in theory, all things being equal, even weight, the FWD car could theoretically be faster as speeds continue because it's wheel HP will be higher as FWD has the lowest drive train frictional loss.

As for road race type of races, a FWD will understeer which while more predictable, will make you slower.
__________________
SOLD - 06 GT 371WHP/332WTQ


Sold - 1998 Camaro SS
Sold - 2001 Audi S4
Borii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 11:24 AM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
Sanguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 1,623
FWD cars can be fast and efficient, but it's way harder to do than with a RWD.

FWD:
-Weight transfer makes keeping traction on the front wheels almost impossible. Some guys at the strip will use methods to raise the rear or lock the suspension to prevent the rear from squatting.
-Torque steer. Good lord, if you've ever experienced it, you'd dread it. The car will suddenly just want to pull to the side instead of going straight. I had to replace control arms on my '00 Grand Prix to help with this.
-Weight transfer makes cornering worse. They are very understeer happy cars,
-Maintenance is a *****. FWD cars typically have the tightest engine bays (except '94-02' Fbodies) and are a pure nightmare to work on for anything in depth. Their transmissions are also more fragile due to their configuration of running things at a 90* angle instead of in a straight line.
-Modifications cost more. Most parts in them are internal to the trans, especially gears. You can't do a gear swap on most to change the ratio, and those you do will cost you a boat load in time or labor. I know the 4t65e also has a chain connecting some parts. Guys typically stretch and break them when they get to a decent power level.

Anyway, I bought a Mustang and not another FWD car. There is a reason for that.
__________________
'13 'Stang V6 - MT82 - GHIG Ordered: 5/31 Pickup: 7/3
35% Tint, Homemade Intake (1, 2), GT500 Heat Extractor/Splash Guards, Custom Gas Cap
Barton Shifter Bracket, GHIG Shift Knob


'98 Grand Prix GTP - New Project for DD
Sanguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 11:37 AM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeland
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,699
Send a message via AIM to Borii
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguin View Post
FWD cars can be fast and efficient, but it's way harder to do than with a RWD.

FWD:
-Weight transfer makes keeping traction on the front wheels almost impossible. Some guys at the strip will use methods to raise the rear or lock the suspension to prevent the rear from squatting.
-Torque steer. Good lord, if you've ever experienced it, you'd dread it. The car will suddenly just want to pull to the side instead of going straight. I had to replace control arms on my '00 Grand Prix to help with this.
-Weight transfer makes cornering worse. They are very understeer happy cars,
-Maintenance is a *****. FWD cars typically have the tightest engine bays (except '94-02' Fbodies) and are a pure nightmare to work on for anything in depth. Their transmissions are also more fragile due to their configuration of running things at a 90* angle instead of in a straight line.
-Modifications cost more. Most parts in them are internal to the trans, especially gears. You can't do a gear swap on most to change the ratio, and those you do will cost you a boat load in time or labor. I know the 4t65e also has a chain connecting some parts. Guys typically stretch and break them when they get to a decent power level.

Anyway, I bought a Mustang and not another FWD car. There is a reason for that.
Modifications do not cost more. Only the ones that WORK lol.

Example, you can throw a full exhaust on a 95 civic for less or equal the price of headers for our cars, but they'd net 8-10WHP sadly on them tops.

There is however an awesome aftermarket crowd and support so there will always be fast FWD but at the expense of many things. Such as, many of the FWD cars that are competitive with modded or highly modded RWD cars generally are not streetable in race trim vs the other cars being driven in and out the same way.

As far as tight engine bay, I'd say that is all cars as they get newer (aside from transmissions). I find it much easier to operate on most FWD cars but the transmission is hours upon hours to do work. People buy final drive and what not but still so much harder than a gear swap.

But specifically our cars, most shops prefer to remove the engine for heads and most internal work on an s197. Something not necessary most times on FWD cars.

Torque steer isn't as apparent on say the SE-R Spec V or the ITR because of stock LSD. The lack of LSD is a huge part as to why torque steer happens. Such as the Grand Prix having decent torque and an open differential. One wheel pulling you.

Additionally, you need a FWD car with power first lol. Most FWDs do not have the power to torque steer at all.
__________________
SOLD - 06 GT 371WHP/332WTQ


Sold - 1998 Camaro SS
Sold - 2001 Audi S4
Borii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 12:13 PM   #25
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borii

Modifications do not cost more. Only the ones that WORK lol.

Example, you can throw a full exhaust on a 95 civic for less or equal the price of headers for our cars, but they'd net 8-10WHP sadly on them tops.

There is however an awesome aftermarket crowd and support so there will always be fast FWD but at the expense of many things. Such as, many of the FWD cars that are competitive with modded or highly modded RWD cars generally are not streetable in race trim vs the other cars being driven in and out the same way.

As far as tight engine bay, I'd say that is all cars as they get newer (aside from transmissions). I find it much easier to operate on most FWD cars but the transmission is hours upon hours to do work. People buy final drive and what not but still so much harder than a gear swap.

But specifically our cars, most shops prefer to remove the engine for heads and most internal work on an s197. Something not necessary most times on FWD cars.

Torque steer isn't as apparent on say the SE-R Spec V or the ITR because of stock LSD. The lack of LSD is a huge part as to why torque steer happens. Such as the Grand Prix having decent torque and an open differential. One wheel pulling you.

Additionally, you need a FWD car with power first lol. Most FWDs do not have the power to torque steer at all.
I think a full exhuast on a 95 civic would be close to a Mustang. And I think the gains are more in connection with the power the engine makes. 8-10 hp for a civic can be more than 10%, while 10% for me would be in the twenties.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 12:19 PM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeland
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,699
Send a message via AIM to Borii
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
I think a full exhuast on a 95 civic would be close to a Mustang. And I think the gains are more in connection with the power the engine makes. 8-10 hp for a civic can be more than 10%, while 10% for me would be in the twenties.
There are brands which cost equal or more than Mustang parts but there are far more that are far cheaper.

Now, doesn't mean the cheap parts are quality but an older civic can be made faster for cheaper overall simply on weight but bolt on performance is a dead end.
__________________
SOLD - 06 GT 371WHP/332WTQ


Sold - 1998 Camaro SS
Sold - 2001 Audi S4
Borii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 05:05 PM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borii

There are brands which cost equal or more than Mustang parts but there are far more that are far cheaper.

Now, doesn't mean the cheap parts are quality but an older civic can be made faster for cheaper overall simply on weight but bolt on performance is a dead end.
An older civic? Wait, are you comparing a 95 civic to a 2014 Mustang?
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 05:15 PM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
Doe_Rae_mi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: South Carolina
Posts: 2,587
I thought by fwd we were talking about 4 wheel drive.....hmmmmm
Doe_Rae_mi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 05:17 PM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doe_Rae_mi
I thought by fwd we were talking about 4 wheel drive.....hmmmmm
FrontWD, not AllWD, or 4x4.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 05:18 PM   #30
Registered Member
Regular
 
Doe_Rae_mi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: South Carolina
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc

FrontWD, not AllWD, of 4x4.
Yea I realized lol
Doe_Rae_mi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 06:48 PM   #31
Registered Member
Regular
 
99mustang99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Piedmont
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 651
Pretty quick honda http://youtu.be/A4fv6aBIk4Y

But im always going to be a RWD lover and it will always be in a mustang
99mustang99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 06:56 PM   #32
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeland
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,699
Send a message via AIM to Borii
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
An older civic? Wait, are you comparing a 95 civic to a 2014 Mustang?
I'm not comparing any specific mustang to any specific car actually, just saying that parts are cheaper, not more for most imports that are comparable years.
__________________
SOLD - 06 GT 371WHP/332WTQ


Sold - 1998 Camaro SS
Sold - 2001 Audi S4
Borii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 07:21 PM   #33
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borii

I'm not comparing any specific mustang to any specific car actually, just saying that parts are cheaper, not more for most imports that are comparable years.
Hmm. I wonder now. I don't really price it out, I wonder if headers for a civic si compare to headers for a 3.7/5.0, by price or % of power gain.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 07:22 PM   #34
Registered Member
Regular
 
DustyStang306's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Belleville On
Region: Canada
Posts: 342
In drags no fwd car don't run sh** what's the worlds fastest fwd? an what's the fastest street car that's rwd look them up on YouTube! (Drag week 2012) it was on speed haha there's high 6sec street cars that's are rwd an what fwd car is running 6 sec an can drive home after???
DustyStang306 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 07:25 PM   #35
Registered Member
Regular
 
2300turboford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: london
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 2,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post

Hmm. I wonder now. I don't really price it out, I wonder if headers for a civic si compare to headers for a 3.7/5.0, by price or % of power gain.
Well for a header that won't crack for my 2.3 turbo is 800 dollars if that tells you anything lol. God I want one
__________________
"Racing is life ,anything before or after is just waiting "-the king of cool -Steve McQueen
2300turboford is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Ford Mustang | Wrenching, Care and General Topics > General Mustang Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


» Like Us On Facebook



02:37 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.