Numbchux Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Subarus do not have torque steer. Don't confuse them with other FWD cars, they're much different. What causes torque steer, is the tranverse mounted engine, and therefore the tranny/diff has to be mounted off to one side. This forces the front axles to be different lengths. Under accelleration, the axles actually twist a little, and because of the unequal lengths, unequal amounts of power go to either front wheel. This causes one wheel to want to accel more than the other, cause the car to turn (This is why Brian's eclipse turns at the start of the race in the Fast and Furious, btw, everyone mocks that, but it's actually quite real). Subarus, on the other hand, have a longitudanal (I didn't spell that right...sorry) engine/tranny configuration. allowing for exactly equal length front axles (they're even interchangeable). Torque steer is a non-issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoodsWagon Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 If you're going at the switch because you think it will help the car handle better, don't bother. It was built with FWD in mind, and the weight distribution is better for a FWD. Hanging the engine infront of the front axel helps put more wheight up there. But if you are going for fun driving with the added spice of sideways action, go for it. Don't use the Full Time 4wd tranny, the center diff is known to blow it's locking mechanism when being used in RWD setups. It then becomes NWD, NO wheel drive. The pushbutton and D/R trannys should be good, both have the same 4wd engagement in the tranny. With pushbutton, make real sure that the 4wd is fully engaged and use some wire or something to lock it there. If you can, get a limited slip rear end. It makes whipping donuts easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85Sub4WD Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I have to disagree... give the tires one job and one job only. no - and Numbchux is correct as to why - turning actually improves dramatically on these cars under acceleration (exception is when accelerating from stop, you will spin one wheel) - with the proper technique, you can actually use your engine to add traction and "pull" yourself around curves - that's why I can go down a mountain at an insane speed - the only reason you may have issues, is if your front suspension (particularly sway-bar related components) is not working properly of you work the physics force vectors on the wheels on curves with acceleration, you will see what I am talking about - whey you accelerate in a curve, you decrease the effect that the inertia of the car moving forward has on the road - it's really simple actually if you do the same force vector setup for RWD (much more difficult), you will see why RWD is a disadvantage, because the rear end will want to slide out, and put additional strain on the forward wheels the reason that Subarus do it MUCH better than other FWD cars is what Numbchux said - it's all about the rotating mass inequality in the transversely mounted engine designs that contributes to the problem (different length axles), also given that mounting the engine on top of the tranny makes EVERYTHING sit higher, and it increases the height of your CG, subarus have an abnormally low CG for their size due to how the engine is mounted, and that it is a flat four - another issue that is mainly a problem with US Domestic manufacturers is that they tend to put the tie rod ends behind the front axle, which causes crappy handling period (jerky, unresponsive) most racecars are RWD for two reasons - tradition (think NASCAR - heck, they still run with carbs....), or because they are wanting to transmit insane amounts of power, and it is simply easier to do that with a RWD configuation (think Formula 1) - pure acceleration is better for RWD cars too, but FWD/AWD will still have a turning advantage, and AWD has advantages over both drive methods for pure acceleration because you are driving ALL wheels, so you have more grip for startoffs BTW - numerous famous/legendary rally cars were FWD - the ORIGINAL mini cooper of the 1960's beat the heck out of everything else due to size, and the handeling, Datsun also had one, but I can't remember the name of it off the top of my head - the (in)famous Traction Advant (by Citroen I think) was FWD, and it used a very similar design to subaru for it I've had the pleasure to drive FWD and RWD cars, and my expierence has taught me that each drivetrain has its pros and cons, but you have to adapt your driving technique get the most out of each one;if anything, AWD is the only one that is really best in all conditions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phizinza Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Oh, sorry fbh. I thought I saw somewhere you were from the US, must of been looking at someone elses thingamobob. Gotta love all the technical talk. but there is a reason that all race cars are RWD. No, MOST race cars are RWD. Have you seen a RWD car rally??? ITS BLOODY HILARIOUS! Theres a reason why subarus are 4WD, becuase thats what there ment to do. But if RWD is your thing, and you don't have a lot of money (and if your from Australia or New Zealand: you hate Commenwhores and Falcons) go for it. I just think 1/4 miles and burnouts are for nissans. Leave the cornering upto subies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75subie Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 if you have a traction problem, and don`t mind loosing a little cargo space, just drop some sandbags in the back, and you`ll be all set;) no need to get all technical and write a story:lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple monkey Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I can go down a mountain at an insane speed. watch some best motoring, and you will see how the rwd handles curvy roads in the downhill and in the uphill. but i understand what you are saying, a fwd car will handle well if its supposed to be fwd. i bet civics would handle like crap if they were converted to rwd, thats just how they're designed. there is no real way to prove who is right here, it all has to do with the driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddy Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 wouldn't that hurt the fun of 4wd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple monkey Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 different kind of fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikie Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 On topic, try it out and see how you like it. Get a spare outer cv to hold the front hub together so you can keep youres clean and complete should you want to put it back in. The one subie i drove with a missing axle was a no-traction machine, fun for a moment in the paddock because the weight distribution is all wrong for RWD, but i got over that pretty quick. And on FWD v RWD....... Those thoughtful Korean car makers produce FWD cars for handling and traction reasons, not cost. Those silly techs at Mercedes, BMW, Chrysler, GM and the like are hell bent on making more expensive RWD cars tjust because they handle worse. Or not. Ive driven FWD, RWD and AWD, and i can state with absolute certainty than the drivetrain layout is secondary to the quality of the tires and suspension setup of the car! And since all three layouts have different applications its hard to compare them in anything like an apples vs apples scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torxxx Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phizinza Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 And on FWD v RWD....... Those thoughtful Korean car makers produce FWD cars for handling and traction reasons, not cost. Those silly techs at Mercedes, BMW, Chrysler, GM and the like are hell bent on making more expensive RWD cars tjust because they handle worse. Or not. Ive driven FWD, RWD and AWD, and i can state with absolute certainty than the drivetrain layout is secondary to the quality of the tires and suspension setup of the car! And since all three layouts have different applications its hard to compare them in anything like an apples vs apples scenario. ... It's amazing! There are accually people out there that think sensibly! This forum is amazing... You should check out the australian forums (even the subaru one) its just... annoying. Although I must admit. 500HP in FWD would not be fun.. But thats what AWD is for. I'm not a "go fast (in a straight line)" kinda guy. I like acceleration and cornering. Maybe thats why I don't like the muscle car style of vehical. Gotta wonder, if I like cornering, why am I driving a lifted subie with M/T tires?? lol... oh that's right, offroad... I agree to testing it out and see how you like it fhb, tell us the resualts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fbh Posted February 25, 2006 Author Share Posted February 25, 2006 well, I REALLY don't mind BMW's being RWD, they've got a 50/50 weight distribution, and even if that weren't the case, my old man's 300hp V8 wouldn't treat the front tyres too nicely - WITH traction control, 235/60R15 tyres and an automatic in Economy mode he still manages to spin the tyres up pretty good... my reasoning in this case is, when you accelerate the weight is shifted to the back of the car - if you make like BMW and get a 50/50 weight distribution, methinks RWD would be pretty desirable. My Nissan's got a weight distro of approx. 75/25, and that manages to spin the front tyres occasionally on dry pavement (100hp, auto, 185/65R14 Goodyear Ducaro GA's). Does anyone know exactly what the weight distribution is on the '89 GL wagon? if it's something like, say, 60/40 or 65/35 then I might still give it a go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SakoTGrimes Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 I can't believe that this little "Civic vs Camaro" battle has gone on so long. FWD is better for: low cost of build, inexperienced drivers in snow and doing retarded looking wheel-hoppy "burnouts". RWD is better for: acceleration (which end or the car does the weight shift to?), cornering burnouts, as in: actual wheelspin and smoke. The worlds first "sport sedan" first introduced in 1968 was RWD and still handles better than most new FWD cars. Formula 1 cars and dragsters are RWD. NSXs are RWD. Oh, and so are all Surpas, Ferraris, Lamborghinis (some AWD), Paganis, BMWs (some AWD), Mercs (some AWD), Corvettes, Lotus's and other vehicles known to go fast. There has never been, and never will be a FWD sports car. It's that simple. The ill handling and reduced acceleration of FWD have been proven thousands and thousands over by profesional drivers, they are not simply my opinions. There's nothing wrong with FWD, it's great for commuter cars. But it's fanatics need to know it's place when it comes to performance. THIRD place. Whoever started this thread, your Sub will be fine in 4WD. To the guy who posted the burnout pics, well, those are the sweetest burnout pics evAr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carfreak85 Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Thank you Sako, you spelled it out perfectly. Look at the lap times on Top Gear and tell me the top 30 cars, I bet there isn't a single FWD car in that group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fbh Posted February 25, 2006 Author Share Posted February 25, 2006 I kinda agree with you guys - take an automatic FWD car, put it in Drive, floor it. Now stop, put it in Reverse and floor it. You will notice a big difference Anyway, does anyone know the weight distribution of an '89 GL wagon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbchux Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 To the guy who posted the burnout pics, well, those are the sweetest burnout pics evAr. Why Thank you...that was a fun day I kinda agree with you guys - take an automatic FWD car, put it in Drive, floor it. Now stop, put it in Reverse and floor it. You will notice a big difference Anyway, does anyone know the weight distribution of an '89 GL wagon? that's exactly right! I noticed that very early on in my FWD loyale, when going through snow, if I went in forward, I could almost always back out! weight distribution? like most of it in the front, not much in the back :-p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.