Motor Hot Tuner Challenge

[blah_blah]

Also please note that the money spent on modifications includes other items not just amounts spent on engine. I.e. tyres and suspension, clutch upgrades etc..

[Birds]

Any magazine comparison or challenge should be taken with a massive shaker of subjective salt! It's meant for entertainment only...

you put $12,000 into an evo and you only get 196kw?

Overnight parts from Japan! This will decimate all! Except a FWD Golf lol.

FWIW the FWD sucks consensus is based on most FWD cars being cheap passenger cars...when you properly engineer one to handle rather than using the FWD to keep producton costs down and interior space up, it is every bit as good as using a RWD platform for most intents and purposes...just driven differently.

[R31Nismoid]

Also please note that the money spent on modifications includes other items not just amounts spent on engine. I.e. tyres and suspension, clutch upgrades etc..

So like i said - EVO's already have the bood brakes, turbo & ECU capable of all of that power.

The only things that get altered really are suspension, clutch, exhaust and cooler piping. Along with wheels and tyres.

Now if you can find 20k in just those parts then I'd be questiong the supplier of said parts and asking why they are charging you almost double

[Nee-san]

Any magazine comparison or challenge should be taken with a massive shaker of subjective salt! It's meant for entertainment only...

Overnight parts from Japan! This will decimate all! Except a FWD Golf lol.

FWIW the FWD sucks consensus is based on most FWD cars being cheap passenger cars...when you properly engineer one to handle rather than using the FWD to keep producton costs down and interior space up, it is every bit as good as using a RWD platform for most intents and purposes...just driven differently.

Going to have to disagree with you on this one, when you actually look at say the traction circle of opposing RWD and FWD platforms you can see that the way power is fed through the front of the chassis dynamically affects the slip angle causing understeer.

There is actually a pretty good evaluation of the concept in one of Carroll Smiths books, fairly certain it's 'Tune to Win' that we used at uni for this unit. Fundamentally it goes on to actually draw the traction circle showing how requiring the front wheels of the vehicle to play a dual role (turning and propelling) will result in detrimental vehicle handling dynamics, or at least that's what I took from it anyway.

Cheers,

Mitch.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Nee-san

[Birds]

As I said, driven differently. If you drive a FWD like a RWD, the dynamics of FWD will hurt you. But you can use the inherent understeer to your advantage around a racetrack, and you can alter the dynamics of FWD with swaybars and an LSD. As I said, a FWD engineered to handle...

But before this escalates to extreme examples, I'm not talking about Formula One racing here. I hate to refer to it, but in the above comparison the FWD vehicle had no issue keeping up because the vehicle was no doubt engineered to handle well, and driven as a FWD should be...as opposed to say, an Hyundai Excel. An example of this kind of engineering is the intermediate CV shaft which you can find in cars like the Calibra or V6 Magna (IIRC), which usually runs across the back of an engine. This device is used to counter the torque steer produced by an off centre diff, and when used with an ATB differential results in massive deletion of torque steer.

[NickR33]

So like i said - EVO's already have the bood brakes, turbo & ECU capable of all of that power.

The only things that get altered really are suspension, clutch, exhaust and cooler piping. Along with wheels and tyres.

Now if you can find 20k in just those parts then I'd be questiong the supplier of said parts and asking why they are charging you almost double

makes owning a GTR seem cheap

whenever I think its expensive to run an import I just look at what the euro guys get charged for a basic boost up tune and it makes me smile... let alone if you own a Porsche... eeek

ps. if my mechanic is reading this, don't you go raising your rates... I'm poor enough already lol

[R31Nismoid]

Yeah funnily enough the whole euro chip'n'tune thing has been a hot discussion between many close mates of mine the past week on email given a few of them have euro's (TT-RS etc).

Given you are paying $1500 for a GENERIC based flash tune... It's mighty expensive.

Its relative though as the ECU tuning software etc costs 5 figures. It's not like a PowerFC that you can purchase for $1000 and use the hand controller or datalogit nice and cheap

So i can understand where the costs comes from - but fact is once you "make" a generic tune for "x" parts then you make your money back much faster/better as Euro people have no choice being select market etc.

At least Jap imports stuff is reasonably priced (depending on how many times to have rebuild RB26s)

[Nee-san]

As I said, driven differently. If you drive a FWD like a RWD, the dynamics of FWD will hurt you. But you can use the inherent understeer to your advantage around a racetrack, and you can alter the dynamics of FWD with swaybars and an LSD. As I said, a FWD engineered to handle...

But before this escalates to extreme examples, I'm not talking about Formula One racing here. I hate to refer to it, but in the above comparison the FWD vehicle had no issue keeping up because the vehicle was no doubt engineered to handle well, and driven as a FWD should be...as opposed to say, an Hyundai Excel. An example of this kind of engineering is the intermediate CV shaft which you can find in cars like the Calibra or V6 Magna (IIRC), which usually runs across the back of an engine. This device is used to counter the torque steer produced by an off centre diff, and when used with an ATB differential results in massive deletion of torque steer.

The driving technique used and how it differs between a RWD and FWD platform will only ever be able to marginally mask underlying fundamental deficiencies with the FWD layout.

You are correct in saying that this is not Formula 1 we are talking about, however, It is on even amateur level racing and racetracks that the FWD starts to drastically lose ground to it's rear wheel drive and (4WD/AWD) counterparts.

As for the torque steer issue, I see it as another negative aspect of the FWD handling dynamics, however, it is not central to our issue at the moment.

The main point I was trying to make is that although FWD platforms may be able to be engineered to perform at a certain level, as you are still requiring the same two wheels to provide both propulsion and steering, something which drastically reduces the ability of the tyres contact patch to do efficiently, this means that a FWD layout will never perform as well as some of the other platform available.

You may be able to mask these detrimental conditions with some of the measures you have mentioned, such as LSD's and ARB's however, all of these solutions are those which may also be applied to the RWD and AWD/4WD platform meaning that all three systems have fairly similar levels of tune-ability however with front wheel drive you are simply starting from a less efficient platform in my opinion.

As for the tuning of the handling characteristics, inherent oversteer/understeer this may be adressed and changed dependant on the various requirements of the driver and are not mutually exclusive to any one drive platform.

Cheers,

Mitch.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Nee-san

[Peter89]

and people say fwd cars are crap......

it only took x3 the value of mods.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Peter89

[Shazza24]

The whole article and track testing sound like a bit of a WOFTAM!

[Duncan]

Some of the track laps where done in the wet, doesnt specify which ones where done in the dry and which ones where in the wet so I guess its not much of a comparison

wet makes everything meaningless. those times in the first post are 20sec off what they are capable of.

[gregor]

i know the tunehouse guys were disappointed with the weather, especially the impact it had on the xr6t's ability to get power down.

[Birds]

The driving technique used and how it differs between a RWD and FWD platform will only ever be able to marginally mask underlying fundamental deficiencies with the FWD layout.

You are correct in saying that this is not Formula 1 we are talking about, however, It is on even amateur level racing and racetracks that the FWD starts to drastically lose ground to it's rear wheel drive and (4WD/AWD) counterparts.

As for the torque steer issue, I see it as another negative aspect of the FWD handling dynamics, however, it is not central to our issue at the moment.

The main point I was trying to make is that although FWD platforms may be able to be engineered to perform at a certain level, as you are still requiring the same two wheels to provide both propulsion and steering, something which drastically reduces the ability of the tyres contact patch to do efficiently, this means that a FWD layout will never perform as well as some of the other platform available.

You may be able to mask these detrimental conditions with some of the measures you have mentioned, such as LSD's and ARB's however, all of these solutions are those which may also be applied to the RWD and AWD/4WD platform meaning that all three systems have fairly similar levels of tune-ability however with front wheel drive you are simply starting from a less efficient platform in my opinion.

As for the tuning of the handling characteristics, inherent oversteer/understeer this may be adressed and changed dependant on the various requirements of the driver and are not mutually exclusive to any one drive platform.

Cheers,

Mitch.

That's not true, it's not a mask at all. You're not covering up deficiencies when you modify a FWD, you're just changing the behaviour of the chassis and your driving to suit it, as you would when you modify a RWD. You make it sound like a FWD gets modified to mimick a RWD when it doesn't, it is modified to handle well and oversteer isn't everything in racing.

Where you point out FWD deficiency, I agree with the "one set of wheels doing two tasks" thing. But RWD also has these in it's own way. Take for example, in a RWD the power is put down through wheels that trail and get pivoted when turning corners (resulting in less traction for the wheels that deliver power, and conversely, power resulting in less traction for the wheels that are trailing/pivoting). As opposed to front wheel driven where power is delivered in the direction the tyres are supposed to be facing, whilst the rear wheels only have to trail/pivot. RWD deficiency or just the way the vehicle needs to be driven around a track?

For all the suspension experts I have used to set up our racecars (and they know a shit ton more about chassis dyamic than me), I have had this discussion many a time and none have ever ruled out the abilities of a well prepared FWD vehicle up against RWD...some have even preferred it for certain conditions. The only time we have agreed upon RWD superiority is in Formula 1 racing. Even with the shit comparison done in this topic, wet or dry, by your logic the GTi should be far behind the rest of the field. It's not. What are the rally teams running FWD setups thinking! If power through the front wheels offered nothing extra in their own way then AWD vehicles would not have the traction advantage that they do over RWD.

Anyway, original statement was that the "FWD is crap" consensus is based on production cost cutting FWDs, which is fair enough, but that's not all of them.

[mad082]

a large part of the "fwd is crap" theory is based on 2 things, and very little on actual knowledge.

1: a lot of people who have never driven fwd cars, or at least decent ones.

2: you can't do fully kebab spec burnouts and get the arse end out when taking off from the local mcdonalds in front of a group of flat brimmed cap wearing mates.

[Birds]

Yep agreed^, it's the more "technical" of the ignorant who usually refer to manufacturing reasons.

You can get some Maccas trays though hehe

[Peter89]

while ill never say fwd cars cant race, i would never buy one for racing or even as a weekend car.

rwd cars just are more fun and in the end that's what's important.

[Duncan]

each to their own....I learned racing in an underpowered front drive car rather than an overpowered rear drive car....and I reckon it taught me to get the most out of the available performance.

Until you get to overpowered cars where they can't get traction, there is little to no advantage in rwd or even 4wd. most controlled race categories apply power limits so fwd is no big deal. look at btcc, fwd finishes ahead of rwd 90% of the time.

In any case, it is all moot if some times were wet and some times were dry (or even if everything was in the wet). Wet track is a very small part of the time in Oz and requires totally different setup - so publishing wet results was somewhere between brave and meaningless.

[mad082]

example of a key advantage of fwd. when the back steps out (or is punched out) then you just floor it to gather it back up

[Nee-san]

That's not true, it's not a mask at all. You're not covering up deficiencies when you modify a FWD, you're just changing the behaviour of the chassis and your driving to suit it, as you would when you modify a RWD. You make it sound like a FWD gets modified to mimick a RWD when it doesn't, it is modified to handle well and oversteer isn't everything in racing.

What I'm saying is that fundamentally anything you can do to make a FWD handle better, you can do to a RWD or AWD platform, meaning that your just disadvantaging yourself but having a system which increasingly understeers as you increase power, this is why as Duncan had correctly stated FWD are only successful where the regulatory body of the sport has artificially capped power levels at what we would consider a "low" level.

There is a reason most of these FWD cars you see at sprint days are very light lower power vehicles. It is because that you cant simply add power to a FWD race car, not to the extent that you can for other platforms so people have to use the low weight of these vehicles to overcome the downside of having a low powered FWD platform.

Where you point out FWD deficiency, I agree with the "one set of wheels doing two tasks" thing. But RWD also has these in it's own way. Take for example, in a RWD the power is put down through wheels that trail and get pivoted when turning corners (resulting in less traction for the wheels that deliver power, and conversely, power resulting in less traction for the wheels that are trailing/pivoting). As opposed to front wheel driven where power is delivered in the direction the tyres are supposed to be facing, whilst the rear wheels only have to trail/pivot. RWD deficiency or just the way the vehicle needs to be driven around a track?

With a RWD platform, the turning and driving of the car are not intrinsically linked. With FWD they are, as any loss of traction you have is going to neutralise your steering inputs to a certain extent, Now I knew someone was going to post that video of Jason Plato in the BTCC

For all the suspension experts I have used to set up our racecars (and they know a shit ton more about chassis dyamic than me), I have had this discussion many a time and none have ever ruled out the abilities of a well prepared FWD vehicle up against RWD...some have even preferred it for certain conditions. The only time we have agreed upon RWD superiority is in Formula 1 racing. Even with the shit comparison done in this topic, wet or dry, by your logic the GTi should be far behind the rest of the field. It's not. What are the rally teams running FWD setups thinking! If power through the front wheels offered nothing extra in their own way then AWD vehicles would not have the traction advantage that they do over RWD.

the AWD argument goes to the size of the benefit of having extra driving wheels and the traction they bring. Hallmark of powerful AWD vehicles ? understeer on power. not to the extent that a FWD has however as it is only a fraction of the power passing through the front wheels. In saying this, it can also be said that not all AWD systems are equal the Porsche/nissan style of system is in my opinion superior to that of the evo but that's and entirely new argument on the technicalities of how the operate.

I agree that yes in formula 1 RWD is superior but remember formula 1 cars still operate within the realms of physics and what holds true for the development of those cars holds true for normal cars too.

and yes, keep adding power to this comparison like you would in any sort of racing competition and you will see the front wheel drive vehicles start to fall to the back especially on road tyres, you can probably tell I don't agree with a fair proportion of the regulations placed on various racing series these days and to be honest I would probably rather watch V8 Supercar then BTCC.

Anyway, original statement was that the "FWD is crap" consensus is based on production cost cutting FWDs, which is fair enough, but that's not all of them.

[Birds]

It does not sound like you've ever raced a FWD vehicle because you don't seem to be aware of how the supposed deficiences can be used as benefits. Anyway, I'm not doing another rotary thread, enough has been said on my part for people to make up their own minds.