New lap record at Willow Springs

[(goldfish)]

I can't believe what is going on in this thread. ONE guy has a screaming fast FWD car and all of a sudden you have a bunch of people who are RWD car enthusiasts praising the FWD platform as if it were the greatest platform around.

 

I think Tony's example says it best. The reason the FWD car is so fast is because the guy ISN'T BUILDING TO A RULESET. He can do whatever the hell he wants. That opens up endless possibilities, and unconventional thinking has clearly ruled the day. To compare his car built to no ruleset vs another built to no ruleset is also fairly meaningless, unless you're looking for a science fair type of thing where my science project > your science project. So far, this guy has the best science project, and that is really cool, but it doesn't mean that his platform is intrinsically the best. He's only being beaten by the open wheel cars, right? What wheel drive are they? WHY?

 

Read the Millikens' book or any kind of basic racing principles book by Carroll Smith, etc, and you'll find that FWD is not the preferred platform because as you accelerate the weight shifts off the drive wheels and they are also responsible for the majority of (and carry more of the weight during) braking and turning. AWD has a CLEAR advantage over either FWD or RWD because when the 2WD can't put any more power down to the drive wheels there is UNUSED traction available at the other end that it can take advantage of.

 

Efficient, yes. That does not make it the best format for racing, and I never said it would. Clearly efficiency is not always the fastest way around a track or spoilers wouldn't work as clearly they make drag.

 

But given infinite traction and equal HP, FWD would be faster. You just have to bend the physics rules for lots of traction

[johnc]

It really comes down to tires.

 

A 2WD (front or rear) can only apply power through two tires that reach the traction limit around 220 degress F. A 4WD car can increase its acceleration traction limits by about 50% over a 2WD car.

[JMortensen]

Efficient, yes. That does not make it the best format for racing, and I never said it would. Clearly efficiency is not always the fastest way around a track or spoilers wouldn't work as clearly they make drag.

 

But given infinite traction and equal HP, FWD would be faster. You just have to bend the physics rules for lots of traction

Really? That is your argument? Racing is about traction, not efficiency as you said. Are we not arguing about race cars in this thread??? Let's completely ignore that for a minute and ask another question. Why do you think FWD is more efficient? I'm guessing that it has to do with the lack of a drivetrain that goes from one end of the car to the other. Guess what mid or rear engine RWD cars don't have? How does this affect your efficiency argument now? Does this ruin your argument?

[JMortensen]

It really comes down to tires.

 

A 2WD (front or rear) can only apply power through two tires that reach the traction limit around 220 degress F. A 4WD car can increase its acceleration traction limits by about 50% over a 2WD car.

I don't think you can get that much more acceleration out of AWD. When you accelerate you don't have 50% more traction at the front because weight transfer moves available traction to the rear. This is why you have 80/20 splits on power distribution on higher hp AWD cars. I think you might have 20-30% more traction in pure WOT acceleration from a stop, and perhaps a bit more when you're not WOT but are pushing on the accelerator mid corner.