Front Wheel Drive Vs Rear Wheel Drive vs All Wheel Drive

[noowve]

Hi All

If someone in this forum is able to shed some light on the topic above. I am about to order the new MK6 GTI, as you all know it, it's a Front Wheel Drive.

Does it matter whether it's front wheel or All Wheel drive? i am also thinking about the R, as it's a four wheel drive, but it boils down to cost. So can anyone shed some light?

[mattyf83]

Hi All

If someone in this forum is able to shed some light on the topic above. I am about to order the new MK6 GTI, as you all know it, it's a Front Wheel Drive.

Does it matter whether it's front wheel or All Wheel drive? i am also thinking about the R, as it's a four wheel drive, but it boils down to cost. So can anyone shed some light?

Front wheel drive, drives the front wheels, rear the rear and all the all.

Hope this clears things up

[Corey_R]

I'm not really sure this is the place for this topic.

But what do you want to know specifically? They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

Given sufficient grip, RWD is the perfect setup - hence why every major motorsport in the world uses it. Even the most famous of 'AWD' cars (Nissan GTR for example) strip back to RWD for the race track. The rear wheels take care of acceleration and the front wheels take care of steering.
RWD cars tend to balance towards 'oversteer' which means the front of the car pulls to the inside of the corner (whilst the rear comes out), but as you know from 'drifting', some opposite lock combined with accelerator application fixes this

FWD is probably the worst of the bunch - especially in older designs. When you accelerate hard, weight shifts to the rear of the car which only lessens the grip to the front wheels (conversely, in RWD it provides more grip), and then to make matters worse, if you're turning at the same time, the wheels not only have to try accelerate, they then need to steer. This means they tend to 'understeer' or push towards the outside of the corner.
FWD are the most fuel efficient due to the lowest weight and highest drivetrain efficiency.
Having said that, the Golf GTI is a very well balanced FWD car. It has minimal 'weight shift' to the rear during acceleration, it has an awesomely balanced chassis that can literally corner on 3 wheels, and it has balanced 'drive shafts' so torque steer is all but elimated. It also has XDS which helps with the understeer issue during hard acceleration in corners.

AWD uses all 4 wheels to accelerate. Thus it's big advantage is that when acceleration exceeds the grip that two wheels can obtain, the other two wheels keep it accelerating hard. So on dry tarmac, this typically means on initial acceleration from a stand-still. In the wet this can mean even on rolling acceleration. On gravel or dirt, this means basically all the time.
Other than the advantage of superior acceleration, AWD then basically has negatives. It generally suffers the same understeer issues as FWD cars. The AWD system weighs more, meaning that they typically have lower peak cornering speeds as the added weight combined with lateral G means an identical car with AWD would need more lateral grip than the identical car with only FWD or RWD to maintain the same speed (and AWD gives more forward grip, not lateral grip). The added weight will also have a small disadvantage in braking distance, again for same reason. Also, the combination of that added weight and 'drivetrain loss' from being split to 4 wheels instead of 2 wheels means they're not as efficient as RWD or especially FWD cars.
So when it comes down to it, the power of the car needs to exceed the grip that two tyres will achieve for a 'significant-enough portion' of its 'intended use' for AWD to be an advantage, hence why AWD has never had wide adoption on closed tarmac racetracks where you're almost never at a standstill (apart from the start) and usually have wide slick tyres (F1, Indycar, Nascar, V8 Supercars, Japan-GT, 'Lemans' sports cars (LMP1/2, GT1/2/3 etc). Rallying (both 'WRC style) and 'Targa Tasmania' style is generally where AWD cars have an advantage. Plus, in countries with plenty of snow.


So this is all generalisations. Different cars do better or worse jobs at implementing each of these configurations.

Should you be worried about the GTI being FWD? No.
Will the R be better for having AWD? Yes.
Will a 300KW GTI be drivable with FWD? Yes, given some respect to the throttle application and a new LSD etc.
Will a 300KW R be easier to drive than the GTI? Yes. And much more forgiving.

Anyway - I hope that's a help

For experienced members... please don't come along and rip my post to shreds - I have a much more indepth understanding of these things, I'm just trying to be brief and not too complex or specific. Feel free to add things though - everyone has different experiences and opinions

[pologti18t]

A favourite saying while driving in the snow is that AWD just gets you to the next corner faster

I would go out on a limb and say that for most people in most conditions AWD is unneccessary. The rest of the time you are carting round extra weight and driveline inefficiencies. For this reason I can't understand cars a like an AWD base spec 100kw Subaru Impreza.

[Corey_R]

I would go out on a limb and say that for most people in most conditions AWD is unneccessary. The rest of the time you are carting round extra weight and driveline inefficiencies. For this reason I can't understand cars a like an AWD base spec 100kw Subaru Impreza.

+1

That's so true. It's one of my 'beefs' with Subaru drivers. They think that their regular Subaru is safer because it has AWD - that it has 'saved' them when they had to quickly brake or turn. It's rubbish - both of those situations AWD is a disadvantage! And with a 100kw car, unless you're driving 'irresponsibly' in the rain, the AWD won't be an advantage in acceleration either!

[noowve]

Coreying, thanks for your info, that really helps, for awhile i got worried about front wheel drive especially when i am about to put down a deposit for the new GTI MK6 end of this month.

Hey is it alright if i can ring you and talk to you abit more?

[Psyk]

I can't understand cars a like an AWD base spec 100kw Subaru Impreza.

Totally agree.

An AWD car with sufficient power does give you a sense of extra grip... however when it comes to braking we're all in the same boat... i.e. 4 wheels on the ground. The AWD does sometime give inexperienced drivers a false sense of security. The marketing and advertising machines do a pretty good job.

Although, if you know what you're doing the grip levels in an AWD are quite amazing. Accelerating on slippery surfaces, rain, a gravel car-park and you can easily take it for granted - especially if you're in FWD/RWD loan car

Competitivley in things like targa tassie (which is really a series of tarmac rally stages) they (Mitsu's and Subaru's) do very well. However, the AWD is a significant but not the only thing that makes these cars so competitive... (i.e. Bathurst 24hrs, Targa Tassie etc.).

[Stoney!]

I can't understand cars a like an AWD base spec 100kw Subaru Impreza.

+1 and well said.

Stoney!

[noone]

For this reason I can't understand cars a like an AWD base spec 100kw Subaru Impreza.

My last car was a 2003 Impreza RS (2.5L)
My little Polo with a little tuning and suspension work has far more power, is far more fun to drive and is a lot faster on the track.

AWD is great if you plan on tracking your car and for improved acceleration out of corners (again, you need to be driving hard to need the traction).

If you are asking, you probably just answered your own question.

The R is going to be expensive.

[roy]

a little off topic...
so if a car has the 2 version(such the coming X1), both AWD and RWD,...
AWD may not be better than RWD on performance, safety, drive fun... it all depends?