RWD vs FWD

[Dualie]

Has been reading the thread on the Supra crashed + other threads. Apparently, general consensus is that RWD is more difficult to handle than a FWD. Why is it so? For a normal family driver, does it makes a diff?

[S2077s]

More power + reckless driver = easier to crash, not RWD or FWD.

 

4WD WRX also recently crashed being piloted by an undergrad whom got the car less den a month or so. Do bear in mind that most continentals like BMW and Merc are RWD...... are they easier to crash? So are buses, vans, and trucks.

[Genie47]

In most normal circumstances, some understeer is safer than oversteer. There is also the fear factor. Knowing that your FWD car can plow right ahead due to understeer can be frightening so the natural response is to hit the brakes. This in many ways will restore traction and reduce the understeer. It's slower around a turn but safer. So for a normal family sedan, yes, a FWD is safe in amateur hands.

 

RWD does have their advantages. The cars usually have longer wheelbases. They are more stable and thus a better ride. The car is also much more balanced overall but in the hands of an idiot, you will get the same thing with idiots on a FWD.

Edited October 3, 2006 by Genie47

[Veryfree]

i think hor, more important factor is the distribution weight of

the vehicle. if 50/50 front & back, then, RWD/FWD is not an issue.

That is why most MR cars are well-balanced in performance/handling.

[Genie47]

The longer wheelbase of RWD vehicles is usually used to address this balance issue.