Rear wheel drive
astrog
Ok,this has probably been done to death but bear with me.
I have an ancient (old 'P' reg Mk1) MX-5. It is a blue Dakar model, 1.8i
with big fat tyres. It is probably worth about �600 (if that).It has
76,000 on the clock. It's goes like a deranged banshee off the lights.
Body work is not great,I had to get bits welded at the seat-belt anchor
points, neds keyed it, and the cat insists on peeing on the canvas roof.
So not a pretty car. And of course, zero airbags, so just an engine in
your lap.
It will never ever beat any powerful cars over a distance. But hell does
it move in initial acceleration. When you put the pedal down, you can
feel the back of the car dropping, the wheel grips to the road and it
just flies away like a total b@stard..I do enjoy playing with
4x4's..annoyed a Porshe Cyannething the other day..
So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
Gawd, I sound like Clarkson..
Astrog
AstraVanMann
> I have an ancient (old 'P' reg Mk1) MX-5. It is a blue Dakar model, 1.8i
> with big fat tyres. It is probably worth about �600 (if that).It has
> 76,000 on the clock. It's goes like a deranged banshee off the lights.
> Body work is not great,I had to get bits welded at the seat-belt anchor
> points, neds keyed it, and the cat insists on peeing on the canvas roof.
> So not a pretty car. And of course, zero airbags, so just an engine in
> your lap.
>
> It will never ever beat any powerful cars over a distance. But hell does
> it move in initial acceleration. When you put the pedal down, you can feel
> the back of the car dropping, the wheel grips to the road and it just
> flies away like a total b@stard..I do enjoy playing with 4x4's..annoyed a
> Porshe Cyannething the other day..
>
> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
I've got rear wheels on my car. Front ones too.
But seriously, there are loads of RWD cars still about. Little ones, big
ones, in between ones. Loads. I can't be arsed to list all of them, but an
RX8 sort of does the roadster thing except in hatchback form, sort of.
Loads of others too. I can't be arsed to list them all, but seriously.
Loads.
--
"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."
Adrian
were saying:
> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
There's plenty about. Including the MX5.
If anything, there's probably more than in the mid-90s.
Mike P
I'm going to presume the OP means mainstream cars - Escort MK1/2 RWD,
Escort 3 FWD, Cortina RWD / Mondeo FWD, Marina RWD, Rover shitbox
whatever FWD - that sort of thing. It's because it's cheaper to design
and build an FWD car and you get more room inside a FWD car because of
the lack of tranmisson tunnel I suppose.
Mike P
AstraVanMann
>>> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
>>
>> There's plenty about. Including the MX5.
>>
>> If anything, there's probably more than in the mid-90s.
>
> I'm going to presume the OP means mainstream cars - Escort MK1/2 RWD,
> Escort 3 FWD, Cortina RWD / Mondeo FWD, Marina RWD, Rover shitbox
> whatever FWD - that sort of thing. It's because it's cheaper to design
> and build an FWD car and you get more room inside a FWD car because of
> the lack of tranmisson tunnel I suppose.
Up to and including the repmobile class, most of the mainstream/budget
marques produce largely FWD stuff. But looking at more upmarket/bigger
stuff, and Merc and BMW as well, most stuff is still largely RWD. And most
decent roadster type stuff is still RWD. I think.
--
"That's the cunt calling the kettle a cunt." - Charlie Brooker on the Jeremy
Clarkson referring to Gordon Brown as a cunt situation.
Adrian
saying:
>>> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
>> There's plenty about. Including the MX5.
>>
>> If anything, there's probably more than in the mid-90s.
> I'm going to presume the OP means mainstream cars
Then they've not been around since the '70s or early '80s for
particularly retrograde manufacturers. Then there's a couple who insist
on it even now. Mad. Especially for an Ashtray-sized hatch - which just
proves your packaging point. Half-way sensible manufacturers haven't
built RWD cars since the '30s. If ever.
But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
intention.
Peter Hill
<pe...@swerveweb.com> wrote:
>But seriously, there are loads of RWD cars still about. Little ones, big
>ones, in between ones. Loads. I can't be arsed to list all of them, but an
>RX8 sort of does the roadster thing except in hatchback form, sort of.
RX8 isn't a hatch, the rear glass is stuck firmly in place, resulting
in a silly small post box that doesn't allow a single bike to be
posted into the car without extensive disassembly. Then it goes in
though the back doors, won't fit with back seats down as they reduce
height so you need blankets and stuff and run risk of damage to seats.
If it was at all practical I might be tempted to live with the
excessive 10.6m turning circle and piss poor aero (CdA = 0.30x2.37 =
0.71m�) that shows they chose style over technical achievement and
economy. Spent all the money on the engine and back doors, had nothing
left over for wind tunnel time.
MX5 has a 9.4m turning circle. All those "ultimate" driving machines
and other RWD cars are way out of it, most being over 11m.
"Fastback" 2+2 coupe 1990 8V Vauxhall Calibra 2.0i had CdA of 0.5m�
while the 16V/turbo/4x4 were 0.56m�. If GM can do it why can't Mazda?
So I'm still looking for a new car with 9.5m turning circle and 0.55m�
CdA, that I can just lob 2 whole bikes in the back or stuff a 3m
copper tube in without bending or cutting it down.
--
Peter Hill
Spamtrap reply domain as per NNTP-Posting-Host in header
Can of worms - what every fisherman wants.
Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!
Steve Firth
> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
<stares>
Other than:
Aston Martin
Bentley
BMW
Chrysler
Dodge
Ferrari
Ford
Holden
Honda
Hyundai
Jaguar
Kia
Lexus
Lotus
Maserati
Mazda
Mitsubishi
Morgan
Nissan
Mercedes
Porsche
Rolls-Royce
Suzuki
Vauxhall
You mean?
Adrian
much like they were saying:
> RX8 ... piss poor aero (CdA = 0.30x2.37 = 0.71m²)
> "Fastback" 2+2 coupe 1990 8V Vauxhall Calibra 2.0i had CdA of 0.5m²
> while the 16V/turbo/4x4 were 0.56m². If GM can do it why can't Mazda?
Simple. Because modern cars have a much larger frontal area, and because
there aren't corresponding gains to be made in drag.
Ttoommy
so just one car per house eh? ;-)
"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1j3y67g.abkwarq4qle9N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
Pete M
All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
and always will be.
Yes, I know the Volvo is FWD, it tells me every time I use full throttle.
--
Pete M - OMF#9
'62 Rover P4 100
'61 Rover P5 3 litre
'72 Rover P6 3500 Auto
'78 Escort 1300 Sport
'96 Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate
"It's an Alfa, it will go wrong, it will piss you off, why should your
Alfa experience be different from everyone else's.
Now get back out there and swear at it before something else breaks."
Dave Plowman (News)
Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
> > intention.
> All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
> and always will be.
I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
--
*My designated driver drove me to drink
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Conor
says...
>
> In article <h5bj5s$gaj$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > > But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
> > > intention.
>
> > All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
> > and always will be.
>
> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
Yes with more torque than you're ever likely to.
--
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
Adrian
saying:
>> > All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is
>> > wrong and always will be.
>> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
> Yes with more torque than you're ever likely to.
A little more weight, though...
Willy Eckerslyke
> In article <h5bj5s$gaj$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
>>> intention.
>
>> All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
>> and always will be.
>
> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
Best car I ever had for driving through snow was a Vauxhall Viva HB (RWD
of course). Dunno how, but it just trundled on merrily while everything
else slithered to a halt.
Come to think of it, the Vauxhall Carlton (also RWD) was even better but
someone had fitted an LSD to it, so it doesn't really count.
Conor
Yebbut only 3-4 times as much but 10 times or more torque.
Pete M
> In article <h5bj5s$gaj$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
>>> intention.
>
>> All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
>> and always will be.
>
> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
>
RWD takes a bit of practice on snow but I've never had an issue. In
fact, whenever it snows I like to have a RWD car to go playing in ;-)
Dave Plowman (News)
Conor <co...@gmx.co.uk> wrote:
> > > All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
> > > and always will be.
> >
> > I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
> Yes with more torque than you're ever likely to.
That won't be in your Capri then - which apart from having less torque
than either of my cars is also useless in snow.
Oh - I well remember one night in the '60s near Arbroath where no truck
could get up a main road hill in the snow. My MiniVan did.
--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?
Dave Plowman (News)
Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
> >
> I have, plenty of times.
> RWD takes a bit of practice on snow but I've never had an issue. In
> fact, whenever it snows I like to have a RWD car to go playing in ;-)
Oh not denying the fun of it - but for maximum traction on slippery
surfaces you need the weight over the driving wheels. And skinny tires.
And good ground clearance - if the snow is thick. Rear engine rear drive
would be better - but reversing a FWD up a hill allows you to rock the
steering to find better grip.
--
*You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me *
Conor
says...
> Oh - I well remember one night in the '60s near Arbroath where no truck
> could get up a main road hill in the snow. My MiniVan did.
Your mini probably had more torque. 1960's trucks weren't exactly noted
for power, good brakes, decent steering....
Pete M
> In article <h5bpv3$qkr$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
>>>
>> I have, plenty of times.
>
>> RWD takes a bit of practice on snow but I've never had an issue. In
>> fact, whenever it snows I like to have a RWD car to go playing in ;-)
>
> Oh not denying the fun of it - but for maximum traction on slippery
> surfaces you need the weight over the driving wheels. And skinny tires.
> And good ground clearance - if the snow is thick. Rear engine rear drive
> would be better - but reversing a FWD up a hill allows you to rock the
> steering to find better grip.
>
I have noticed that in the very small village where I stay in Czech most
of the locals either drive 4wd stuff all year (My mechanic mate, Martin,
drives a Sierra 4x4 Estate) or they tend to have old rear engined Skodas
they use in winter. The only FWD cars I've seen there have been Citroen
Berlingos - they seem to manage ok, but they seem to be the only FWD
cars that can actually make it to the village from the main road.
Every house seems to have either an old Russian 4x4 or a rear engined
Skoda outside - even the huge posh houses seem to rely on 'em.
Peter Hill
>In article <5086175...@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman (News)
>says...
>
>> Oh - I well remember one night in the '60s near Arbroath where no truck
>> could get up a main road hill in the snow. My MiniVan did.
>
>Your mini probably had more torque. 1960's trucks weren't exactly noted
>for power, good brakes, decent steering....
How about late 80's tankers? Like the one I went past on it's side in
2 inches of snow on an uphill DC. There was a cop in attendance, I got
"hairdryered" doing 70mph in RWD Celica 2.0XT. I'd had a set of new
tyres fitted that morning, less than 30 miles on them.
Mike P
> In article <h5bj5s$gaj$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> > But, since he started off about his MX5, I'm not sure that was the
>> > intention.
>
>> All cars should be RWD. It's the proper way to do things. FWD is wrong
>> and always will be.
>
> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
My MX-5 was *ace* in the snow in February round here. I went where other
cars couldn't go with no problem at all. It was on Avons, and felt a
whole hell of a lot safer then the FWD Puma on Pirelli ditchfinders did.
Or maybe I can just drive in snow?
Mike P
Mike P
Hmm. My retard alarm just went off big time.
Mike P
DavidR
> Yes with more torque than you're ever likely to.
All the cars I've driven have had a pedal to allow me to adjust it.and a
gearbox to change the muliplier. Is there something I have missed?
Dave Plowman (News)
There's a big difference between feeling safe and outright traction on
slippery surfaces.
> Mike P
--
*Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine*
vulgarandmischevious
>Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
>> In article <h5bpv3$qkr$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Pete M <pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> I take it you've never driven in heavy snow on ordinary tyres?
I don't have snow tyres fitted to any of my vehicles.
>>> I have, plenty of times.
Fairly regularly, for five months of the year, for the last three
years.
>>> RWD takes a bit of practice on snow but I've never had an issue. In
>>> fact, whenever it snows I like to have a RWD car to go playing in ;-)
>>
>> Oh not denying the fun of it - but for maximum traction on slippery
>> surfaces you need the weight over the driving wheels. And skinny tires.
>> And good ground clearance - if the snow is thick. Rear engine rear drive
>> would be better - but reversing a FWD up a hill allows you to rock the
>> steering to find better grip.
>>
>
>I have noticed that in the very small village where I stay in Czech most
>of the locals either drive 4wd stuff all year
We have two 4wd cars, for exactly that reason. Most people have 4wd
cars, at least one per household.
Elder
pete....@SPAMFREEblueyonder.co.uk says...
> Every house seems to have either an old Russian 4x4 or a rear engined
> Skoda outside - even the huge posh houses seem to rely on 'em.
>
stuff.
--
Carl Robson
Get cashback on your purchases
Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm
Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553
Steve Firth
> Every house seems to have either an old Russian 4x4 or a rear engined
> Skoda outside - even the huge posh houses seem to rely on 'em.
In Italy it depends where one lives. Above 1200 feet snow is guaranteed
each winter, so anyone living above or near the snow line will have at
least one 4x4. The preferred models seem to be Panda 4x4 (old style),
Panda 4x4 (new), Lada Niva, Alfa Sportwagon and Audi Allroad. There are
some Gallopers and Pajeros, but not many. The Carabinieri favour the
Defender SWB. Just below the snow line front wheel drive cars
predominate, but there's always some knob who has a Maserati or Ferrari
who can't get home when it snows.
ChelseaTractorMan
wrote:
>So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
big powerful cars have rear drive or all wheel drive, small cars with
limited space to eek out use front.
--
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
Mike Cawood, HND BIT
news:Xy0em.83869$zh1....@newsfe04.ams2...
> Hi,
>
> Ok,this has probably been done to death but bear with me.
>
> I have an ancient (old 'P' reg Mk1) MX-5. It is a blue Dakar model, 1.8i
> with big fat tyres. It is probably worth about �600 (if that).It has
> 76,000 on the clock. It's goes like a deranged banshee off the lights.
> Body work is not great,I had to get bits welded at the seat-belt anchor
> points, neds keyed it, and the cat insists on peeing on the canvas roof.
> So not a pretty car. And of course, zero airbags, so just an engine in
> your lap.
>
> It will never ever beat any powerful cars over a distance. But hell does
> it move in initial acceleration. When you put the pedal down, you can feel
> the back of the car dropping, the wheel grips to the road and it just
> flies away like a total b@stard..I do enjoy playing with 4x4's..annoyed a
> Porshe Cyannething the other day..
>
> So,(finally) why no rear wheel cars anymore ?
>
>
> Astrog
>
>
BMWs are all RWD.
Regards Mike.