Topic: 2015 Ford Focus RS

[johngenx]

50:50 is the best weight distribution.  No FWD comes close.

[HeliDriver]

50:50 is the best weight distribution.  No FWD comes close.

Best for what? I'd say 40:60 front to rear would be my ideal.

[johngenx]

Best for what? I'd say 40:60 front to rear would be my ideal.

Overall handling.  I've owned/driven cars ranging from 60:40 to 40:60, and would say that the ends of that spectrum don't do as well as 50:50.  The 911 is a classic rear engined 40:60 (ish) car that has amazing acceleration and braking performance thanks to the weight bias, but the handling has to be tamed.  The Boxster/Cayman's mid engined configuration takes far less engineering to make handle well.

[HeliDriver]

Not that I've driven either of them (been a passenger in a 911 for some hot laps, though), but I was thinking more like the Lotus Elise as an example of "ideal" handling and weight distribution.

Same 40:60 (ish) distribution as the 911, but with the mass centered between the wheels, like a Cayman.

[blur911]

   Exactly and few comparisons can be drawn here. The 'sit up and beg' rear wheel drive car has a lot of weight over anyway , if you look at diff assy. and massive thick wall prop shaft and as much weight as possible located rearwards. From what I have seen...even the driver sits in the back seat. When that thing comes down, the driver will find that the front wheel drive car is probably 100 yards up the track (if he is still pointing in the same direction....not guaranteed), having just got on with it and got going. From there on it is just shear power versus weight. Absolutely not related to road going vehicles at all.
   In fact, other than an example of the requirement for weight over, drag racing has nothing to do with the design of road going machines since in the first 100 yards the vehicles are probably exceeding the speed limit by 100%.

Sorry Rupert, obviously you have never been to a drag-race or drag-raced yourself.

Anyone who has driven a FWD car with much power knows that the main disadvantage is front end traction when accelerating or turning.  I dumped my turbo FWD car after doing one autoslalom with it and not managing much more than understeering around the course while burning up tires looking for traction.  I sold it and switched to RWD.

Find me a FWD car that can do the 1/4 mile in under 7 seconds.  I'll show you a front-engined RWD funny car that can do it in under 4 seconds.

[tpl]

Not that I've driven either of them (been a passenger in a 911 for some hot laps, though), but I was thinking more like the Lotus Elise as an example of "ideal" handling and weight distribution.

Same 40:60 (ish) distribution as the 911, but with the mass centered between the wheels, like a Cayman.

In the good old days of less sticky tires, mid engined cars, although they had higher limits than cars with the engine at one or other end, when they did let go they let go REALLY, REALLY fast.  Faster than most people could spin the wheel to catch them.  I am thinking of the old Lotus Europa.

[johngenx]

I understand that the Elise has many of the same demons that the 911 has, including the need to be very vigilant with the throttle and brakes mid-corner.

Here's a guy that tries to scrub off a little speed in a downhill bend.  The Elise unloads the rear and with the rear weight bias, the pendulum effect bites him hard...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgXieZTHqq8

I agree though that with skill and experience, a rear bias car can be great fun.

[blur911]

Not that I've driven either of them (been a passenger in a 911 for some hot laps, though), but I was thinking more like the Lotus Elise as an example of "ideal" handling and weight distribution.

Same 40:60 (ish) distribution as the 911, but with the mass centered between the wheels, like a Cayman.

In the good old days of less sticky tires, mid engined cars, although they had higher limits than cars with the engine at one or other end, when they did let go they let go REALLY, REALLY fast.  Faster than most people could spin the wheel to catch them.  I am thinking of the old Lotus Europa.

Low polar moment in mid-engined cars.   Sometimes it's a bug, sometimes it's a feature.

[aquadorhj]

yeah...  50:50 weight  is good for front engined RWD cars..   


re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

[Fobroader]

I understand that the Elise has many of the same demons that the 911 has, including the need to be very vigilant with the throttle and brakes mid-corner.

Here's a guy that tries to scrub off a little speed in a downhill bend.  The Elise unloads the rear and with the rear weight bias, the pendulum effect bites him hard...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgXieZTHqq8

I agree though that with skill and experience, a rear bias car can be great fun.

My buddies Sunflower used to do that on ice......

[blur911]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

[Fobroader]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

Can you imagine how awesomely dominant this thing would be with AWD.....

[aquadorhj]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

and how is this different from "Launch controls" found in numerous sports cars?    driving wheel is different, but effect is the same.   reducing wheel spin, torgue steer (or wheel hop in RWDs) and ultimately make the car actually faster.

without launch controls, all the powerful RWDs would burn up the tires endlessly if you floor the throttle and you will slide sideways.   

anyway.  yes, FWD super powerful cars do have issues and electronic trickery to reduce power is a bit of downer, but i still think this car is very cool.  (i might even pick this over FRS)

[blur911]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

and how is this different from "Launch controls" found in numerous sports cars?    driving wheel is different, but effect is the same.   reducing wheel spin, torgue steer (or wheel hop in RWDs) and ultimately make the car actually faster.

without launch controls, all the powerful RWDs would burn up the tires endlessly if you floor the throttle and you will slide sideways.   

anyway.  yes, FWD super powerful cars do have issues and electronic trickery to reduce power is a bit of downer, but i still think this car is very cool.  (i might even pick this over FRS)

Having actual traction would make the car faster. 
Does your M3 have to limit power in 1st and 2nd?

[aquadorhj]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

and how is this different from "Launch controls" found in numerous sports cars?    driving wheel is different, but effect is the same.   reducing wheel spin, torgue steer (or wheel hop in RWDs) and ultimately make the car actually faster.

without launch controls, all the powerful RWDs would burn up the tires endlessly if you floor the throttle and you will slide sideways.   

anyway.  yes, FWD super powerful cars do have issues and electronic trickery to reduce power is a bit of downer, but i still think this car is very cool.  (i might even pick this over FRS)

Having actual traction would make the car faster. 
Does your M3 have to limit power in 1st and 2nd?

yeah, but that's a trade off between    Traction, everyday practicality and tire choice, isn't it?

on icy road, my M3 DOES limit power, by way of traction control.     even with it off and dry warm road, 200 width rear would light up on 1st gear and i wouldn't go nowhere fast.

to the greater extreme, say, RRocket's old supra.   say, he had 600 HP.   if there was a tire a meter wide on each side, he wouldn't have any issue with traction but it would be pisspoor to drive otherwise.

that's all i'm saying.    as long as it's fun to drive, unless i'm competing and i need every advantage i can get, i don't see the negatives with FWD.

[Rupert]

It matters to some folk and name a front engine RWD sedan that has 50/50 weight distribution. FWD...even if only considering the practicality of design space is the best overall way to go. The savings on the climate by being more efficient is probably very important too. Valid reasons why RWD takes a 'back seat' and AWD should be restricted to specialty vehicles only.

[Fobroader]

It matters to some folk and name a front engine RWD sedan that has 50/50 weight distribution. FWD...even if only considering the practicality of design space is the best overall way to go. The savings on the climate by being more efficient is probably very important too. Valid reasons why RWD takes a 'back seat' and AWD should be restricted to specialty vehicles only.

Well said by a person whos probably squealed their tires once in their life.....and hated it. FWD is ok for a commuter car thats cheap....from every other standpoint its inferior. It handles worse, has worse traction, the front/rear weight bias is wrong, cant do burnouts properly, cant drift.....if fwd is so fantastic, how come every expensive sports/luxury car is usually rwd or AWD. FWD is a great solution for people that consider cars to be an annoyance to get to shopping and bingo.....

[Rupert]

Not exactly 'valid reasons' I think.

[blur911]

re: Focus RS , what's with all the argument over FWD?   it's a cool, fast Focus!!  20 years ago, people said 'oh 200hp is absolute limit for FWD', but they manage to make it work, (like 911's rear engine) so why the heck not?

How much is the RS power limited in 1st and 2nd gears as it can't get traction because it's FWD?  I believe it was up to 60% in previous versions.

and how is this different from "Launch controls" found in numerous sports cars?    driving wheel is different, but effect is the same.   reducing wheel spin, torgue steer (or wheel hop in RWDs) and ultimately make the car actually faster.

without launch controls, all the powerful RWDs would burn up the tires endlessly if you floor the throttle and you will slide sideways.   

anyway.  yes, FWD super powerful cars do have issues and electronic trickery to reduce power is a bit of downer, but i still think this car is very cool.  (i might even pick this over FRS)

Having actual traction would make the car faster. 
Does your M3 have to limit power in 1st and 2nd?

yeah, but that's a trade off between    Traction, everyday practicality and tire choice, isn't it?

on icy road, my M3 DOES limit power, by way of traction control.     even with it off and dry warm road, 200 width rear would light up on 1st gear and i wouldn't go nowhere fast.

Still running those narrow all-season traction limited tires on the M3? 

[Fobroader]

Valid reason...an awd car with equal tires will always be superior in snow. An awd with equal tires will always be superior in the wet. On a twisty mountain road a rwd with equal tires will be superior. Im sorry, Ive owned two front wheel drive, an Audi 5000 and a Nissan Altima V6, and I will never own one again.