Forget Politics, AGW, Peak OIL, IRAN - THIS IS SERIOUS

[user removed]

I like the idea of independent in wheel drives. Then you could add power to the outer wheels in a turn to enhance handling. Differentials would be obsolete, so would prop shafts, half shafts, u joints, transmissions, clutches, flywheels, starters, and the required mounts for the above.

regards
Mech

[botsapper]

Every precious tire patch contributes to energy transfer, nothing dragged along or wasted. AWD GT-R, just efficient @ 1/4 mile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJdXx-2DTmg

...it could make turns too. 7:21 w/o superslicks (7:19 w/ ZR1 super slicks)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSi76KhfJjI

[user removed]

Every tire patch provides a source for regeneration of decelerative forces.

regards
Mech

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by niky

Of course, it's not an efficient way to get around a dry track...

How about one that's wet, or covered in snow? The FWD cars I've driven have been much better in snow than the RWD ones. (But again, that's just my experience of a limited number of cars.)

[botsapper]

Having driven both RWD & FWD in snowbound Midwest winters, FWD was much better in most cases than RWD vehicles. It was quite apparent that the weight distribution was the difference. More engine & transaxle weight on the FWD was beneficial in having more 'bite' than the RWD. A remedy for RWD owners is to carry 100 lb bags of sand in the trunk for more bite. Unfortunately, there are AWD d-bags who think they are invincible in heavy snowstorms. They pass at x2 our reduced speeds only to see them later either at the bottom of a ditch or missing bumper covers after meeting the guardrails.

[320touring]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

That's a subjective evaluation, and I'd suggest unlikely to be accurate because of the many other differences between typical RWD and FWD cars. Just to take a couple of extremes, can you honestly claim that a RWD '59 Chevy http://photos.cokertire.com/data/505...ala-white2.JPG is more fun to drive than a FWD Honda CRX?

I'd argue that wasn't an "Apples and Apples" comparison

of course the chevy is more fun

fair point though.

The whole thing is subjective- thats why, even when ford was lashing out his Model T's, there were other car makers on the go.


let me say this though,

I prefer a well balanced RWD car to a well balanced FWD car in principal.

However, give me a mk1 golf GTI and a twisting backroad, and I'd be sure to have a hoot.

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

I like the idea of independent in wheel drives. Then you could add power to the outer wheels in a turn to enhance handling. Differentials would be obsolete, so would prop shafts, half shafts, u joints, transmissions, clutches, flywheels, starters, and the required mounts for the above.

Would the weight (unsprung especially) of those items be enough to offset the increased weight of the drives ? Someone did speculate on creating a car with independent hydraulic drive for each wheel for rallying many years ago at the height of the 600hp+ Group B boom - just before Group B got banned.

Originally Posted by 320touring

I prefer a well balanced RWD car to a well balanced FWD car in principal.

I prefer the opposite, which is where we came in

How about AWD without the need for transfer mechanisms ?

[tjts1]

AWD is only as useful as the tires its sitting on and it doesn't help you stop. Something most poeple seem to forget.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9-BK-HT2HI

I've driven over enough snow and ice covered mountain roads to know that FWD + snow tires has all the traction I'll ever need.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by tjts1

I've driven over enough snow and ice covered mountain roads to know that FWD + snow tires has all the traction I'll ever need.

For pavement, yes. I've taken the Insight (and the CRX before it) over a number of snowy 8000+ ft passes. But I've also been in a few non-paved places where I was glad to have the Toyota pickup in 4WD, with chains on the front.

[320touring]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

Would the weight (unsprung especially) of those items be enough to offset the increased weight of the drives ? Someone did speculate on creating a car with independent hydraulic drive for each wheel for rallying many years ago at the height of the 600hp+ Group B boom - just before Group B got banned.

I imagine with some creative engineering, they can easily offset the weight of the 4 motors at the extremities by the fact that there would be no engine/transmission/fuel tank etc..

I prefer the opposite, which is where we came in

so you call a Vrs with 1/2 tonne of PD pig iron up front, and an aygo with a "tube" rear axle well balanced?