So Much for AWD - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

ned2683 · #1 04-18-2013, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

I guess you have not noticed how the Subies dominate the stock classes they run in. Heck they aren't even very well balanced, very nose heavy. If they were balanced theyd be even faster. I am not aware that any subies fit into BS or AS and run head to head with s2000s. It may be different other places but I doubt it.

like i said, Subaru WRX STI and S2000 run in B Stock

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2013%20Stock%20by%20manufacturer.pdf

the national results shows that ALL rankings are by lightweight RWD cars. top 8 are S2000's. are you going to tell me that ALL of the Subaru STI's decided they are going to skip this class or that you were wrong about subaru's dominating the class they are in?

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/results/2012%20Solo%20Nationals%20Final%20Results.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

At Indy in the late sixties the stp turbine cars ran 4wd. Their cars were heavier and had less horsepower than the other cars and (I just read an interview with Parnelli Jones yesterday in Racer magazine) the gearing was such that he ran out of acceleration about half way down the straightaways. He made it up in the turns. That was in 1967. They ran the tires on all four wheels that the rear drivers ran on the rear.

For 1968 Lotus designed all new four wheel drive cars which were lighter and (if possible) handled even better) but USAC limited the intake size and restricted them to the smaller tires on all four wheels that the rwd cars ran on the front, hoping to make them uncompetitive. They made up some of the lost power by running white gas instead of jet fuel and still dominated the race.

After that usac reduced the intake even more... effectively banning turbines, and later went so far as to outlaw 4WD altogether when folks started showing up with it in piston engine machines.

4wd was banned in every major form of racing it was introduced in because it effectively made all the 2wd cars obsolete.

I suspect the ruling bodies also may feel it is more boring since with the added stability there are not as many crashes.

i don't think i can comment much on this as it was way before my time, and these are far from street cars. sounds like the car in your first example was geared lower than the rest to make up for the weight and HP difference? also you said it ran all 4 tires the same as the RWD ran in its rear? so it would have more rubber under it? depending on the course and how much are straight and how complex the turns are this may be good or bad.

I tried convincing my coworkers about this, and you are much older and wiser than them so i don't think i am going to convince you in your life time.

a tire, no matter on which end of the wheel can only do 100% of 1 thing, do you want to stop, go or turn? you cannot stop and turn at the same time and expect 100% stop and turning. To me what some pro-awd people thinks that the front driving wheels somehow negate this fact and let the front tires perform @ 125%

Do you at least agree that a lighter car will perform better than a heavier car? (you have to this is the basis for autocrossing!) and that an AWD drive drain typically add weight to a car? and that an AWD drive train has more drivetrain loss?

Brian Carlton · #2 04-18-2013, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ned2683

I tried convincing my coworkers about this, and you are much older and wiser than them so i don't think i am going to convince you in your life time.

a tire, no matter on which end of the wheel can only do 100% of 1 thing, do you want to stop, go or turn? you cannot stop and turn at the same time and expect 100% stop and turning. To me what some pro-awd people thinks that the front driving wheels somehow negate this fact and let the front tires perform @ 125%

Don't waste your time on this. The people arguing with you do not understand the physics and do not want to understand the physics. They simply want to argue their autocross experiences, which are all well below the cornering limits because they are not (probably cannot) be skilled enough to keep the tires at the cornering limits at all times. This is also due to widely varying friction conditions on a millisecond basis.

The only way to make the argument is on dry pavement with constant friction. If they agree to discuss with that as a premise, then the physics can be applied uniformly and the answer will be obvious.

Anything else is a waste of time.

t walgamuth · #3 04-18-2013, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

Don't waste your time on this. The people arguing with you do not understand the physics and do not want to understand the physics. They simply want to argue their autocross experiences, which are all well below the cornering limits because they are not (probably cannot) be skilled enough to keep the tires at the cornering limits at all times. This is also due to widely varying friction conditions on a millisecond basis.

The only way to make the argument is on dry pavement with constant friction. If they agree to discuss with that as a premise, then the physics can be applied uniformly and the answer will be obvious.

Anything else is a waste of time.

You guys have dreamed up some theoretical scenario which cannot be duplicate in the real world. In the real world 4wd rules racing when it is legal. Show me scientific proof I am wrong.

link · #4 04-18-2013, 01:36 PM

Great job of research and presentation, Rick.

ned2683 · #5 04-18-2013, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

You guys have dreamed up some theoretical scenario which cannot be duplicate in the real world. In the real world 4wd rules racing when it is legal. Show me scientific proof I am wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ned2683

like i said, Subaru WRX STI and S2000 run in B Stock

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2013%20Stock%20by%20manufacturer.pdf

the national results shows that ALL rankings are by lightweight RWD cars. top 8 are S2000's. are you going to tell me that ALL of the Subaru STI's decided they are going to skip this class or that you were wrong about subaru's dominating the class they are in?

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/results/2012%20Solo%20Nationals%20Final%20Results.pdf

if this is not real racing then maybe look up ANY race track record.

VIR
Virginia International Raceway lap records - FastestLaps.com

HMM top 10 track times only 2 are AWD, they must have forgot to turn off the physics, of the top 100 only 23 are AWD.

laguna seca
Laguna Seca lap records - FastestLaps.com
top 10 track times only 1 is AWD, of the top 100 only 12 are AWD

same story with willow springs
Willow Springs lap records - FastestLaps.com

you would think that with SUCH a HUGE AWD benefit, they would be lining up on the top there.

t walgamuth · #6 04-18-2013, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ned2683

if this is not real racing then maybe look up ANY race track record.

VIR
Virginia International Raceway lap records - FastestLaps.com

HMM top 10 track times only 2 are AWD, they must have forgot to turn off the physics, of the top 100 only 23 are AWD.

laguna seca
Laguna Seca lap records - FastestLaps.com
top 10 track times only 1 is AWD, of the top 100 only 12 are AWD

same story with willow springs
Willow Springs lap records - FastestLaps.com

you would think that with SUCH a HUGE AWD benefit, they would be lining up on the top there.

check out STU. the winner is a bmw but all the rest are subies and Mitsubishi 4wd.

as for the other tracks, look at positions ten and eleven at laguna and you find the Nissan STR (or whatever the letters are) which is four wheel drive and certainly not in the leage of Ferraris, vipers and such. Its basically a sedan with a big motor and FWD. Audi Quattro too with a little sedan like 4.2 liter motor. Not really apples to apples is it?

the Indianpolis 500 was the perfect showcase since there were no weight limits, or such back in 67. With less power the STP car blew off all comers until it broke a minor part near the end. I am not familiar with the model designations but Lambo, Ferrari and Porsche all offer 4WD high performance variations which are great athletes....

ned2683 · #7 04-18-2013, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

check out STU. the winner is a bmw but all the rest are subies and Mitsubishi 4wd.

yeah, a "STREET TOURING" class that limits to 140 thread street tire (no R compounds) and if you are comparing that you need to compare it the STR (street touring RWD/Roadster) where the best AWD car you mentioned would rank 9th there.

so you limit the traction available by going to street tires and allowing for modification, yeah i can see how AWD will help out there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

as for the other tracks, look at positions ten and eleven at laguna and you find the Nissan STR (or whatever the letters are) which is four wheel drive and certainly not in the leage of Ferraris, vipers and such. Its basically a sedan with a big motor and FWD. Audi Quattro too with a little sedan like 4.2 liter motor. Not really apples to apples is it?

i Don't think you really know these cars.

The 8th place is the Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 which is a AWD car with a v12 and 700 hp and cost over $350K.

The Nissan GT-R is NOT a sedan - it is the AWD super car killer, the wonder 100K Nissan. it has 550 hp and certainly belongs in that group.

the Audi R8 is not a "little sedan" is it a 2 door $100K super car, the GT version has a 5.2 lliter V10 that cost over $200K.

are you saying these are not in the same league as a corvette and viper?

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

the Indianpolis 500 was the perfect showcase since there were no weight limits, or such back in 67. With less power the STP car blew off all comers until it broke a minor part near the end. I am not familiar with the model designations but Lambo, Ferrari and Porsche all offer 4WD high performance variations which are great athletes....

i cant comment on indy 500, i know nothing of them. but as you pointed out the fastest lambo currently got beat by a corvette and viper.

ferrari only has 1 current AWD that i know of, the FF and it is a GT car and will not compete with the rest of the RWD offering.

The 911 turbo is slower on the track than the GT2RS and GT3RS. do you think there is a reason they decided to use a RWD in the GT2RS and GT3RS to save weight? they could have thrown the AWD system from the 911 turbo in there and gain more speed. those German engineers must not know anything.

Brian Carlton · #8 04-18-2013, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

You guys have dreamed up some theoretical scenario which cannot be duplicate in the real world. In the real world 4wd rules racing when it is legal. Show me scientific proof I am wrong.

Ned took care of that perfectly.

You are wrong and you have always been wrong. With constant friction and an expert driver, the 2wd vehicle always wins.

If you're subpar or you have subpar friction (varying condition), you'll find that 4wd will help you.

You have already experienced this on your dirt tracks..........so all the data correlates.

t walgamuth · #9 04-18-2013, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

Ned took care of that perfectly.

You are wrong and you have always been wrong. With constant friction and an expert driver, the 2wd vehicle always wins.

If you're subpar or you have subpar friction (varying condition), you'll find that 4wd will help you.

You have already experienced this on your dirt tracks..........so all the data correlates.

And you're that expert driver?

Brian Carlton · #10 04-18-2013, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

And you're that expert driver?

Why, yes........yes I am.