What is going on?

Hammyman

I'm a follower of BTCC and now WTCC for about 3 years.

We have front wheel drive cars trouncing rear wheel drive - I thought FWD was worse?

We had diesel trouncing petrol in BTCC last year - I thought diesels were supposed to be slower?

And in WTCC, we have European Chevrolet donks trouncing the rest of the field.

Just what the hell is going on?

grizzly1911

Hammyman wrote: »

I'm a follower of BTCC and now WTCC for about 3 years.

We have front wheel drive cars trouncing rear wheel drive - I thought FWD was worse?

We had diesel trouncing petrol in BTCC last year - I thought diesels were supposed to be slower?

And in WTCC, we have European Chevrolet donks trouncing the rest of the field.

Just what the hell is going on?

Not sure about the Chevrolet bit I guess it just shows where the R&D/Investment is going in "future" technology rather than "old world"?

I frequented a Hot Rod raceway some years back for a whole season - I got better though.

There was a Super Rod 3.0 Capri category. Some rich well healed business man trounced them all season in his well maintained pristine 2.8 injection.

When he ploughed into the armco and lost his front suspension, in one of the last races, the noise in the stadium said it all..

bigjl

A FWD car is imply easier to race, they are more forgiving, easier to get the power down and more stable if you over cook it.

If you get a big slide on in a FWD car you just give it lots of throttle and spin up the fronts and pull yourself out of the slide and off you go.

I a RWD car you have to get out of the throttle a bit, to give the back a chance to grip again.

The biggest surprise is that the Vectras are right up there with the leaders again, the chassis must be 5 yrs old now.

It will be interesting when the economy improves as there will be more chassis being developed.

I think you will find that technology from LeMan racing will be coming across into BTCC, if it hasn't already, as most of the top LeMan team use diesels these days.

Is it wrong to think the Chevrolet Cruze is actually a nice looking car?

If it wasn't for the depreciation that it will have then I would consider one, though when they reach three years old they should make great used buys.

almillar

It's all about the rules. Do you remember Audi brought in A4s which were 4wd, beat everyone, and gradually weight was added, they became less competitive and left?
The BMWs had great starts due to the RWD, so they were made to run a higher ratio 1st gear to even it out.
Nowadays there are 3 different specs that are being followed, the 'Next Generation Touring Car' which is the new spec - this is basically the turbo cars - a standard brought in to make the cars cheaper to run, but still be the same speed.
S2000 - the oldest spec, these were the Honda Integras, and I think the BMWs.
And something in between, which includes the Chevrolets. It's not about FWD/RWD at all, everything has been evened out as much as possible, and different race teams and drivers can do better or worse things with a basic chassis and body shell. To buy your road car based on Jason Plato winning a race in a Cruze would be pretty mental, I'd take the Beemer...

Kilty_2

bigjl wrote: »

Is it wrong to think the Chevrolet Cruze is actually a nice looking car?

Yes

But I kinda think so too

Strider590

Hammyman wrote: »

We have front wheel drive cars trouncing rear wheel drive - I thought FWD was worse?

FWD has an advantage in the BTCC because yon can get power down out of corner much sooner in a FWD car. They've (touring cars) have always been quite tail happy..... and the way to pull a FWD car out oversteer is to boot it, RWD is the opposite, so theres clearly a point where FWD is going to be pulling away from the RWD boys.

Not only this but we're talking front engined rear wheel drive in cars which aren't exactly small hatchbacks.
The only reason BMW's stay on the road these days is all the fancy trickery/electronics (which isn't allowed in the BTCC afiak).

Put the road going versions head to head on a track and the RWD's would run rings around them, road cars are typically setup to give understeer (safety reasons), which is as far as speed goes is the ultimate killer.

Hammyman wrote: »

We had diesel trouncing petrol in BTCC last year - I thought diesels were supposed to be slower?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_R10_TDI

What can I say

spikyone

Hey Hammyman,

I've been following touring cars since the glory days of the Super Touring era in the 90s. I'm starting to lose interest a bit lately though - there's just not the quality of competition there used to be and some of the driving in the BTCC has been decidedly suspect in recent times.

Hammyman wrote: »

We have front wheel drive cars trouncing rear wheel drive - I thought FWD was worse?

RWD is always better than FWD in a racing car. Tyres only have a certain amount of grip - coming out of a corner in RWD the rear tyres provide longitudinal grip (traction), the fronts provide lateral grip (turning). In FWD, traction out of corners is compromised by the need for the front tyres to provide both lateral and longitudinal grip, so acceleration is necessarily slower - google for "circle of forces" for a full explanation. It also means that the RWDs tend to look after their tyres better!
The reason the BMW (although Rob Austin's running a RWD Audi A4 in BTCC, it's pointless comparing it here!) is slower is related to its age - the chassis has been around for 6 or 7 years now, and BMW haven't developed it for a couple of years. The Cruze is winning because it has RML developing it as a works team and is simply a newer car. The RWD cars are also handicapped by running a higher 'base' weight - the weight to which success ballast is added.

Hammyman wrote: »

We had diesel trouncing petrol in BTCC last year - I thought diesels were supposed to be slower?

The issue here is not petrol vs diesel, but naturally-aspirated vs turbocharged cars. You'll also see that in the BTCC this season, the NGTC-engined cars (Civics, Vectras, Focuses) are destroying the NA Cruze in a straight line. So far, TOCA are doing a poor job of ensuring equality, and the FIA did little better in WTCC when the SEATs were dominating with diesel power.

Hammyman wrote: »

And in WTCC, we have European Chevrolet donks trouncing the rest of the field.

This is down to the fact that the Chevys are the only works-supported team in WTCC. Whilst I'll cheer on Huffy all the way, the series really doesn't carry the same prestige and strength in depth as the days when Andy Priaulx won three successive titles.

FWIW I've been following FIA GT3s this season - great racing between a variety of very different but well-matched cars (Ferrari 458, Porsche 997, Aston DBRS9, Audi R8, Lambo Gallardo, Ford GT, BMW Z4, Mercedes SLS)

spikyone

Strider590 wrote: »

FWD has an advantage in the BTCC because yon can get power down out of corner much sooner in a FWD car.

'Fraid not - see my previous post. Doesn't matter what type of car, there's a limit to how much grip a tyre can provide regardless of what direction that grip is in. If you want your front tyre to accelerate the car forward (traction), you have to sacrifice some lateral grip for that. A FWD can never be as quick out of a corner as an equivalent RWD. Of course, all other things are never equal...

bigjl

Strider590 wrote: »

FWD has an advantage in the BTCC because yon can get power down out of corner much sooner in a FWD car. They've (touring cars) have always been quite tail happy..... and the way to pull a FWD car out oversteer is to boot it, RWD is the opposite, so theres clearly a point where FWD is going to be pulling away from the RWD boys.

Not only this but we're talking front engined rear wheel drive in cars which aren't exactly small hatchbacks.
The only reason BMW's stay on the road these days is all the fancy trickery/electronics (which isn't allowed in the BTCC afiak).

Put the road going versions head to head on a track and the RWD's would run rings around them, road cars are typically setup to give understeer (safety reasons), which is as far as speed goes is the ultimate killer.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_R10_TDI

What can I say

There you go Strider, we do agree on some things, your post is almost identical to mine, LOL.

Who would have ever thought that would happen.:D

bigjl

spikyone wrote: »

'Fraid not - see my previous post. Doesn't matter what type of car, there's a limit to how much grip a tyre can provide regardless of what direction that grip is in. If you want your front tyre to accelerate the car forward (traction), you have to sacrifice some lateral grip for that. A FWD can never be as quick out of a corner as an equivalent RWD. Of course, all other things are never equal...

Your wrong there, as when you lose traction in a RWD car you have to ease off more than in a FWD car.

FWD are also a lot harder on tyres, look at how the FWD boys keep off the kerbs for the first part of the race, and the BMW's don't, they are simply not as hard on front tyres.

If you seen the race a few weeks ago, there was a Vectra in big amounts of oversteer, but the driver kept his foot in and managed to drive out of it without losing track position.

Try that in a RWD car and you would have to back off, or your car would swap ends.


To put and end to the discussion, my opinion is formed from listending to the God of Touring Cars, Jason Plato, though he has only confirmed what I already experienced.

When it comes to fun factor, it is RWD everytime.

If FWD was inferior to RWD in a racing situation then the leading cars would be RWD, simples.

I personally think the main reason for F1 and LeMan cars being RWD is simply to do with the engine position.

We all know that a BMW is very well balanced, but on the limit with two identical drivers in matched cars I think the FWD car will win every time.

Don't take my word for it, but that is definately the way i take the comments of JP and other Touring Car Drivers.

spikyone

bigjl wrote: »

Your wrong there, as when you lose traction in a RWD car you have to ease off more than in a FWD car.

Please, google "circle of forces". It doesn't matter what happens after you lose traction, as that is not the quickest way to corner in a 2WD car. Based on the forces involved, RWD (which equalises the loadings on front and rear tyres) is better than FWD (which loads the front tyres much harder than the rear, and is therefore more likely to over-load its tyres, leading to loss of grip).

bigjl wrote: »

FWD are also a lot harder on tyres, look at how the FWD boys keep off the kerbs for the first part of the race, and the BMW's don't, they are simply not as hard on front tyres.

Which is what I said in my previous post -

It also means that the RWDs tend to look after their tyres better!

bigjl wrote: »

If you seen the race a few weeks ago, there was a Vectra in big amounts of oversteer, but the driver kept his foot in and managed to drive out of it without losing track position.

It may not have lost a position but it wasn't the quickest way to take the corner, and doing it lap after lap will destroy the rear tyres. Being easier to rescue from oversteer is not that important to a racing driver. Watch those touring car races again - you won't see a RWD oversteer much. The reason FWDs oversteer is because they're set up that way, such that when their front tyre wear hits towards the end of the race (due to being over-worked), they handle in a more neutral way rather than understeering straight on at every corner. The handling balance of a RWD car changes less over the course of a race, so they are not set up to oversteer initially.

bigjl wrote: »

To put and end to the discussion, my opinion is formed from listending to the God of Touring Cars, Jason Plato, though he has only confirmed what I already experienced.

...and mine is formed from a knowledge of physics, and a masters degree in automotive engineering.

bigjl wrote: »

If FWD was inferior to RWD in a racing situation then the leading cars would be RWD, simples.

I personally think the main reason for F1 and LeMan cars being RWD is simply to do with the engine position.

We're back to your opinion versus facts here. The leading cars are FWD because the road cars they're based on are FWD. Making a RWD Cruze, for instance, would take the car outside touring car rules, which limit floorpan modifications - you couldn't run a propshaft under a FWD floorpan. I believe Rob Austin gets away with the RWD Audi because Audi manufacture a 4WD A4, so the 4WD floorpan could be used.
As for engine position, this is clearly nonsense - all high performance cars, regardless of engine position, drive through the rear wheels (or all four wheels). Which is because a RWD will always handle better than an equivalent FWD. FWD is used on mass-produced cars primarily because it is cheaper.

bigjl wrote: »

We all know that a BMW is very well balanced, but on the limit with two identical drivers in matched cars I think the FWD car will win every time.

Opinions again. As I said, all other things will never be equal, but if they were, RWD would be faster. Which is why the RWD cars have always run to a higher base weight in touring cars.