| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums > Technical Discussion > Lets talk about what FFs can do... |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 13 2003, 06:58 PM |
| I'm only a few days from getting my AE86 from my brother (just waiting for is new car to be ready for the road). Meanwhile i want to talk about the great things FFs can do (since it's what i currently have, and about the only thing i have driven save a few times in my Father's and my brothers cars). I know most peoples around here have little faith in them, others just plainly hate them. Besides, some just blame FFs from replacing FRs, yet many of the cheap sport cars have been replaced by SUVs, wich are FAR worst in my opinion... Another sad thing aside the poor reputation of FFs is there are very few places where you can learn about advanced FFs driving techniques. I had to look for a while on the net to find them (was at Drivingtechniques.co.uk, now dead link), most sites not even bothering, some almost claiming the only one is the hand brake turn... .......... So here the ones i do know : Left foot braking Lift off oversteer trail braking (or delayed braking) Hand brake turn Powerslide Feint Pendulum Scandinavian flick One thing i find puzzling is the claim FF can powerslide easily... Might be true on heavily race modified ones, but on thoses i owned or driven, turn too quickly or put too much power while cornering and they loose traction, going forward despite the wheels fully turned. Doing a powerslide does require some technique as far as i am concerned. Left foot braking is a powerful technique, and has multiple uses besides racing at high speed. For exemple, in the snow or ice or any low traction surface, applying the brakes while attempting to accelerate prevent the wheels from spinning. But so few FFs drivers are aware of this and just curse their cars when they start to accelerate sideway instead of forward... Engine braking is also a strong ally of the FFs as it can allow the car to oversteer, but also as it can be used as antilock brakes. As long as the engine don't stall, the front wheels can't lock under the braking, fairly useful when you have weak brakes or very bad tyres. Let's see where this will lead to. I hope this won't lead to flames or bring back the "FFs can't drift" debates (please don't). |
| Posted by: Tai-Mai-Shu Jun 13 2003, 07:19 PM |
| Hm..interesting...I usually believed that in order for an FF to drift , your drift relies on bodyroll of the chasis since the steering and powering is done by the same wheels. Maybe it's easier to powerslide because FFs are stable enough to enter corners and continue drifting with it's nimble chasis? Problem in my opinion is weight. When a more heavier engine is put into an FF, it's not as nimble as it should and it might cause some heavy nosedives in the corner and some serious understeer. They can be cheaper to mod, but the AE86 is a prime example of an FR beater to racer car conversion. Those techniques are pretty handy with the help of braking, but i don't think FFs can use throttle control can they? just my 2 cents. feel free to correct any statement i said wrong, I'm here to learn. |
| Posted by: S15-guy Jun 13 2003, 07:45 PM |
| I dont hate FF's, infact, I own and drive one, I just feel that as a performance car, they are not as good. Keep in mind, my car is a daily driver, not a racing car. I know loosing traction in the front wheels while going around a corner is kinda fun, but not actually a drift, IMO, as you really need to slide the rear end around, but as you said, this is not a debate about the ability to drift or not, as it is simply a matter of interpretation. You can still have a lot of fun in an FF, and plus, you can do reverse doughnuts, for that great 'in-car-carnival-ride' feeling.  |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 13 2003, 07:45 PM |
| To Tai-Mai-Shu : First thing, if you want to avoid the flames of some regular here, avoid putting drift and FF in the same sentence. Not that I mind, but they do. So just say sliding through a corner, or use the shameful "ass dragging"... As for nosedive and such, it can be corrected with suspension setup. Also, body roll isn't that much of an issue, most cars now have anti-sway bars... It's the weight shifting that count, and you can do a lot of crasy thing with the weight shifting. My personnaly way to correct the FFs understeer is to put more suspension travel and stiffer spring in front. Well, never actually did, simply because my civic 87 had thoses convenient torsion bars instead of springs (mean i could adjust them unlike normal springs). FFs can use throttle to control a slide, but in a different way. Accelerating cancel oversteer, while decelerating increase front grip at the expense of the rear (oversteer). But there is also a special way you can use to swing the rear around while accelerating, but it's tricky. |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 13 2003, 08:05 PM | ||
S15-guy : Well, you can do a lot better than that  . BTW, what make and model is it?I do know a cheap way to make a FF do 'in-car-carnival-ride' in the forward motion. Just slack the middle nut from the front chucks (the upper ones of course). That way there is a gap in response from the gas chuck, lettling some slack to the springs (note that you should not drive on the road after doing this). Now try some braking turns and acceleration-deceleration, you will notice the car is very ass happy, and you can even do counter-steering turns (mean the inside wheels makes the rear swing around). The bad thing is the car will violently oversteer with little warning at high speed cornering. I have yet to find a safe way to produce the same effect WITHOUT the unstability at higher speed... Still, try that in an empty parking lot, lots of fun. |
| Posted by: Tai-Mai-Shu Jun 14 2003, 09:20 AM | ||
don't worry about it. Out of all the forums I've been this one sure seems to have kind folks, (at least karasac doesn't mind ) so flaming against FF isn't a big issue. But i still don't understand. Until it is actually proven that FFs can out preform FRs in some drift competition, why would we stick to FF cars in the first place? Sure we lack alot of FR but the 240sx, FC, FD, and cars like WRX are equipped with AWD are now sold. What exactly is the advantage of FF over FR in a drift competition? I , for one, would be more than happy to have an FF drift car since there are so many on the market, but it still doesn't beat my reason to get a 240sx. Maybe alot of people discriminate against FF drifting because it's not "traditional japanese" style drifting, meaning the big folks on the other side of the world don't do it. But perhaps Signal might shoot for the FF aftermarket suspension in U.S for drifting. |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 14 2003, 10:21 AM |
| It's not that I hate FF's, it's just that FR/MR/AWD/RR have so much more potential in racing, but in the Rally scene, some FF's have out done the AWD cars, so they do have spunk in them. As for yyour techniques, I've noticed a few things. Lift off over steer can be used with most, and MR's especialy (sp?). My friend Angel has an MR2, and that thing can corner like there's no tomorrow, and you yoiu really don't need to brake. Lift off just shifts the weight forward, fiving the front tires 'more bite' allowing you to turn at faster speeds. This technique can be applied to most cars, but FFs especialy (sp?) since they naturaly understeer =p Left foot braking can be applied to ANY, mostly turbo charged cars since you can brake and keep the turbo spooled up so you can get it instantly. This isn't a very practiced technique because it will eat you brakes up REAL fast, but it helps when qualifying to get you those few extra seconds off the clock. Hand brake=evil. If you've been here long you already know my opinion on it >_< Trail braking is a common technige used by all racers, so I won't go into that. Flick, we all know what it is and know that all cars can use it so I won't say any more. Fient, refer to Flick.  So you can see most of these techniques can be used by mnost good drivers regardless of the car. One that I am curious about though is the Pendulum technique you speak of. Is this one used only for FF's? and what is it exaclty? Does it go by any other name? Over all, the order for drive train goes; MR>FR>AWD>FF as far as racing is concerned. This is just my opinion of course, by I can get a lot of people to agree with me on this as well =p FF's put way to much stress on the front tires. They need to turn, brake and accelerate. Thats not very econmoic in my opinion for when you racing. Ciao |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 14 2003, 10:24 AM | ||
I just saw this. If some one could please explain this for it would be AWESOME. I've done this one to many times and I don't want to again. Hell, didn't we have not one, not two, not three, but a whole load of threads where this came up? |
| Posted by: S15-guy Jun 14 2003, 10:26 AM |
| we certainly did: https://idforums.net/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=203 https://idforums.net/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=181 https://idforums.net/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=540 how, as the tile says, lets 'leave the drift debate at the door' |
| Posted by: SiGNAL* Jun 14 2003, 10:44 AM |
| FF's make for good beaters!!(cheap cars that you dont care about and usually crash on purpose!) Some Civic's and Integra's can look REALLY nice...but FF's cant do anything that FR's or AWD's cant... |
| Posted by: S15-guy Jun 14 2003, 11:40 AM |
| or a first car that you can actually afford insurance on! |
| Posted by: Tai-Mai-Shu Jun 14 2003, 11:48 AM |
| whoops, my bad. Didn't notice it was a repeated topic on this forum, I haven't been here for awhile. Anyways thanks for posting up those links, i'll read them Edit: After reading all those links i've come to the conclusion - FF cars cannot drift because it bends the laws of physics (which I have learned like have a dozen terms from reading) - Neo vash has no....uh..I don't know if the administrators allow me to say it. - Powersliding and drifting are two different things. |
| Posted by: karasac Jun 14 2003, 03:38 PM | ||
you have learned well grasshopper |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 14 2003, 06:09 PM | ||||||
| Jayson : Of course, most of the techniques i have put there aren't new, they aren't FF specific either... It's just that you need to know they exist, and that they apply to FFs... Lift off oversteer work differently in an FF than in a MR or a FR (but quite similar to a AWD). At high speed, lifting off will give grip to the front, but will also break loose the rear, but without the need to lock them or spin them (you basically rotate the car over the front wheels). Of course the result vary from one car to another, some FFs are really hard to lift off, others will do it easily.
LFB is typicaly used in FF cars as it has very little use for other type of cars (your exemple is an exeption, not the rule). LFB unload the rear and help corner (in FF that is), and also prevent wheel spin as the braking replace the ground friction when it is too low. You don't need much brake pressure to make this work...
Got you on that one, you confuse things here (or don't know what i'm talking about). "Scandinavian flick" is getting sideway (using LFB / lift off then keeping the brakes), facing opposite of the corner, building up the springs (you are sliding, most likely in the dirt or snow) then release the brakes the last moment to swing the opposite way, into the corner. This technique needs skills to perform, and seldom used on tarmac (it's a RALLY technique). I believe it's mostly a FF techniques as other drivetrain have little need for such a overkill technique to ensure the car will turn. A feint is pretty quick, you don't slide. It can be used to initiate a drift in a FR/MR or oversteer in a FF (and AWD). Same technique, different effects.
Pendulum is rocking the car heavily during a VERY tight corner to use the rebound grip to turn. You see one in the first episode of ID, when Takumi beat the FD for the first time. It's not a typical drift technique, but it's used a lot in Rally. Any cars can use this, but suspension suffer a lot from that technique, it's more suited for rally cars or cars with a lot of suspension travel (you need clearance or else you will bottom out). |
| Posted by: TRD 4A-GE Jun 15 2003, 03:04 AM |
| so..the conclusion is: FF car can drift( i dun care bout what u all think, i can drift my AE92 but why can't you?) , but it require more skills and more to initiate the drift... It's not widely used in rally because it needs more speed to loose traction and not that easy to drift compare to AWD FF car does hv understeer problem, but IMHO, Rx7's understeer problem is far more prominent and serious... Case closed. |
| Posted by: TRD 4A-GE Jun 15 2003, 03:08 AM |
for those who doesnt own any FF car, get urself a copy of Colin Mcrae 2.0 and try drifting with Mini Cooper...  you will get what i mean |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 15 2003, 06:05 AM |
| Argn... I said, please leave the drift debate at the door, as i don't want my thread to be highjacked by it. I'm talking about legitimate FF advanced driving techniques, not why they can't drift or why other drivetrain can be superior in a race (and FFs do have some edge on dirt, snow, grass, and that before adding any electronic junk to control the spining). So please, keep the topic on FF drivetrain and noting else. |
| Posted by: TRD 4A-GE Jun 15 2003, 08:23 AM |
| then, i would say FF is capable of what FR can do but most of the time we are "simulating"it... |
| Posted by: |[ .tainted. ]| Jun 15 2003, 08:41 AM |
| ff's are safe to drive on snow unlike fr's that always fishtails and unlike awd's that i think consume too much fuel and more expensive than most front wheels ff's are the ideal everyday car in my opinion [especially in the snowy areas] |
| Posted by: SuperMazdaKart Jun 15 2003, 09:30 AM |
| if your driving on gravel you can put the handbrake on & throttle it in reverse to flick up stones at unsuspecting poor victims.. |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 15 2003, 11:27 AM | ||
When I said "Refer to Flick", I meant that we all new what it is and that there was no need to go into detail. But you took care of that for me |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 15 2003, 03:31 PM | ||
You sure? To me the is a HUGE difference between a Flick and a Feint, even if they use the same basic principle to work. |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 15 2003, 06:01 PM |
| I did dig out thoses infos some of my friend "stole" from the defunct "drivingtechniques.co.uk"... Here the meat : FRONT WHEEL DRIVE Front wheel drive, sometimes referred to as 'Wrong Wheel Drive', is both the easiest to drive and the most difficult to fully master. Almost anybody can drive a FWD car fairly quickly, they can appear to be right on the limit when in fact they are only on the limit of the front tyres. Exploiting the genuine limits of the entire FWD car can be a real challenge. The difficulty arises from the fact that you have little control over the rear wheels. In a rear wheel drive car you have control over the front wheels with the steering and the rear wheels with the power. But in front wheel drive both control forces are focused on the front wheels. On top of this, the fact that putting power to wheels creates the reduction of traction, and understeer is the most uncontrollable handling characteristic means the whole set up should be a recipe for disaster. However.... The advances in suspension and handling setups on road and race cars have lessened these characteristics and turned some front wheel drive cars into extremely drivable cars. Certainly most of the new hot hatches and even some of the older ones such as Escorts (particularly XR3 etc.) have good levels of front wheel grip. The techniques involved in effectively driving a front wheel drive car are quite complex and require serious practice to get right. The most demanding motorsport for front wheel drive car control must be rallying or derivatives where you can be running on loose surfaces and need to find sure fire ways of creating oversteer. SCANDINAVIAN FLICK Used as a way of committing to medium slippy corners at speed by eliminating understeer. Particularly if the entrance to the corner is tight on a surface such as gravel, you need a way of quickly turning into the corner without the possibility of understeer. Using left foot braking, you should aim to put the car into a sideways skid heading down the road towards the corner whilst the car is pointing in the opposite direction to the corner (e.g. pointing right heading towards a left hand turn). The car can then be held in that position by flooring the brakes and locking up all the wheels or just balancing the brakes and throttle. At the point when you want to turn in you can come off the brakes and let the car change direction and swing into oversteer in the other direction. It is then a case of balancing the brakes, throttle and steering using the left foot braking technique to balance the car through and out of the corner. HANDBRAKE TURN The hand brake is the savior of front wheel drive in many situation. The front wheel drive car is by far the best at handbrake turns and by far the easiest to master them in. Due to the fact that the front wheels are driven and the handbrake acts on the rear wheels you can pull the handbrake without coming off the gas. To perform a 180 and continue in the other direction. Slow down to about 20-30ish in second gear, pull the handbrake hard enough to lock the rear wheels and steer smoothly in either direction. The car will start to swap ends. When at about 140ish degrees, hit the gas, drop the handbrake, select 1st gear and dump the clutch, all in one smooth motion (takes practice). This should finish off the 180 and start pulling you down the road amidst a cloud of tyre smoke. LEFT-FOOT BRAKING Left foot braking is probably the most important technique to master in driving a front wheel drive car effectively. In order to defeat understeer you need to provide more grip to the front wheels than the rear. To be able to commit to a corner completely and at speed you need to be sure that, when you turn in the car isn't going to go straight on (understeer). Approaching a corner you should slow down as usual using your right foot on the brake, maybe a bit of toe and heel. When in the desired gear but still maybe too fast, swap your feet over, moving your right foot back to the accelerator and your left foot over to the brake. It is possible with some gear boxes to change gear without the clutch without causing damage, meaning you could use your left foot to brake from full speed and blip the throttle in-between each gear. This should only be used if the gear box can cope with it, such as a competition straight cut gearbox. Whilst it is possible to do this with a synchro-mesh gearbox, they really don't like it and after prolonged abuse will just end up on the road!!! Anyway.... You are now using your left foot to slow the car down the last few MPH and about to turn into the corner. If at this point you hit the gas with your right foot, brake with your left foot and turn in, all in one smooth motion, the rear wheels will fully or partially lock. This resulting difference in grip levels will throw the car into oversteer. From this point, you need to balance the car by steering in the direction you want the car to travel and braking / lifting off the gas for more oversteer, more gas / less brakes for less oversteer. In reality I often just keep the accelerator planted and balance the car using the brakes and steering. This technique overcomes understeer and allows you to keep the power on through the corner. LIFT-OFF OVERSTEER When cornering at speed in a front wheel drive car, the weight distribution between the front and rear wheels is fairly even. There is obviously far more weight on the outside wheels than the inside wheels. This is assuming a fairly neutral throttle position. If you lift off the throttle at this point, the weight will move from the rear to the front. This will mean that the weight distribution will be likely to be in the following order, most to least:- Front Outside Front Inside Rear Outside Rear Inside If you analyse this, there will be little or no weight on the inside rear wheel, but probably a bit of weight on the rear outside wheel. Bags of weight on the outside front wheel (the one which does most of the turning) and a fair chunk of weight on the inside front as well. If you link this situation with the steering you will have due to the corner, the result will be that the front will continue to turn but the rear will have so little traction that the car will go into oversteer. Once sideways, the slide can be controlled with opposite lock steering and throttle. More throttle = less sideways. SLALOM The slalom in a front wheel drive car is not as simple as in rear wheel drive. The technique will alter depending on the surface, conditions, distance of cones etc. The most effective way of driving the slalom is to build a rhythm and be able to keep up a good speed. The best way of doing this is to overcome understeer by either using left foot braking of throttle off oversteer. Using left foot braking the procedure would be as follows. Using a gear with lots of torque at the relevant speed, approach the first cone to the left or right with your left foot hovering over the brake. turn in and hi the has aiming for the slightly wide of the opposite side of the next cone. As you steer to change direction hit the brake and the gas to lock the rear wheels, delivery weight and power to the front wheels creating oversteer. As the car oversteers round the next cone wind on enough opposite lock to balance the skid with the power and brakes. When you want to change direction for the next cone, simply come off the brakes and then back on and the car will pendulum round to oversteer in the other direction. Easy! --------------------------------------------------------- I think this post is long enough
|
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 15 2003, 06:55 PM |
| kewlio's, but I already new all that. But neato none the less! |
| Posted by: bunta_boi Jun 16 2003, 05:06 PM |
| before speaking, you hafta have the experience to know what u talkin bout... I rode in my friends RSX and that thing can really corner..just around 174hp too...try going through those circle things at around 120km.....drift or no drift....high speed in low speed corners is still pimp! it dont matter whether its the best, worst or no technique....as long as you can enjoy yourself without peeing yourself |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 17 2003, 12:04 AM |
| I know there is a hure difference between Flick and Fient, but how did I explain Flick? and then when I said refer to flick when I was explaining Fient I was going by the definition I gave. Obviously your a shmuck and didn't get the little joke and by me explaining it to you that makes you even more of a shmuck, and by wanting to know more about what FF's can do that makes you more of a shmuck, and by making me explain this more that makes you more of a shmuck. But don't worry, every one here is a shmuck |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 17 2003, 04:11 AM |
| What a shmucking way of shmucking things... |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 17 2003, 09:41 AM |
| yeah, you know what I mean shmuck |
| Posted by: TRD 4A-GE Jun 17 2003, 06:07 PM |
| who is the least shmuck then? you? are u sure? |
| Posted by: Wheels84ss Jun 17 2003, 06:53 PM |
| What a front drive does well. Save space, due to the enitre drivetrain being in one end. Develop traction in less then great terrains (snow mud) because the weight on the drive wheels is higher then other platforms. Allow for beginner drivers to gain knowledge, due to the relative price and availability of them (ie cheap and everywhere) it makes a car available to the finacially strapped. These are about the only endearing qualities for the FF. Yes they can be built in to highly tuned race cars, but then again so can an old station wagon. Any material thing can be improved if you throw enough cash at it. But "wrong wheel drive" has two major downfalls. Not so much with the drivetrain but in the type of people it attracts, at least in the racing field. We'll leave commuter cars out of this because if all you use your car for is to commute, your not going to use 90% of the techniques discussed already. FF's attract drivers that either A) want to "hook their cars up and make them Phat" or  people that aren't yet skilled in alot of techniques and think they can drive any car like an FF. This has given FF such a bad name in racing scenes. The "ricers" who think that because their civic with 140 horse can go full bore through a turn can do it with a camaro or supra. Now yes I know there are exceptions to this rule, as there are to every rule, but thanks to these two types the FF is the bastard of the drivetrain family. FF has it's niche in the auto and racing world, but it's niche is that it's an all around average. It has no real clear dominace in any one realm. It's not a rally dominator like the AWD, it's not a corner carver like the MR and it's not a drift/drag king like the RWD. And that is it's best quality, it may not be a king of any of them, but it can also do all three which not may of the others can. OH and by the way, the original mini coopers are a blast, everyone should drive one at least once. |
| Posted by: Jayson Jun 17 2003, 10:26 PM |
| shmuck |
| Posted by: bunta_boi Jun 19 2003, 05:00 PM |
yah im not so fond of that word as i used to be....  |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 19 2003, 06:51 PM |
| That's what happen when someone use it as much as a Smurf use Smurf... |
| Posted by: killerenergy Jun 19 2003, 07:27 PM |
| appreciate this topic, great info got an FF too, looking forward to praticeing |
| Posted by: S15-guy Jun 19 2003, 10:13 PM | ||
smurfy comment dude |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 21 2003, 08:57 AM |
| I'm a bit curious about how they manage to "powerslide" their FFs... I did try a few times but my own FF isn't much responsive to that (or maybe a bit underpowered). But i do know a more impressive trick i call the counter-steer (powered)slide (dunno if it has a better name, at least i never heard anyone else doing it), a FF specific technique that need front traction to work... I'm curious if anyone can guess how i pull it off. |
| Posted by: Perry Jun 21 2003, 04:07 PM |
| Lift Off ? |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 21 2003, 08:32 PM | ||
Nah... Let me explain it another way : Begin by accelerating and turning in, then make the rear slide in position while recentering the steering. The gas isn't released, the brakes aren't used. Note, it work better on grass, dirt or snow, but still possible to pull off on dry asphalt... |
| Posted by: Wheels84ss Jun 23 2003, 03:32 PM |
| Yea It's called a Donut and you do it in reverse. |
| Posted by: Rayp Jun 23 2003, 05:58 PM |
| Wrong again, i do it in forward motion . Besides, a donut rotate the car around the Rear wheels, the technique i talk about does it around the Front wheels... It's none of the well known FF techniques BTW. |
| Posted by: Rayp Oct 24 2003, 02:38 PM | ||
Let's bring this thread back from the abys... Well, since that no one ever answered my quiz, i'll just give the answer... The technique is to turn in and puposedly loose traction once well in then immediatly let the wheels realign themselves. When the wheels return to their center, they regain grip and the rear will be unsetled. Of course this is dependant on many factor, and it work well on snow, dirt, gravel than on dry asphalt. If the front never loose traction while turning in, it will never happen. My Accord has too much grip now to use that trick on dry pavement, but it work wonderfully on dirt (as i did again lately). I belived before i was the only one using it, but i found one or 2 guys i know who do use this from time to time. Of course i'm probably the only one who do it as extensively whenever the occasion arise. |
| Posted by: 156GTAE86 Oct 26 2003, 05:43 PM |
| i agree about the mini cooper..... it's a blast to drive. but wait, what about the new mini cooper s? or better still, the new mini cooper s works by john cooper? a cheek bending, tear inducing blast to drive fast. it may be the most hilarious mini ever to be built (we know there are a few of them) test driven it the other day, get this:- 200BHP1.6L supercharged engine all driven to the front wheel and not a trace of torque steer. that's one hell of a drivetrain. and the rolling acceleration.., wow! in third at 160KM/H. you go from oh god to oh blimey! if there is any car i would call point and shoot, this is it. superb! |
| Posted by: Rayp Nov 8 2003, 04:50 AM |
| Too bad there is not more interest in my last technique. I havent come up with a name for it (i doubt i has one already, at least never heard of it). So, the complete explanation : Come to the corner relatively slowly, once close to it, accelerate forward (enough for the rear suspension to compress), then turn sharply in the corner. Due to the extra weight in the rear and the lightened front, the car should understeer. Now the trick is to use the rebound grip that happen when the front loose traction and the rear uncompress. Return the steering and keep accelerating, the front will regain traction, the rear will snap around suddently. Work best in low traction environment like rain, mud, dirt, snow, but can work on normal asphalt. While i have been experimenting with it for a long time, i haven't mastered it yet. Lets say it works against normal driving sense, when corner are comming we usually want to slow down, but this technique cannot work unless we accelerate hard, wich increase the fear of messing up... On a side note, i even managed to pull it off while playing ID arcade, i ever thought it would work there but it did  . |
| Posted by: funixxx Nov 9 2003, 12:09 AM |
| I think what you are doing is simply lift throttle oversteer, but if you believe differently, please explain. EDIT: Reread it again... so you didn't lift. It sounds like a mild version of a Scandinavian flick - i.e. Feint motion. You are using rotational momentum about the front wheels to induce oversteer. |
| Posted by: Rayp Nov 9 2003, 05:58 AM | ||
Yeah, i know, it's so unlike what FF normally do, but it works. I don't know the full extent of it's uses since i don't have a track to practice it safely in all possible variation. The trick is to loose front traction when turning in, either by feeding more power (maybe clutch kicking) or turning in too much (and suddently) for the current speed. If done right, the rear will swing around due to the front wheel power. It's done with full acceleration, with no need to feint (Well, some rotationnal force is needed, the more the better, so feinting might help a lot). My understanding of it is the rebound that happen when the car suddently loose acceleration. The car is already unballanced because of the turning, it need very little to break the rear, the front outside wheel just does it when it suddently regain it's grip. It work fairly easily on dirt and such (little speed and power), but need a more brutal acceleration and a lot more speed to work on more grippy medium (with the additionnal risk that comes with this). |
| Posted by: funixxx Nov 9 2003, 05:43 PM |
| So what you accomplish is lift off oversteer w/o actually lifting - i.e. forward weight transfer due to decreased acceleration as a result of the front drive wheels losing traction. |
| Posted by: Rayp Nov 10 2003, 07:58 AM |
| It's a bit more than that. When i loose traction, the car don't oversteer. It's when i regain it that the "magic" happen. Also if i use the clutch or shift when i first loose traction, no oversteer. So the power is needed, as well as the spring action... And last, the oversteer can be very quick, unlike a brake slide or a lift off oversteer, while moving at relatively slow speed (in the dirt or snow, it can be done with less than 30 km/h). A side note : i discovered that manouver when i spun out twice in a row in the snow while taking turns at slow speed. It took me a while to understand what happened. I had worn out tyres in the rear at the time (just switched them from the front to the rear), that's why it happened so easily despite not using much power... |
| Posted by: IntegraToast Nov 10 2003, 10:26 PM |
| iono ffs are fun to drive since they have good traction...left foot braking is a good techinique and honda does make decently tunable engines...there not great but they can go fast and if you dont need to drift there great..i just really hate torque steer thats sucks~! |
| Posted by: Rayp Nov 11 2003, 06:43 AM |
| Never had much experience with torque steer... The only time it happened to me was in the snow, or when my tyres were quite worn or something was wrong in the alignment. You need quite a lot of power before this happen on a regular basis, and an LSD is the best fix (few FF come with this stock though).
|
| Posted by: Alex Nov 11 2003, 06:03 PM |
| FF wasn't made to be a perfomance car but Honda/Acura made that a little less true by introducing the Type-R Integra and the Type-R Civic. Trying to do stuff like burn-outs in an FF car can hurt your drivetrain. But putting the e-brake on and pressing the gas is fun, lol. |
| Posted by: hirothegreat Jan 16 2004, 09:24 PM |
| this thread is great, its hard to find detailed technique guides elsewhere |
| Posted by: Rayp Jan 16 2004, 09:34 PM |
| It took me a while to compile all this. For some reason most site dedicated to FF cars don't bother discussing driving techniques, and other driving sites don't bother talking about FFs... Enjoy . |
| Posted by: VRr1FD Jan 18 2004, 08:57 AM |
| ff's can be pretty decent grip (fast turning) cars. they can even oversteer if you tune them or whip them for it... they just can't drift. but hey, drifting isn't everything. i don't think at the top levels it's easy for an FF to keep up with another drive train on a track, but they can be setup pretty well if you know what you are doing. |
| Posted by: AJS13 Jan 18 2004, 11:53 AM | ||
The original Mini has been a performance car since the 60s, With the Cooper S as its normal performance version, people then modded the mini to what they were using it for. It won many races in the 60s, and there was even a mini that did a 1/4 mile in 13 seconds. I mean it wasnt as high performance as the Honda's of today, but for its time it was a great car. Also FF cars that do burnouts end up with a screwed up gearbox. It's funny really, you hear people getting told that it will cost them later when they do it, but the never listen to you. And then they spend money to fix it, and go back out and do Burnouts again. |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 2 2004, 06:28 PM |
| Nice, it finally got pinned . |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 5 2004, 07:38 PM | ||
Well, this is the only thing that I really found to respond to so I will respond to it. You also have to remember that there are MANY other things that happen during a drift that "defy" the laws of physics, and in some sense, practicing still those certain, outdated, laws is irrelevant. Once I find the money to fix/buy a new digital camera then I will get some friends to take pictures of me drifting down the Apps. in my 98 GAGT. You won't believe it, but 20,000 dollars does a lot to a car, even breaking rules that weren't meant to be broken. On to something else about FF's. The one thing that I hate about some FF owners, is that they are INTENT on the fact that a HUGE FRIGGIN REAR SPOILER creates traction on the front end of the car...  . Unless you have a big a$$ air splitter up there, that wing is going to do you nothing at all.At the current rate that I am going, the car has no wing, a partial molded body kit, air splitter, carbon hood, cast white rims that match the original rolling stock, only more wide. There are some other exterior carbon parts as well but those are more for look and are being taken off soon enough. The suspension setup is where it really is kicked in the balls. I am NOT going to tell you what the settings are on, cause that's me and my "teams" secret. I will tell you though, that there are huge sway bars in front and back. Tein gas struts and Eibach coilovers on all corners. The car sits about three inchs lower to the ground and has nearly nonexistant bodyroll. The engine is something else alltogether though. Almost the entire interior of the block, from the pan to the headers has all been replaced with performance components. Not to mention a new ignition system, intake, manifold, enlarged downpipe... remove CAT... ... 2.5" exhaust piping leading to a Vsplit pipe and to a couple of Tanabe Fireballs... ooooooo pretty. Like I said, once this winter crap is over and I can keep the car clean for a friggin weak, and when I get my new camera, there will be picture... oh there will be pictures.For now, KNOW THIS!!! FrontFronts can drift as good as anything else, but it takes heart, pride, and more balls then a bowling alley to get anywhere with it. To anyone and everyone that wants to go somewhere with your FF but thinks that it's... too much of a hassel and whatnot... SCREW THAT!!! It's your car, your image, your dream... no one should be able to turn you from your dream!!! KEEP IT ON!!! |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 6 2004, 05:51 AM |
.:: Miz ::. : I want to see that car . But be warned though, claiming to drift with a FF here attract flames (i don't mind, but many do), so just say it slide very well  . I also like to do drift like cornering with my car, even if it's nothing like the car you describe. But it does sliiiiiiide a lot when i'm into it, and don't need e-brake for this. Btw, do you use any of the techniques i described (besides the e-brake) to do your cornering? |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 6 2004, 11:15 AM |
| It really depends on what kind/type of corner I am coming up to. If it's something like a huge sweeper, a simple flick will get the car broken from traction and sliding across the ground all nice and nice. With most turns though, especially when it comes to Touge, it's almost always an Inertia Drift or something else around there. When it comes to a massive hairpin though, along a flat or slightly banked road, decelerate coming into the turn, left foot brake for a little under a second to brake traction while going slightly into the turn, mash the ebrake when you reach about... 10-20 feet from the apex, depending on your entry speed and road conditions, press the ebrake release and really pull into the turn. By this time the car should be at a wonderfully perpendicular angle, with the nose of the car near the inside apex at a... 60 degree angle, maybe a little tighter. Countersteer and step on the gas. Acceleration for my nimble FF almost rivals the insane pickup a properly driven Skyline has. Oh, and I know this. I have a friend that I will call Ryo that lives inside one of the northern prefictures(sp?) of Japan and loooooves his Skyline. Oh, and if you EVER get to drive a skyline, even down a straight road in the middle of nowhere, do it, there's nothing else like it. I have driven the hell out of rented Corvettes and 8 cylinder, supercharged Mustangs and there is still nothing like shifting at a 10k redline, hearing the foosh of a 300 dollar blowoff valve and then listening to the nitrous being poured into a car as you rocket from 0 to 100 in less then 10 seconds. It's almost terrifying... but that's my goal for the GrandAm, pure... unadultered speed and agility. Like mixing a Miata with a Skyline... this should be something queer of nature. Oh yeah, let them flame about FF's not being able to drift, it's them in the wrong, not me so I could really care less. I know the ability of the front driven car and I stand behind it will all of my pride and dignity. |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 6 2004, 02:12 PM |
| I think we might become good friends .:: Miz ::. . Up until now we were very few FF believers in this board, and i was probably the only one who did push his own that hard into corners . As you can guess, i did a lot of research and experiments with my FFs (hey, i'm the one who started this thread ), and probably did almost every possible techniques a FF can pull off... Even made my very owns. But i'm limited to what a nearly 20 years old, nearly stock old Honda Accord can do (still a lot)... Just curious, how fast a car can corner in Touge (especially a FF)? |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 6 2004, 10:22 PM |
| The POWER of the car does not seriously matter. The real thing that that does though, is that you will have to watch the gas when applying it to countersteer and correct yourself during a turn. If you put too much into it, you could either eat the apex, or hit the guardrail... bad. You don't want a car with INSANE power though, just one that pushed near 400hp MAX and weighs... I'd saaaaaay, 2400lbs? Somewhere around there. Those aren't MY car specs, but that's the MAX in both areas that I would go to, although you might have MORE weight on your car, which is easily and cheaply solved. With more power, you need to be more careful, and more careful, can't help with being MORE CAREFUL with MORE POWER. It pays off big time on the straights though, big time. Being able to pull on just about anyone is a MASSIVE plus for you, obviously. I am looking into something though, something weird... something called, a Scion... not for drifting... but for sleeping. Quack... quack. BTW... without looking at my profile... how old am I? |
| Posted by: SuperMazdaKart Feb 6 2004, 11:14 PM |
| got pictures of this Accord Rayp?? I, Renesis of the Adelaide RoadPouncers will challenge you & your Accord with my 121 one day. hahah, just kidding |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 6 2004, 11:24 PM |
| Hey Rayp... got AIM? |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 6 2004, 11:52 PM | ||||
I did post my Accord Picture before, just don't remember in wich thread (probably along my 86 picture, or in the thread about my old clunker ). But that car isn't pretty, still holding but it's age shows... Btw, what is a 121?
No, but got Trillan (with both ICQ and MSN account on it). |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 6 2004, 11:57 PM |
| Hit me up with something at: Fluffyannialation@hotmail.com <~~ MSN MizerokRominus <~~ AIM |
| Posted by: SuperMazdaKart Feb 7 2004, 12:03 AM | ||||
see the link in my sig to my cardomain it too is an FF |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 7 2004, 12:26 AM | ||
Oh, i remember having seen your car a while back, but forgot about it. About the same size, if not smaller than my old Civic 87 i had (and probably as fun to drive). I remember you said it wasn't fast, but could go about anywhere (where no bigger car would dare to go, Lol). .:: Miz ::. : Added you to my list (MSN). |
| Posted by: SuperMazdaKart Feb 7 2004, 08:10 AM |
| well, the speedo reads up to 170KPH. which is pretty fair for a car of this type & age. acceleration is pretty decent too, when you get out of 1st gear. 1st gear redlines at 6000RPM with 50KPH & the stock exhaust is rather restrictive so getting a better one should give it more push indeed. not that i need it for any particular performance reasons, it'd just be real nice for going uphill i kinda like dislike how (around here anyway) people stereo type small car drivers to be slow, it's drivers like us that prove that wrong |
| Posted by: AJS13 Feb 7 2004, 01:55 PM | ||
Everyone thinks that here aswell, then me and my Mini show up. Ive converted a few people in to thinking Minis arnt bad like most people think. |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 7 2004, 05:49 PM |
| Gah! Mini's are crazy!!! AHHH!!! |
| Posted by: TRD-hachi-roku Feb 7 2004, 08:24 PM |
| i love mini's...the new ones though are fat 300 pound cake addicts that needs to call jenny craig, but the old mini's...those are the true meaning of fast and the furious... |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 7 2004, 08:32 PM |
| Ahhh... You all remind me of the old days, in my old Civic. It was the old school one, when Civic were still so small and agile (and turned 180 on a dime). You can't imagine how crazy driver i was with that 60 hp car. That old 320 000 km car still had so much to give. Having known what i know now about carburator, it would have been even nicer... It wasn't a very fast car, but sure got good headstart at red lights and cornered so well (and i did waste a lot of tyres with it due to my insane cornering and extreme braking). I miss it a lot... |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 8 2004, 07:58 AM |
| Reminds me of me when I had my Fiero... stuck to the road like it was on rails. |
| Posted by: Wes Feb 12 2004, 09:28 PM |
| yea i hate ricers. Theres this guy at my school who has an accord like mine (sig) cept its turquiose, it has fat dents in it, its lowered with hubcaps, 4 foot high double deck carbon fiber spoiler and its auto. Look at my car. Dont try to be what your not! |
| Posted by: VRr1FD Feb 13 2004, 07:07 AM | ||
ff's can't drift by nature. there is nothing you can do about it. ff's CAN oversteer, but they can't drift. they keep the rear end out without e-braking because they don't have power going to the rear. nothing anyone can do about it. |
| Posted by: [ Mizerok ] Feb 13 2004, 08:23 AM |
| Har har, I know what I know... and I do what I do. So you can say what you want... no matter how off it is. |
| Posted by: SLAVE Feb 27 2004, 11:55 PM |
| Hey peeps, new guy here, I've always been one for running my 2nd Gen CRX around the mountain passes, mainly on raw skill, and balls, but no full on technique to be honest, it was interesting to read these posts. The other FF's I run cant keep up, not that the ones I've run against are superbly quick. Couple of q's though, why can i outrun Teg type-r's at high speeds? (And a few guys I know say their teg type-r's lose to 206 GTi's at speed too, which I also beat) Who makes a good clutch plate??? What are some non showy ways for flat out speed through corners other than pure grip driving?? |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 28 2004, 06:19 AM |
| Too many pages so i dont know if its in here, But actually the sr5 IS the AE86 here in america, and the Corolla GTS is ae88 |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 28 2004, 06:37 AM | ||
| CRX are great cars, even by today's standard. They are light, well ballanced and can beat more powerful cars since they don't need as much effort to accelerate and corners. Many newer cars suffer from extra weight. They are more powerful, yes, but have plenty of new gadgets, options and safety thingys and emission reduction hardware that end up slowing them down and adding a lot of extra weight. So in the end, many older cars, even if low in hps can outrun them, or at least beat them in early acceleration. Btw Slave, does your car has any mods or missing parts? Why missing parts? Well you can shave weight that way, or if emission parts are removed, can get some extra power. In my case my catalyser is gone, and many non essential parts are gone from my old Accord... I can get some great acceleration from it, more than you can expect from a old 3rd gen running with a carburator. Sadly i can't make it go over 180 km/h...
Brake slide, lift off oversteer, feinting, left foot braking... I personnaly never use my hand brake in corners, i just don't trust it for it (my rear brakes are drums and don't seem to lock too well), so i rely on many other techniques. My favorites ones are mini-feinting and left foot braking, and sometimes do a braking slide. Oh yeah, there is also tucking-in, but that one i haven't mastered it (work better with high grip tyres though). |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 28 2004, 07:19 AM |
| I actually wanted a crx myself for a first car, but im changing my mind now. the more i weigh the options the more advantages i see in a fr layout. as for what you said about weight its not really all that crucial. Problem with crx is the best engine (Well, honda engine anywyas) you cn put into it is a b16a engine obviously, and though it is the best horsepower in its size it has its limits. Still a great car in my oponion just pointing it out Racing civics are like winning the special olympics, either wya your still retarded |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 28 2004, 08:53 AM |
| Weight matter a lot, you'll see. My guess is you haven't driven much... Anyway, weight matter a lot. Heavy cars need a lot more power to accelerate, but it isn't a great issue. Where weight have the most disadvantage is in braking and cornering. More weight means you need more grippy tyres to do the same as a lighter car, also means a lot more wear on tyres, engine, suspension, brakes etc. The CRX don't have any real problem. Just like any other car, all depend on how much money you want to throw at it. It also depend what you want it to be: a drag car, a cornering machine, a week-end car or a daily driver... If you want a car to be used all year long, a CRX would be a good choice. A FR isn't that good in winter or in the rain, and no good in dirt. |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 28 2004, 09:24 AM |
Fr no good in dirt? Man... thats why the corolla gts won 6 rally races when it came out  As for weight yes its an issue but not a big issue, reason why? Heavier cars NORMALLY have more horses anyways, and on top of this they potential for more horses. the crx's downside is it is ff plain and simple. |
| Posted by: Neo Xian Wu Feb 28 2004, 07:25 PM |
| actually RWD isn't good in limited traction situations. the ass-end likes to swing out, usually resulting in accidents. the last Corrolla i saw in WRC was AWD. i don't think there's many RWD cars in Rallying nowadays. |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 28 2004, 08:56 PM |
| Just pointing out. Its what the corolla gts was designed to do, and it did it well. |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 28 2004, 10:16 PM | ||
Ok, maybe "no good" isn't the right way to say it. Yet FR struggle more in dirt that FF or AWD. And yes, some cars are better than other at thoses things. And last, FF isn't a downside. Just take the old MINI, it was FF and won many rallies ; it wasn't fast, but cornered so well... One last thing : this thread isn't about debating if FF can stand to FR or if it's better, it's about what they CAN do. You don't need to try to convince anyone here, especially when this forum is already pro FR to start with (especially pro FD). |
| Posted by: SLAVE Feb 28 2004, 10:29 PM |
| Yeah, i always find it easy to throw the CRX through corners due to the weight and its a well balanced car. I've never been able to step a car out beyond 90 degrees and get it back besides my CRX (downward slope, low speed) but still, do that with any other car. My mate has a 12 second 180SX and its an ex Jap comp drifter, on tight roads, I flog him, the CRX just chews too many tight corners too easily. |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 12:17 AM |
| hes just got too much power, works to his disadvantage. maybe i shold consider getting a crx again... I just find FR to be a little more fun to drive. haha i can get an ae88 and crx together maybe.. both are fairly cheap cars. |
| Posted by: TRD-hachi-roku Feb 29 2004, 12:30 AM |
| ae86 refers to both the 1985 corolla gts and the sr5... |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 01:15 AM |
| Correction, Sr5 is the ae86, corolla gts is the ae88. > VIN NUMBERS!< As stated- most people i knew of went by the vin at this time! this was before i was into initial d and chassis codes were new to me |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 01:21 AM |
| http://forums.club4ag.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=62236 You should frequent this site a bit more. |
| Posted by: SLAVE Feb 29 2004, 04:42 AM |
| Cars mods = exhaust, fully reconditioned engine, rebuilt and strengthened gear box, intake. Looking to install cams/cam gears and new valve springs after July. (Going to America in July so need to save the cash.) |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 03:35 PM |
| Bad post and dumb post- ignore me |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 03:42 PM |
| actually they do have a considerable amount of handling thoough at high speeds they experience a good bit of understeer, but theres ways to cope with it |
| Posted by: TRD-hachi-roku Feb 29 2004, 08:48 PM |
| ae86 refers to the chasis, not the vin number... |
| Posted by: sideways Feb 29 2004, 10:18 PM |
| People i know by go by the vin tho not the chasis (not just these cars either)- if your going by the chasis then the sr5 and gts both use the 86 chasis. The ae85 was never offered in america and used a 3a-u engine didnt it? initial d fans mostly know it was SOHC |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Sep 9 2004, 04:59 PM | ||
AE86 for the SR5 and AE88 for the GTS are the VIN numbers, the chassis codes are still AE86 and AE85. |
| Posted by: sideways Sep 9 2004, 07:09 PM |
| Actually the sr5 has the ae86 chassis as does the GTS. The only places youll really find the "ae85" chassis are japan and a FEW other countries. Many though were given the ae86 chassis for both vehicles. SOMETHING I WANT TO POINT OUT those posts are VERY old, and i had JUST gotten into initial d. Many people i knew and talked to refered to the cars via their VIN numbers, and chassis codes was a new thing to me. But you are correct- ae86 is found in the SR5 (or sr85 as i joking call it) and ae88 is found in the vin of the Gts |
| Posted by: case Sep 10 2004, 01:57 AM |
| VIN numbers are chassis codes.. FC33, FC32, FC3X, FC3S.... |
| Posted by: sideways Sep 10 2004, 11:14 AM |
| yaaa but not always. The vin number in my corolla gts for example is Ae88, and to the left a bit youll find the chassis code etched in to the firewall- Ae86 (confused me for a bit until i learned more about it) |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Sep 10 2004, 11:19 AM |
| i had the same problem on my first 86, i was like AE88??? then looked to the left and saw the good ole AE86, you got any pics of your 86? |
| Posted by: sideways Sep 10 2004, 11:16 PM |
 Bread and milk baby! the "cockpit" as i like to call it (though.. it doesnt feel like one, liek the FD does but i can pretend  ) Also note i no longer use the trd shifter that much- I prefer the feel of the stock shift knob..man i got 3 shift knobs, Ricer: Trd: Stock It came with the trd and stock one (thankfully) and the "ricer" one was a gift.. its kinda cool cuz it like changes colors and crap... its so rice- but so interesting i cant help but love it.. if only i didnt live in a desert where it reaches over 100 and if only it wasnt metal. oh well winter is here now... |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Sep 13 2004, 07:26 PM |
| that thing is NIIICE i love black, mmmm I also like the stock shift knob it just feels perfect, IMO it might not be the same as your but i think your car would like nice with black Watanabe's with the silver polished lip, is that an 86 or 87? looks like an 86 to me. |
| Posted by: sideways Sep 13 2004, 07:32 PM |
| Haha shes dirty, has about 6 dings to fill out (nothing bondo cant handle thankfully)- then shes getting a quick mako paint job (retouch black for now) at minimum i need about 700 into her. But i agree- the stock shiftknob does feel great, fits perfectly in my hand. ___ Ultimate goal is a pands scheme (slightly different from takumis) but a VERY light silver with black. Ive always liked the contrast long before i saw initial d. Sadly i must admit ill probably be getting watanabes, and probably because of initial d. I have no taste in rims but i must admit they look nice on almost anything ive seen em on (check out the watanabe website- they got vans looking nice with these things on). But ya shes an 86 IF my "Dreams come true" shell have about 10-11 grand into her.. haha Ahh.. gotta love my 5 bucks into my engine (look below) |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Sep 16 2004, 05:47 PM |
| hey man I love watanabes they look great, might i suggest the ones that have the polished silver lip. |
| Posted by: sideways Sep 16 2004, 06:22 PM |
| I like to keep things pretty plain- not to say they dont look nie (trust me they do) its just not my "Style" Ill get them as "plain" as i possible can. Probably a flat black, just border line "shine" to em (hard to decribe what i mean but i got it in my head) |
| Posted by: Nd4SpdSe Oct 12 2004, 03:36 PM |
| Wow! I love this thread! I'm a big FF fan too...i drive a Mazda Mx-3 GS, swapped in a Japanese version of the 2.5L v6 (found in Mazda 626, Mx-6, Millenia and Ford Probes) known as the KLZE, 200hp. The car has great handeling to begin with, but, of course, i want better. I caught onto Heal-Toe and left-Foot braking from Initial D, but these extra technique are great, too bad the Mx-3 is going away for the winter in a month, and the '90 626 i'll be using is just too old, too many kms (270'000) and doesn't have the power, but i can still snow drift I've always wanted to go against the grain and race an FF, come spring, when the suspension and tires are bought and on, I'm hoping to start |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 12 2004, 03:39 PM |
| FF can def hold their own in their class; good luck |
| Posted by: But she looked 18 officer Oct 12 2004, 04:04 PM |
What is this thread about?  |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 12 2004, 04:31 PM |
| Title explains it all |
| Posted by: But she looked 18 officer Oct 12 2004, 04:39 PM |
| and yet the last page and a half of the posts in it are about rwd corolla's. |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 12 2004, 04:45 PM |
| ... oops |
| Posted by: RalliKai Oct 14 2004, 04:49 PM |
| I've recently started trying to drift my FF which is a Cavalier around corners and such, haven't had much success since I'm still a beginner at it but I can see why everyone likes the FRs for drifting cause its a real pain to keep my FF controlled enough to exit the slide correctly. |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 14 2004, 04:51 PM |
| FFs just dont suit the definitions to many drifters thats all. They can only do what many consider a lesser form of drifting, "ass draging". Even when done in an fr its looked down upon. |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Oct 19 2004, 09:34 AM |
| yes it isn't really drifting IMO Rhys millen (I think hes the son of Rod millen, though I may have the names backwards) said the start some of the drifts at over 100+ mph, I'd like to see somone start a drift at that speed in an FF. |
| Posted by: Rayp Oct 19 2004, 12:50 PM | ||
The funny thing is, an FF is very likely to oversteer badly at thoses speed. It's very hard to control though. |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Oct 19 2004, 12:58 PM |
| thats what I meant too much oversteer, probably sending the car out of control. I have used the e-brake for years but I wouldnt be trying it at those speeds. |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 19 2004, 02:49 PM |
| i cant use the ebrake even if i wanted to any drifting ive ever done has been done with gas brakes and steering only. (my hand brake is broken/disconnected) |
| Posted by: F22A6 Oct 19 2004, 05:35 PM |
| hey sidewaysgts didn't you say posts ago that you were gonna get your e-brake fixed |
| Posted by: sideways Oct 19 2004, 06:32 PM |
| I have a cable comming in early november to fix it |
| Posted by: jetstopi Jan 11 2005, 10:34 AM |
| do automatic cars apply with any of this? i own a luxury car, handed down from my mom, a camry, and i've been trying to use the e-brake to try to slide the car. i don't know if it's doing any damage to the car or if there's anything i should know about... since i'm getting new rims and tires, i'm wearing the old tires out. it's pretty fun trying to get the car to turn sideways, and i'm doing as much as i can befrore i get the new tires with 18" rims. |
| Posted by: sideways Jan 11 2005, 05:45 PM |
| Beyond shifting techniques mosto f whatevers been said probably applies. as for the hand brake not sure how they work in an auto, in a manual you need to hold in the clutch to do it properly though |
| Posted by: Rayp Jan 12 2005, 11:17 PM | ||
Holding the clutch is for FR and AWD, in FF it doesn't matter. In fact, it work better if you keep the the throttle on. |
| Posted by: sideways Jan 13 2005, 01:41 AM |
Har, thats true i wasnt even thinking about that, those wheels arent powered  |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Feb 6 2005, 06:47 PM | ||
I've got myself a rare beast: 1990 Subaru Legacy L, FF, AT, no ABS. You wouldn't believe how many times I've had to fight mechanics and friends alike by repeating, "No, it's not an All-Wheel Drive!" Trying to charge me for replacing rear differential fluid... sure, if you can find a rear differential under there! Aaaanyway, back on topic. My car also has an auto, but I've been using the gear selector (numbered gears) lately. I'm not sure how the Camry's AT works, but in mine, 2nd gear is the cornering gear. If you put it into a numbered gear instead of Drive, the transmission seems to lock up with the throttle more. That is, when I lift off of the throttle, there's insane weight transfer. When I downshift, the engine braking is immense. When I touch the pedal, the response is immediate. There are also a lot of neat tricks that my Subaru AT can do to play like a MT... I've also played around in parking lots in the snow, with and without the e-brake. If you use the e-brake in an AT FF, you aren't damaging anything (except tires, if you're not on snow or gravel). I've done a lot of psuedo-drifts in my Subaru, and it's a hell of a lot of fun. I've even done pendulums without trying--my car's suspension is such that oversteer is easily controllable. For techniques, I use the e-brake only on a few turns (and when in snowy parking lots), left-foot brake if I took a turn a wee bit too quickly, left-foot rev-match the AT's shifts (Legacy ATs are notorious for jerky shifts; I correct that), pendulum mostly on S-turns (though I have done it accidentally a few times while making correction turns), and I think that's about it. All I can say is that I love my car to death, and it has yet to fail me. FFs can indeed rock even if they can't "drift" by definition. I maintain that plowing through turns and oversteering is fun all on its own. (I'd post a picture or two, but I want to post recent ones, not old ones. I haven't made recent ones just yet, though, since my modifications aren't complete yet) |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 9 2005, 01:15 AM |
| Nomake Wan : Thats great ! It's fun once in a while to have someone who have genuine fun with an FF... Auto at that! No need to have a super car to enjoy it... |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Feb 9 2005, 02:39 PM |
| Yep! Especially with the great touge course here. My only complaint is that it's relatively short and has only two hairpins... though they are one after another (The S-Turn I mentioned before). It even has a narrow bridge after a downhill section... it's where I test all of my car stuff. Plus there's a nice "End 40 MPH Speed Limit" sign with no other signs posted after it. Anyway, I'm working on some modifications to my transmission as we speak. At present, if I rev to redline while in 1, 2 or 3 it upshifts no matter what gear I selected. Meaning that I can get it into third gear while first is selected... and when I lift off of the throttle, it downshifts straight to first. Incredible engine braking on that shift. But anyway, it makes these shifting decisions based on a transmission computer that interprets speed and RPMs. I'm designing a circuit that would make the computer think that it's running at a lower speed and RPM than it really is, thus making the shifts up to me. And since that won't work in Drive, I can turn the circuit on and off (there's even a switch on the shifter marked "Manual" that I can wire it to). The bonus feature I get is that my car's engine computer would still prevent over-revving by cutting ignition... so afterfiring (that flame from the tailpipe like in Initial D) would be possible in my car. Great for scaring pedestrians at stoplights. XD So yeah... I'm having a ton of fun with this car. |
| Posted by: Cubits Feb 18 2005, 08:24 AM |
| You guys need to experience a peugeot 205 gti. Faaaantastic car. I've had mine for just over a year (after graduating from a suzuki swift gti and aw11 sc), and it's the sharpest fwd i've EVER driven. Sharper than a teggy r (98). It has less power (130hp) but uses an 8v motor (good, flat torque curve). You can swap in a 16v motor which is more reliable, and tune it to 250hp (for track use you can hit 280-290). The engine is from an mi16, if you want to look that up. It weighs under 900kg (mine is at 880 after ditching some interior but keeping the air-con). Anyway, about the car. On the touge it's nearly untouchable. It can carry more speed through a corner than a wrx. It has more throttle adjustability than any other fwd on the planet, and can oversteer fiercly if dealt with incorrectly. On a couple of occasions i've left smoke from the rear tyre (the one that was on the ground) sliding through a corner by lifting sharply. With the mi16 engine, it's the closest thing you'll drive to a junior WRC car! I'm going to get some incar video at next saturday's event. Think they have to be limited to 30 second clips by my camera (sorry, no real video cam, not enough cash after the car's needs are met!). |
| Posted by: GT3 Feb 18 2005, 08:31 AM |
| i cant belive this has been going on for so long................. |
| Posted by: Cubits Feb 18 2005, 08:54 AM |
| What's been going on so long? I said my fwd is fast... i didn't say it's a drift god. There is an ability to eliminate understeer at any speed, giving you perfectly neutral cornering. Of course that comes with an opportunity for oversteer, but it's hardly the same as showy rwd powerslides. This thread was about the capabilities of fwd's, and my fwd is capable of beating many rwd's on twisty roads. |
| Posted by: Rayp Feb 22 2005, 09:29 AM |
| Some peoples here don't like anyone saying good things about FFs... Most of the time they never driven one, or just had nightmares driving one. I had started that thread at the time because FF were bashed badly. But theses days FF drivers are becoming more common on this forum so some feel FR are loosing the podium... Too bad Peugeots are not sold in Canada, i would gladly try one. |
| Posted by: Cubits Feb 22 2005, 09:49 AM |
| Fwd's do make good rally cars. I plan on eventually using mine in the state rally championship, although i'm going to need some serious budget to keep my car running for a whole season of rally (they're not too reliable at the best of times). In the tarmac events i've contended in, it's performed very well indeed (beating many higher powered cars and taking a stock hatch class win). http://www.lotusespritworld.co.uk/ERoadtests/5000miles_Car88.html I had that magazine when it came out, it was something that compounded my lust for a 205 gti. CAR magazine had been raving about them since it's release, a magazine which i've followed religiously since i could read (about the time the 205 was released... funnily enough). Oh, and it also clenched "car of the decade" for the 80's. No small feat for an underdog like a hot hatch. Read, and be amazed that a mid-engined, turbocharged supercar could barely beat a "beginners car" on a race track (a car which was fitted with pretty crap tyres, even for its day). |
| Posted by: panda_crx Mar 2 2005, 06:24 AM | ||
sounds nice i drive a 89 honda crx and i'm with cubits. i'm a huge FF fan, i have little interest in drifting at all, i enjoy mountain runs (i refuse to use the term touge  )and track days.even when i had my old engine i found that most RWD (most of them 2L turbo) cars cant keep up in the mountains, they just cant keep up on the turns. i've been to 2 track days and got faster times than RWD V8's, v6's and some 4 cylinder turbos like silvias, 180sx, wrx. sure straight lines arent the FF's friend but since my engine swap i have no problems keeping up with wrx, s15's etc cant wait for the turbo |
| Posted by: Cubits Mar 2 2005, 07:22 AM |
| Haha... i only used touge so others would understand. Generally i don't race in "touge" events, but in hillclimbs and targa rallies. http://users.tpg.com.au/cubits/carpics.htm I couldn't upload my shoddy videos because of lack of space (theyre 7 megs each). Good news though, i got my grubby paws on a brand new digital video camera. We're fabbing some mounts for the cars and we'll take her for a spin some time in the next couple of weeks. I've always wanted to see my car from behind when i'm kicking a mountains ass. |
| Posted by: AETRAN86 Mar 2 2005, 09:23 AM |
| those peugeots look nice. |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 3 2005, 10:04 PM |
| http://www.track-challenge.com/main_e.asp I've had a link to this site for aaages. Go to the tracktest area and check out some of the stats. If you hit the little "i" button at the end of each cars info, it'll bring a popup with extended stats for the cars. Here are some of the more interesting numbers for the slalom(in cars most people are familiar with): 2004 Renault Clio Sport (FF) = 67.2 km/h 2001 Mazda MX-5 Sportive 1.9 = 62.1 2000 Honda Integra Type R (FF) = 63.6 Porsche 997 Carrera S (RR) = 66.9 2001 WRX STI (AWD) = 63.5 BMW E46 M3 (FR) = 66.4 2004 Viper SRT-10 (FR) = 66.3 Lotus Elise 111R (MR) = 69.4 350Z (FR) = 66.9 RX-8 (FR) = 65.8 The slalom test translates the best to real world performance on dry twisty roads. The Peugeot 205 is even sharper/lighter than the clio, and would certainly give the elise a run for its money when shod in similar rubber (the elise is practically on race slicks). Most people who slam FF's dynamic abilities have never driven a good FF, yet they feel obliged to blame the drivetrain, and not the manufacturer of the mid 80's family car they base their opinion on. While a vast majority of fwd's do handle like crap, it doesn't mean that they're all bad. It would be nice if people stopped posting misinformed opinion as fact (on the internet as a whole... it's everywhere). |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 3 2005, 10:15 PM |
| Light weight and compact have many advantages |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 3 2005, 10:31 PM |
| It has more to do with the setup than the size and weight. The new Golf GTI can break 67kmh and it weighs 1350kg. The clio weighs just over 1000kg and is smaller. Suspension rates and geometry are very important in a slalom, which is why the english, french, and the germans always seem to be a bit quicker than the rest. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 5 2005, 12:29 PM |
| Like I said in the FF drifting thread, drivetrain really has almost nothing to do with how a car handles. Sure, it determines which wheels will break traction first by default, but with the right LSD and suspension setup, you can make it so that only under the most extreme conditions will those wheels break loose. The Peugeots, Citroens, and Alfa Romeos are the best examples of how a FWD car can have so much grip in the front wheels that the rear ones will actually break loose first. |
| Posted by: Rayp May 5 2005, 09:11 PM | ||
At high speed, FF easily break rear traction, especially if they have poor tyres in the rear or the camber has been tampered with. The catch is unless the suspension has been made for controled oversteer (like Peugeots), the car may break free suddently and be hard to bring back. I experienced it with my Accord, had dialed off my rear camber... My car had become oversteer prone at high speed. The lack of understeer made me enter corners much faster than i used to, but the oversteer would snap suddently and only fast countersteer and flooring it would save me from a spinout. Needless to say, after a few close call i just put everything like it should be, fun but too dangerous. |
| Posted by: ZERO1 May 5 2005, 10:27 PM |
| lol i'll b drifting in my Tercel lol |
| Posted by: sideways May 5 2005, 11:41 PM |
| Just because your oversteering, doesnt mean youre doing a good thing. The mix between driver preference and potential is a double edged blade |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 6 2005, 02:18 AM |
| The only way that oversteer is any better than understeer is that a good driver can usually control oversteer, whereas understeer kind of just ends on its own. But really, just because one of them is a popular form of motorsport doesn't mean it's not just as much a loss of traction as the other. |
| Posted by: Akira May 6 2005, 03:53 AM |
| You guys bring up a good point, oversteering isn't good, it's still something that can be done intentionally, and can fortunately be controlled, but at least it's an assload better than understeer. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 6 2005, 08:35 AM |
| If oversteer were always better than understeer, then I guess RWDs would always handle better than FWDs, right? I agree with you that oversteer is controllable, making it inherently more desirable to a skilled driver (kinda like a manual transmission versus an automatic), but it can still slow you down as much or more than understeer does. |
| Posted by: Rayp May 6 2005, 08:55 PM |
| There are uses for creating understeer. Understeer is stable and is desirable when you want to end a slide or a pendulum. Understeer in FF mean the car will go forward and not turn. On corner exit it's faster than trying to cure oversteer or deal with the car instability (wich usually mean slowing down). I do create understeer on purpose from time to time, and it's part of some of my advanced manouvers. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 7 2005, 12:27 PM |
| Understeer isn't that bad, just make sure you have the car lined up for the corner properly before you start it. And yeah, like you said, it's an important part of some more advanced maneuvers. |
| Posted by: Nd4SpdSe May 7 2005, 01:17 PM |
| The nice thing about FF's nature to understeer is that (if you know how) you can control between understeer, neutralsteer and oversteeer. Altough oversteer in an FF would be a pseudo-drift that actually would slow you down, so that's not something you really want to use often. |
| Posted by: sideways May 7 2005, 01:18 PM | ||||
Not really, keep in mind FFs typicly weigh less then FRs do and that gives them a cornering advantage despite the udnersteer. A saying comes to mind, Your average driver will be scared when a car oversteers and slides, a racer is scared when they understeer. Almost every race car driver will tell you if given the choice, its pretty much always faster to oversteer then it is to understeer. I personally cant think of ANY situation where id want to understeer, rather then oversteer. Understeer is safer in the sense you can USUALLY (unless ur REALLY hardcore understeering because you went it -way- too hot) correct it by letting off the throttle, and if its really bad by getting on the brakes slightly to get some weight up front. It really just falls to driver preference. If not being able to turn in adaquetly in the trade off of safety is your thing- go nuts with understeer. Added:
No offence, i dont see any credit in this really, Under this sense its really the same for any car. "If you know how. Theres always "what i can do" and "whats ideal" for any situation. |
| Posted by: Nd4SpdSe May 7 2005, 01:23 PM |
| True, it's also something you can appy to MR's and RR's are well, but how do you get a FR to understeer? |
| Posted by: sideways May 7 2005, 01:44 PM |
| Go in too fast, dont brake enough |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan May 7 2005, 08:18 PM | ||
Um, not quite. Oversteer in an FF is oversteer in an FF. It's not slower, it's just oversteer. My definition of psuedo-drift applied to performing wide-angle slides in parking lots using the handbrake, which is most definitely slow if you tried to do it in a race situation. You're forcing the car to slow down and shift weight by locking the rear tires, and you'd have to be going kinda slow to keep the car from just sliding off the road... that's why I said the psuedo-drift is just for fun and not for doing anywhere but in a big, open lot. Oversteer can be initiated in an FF without slowing it down. Stock FFs don't have a tendency to do this, usually, but they can be made to. I'm lucky because Subaru decided to have a pretty nice anti-roll bar on the rear in my car, so it does get rid of some of the understeer tendency. And with left-foot braking, corner entry is just amazing... I was going 55 into a sudden right corner, used left-foot braking as I turned in and found the nose of the car diving straight for the apex. It was crazy, and still gives me the chills. I have to perfect that little maneuver. Understeer is what I'm really truly afraid of... I have been since I nearly ate rock-wall on an uphill S-turn. Long story short, it was "dry road + winter tires + uphill + rear-seat passengers + FF" that caused the understeer. Still scared the crap out of me. And there's also a pretty good left sweeper at the end of a downhill stretch which had me at full concentration once... went in a bit too hot, and felt that I was right at the traction limit next to the guardrail... all I could do was keep steady speed and steering angle and hope for the best. It worked, with a little oversteer on the side. In conclusion... doesn't the subtitle for this thread say "Leave the drift debate at the door"? |
| Posted by: robots May 7 2005, 10:20 PM |
| Hmmm, what about mastering understeer ? Master everything that goes near the understeer of your car, and use it. Use it as your advantage. Isn't it bad ? Use much oversteer and what will you come up with ? Countersteering all the time and thinking about safety ? Controlled under is better then uncontrolled over for me |
| Posted by: sideways May 7 2005, 10:59 PM |
U have to be going -pretty- damn fast to understeer in an ff uphill even in snow tires  |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan May 7 2005, 11:00 PM |
| The thing with FF cars is that controlled under means that you've reached the absolute limit of your front tires. You can't accelerate more, you can't turn more, you can't brake... nothing until the turn is over with. Therefore, it isn't really "controlled" under... it's really just "at the limit" under. Uncontrolled oversteer sucks. But if you've got controlled oversteer, that means you've still got traction up front, which means you have more control over the car than you do if your drive+steer wheels are at the absolute limit. Shifting the settings so that the car does this would be better, I think. I'm not saying you're wrong... absolutely mastering driving at the limit is amazing. However... if you can create a situation where the point of understeer changes positively, you should be able to go faster, simply because you have more traction to your front tires. Right? I've only driven "at the limit" once during a turn, and it was accidentally... so I could very well be wrong on this. I have yet to try some of my newer discoveries at the absolute limit (which is, of course, the speed limit of 55 on my favorite back road)... so until I can prove otherwise, maybe it's better for someone with more experience to step up and give out facts. EDIT (For Sideways's post): Um, try ~30 MPH through a 10 MPH S-Turn. o.o; Not all that fast... it's just as fast as I always drove it before... except that I had had my other tires/wheels on before then. And with the weight shift, it just... slid out. It was on the second half of the turn... I'll describe it, since I don't have a picture of the turn. You go uphill on a pretty good incline... 35-degrees from ground level. Then, you make a left turn entry into the S-turn, which starts uphill but then goes downhill into the center of the S-turn. At the lowest point of the turn, it changes to the right turn... and at that point was where my car understeered towards the wall. I braked well enough that it stopped before then, however. |
| Posted by: sideways May 7 2005, 11:45 PM |
| The thing about the limits of tires, theres no specific formula for what the limit is, youre not "locked" on what your doing. You can move one aspect of what your tires doing over to another. You can stop accelerating as hard to turn in better, you can accelerate harder at the cost of understeering more. |
| Posted by: robots May 8 2005, 12:06 AM |
| Isn't it better to accelerate-understeer at the exit than accelerate-oversteer at the exit ? Hmmm, i'm not well into theory. But for this example lets take late apex 90 degree turn. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 8 2005, 12:45 AM |
| "Not really, keep in mind FFs typicly weigh less then FRs do and that gives them a cornering advantage despite the udnersteer." My bad, I forgot that the Alfa Romeo 147 GTA weighs less than the Mazda Miata For the purpose of an FF vs. FR debate, let's not bring other aspects into it, since those aspects are completely variable and thus bias the comparison."A saying comes to mind, Your average driver will be scared when a car oversteers and slides, a racer is scared when they understeer." Gotta be more specific with "racer". Again, I don't see how this makes oversteer any faster than understeer, it just means that oversteer is more likely to be controlled. "Almost every race car driver will tell you if given the choice, its pretty much always faster to oversteer then it is to understeer. I personally cant think of ANY situation where id want to understeer, rather then oversteer. Understeer is safer in the sense you can USUALLY (unless ur REALLY hardcore understeering because you went it -way- too hot) correct it by letting off the throttle, and if its really bad by getting on the brakes slightly to get some weight up front." If you understeer really badly, you probably don't even wanna touch the brakes; the resulting weight shift from even slight braking could cause snap oversteer and a spin-out. I usually pump the gas a little bit to try and find some traction for the front wheels. "It really just falls to driver preference. If not being able to turn in adaquetly in the trade off of safety is your thing- go nuts with understeer." You don't usually start understeering before you're done turning in. It's not like the fact that a car is FF will make it understeer before you even touch the gas, and in fact, it's less likely to, because there is more weight over the front wheels. This is why FF cars really shine in tight, low-speed racing like autocross: You can be a lot more generous with the throttle than you can with an FR, because even if your front tires start to go up in smoke, you're about to slow down for another turn anyways. |
| Posted by: robots May 8 2005, 01:45 AM |
| Car behaviour under extreme confitions and it's physics are waiting for me Can you help me out, some links to read about car physics, and all this behaviour ? Wanna know more. |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 03:19 AM | ||||||||||
You didnt just try to compare a v6 4 seater hatch back to a I4 2 seater roadster, did you?
More specific, your kidding me right? Lets try, someone who races 4+ wheeled vehicles for a profession? Find me a group of racers who on average will say understeer is faster then oversteer, and ill shut up.
What are you supposed to do? Sit there and hope that throttle-off is going to save your ass? If letting off the throttle and taking a wide line is enough to save your ass while understeering, you werent understeering that badly. If your understeering badly youll need to get on the brakes or youll run off the road, and please remember i said SLIGHTLY on the brakes, not mashing them as hard as possible.
There really was no point in this, i never said other wise. To make a long and boring story short, refer to traction circles. With the exception of "and in fact, it's less likely to" with ff thing, ill agree with you on this one. To get to the original point;
Compare situations as to how they happen on the average. You understeer through a corner; you slow down because your under steering, you slow down further to help "correct" the understeer, youve now also taken a wider line then normal. This can allow someone to cut in on the inside, and this can also mess up your ability to enter the next corner properly, lowering your time further. You oversteer into a corner; You slow down slightly because your oversteering, of course naturaly your slipping tires dont allow you to accelerate as fast, and slipping tires cant create as much lateral grip. Chance are because of your lower speed despite your slipping tires your still able to take a decent line, hitting a middle or late apex as you like- you can accelerate some-what decently out of the corner granted not as well as if you hadnt and are still oversteering on exit- but your line hasnt been compromised as much much if at all, you can now go about setting yourself up for the next corner properly. Now knowing your a smart ass ill explain in advance, of course it can happen a number of other ways, that said this is what is seen on AVERAGE. ths is why it is said on AVERAGE its faster to oversteer then it is to understeer. Oversteering is more forgiving in what happens should you be able to maintain control. Were, or at least I am talking about racers, those are people who race vehicles for a profession, so its safe to assume they have the abilities needed to remain in control. I ask you to please explain a situation where understeering can be benefitial in speed compared to oversteering, and provide a automotive sport where they (refering to the participants) will claim on average its faster to understeer then it is to oversteer. |
| Posted by: Rayp May 8 2005, 06:39 AM | ||||||||
FF don't react the same as FR. If you are understeering badly while entering a corner, you just failed to slow down before the corner... There is also a difference between understeering because you enter a corner too fast and understeering because there is too much torque on the front wheels for the angle they are turned. The first happen because you don't know the limit of your car, the second is either inexperience or you are a master and know what you are doing.
Undesired understeer is just as bad as undesired oversteer, there is no point arguing for that. You just fail to see we can create understeer ON PURPOSE and use it to take a desired line into a corner. It's just as handy as to know how to make a car oversteer into a corner.
That i can explain. In an FF, "power understeering" is benificial. You actually choose when it happen, ie you increase the torque at the wheel to make the car understeer. It's a very handy thing to do if you want to cancel oversteer or stop a penduluming effect. It can also be used when sudden straithening of the wheel would unballance the car in the corner or the current angle of the wheel would force the car to slow down. I often use powered understeer on corner exist to kill the tendency of the car to slow down just after an oversteer (ie when the wheel start to grip again it just kill the powerband). I can also create understeer when the car is sideway and i want to keep it that way until i reach the corner (ie a 4 wheel drift entry). |
| Posted by: Cubits May 8 2005, 07:02 AM |
| Cancelling oversteer is not understeering... |
| Posted by: Rayp May 8 2005, 07:41 AM | ||
But it's the same as creating oversteer to cancel understeer. You end up neutral, but the techniques are the same. |
| Posted by: Cubits May 8 2005, 07:51 AM |
| You don't create oversteer to cancel understeer.... You balance the car back to a neutral state (even if the car is pointed in slightly due to load affecting slip angles). Neutralising understeer is different to creating oversteer, and vice versa. What you described before was merely throttle steer. You didn't induce understeer, you used the throttle instead of the steering wheel to null the oversteer. Common practice, and definitely not classed as understeer. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan May 8 2005, 08:34 AM |
| However, Rayp was correct in at least one aspect... because despite the fact that the thread does specify leaving drift debates at the door, his sentence about the 4-wheel drift was right on. You are understeering in that situation. And it would be creating understeer to balance the car to get it staying in a sliding situation. Neutralizing understeer does not have to involve oversteer, correct. Neutralizing oversteer does not have to involve understeer, correct. But you can use understeer to turn oversteer into a sustained slide, as with the 4-wheel drift. |
| Posted by: Cubits May 8 2005, 09:07 AM |
| But you didn't "use" understeer, as understeer is a result, not a cause. You can't cause a four wheel drift with understeer, as they are just both states of cornering (it's like having a blue, red car). You can alter the attitude of the car with the throttle to create a four wheel drift. You can alter the attitude of the car with the throttle to create understeer. A four wheel drift can't be understeering, or it would be understeer instead. Do you follow me? |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 12:09 PM | ||
Ive already explained these situations as they happen on an average, not much point in continuing further. Undesired or not, oversteer is more forgiving in terms of how it will affect your speed and your line. Anyways I still dont consider that "understeer on purpose". If i understand what youre talking about your refering to the point when an FF driver will start to accelrate, moving from turning power to acceleration, blah blah- traction circles, what happens is understeer on exit. This is what id consider a result of accelerating out of a corner, not a "desired effect". Id be willing to bet a majoriy of FF drivers would jump at the ability to accelerate that hard and turn slightly tighter if given the choice. __ To follow along with Cubits, Over and Understeer are states a car exhibits, if youre turning in too much, its oversteer- if you cant turn in enough, its understeer. You dont add a little of one to the other to get a result. Think of walking and running, You dont add a little "run" to your walk to speed up, your either doing one- or the other (lamest analogy i could come up with- im running on 4 hours of sleep, sue me ) |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 8 2005, 12:58 PM | ||||
I already did.
The bottom line is that understeer, while less beneficial to the racing line, is inherently more stable than oversteer. If your back end starts going out on a left turn and you have to make a right turn immediately after that, you have to swing the back of your car around much farther to line it up for the turn, and to keep it from spinning out or oversteering too much, you have to spend a lot more time off the throttle. |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 01:16 PM |
| Funny thing about that situation is how well the pendulum effect works, it can point you in the proper direction even faster then normal to boot. And fyi, you may have to lay off the throttle while oversteering in your average car, but you have to lay off it as well when your understeering so that goes both ways. Typicly speaking though, you can apply more throttle while oversteering then you could while understeering. Ill just point to Michael schumacher for my argument, if understeer is better someone should tell him that hes been doing it wrong all these years. Imagine how fast hed be if he understeered  |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 8 2005, 02:20 PM | ||
In F1 racing, you don't wanna understeer or oversteer. If either one happens, you're screwed, because at those speeds, in those cars, in those tightly packed conditions, you're either going to crash or go flying off the road. A good F1 driver tries to avoid both, and utilizes one or the other when they need to or have to. |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 04:09 PM |
| You havent been rude so i should watch what i say. Michael Schumacher is very well known for his ability (or should i say habbit) to slide to the apex point from corner enterance, and for taking a rather odd oliptical line rather then cosntant semi-circlular line. He is also considered one of if not the fastest f1 driver out there. Really shouldnt speak of f1 as though its some exception to tarmac racing. All the same physics still aply. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 8 2005, 05:51 PM |
| No, I haven't been rude, because I'm not trying to "prove that I'm right". I'm trying to have an interesting conversation about the mechanics of FF and FR, and trying to learn something new, and I hope that you're doing the same. Besides, I don't wanna get on bad terms with a moderator before I even reach 100 posts. Anyways, even though F1 racing and autocross are both technically "tarmac racing", that's where the similarities end. The types of corners commonly encountered, the caliber of the cars that participate, and the very nature of the racing is entirely different in these two motorsports. In short, F1 racing is high-speed racing with fairly wide corners and superb tires and aerodynamics, so oversteer isn't as big of a detriment as understeer, because it's a lot easier to control in those situations. In autocross, however, the cars are much less advanced, and the corners are much tighter and more frequent; losing stability in one corner will often cost you big time for the next five corners. |
| Posted by: Rayp May 8 2005, 06:06 PM | ||
I guess you are picky about definition. I don't care about definition, i speak of experience. What i want to explain has little to do with what you are complaining about. And you just can't grasp what i'm talking about. I don't care about how accidental over or under steer is going to affect the line of a car, i talk about when you actually DESIRE thoses behavior while cornering, when you are creating them to take a particular line through the corner. And yes you can create thoses and control to what degree you are making them, and can use them to cancel each others (just not required to do so) or create the other during a manouver. The scandinavian flick is a good exemple where oversteer and understeer happen during the same manouver. |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 07:01 PM |
| To kman10587, dont worry i never hold a grudge im hands down one of the easiest going mods here. I find heated debate fun for the most part so dont worry. As for rayp, youre the ONLY person i know who would intentionaly show "understeer" . Scandanavian flick isnt an eample of under and oversteer, its just oversteer. You cant do both at the same time. That said i know exactly what youre talking about, when you point in yet continue to slide outwards- its still calssified as oversteer, despite your mimicry of an understeering line.I know -very- well what youre talking about, youve just got your own definitions for em |
| Posted by: Jabberwocky May 8 2005, 08:40 PM |
| 147 GTA (1360 kg / 2998 lbs), how is that lighter that a miata? One of the most important aspects of racing is to come out of the corners with as much speed as possible. A difference in 1 or 2 mph entry speed barely amounts to anything. However a difference in 1 or 2 mph exit speed amounts to whole tenths of a second. Hence the old saying: slow in fast out. Giving up a little entry speed wont hurt lap times by much, screwing up corner exit will. It has been my experience that while neither oversteer or understeer are good. Understeer is much easier to deal with. In my opinion, understeer tends screw up corner entry, usually a result of going in too hot. It is easy to just give up entry speed. Understeer on corner exit makes the car predictable. Oversteer on corner entry of a rwd car tends to upset the car. In order to get on the throttle the car has to be stablized. Oversteer on corner exit tends to make early throttle application on corner exit a challenge. Achieving that perfect exit speed is very hard with a car that oversteers. A well balance car should naturally oversteer a bit during corner entry when braking shifts the weight forward - then understeer slightly on exit when the throttle shifts the weight back. A car in motion is dynamic. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that schumacher's F1 car is as neutral as you can get. He can probably coax understeer or oversteer out of the car any time he wants. |
| Posted by: kman10587 May 8 2005, 08:45 PM | ||
Thank you, Jabberwocky. That's exactly what I was trying to say, but you put it much better. Understeer is more natural for the car upon exit, and will usually result in a faster exit speed, because it occurs as you give the car more throttle. Oversteer, on the other hand, can be caused in an FF by braking hard into a turn and shifting the weight over the front wheels, thus causing the rear to break loose. And yeah, like I said, Schumacher damn well better be trying to keep the car neutral at all times, or he's gonna find himself in a very bad position.
Yeah, I never hold grudges either, so it makes it easier to enjoy a competitive debate. |
| Posted by: Jabberwocky May 8 2005, 09:07 PM |
| In general, neither are good. A tires that is slipping too much is not doing its job. For me. In my experience. As an opinion. (I really dont want to get in a debate about this ) The fastest lap times i've ran while autocrossing in had neither understeer or oversteer in abundant quantities. When a hit the gas and the rear jumps 2 inches, that's an acceptable level of oversteer. Likewise, when I aim the car as the apex cone and the front end slides outwards and just misses the apex cone, that is understeer that I can handle. When there is too much oversteer, I'm usually countersteering frantically to get the car pointed straight again. I lose alot of time that way. When there is too much understeer, I can be barreling off course because the car wont turn into a corner. |
| Posted by: Cubits May 8 2005, 09:32 PM |
| The fastest autocrossing i've done has been with braking oversteer (well, more like four wheel drift). When i clip the apex, i hit the throttle and use the momentum of the tail to balance the front end (so i don't have to use the steering wheel), and the car comes out of the turn perfectly neutral. If i have a tight turn following a more open turn, i'll continue the slide down the straight. It takes significantly longer to straighten and shift the weight another time than it does to just slide the distance. This is especially handy in s-bends, where i just link two slides as opposed to cornering, straightening, cornering. The tighter the second turn, the more advantage this technique has. No F1 driver drives neutrally. Because of the nature of tyres (slip angles), to maximise the grip requires the car to be yawing inward slightly. Modern F1 cars have small slip angles, but they're still pushing them to the limit. Schumacher is famous for it, hence why he pwns in the rain. |
| Posted by: sideways May 8 2005, 09:51 PM |
| Thanks for the back up cubits Slip angles god why did that slip my mind? |
| Posted by: Jabberwocky May 9 2005, 06:23 AM |
| A neutral handling car does not mean there is no tire slip, it means that all 4 tires tend to achieve their optimal slip angles at the same time. Depending on how the driver positions a car that is neutral, oversteer or understeer is both available. Because a car is yaw inwards, you can't make the assumption that it is oversteering. When autocrossing, I sometimes yaw my car inwards so that I will run over the apex cone, but I also go into the corner with the lots of speed too, all 4 wheels tend to slide outwards, just missing that cone. Although I was yawed inwards and just by looking at a photo, you would think I was oversteering, it was actually a neutral or understeering type of slide. Im not saying that a terribly understeering car is better than a terribly understeering car. I've been in both and both times it was just not fun to drive either. BTW, your driving style is very different me. Do you really slide into a S-curve? I tend to give up some entry speed, but I am back on the throttle before the 2nd apex. What car do you drive? |
| Posted by: Cubits May 9 2005, 06:59 AM |
| Peugeot 205 gti. Greatest damn fwd ever. I find sliding is quicker because you can use the loaded suspension to change direction in an instant, as opposed to negotiating it like two corners. The quicker i can turn a car, the earlier i can accelerate. I use the momentum of the tail to pull it round which lets me use more throttle earlier. When you have no useful straight between corners, the slow in-fast out goes out the window. The less steering i have to do, the more accelerating/braking i can. That's the main reason behind my style. This only applies to certain circumstances though... just like using the handbrake for a hairpin. I only do autocross and hillclimbs because they're a lot more cost effective than proper rally. When i get the funds up i'll enter the targa events here (targa tasmania etc), and should be able to show up any fwd thrown at me. I'm very, very good on twisty tarmac. |
| Posted by: Rayp May 9 2005, 08:00 AM | ||
The real use for understeering is that while it understeer, you can turn the wheel without affecting the car speed or angle (or stability). When they grip again they are in the right angle (meanwhile you have accelerated the car). At least it's the way i use it. Don't forget you only know FR Sideway, what i describe would not work in an 86. Speaking of definition, right, i may not use it properly. What i meant is as long as the front wheel don't turn the car (despite being turned), the car understeer. So while the car may be oversteering, the front wheel are just slipping in a scandinavian flick, until you flick the other way that is. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan May 9 2005, 10:30 AM | ||
I can't fathom doing that, so what situation would you consider proper for using the handbrake in a hairpin? o.o; I'm not being sarcastic at all, I seriously want to know. You seem to have way more experience driving FFs in twisty situations than I do, and I screw up S-turns all the time (always on entering the second half)... so any advice on technique you can give is appreciated. |
| Posted by: Cubits May 9 2005, 10:43 AM |
| To take a hairpin normally (we're talking a very sharp junction etc) you have to slow down, feed a lot of steering in, then accelerate and wind off lock. Using the handbrake just as you turn brings the tail around, eliminating the need for all of that steering lock. It also adds momentum to the tail so you can hit the gas that fraction earlier without understeering. The difference isn't huge, but it's enough to warrant its use. The tighter the more necessary, as some fast fwd's have pretty poor turning radii. If you pull the handbrake before you turn, you'll go straight. It's easy to practice in a carpark when it's raining. If you do it in the rain, you won't stretch your handbrake cable and you can practice at lower speeds. Brake, turn and handbrake, opp lock and gas. http://www.gasmes.net/videos/golfes/clio2.avi |
| Posted by: Cubits May 9 2005, 10:45 AM |
| Oh, and hows this for sliding on a straight (last part): http://www.allmotorlink.com/galli_video/gigi_6.wmv |
| Posted by: Jabberwocky May 9 2005, 06:00 PM |
| Even at autocross speed there are straight aways. A straightaway that is 3-5 car lengths is enough for exit speed to matter. Again I dont want to get in a debate, you drive a front wheel drive where as I drive a rear wheel drive. There will be some differences in style. The general idea is still the same, turn early, keep some speed, and get on the gas early. Not having that much experience autocrossing a front wheel drive car, I make the following observation with a bit of caution. But the supposed difference between a front wheel drive and rear wheel drive car is that you can get on the throttle earlier with a rear wheel drive. I am usually on the throttle even before I hit the apex. I think your method is actually what alot of FF drivers use since throttle while cornering may be iffy. I dont worry as much about understeer if I give it throttle while turning.Just a guess. I have a feeling that your autocrosses in Europe are alot different than our's here in the US. In the US, autocross is usually held on clean asphalt or concrete surfaces in big parking lots. Many people run R-compound tires. To give you an idea how sticky these tires are. A stock miata can pull around 1.03 constant Gs on sticky tires. Even the FF/AWD crowd usually run very small slip angles, nothing like the wild slip angles you see on those rally vids. Massive sliding ends up scrubbing too much mometum. |
| Posted by: ~Rev Free~ Jul 31 2005, 08:45 AM | ||
man that last corner was the greatest.. totally inspirational.. makes me wanna go to and watch a rally. |
| Posted by: Kaz01 Aug 12 2005, 12:02 PM |
i kno that last turn was godly i was like wtf soooo early its gunna be a spin.....O SHIT!  |
| Posted by: Azuremen Mar 10 2006, 11:31 PM |
| I don't think he intended to do that on purpose, as he slowed down quite a bit it seems compared to if he had just braked normally. When I autocrossed an FF (94 Tercel, slower than crap but light), I found trail braking essential to making it turn in nicely. I never touched my e-brake while on a course, just would work the foot brake to rotate it. Now on gravel and snow/ice, I used the handbrake all the time. Still do on my daily driver 99 Corolla even, just for fun Its not really faster, but does allow you to get back on the gas a bit sooner I've found, but throttle control is essential.Either way, S curves where always a matter of just getting the car to slip a little half way through, and then snap it a back around for the exit and floor it. Same applies to my current race car, a heavily modded 87 MR2. Just with lots more oversteer and less steering inputs. Turn the wheel like an eigth of a turn at the entrance, and then have to put in half a turn or more of counter steer if I don't immediately get off the brakes. Makes slaloms enitrely about the gas pedal though |
| Posted by: keisuke takahashi Mar 11 2006, 12:07 AM |
| IMO FF cars are not compatible for too powerful engine with big displacement. |
| Posted by: Azuremen Mar 11 2006, 11:07 AM |
| Very true for most things. Drag racing it can work, but only with lots of practice on the launch. Big displacement usually means more weight though, which leads to more understeer, espcially at corner exit. I might add that the turn in properties of an FF and FR are very similar under braking. The big draw back is coming out of the corner on the gas. |
| Posted by: sideways Mar 11 2006, 11:28 PM |
| ^-- Sounding smart so far. But, check the dates on things the last post was made of aug 05. Either way- welcome. |
| Posted by: Mid-Nght Kid Apr 22 2006, 09:23 PM |
| I have a question. This e-brake technique that some of you are talking about, does it matter if your rear brakes are drums or disks? I'm familiar with how the e-brake works in a drum brake setup but could someone please explain how the mechanism works on disks??? |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 23 2006, 02:01 AM |
| The E-brake in most cars is cable operated, and it mechanically pulls the pads onto the discs in the case of cars with rear disc brakes, instead of hydraulically. Some cars have drums coupled to the discs purely for the e-brake. Drum brakes summon more force and "stick" better than disc brakes, but have far worse cooling properties. The shoe of a drum brake is actually drawn into the shell harder if it slips, which gives you more braking force but reduces the fidelity of the application. In terms of the e-brake the drum is probably a better option unless it gets used a whole lot. |
| Posted by: shfta Apr 23 2006, 04:10 AM |
| i dont get it... |
| Posted by: Mid-Nght Kid Apr 23 2006, 09:34 AM |
| So does the cable utilize the calipers on a disk brake application or is it a separate mechanism? |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 25 2006, 03:22 AM |
| The cable pulls the calipers directly in most instances. I did state that in the first line of my previous post. Some cars bypass that and run seperate drums for the e-brake, which sit inboard of the discs. Rally cars have a hydraulic setup, which can produce a lot of pressure very easily, with no risk of cable-stretch (because in rally you want to really make sure the rears lock when you want them to!). |
| Posted by: xmrdustinx Apr 28 2006, 06:38 PM |
| so most rally cars have drums or discs? cuz drums dont get as dirty i guess |
| Posted by: VRr1FD Apr 29 2006, 04:20 AM |
| disks. they cool and clamp so much better than drums. that's why disks are used in all sport applications these days. |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 29 2006, 05:51 AM |
| Discs don't necessarily clamp harder than a drum (in fact, a drum self-tightens), but they offer much greater cooling and modulation. Rally cars run discs at the rear, but have the handbrake operated via a dual-circuit hydraulic setup, which means no cable-stretch and massive brake forces with a small input from the handbrake lever. My car runs a drum rear, with no overheating problems (probably because it weighs 850kg and is fwd). On my car, the drums are preferential in autocross/gymkhana because they lock better than the disc alternative. Even on the track they never present a problem. Heavier cars, or rwd's will obviously present a greater case for having four wheel discs, but on fwd's they're more for show than anything. Manufacturers fit them so they can have "four wheel disc brakes" in their ads under the guise of being beneficial. |
| Posted by: xmrdustinx Apr 29 2006, 05:12 PM |
| so assuming drums didnt have a cooling problem, drums would be "better"? |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 30 2006, 08:36 AM | ||
From my own experience, drums have a major problem. They are difficult to adjust so they lock at the same time, the same strenght. Drums are cheap, but they are a bit more complicated and parts do wear faster (and unevenly) than the disc equivalent. At least, it's my observation on my two drummed Honda i had, i never been able to adjust them properly even with brand new parts. |
| Posted by: VRr1FD May 1 2006, 05:23 PM | ||
no. disks are better at everything. being able to lock up more easily than you need is not a plus. |
| Posted by: lee_integra May 15 2006, 03:43 AM |
| Drum brakes blow. Get a car with 4 wheel disk, or don't bother dhrifting your FF. You might die. |
| Posted by: AsH_ Nov 10 2006, 02:33 PM | ||
might be late buy who carez... im bored... going thru those circle thing??? they're called roundabouts... and im sure we can drive throught the roundabout... about about instead of going through it then just to go around it... lol its only 174hp at its peak... is he redlining through the roundabout??? also how big is the roundabout??? they come in different sizes... some easier to take than other... its not about power, its the handling ability... FF are naturally good at cornering... get ur friend to do a 90degree turn around a roundabout... its not aslong as u have fun, its aslong as u dont injury yourself and more importantly other ppl... cars might be good but drivers are what cause crashes... ppl first time getting their licence and killing themselves isnt the cars fault, its the drivers inability to handle the car... ppl need 2 take care on the roads... i once took a wide sweeping curve with a sharp turn to the right on exit... i was travelling in my EG6 and was going too fast and i did lift-off and my cars ass kicked out and i was was facing a traffic island and i countersteered and cleared the exit easily... but i was lucky i countersteered... youve experienced the RSX in the passengers seat, but not done that behind the wheel... |
| Posted by: DAT!!CAPPUCCINO Apr 10 2007, 07:32 AM |
| Please someone correct me if i am wrong, but i think FF can do the Braking Drift. Because it transfers weight to the front, and it does not depend on the rear wheels being driven giving the car oversteer. |
| Posted by: Force Fed Mopar Apr 10 2007, 09:01 AM | ||
It's called left-foot braking And it's hard to get used to, I still can't do it, although I don't have much chance to practice. It's hard to step on the brake w/ your left while still powering w/ the right, it can be confusing at first. I guess w/ practice it gets easier to do, like anything. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 10 2007, 09:58 AM | ||
Left-foot braking isn't an exotic technique like that. To oversteer you just transfer weight to the front, using the brakes (doesn't matter which foot brakes ) or just lifting off the throttle could work. Left-foot braking might be the most sudden way to transfer weight, since you're going from throttle to braking very quickly, but it is not the only way and isn't a "special technique." However, technically (around here) this isn't considered a drift because you can't continue the oversteer using the throttle after the initial turn-in. |
| Posted by: DAT!!CAPPUCCINO Apr 10 2007, 12:14 PM | ||
ok. thank you. you say potato and i say....potato. crap, that saying does not work on the internet! |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 10 2007, 03:04 PM | ||
From the topic description: Lets talk about what FFs can do, Leave the drift debate at the door. |
| Posted by: DreadAngel Apr 10 2007, 07:22 PM |
| To drift is to have your car already sideways much before entrance into the corner. Left foot braking isn't drift at all lol, its a technique for FF drivers to clear corners faster I've used it on Eastern Creek so yeah, NOT drift at all lol |
| Posted by: twitchykun Apr 10 2007, 08:51 PM |
| So, hows about that Front-wheel drive understeer? I read that installing stiffer springs in the REAR and fiddling with the sway-bar can take care of that. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 10 2007, 08:52 PM |
| Increasing the size of the anti-roll bar in the rear can balance out some dynamics, but it won't get rid of understeer. It'll just want to make the car oversteer first. But you can't beat physics--going uphill will negate this unless you have a limited-slip differential. |
| Posted by: DreadAngel Apr 12 2007, 05:21 AM |
| Yup, very true You can experiment using stiffer suspension setup (coilovers lol) then careful selection of swaybars/anti-roll bars/stablisers, you may actually find that you understeer even more if you make the wrong selection of thickness etc. Camber can also help to make your steering neutral And as Nomake Wan mentioned, LSD is also helpful. You can't make it oversteer readily like FR cars can, its all about the fundamentals of the design, but you can try and keep the handling at a neutral point rather than the natural tendiency to understeer Rim and Tire sizing also effect this a lot. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 12 2007, 05:56 AM |
| An lsd can easly make an ff car push more towards understeer. Instead of just spinning the inside tire letting the outside tire hang on doing its thing, now you can spin both tires and completley wash that front end to the outside. They can and do however make a huge difference in how much power you can lay down on exits. The sway bar problem is simple, buy an adjustable sway bar. sabishii: lfb can make a huge impact on the amount of oversteer an FF vehicle will exhibit through the corner. Weight shifting, while important, takes a side seat for this technique. This techniques big plus is its ability to allow the driver some control over the brake bias (in a sense). Think of what happens when braking in an FF vehicle while applying powe: The engine over-powers the front brakes, while the un-powered rear tires slow down drasticly, this can cause the rear tires to slide and lose traction -very- easily in comparison to what the fronts are doing, bringing that rear end around nicely This is imo one of the most difficult techniques to do "properly"- just being able to get over ones natural tendency to slam hard with your left foot alone is incredibly difficult, let alone teaching your left foot the finese required to properly control the bias of the brakes (like you were using your right foot) in proportion with the throttle to help induce oversteer controllably. I guess theres no such thing as an "Exotic" technique, but if you ask me this is as close as it gets. |
| Posted by: ing2ning Apr 14 2007, 12:18 AM |
| I didn't have time to read through all 9 pages, but what I like about front drivers are their ability to approach the limit very neatly. Usually, when you exceed the limit in a front wheel drive car you just need to lift a bit and the front will tuck back in neatly, but in a rear wheel drive you get some pretty wasteful sliding. I would imagine that this would be even more apparent on a circuit, but my experience is limited to autocross only. My 2c |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 14 2007, 07:49 AM | ||
Great exotic technique if you're trying to create an oversteering slide, but since this topic isn't about drifting, it's mainly for weight transfer for, say, autocross. Edit: Well, unless you're talking about rallying, that is. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 15 2007, 05:29 AM |
| And when did i say didly about drifting? You dont -really- want to sit there and use the brakes repeatedly through the corner to add weight to the front, it can help, if you make a mistake. To move weight forward, you need to slow down- slowing down further in a corner means youve entered too fast, and can no longer devote the tire use as youd like to maintain those higher corner speeds. Very important when driving a car that uses the same tires to turn with as it does to accelerate (Traction circles). However if you use the brakes slightly while giving it gas to compensate can allow the car to maintain a proper speed, not diverting from using the tires to do anything but corner faster, you can get a nice effect. Like i mentioned- those unpowered, free going, lightly pressed down on rear tires, will brake completley different than the front tires which have the force of the engine keeping them going. Theyll start to slide before the fronts do- if you dont go overboard on it, this will cause the car to tuck in tightly around the corner- which can be useful for bringing a normally understeering vehicle around a fairly tight corner. The difficulty in using this technique properly lies in using it properly, creating small angles- rather than exessive sliding. This method, and what youre talking about- are on totaly different levels. LFB in rally for what its worth became increasingly common to help aid turbo lag more than anything. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 15 2007, 08:11 AM |
| It doesn't matter what angle you're sliding at - the fact that you're sliding at all means you're going over the traction limit of the tire, meaning you won't be able to accelerate out at 100%. Proper weight transfer however, keeps the weight down towards the front of the car so that your front tires keep their traction and won't understeer. LFB in rally, however, is used the same way that you mentioned for tarmac - to modulate the brake bias so that the car can slide predictably depending on the change of the surface. |
| Posted by: _CRASH_ Apr 15 2007, 09:20 AM |
| I practiced LFB this whole winter, really helps to induce mild oversteer to counter the understeer. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 15 2007, 08:19 PM | ||
Busting out the italics eh? If you need to transfer weight forward to help correct understeer during a corner, you have messed up (I see your italics and raise you with bold). Since i only did a simple explination before, im going to break this down to you as fully as possible. To transfer weight mid corner, you need to slow down. To slow down you need to divert the traction the tires are curently using for maintaining cornering speeds, to slow the vehicle down. Think of it as moving traction from 100% handling, to 80% handling 20% braking (or whatever it is you may decide to do, depending on how much weight you want to move forward), no matter what you do- youre going to corner slower then you were during this moment. So now where are we? Weve got more traction, were taking a tighter line, and were going slower. Great for correcting a mistake, bad for maintaing a higher average. If youre able to take a line tighter than a corners fastest line, youre going too slow- If youre washing out off of it, youre going too fast. This is why what youre talking about, and what im talking about- are on totaly different levels. But hey feel free to explain and give some situations where your example of lfb can be handy. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 15 2007, 08:58 PM | ||
I used italics to change the subject to and contrast to weight transfer. You, however, used it to emphasize the word "during"... to what end? So I don't think you're talking about after the corner or before the corner? Secondly, WHEN did I say that weight transfer DOESN'T require slowing down? I never said anything CLOSE to that topic. What I said was, you do not want to rotate the car through sliding because that will end up reducing the tires' traction usable to accelerate out of the turn. Slowing in a corner does not necessarily mean an overall slower lap time. You can understeer your way into a turn, then try to "balance" it by oversteering outwards, but then you'll be fighting as you try to regain traction to accelerate through the apex. On the other hand, you can slow down a bit, get more traction into the front wheels, tighten your line, and then aim for the apex, and you'll be accelerating much earlier in the turn than the first example and will most likely end up with a higher speed at the exit. (Edit: I should add that if you're understeering, you're going from significantly less than 100% traction to XX% traction + YY% braking) I'm sure you've heard of this popular maxim, but if you haven't: "Slow in, fast out." Anyways, I'm not even sure why we're talking about mid-corner weight transfer. What LFB is more commonly used for is for regular braking and then trail braking for a corner, no different from right foot braking. The only difference being that your right foot is still on the throttle so there is a more instantaneous transition (and smooth, when you get it down) between throttle and brake and then throttle. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 16 2007, 12:33 AM |
| That type of LFB, is once again, different from the type im refering to. Thats just a technique used to shorten the time one would find when moving one foot from the brake back to the throttle, its a fraction of a second- but it adds up over a full race to being the equivilant of having a couple seconds more "on throttle" time. during a however many lap race. In this sense, i agree with you and your post entirely and its spot on correct. However, any car can do this- and is different than the type of "lfb" youd see a FF driver wanting to use during a corner- Which is what i was talking about. And over steering slightly is far from bad, its better than understeering slightly in the opinions of many. The term "slip angles" comes to mind as well. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 16 2007, 03:46 PM | ||
It does not matter if you slide, as long as you are done sliding when it's time to accelerate out of the corner. The hard part is controling when you start and when you stop sliding (and be in the right angle to accelerate out then). |
| Posted by: InitialN00b Apr 16 2007, 05:44 PM | ||
Depending on the corner. I'd love to see you point out to me a driver who prefers a slightly loose car when he's at the kink at Road America. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 16 2007, 07:24 PM | ||||
It does matter, though. I don't think sliding will do you any favors in clearing a corner faster. If you're sliding at any point in the corner, you're not taking full advantage of the traction available, regardless of whether or not you've straightened the car out for the corner exit.
This is true, but I think the oversteer comment was written in the context of low speed, tight corners where understeer really hurts you. It is, as you said, dependent on the type of corner; I can definitely see why you'd prefer to have the car understeer on high speed sections. |
| Posted by: InitialN00b Apr 16 2007, 07:34 PM |
| Even in that context I doubt it. Corner entry o/s and you'll get a push coming out, meaning you'll be slow corner exit o/s, and you won't be putting power down, which means, you guessed it! You'll be slow. O/S feels faster; most people for some reason has it ingrained in their heads that a slight o/s race car is faster; it isn't. YOu might THINK it's faster because you're driving it right to what you perceive as the ragged edge; but I can almost guarantee you in circuit racing, o/s is SLOW. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 16 2007, 07:48 PM | ||
What about for FF cars, though, where the rear tires are not responsible for putting power to the ground? Of course any traction loss isn't so great, but I'm having a hard time seeing why slight oversteer would be worse than slight understeer. |
| Posted by: InitialN00b Apr 16 2007, 08:10 PM |
| what do you think is easier to screw up; dealing with a car that's slightly tail happy or one that is slightly tight. keep in mind that FF usually displays some u/s characteristics; but not if it's well engineered (doable even from the factory; just look at the DC2Rs); what's easier to drive around; a car that's pushing, or a car that's loose. I see a lot of discussion on driving and what not in here; and that's all fine and good. Keep in mind that at the end of the day, the nut behind the wheel still calls the shots and what the car does relates to the level of confidence to which he can take the car to be at |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 16 2007, 08:51 PM | ||||
Might also have been what *I* was talking about in the three paragraphs before I transitioned back to left-foot trail braking.
Neither oversteer nor understeer is good in a corner, generally. I didn't say that understeer is better than oversteer, but that you want to keep all the tires from sliding so that you are able to put down as much power as possible when exiting the corner. And with a proper line, you can be beginning to squeeze the throttle way before the apex. Also, there is a big difference between oversteering and slip angle. When you oversteer you are sliding and are not maintaining traction in the rear wheels. With an optimum slip angle, you are not sliding, but your tire's contact patch is warped/deformed slightly because of cornering forces, and thus you seem to be cornering with your tail out at a slight angle... but still maintaining traction and not sliding at all. Edit: Now there may be specific times when a higher cornering speed is more important than exit speeds, such as when there's a continuous series of very tight corners so that there's almost no time for acceleration, rotating the car through a slide or grip is debatable. For example, with all the grip that F1 cars get with their huge sticky tires and then the aerodynamic grip, they'd probably do much better simply gripping through the turn. On the other hand, a normal street car with street tires on a less-than-perfect road is another story. |
| Posted by: DreadAngel Apr 17 2007, 02:27 AM | ||
FF cars naturally understeer, even if its well developed like you mentioned, the ITR and CTR, if you've driven them, you'll know the limits of its neutral handling. In the end your still left with understeer however mild or strong it is. It heavily dependent on the driver. If the driver knows what's he/she's doing, he/she will know the way a car must be setup (setup meaning positioning of the car, revs on entry, speed on entry, etc). So FF, FR, MR, RR and 4WD/AWD can be fast Its just dependent on driver and of course the road and condition, obviously one favours a certain drive compared to others.FF naturally is an easier drive to control, you don't have to contend with the issue of spinning your car. You can barrel into a corner and your car will give you the senses that it won't make the corner at that speed so naturally you respond off the accelerator and onto the anchors. Simply put, its an easier car to drive but harder to drive fast because you can't "power" through the corners like RWD cars can. I know this because I do race my EG on the circuits around here. The key to it is more like MR cars than 4WD cars, you smooth out every bit of your driving and maintain a constant speed to bring out the most of a FF car. As for typical moderate powered FR, its harder for the beginners to control (I'm of course talking about cars without the aid of traction control, stability control, etc) The natural tendency for the tail to whip around is scary especially at the very low or very high speeds. You have to use a correct amount of countersteer and throttle to keep the tail from whipping around (Of course in daily driving, you don't push it because if you do stuff up using too much lock and too much/too quick on the throttle, you make a hash of whatever your doing). It may sound very simple, but it takes practice to use the correct amount of countersteer and throttle (when I say correct, I mean that the car should exit the corner needing only a bit of opposite lock to straighten up, incorrect amount will lead to the car's tail waving left or right as the driver fights to control the tail while under acceleration) BUT the natural tendency to oversteer allows drivers to push the car to the limit. You don't have that wall of understeer to block you from pushing hard, you can push as hard as you like as long as you can control that tail. In GENERAL, its easy to drive a FF but harder to be fast in a FF car. The understeer stops you from pushing hard, simply put, the car puts a limit on you. As for FR, its harder to start with as you don't have that safety barrier of understeer to tell you your going too fast, but once you get use to it, you can push the car to your own limits, the car can do whatever you want it to do but its up to the driver how far to push it. Personally, I like FF cause its a challenge to drive fast, I know there is a limit to how fast I can go but I find it makes me as a driver more conscious of how I use the car and the way I control the car. That said, I enjoy all cars, I don't really care what drivetrain it is, as long as I have the skills, I can bring out the best of the car, thats my aim And thankfully I'm doing alright I guess so far. |
| Posted by: Force Fed Mopar Apr 17 2007, 06:12 AM |
| I find that the problem w/ having an understeering FF is that you have to lift coming out of the corner to keep from running right into the ditch (w/ LSD) or to keep from spinning the inside tire (w/o LSD). At least w/ my GLHS anyway, no LSD and 12 psi will make the inside spin real easy So either way, you're having to get off the gas to turn properly, which = slower. It's more of a problem in low speed, 2nd gear corners than higher speed curves though. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 17 2007, 11:37 AM |
| Most people here believe FF understeer because of the drivetrain... It's not true, they are set to have serious understeer, because otherwise they would be dangerous to drive. FF's tails are lightweight, they would skid easily if it they were not set to grip better than the front end. If they were not set that way, a small bump or dirt on the road would make the car oversteer at the worst moment. I know from experience, i have messed with my cars suspensions before. An FF that get sideway on it's own while taking a corner too fast can be quite an experience. Since the only way to kill oversteer in an FF is to accelerate, you can see the problem (especially if you have good reasons to want to slow down)... |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 17 2007, 12:00 PM | ||
Well, there are two main reasons due to drivetrain. One, since the turning wheels are the driving wheels, the tires place a much lower limit on the throttle during the middle of a turn, making it easier to go over the traction limit of the tires and thus understeering. The second thing is, since the drivetrain of an FF is all centered in the front of the car (as there is no power going to the rear wheels), most FFs (if not all; I can't think of even any race-worthy FFs like the ITR to have neutral balance) will be nose-heavy and be more likely to plow. And of course a lot of RWDs also can be nose-heavy. Now, this understeering "trait" is not really a bad thing. It usually just limits the lines an FF can take, that they need to take a much later apex so that they do all of their turning before accelerating, and then so the exit line is straighter so they can put down more throttle on the exit. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 17 2007, 03:19 PM | ||
Well, i should have worded it better. FF could understeer a lot less than they do if they were not set that way by design. Besides, even FR will understeer at some point or another (though it's easier to deal with than in an FF). I drove a 88 Prelude with 4WS and it was taking turns that most cars would plow in (and not just FFs). It was insane how fast i could take some turns without understeering (Stock suspension, no mods)... |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 17 2007, 03:35 PM | ||
Well, how would you not set up an FF like that? In the first case... well... an FF car is powered by the front wheels and the front wheels do the turning. Can't do much about that. In the second case, the weight of the drivetrain will always be in the front of the car; can't change that. To get neutral weight distribution, the only thing I can think of is adding ballast to the rear of the car, but the side effect of weighing much more is probably worse. But the easiest way to reduce understeer is... driver's skill. Smooth inputs rather than jerky ones, trail braking for front traction, a large radius entry line, and a proper late apex to put as much throttle as possible without understeer. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 17 2007, 07:31 PM |
| Sabishii has the best point. It's basic physics, people. There's a certain traction limit to any set of tires. When you accelerate, some of that traction is used. When you turn, some of that traction is used. If you attempt to corner and accelerate, you are more likely to run into the traction limit (which would be understeer). FWD cars use the front wheels for turning and power application. Argue all you want, but physics proves that this setup has understeer inherent in its design. |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 17 2007, 09:30 PM | ||||
Why would FF's be purposely set to understeer? Wouldn't oversteering be better because you have a chance to make corrections.
Didn't Fumihiro mention something like that about FR having an advantage off the line over FF. Then one of the mechanics dove deeper into the subject and said that it is an inherent difference between the two drivetrains. So I guess it can kind of relate to what you are saying. |
| Posted by: Force Fed Mopar Apr 17 2007, 09:45 PM | ||
You can move the weight around though, ie relocate the battery to the rear, remove components up front like the AC components, use 'glass or carbon fiber body parts, etc. Most FF's have around a 60/40 f/r weight distribution ratio. For instance, my Charger, Eclipses, and I think the Mirage all have 63/37 ratios. With some weight removal and re-distribution, I don't see it being impossible to both lighten them and improve the ratio to maybe 57/43 or even 55/45. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 17 2007, 09:57 PM | ||
I can't think of a situation in daily life where you'd want the car to oversteer as opposed to understeer. Understeer when you're not expecting it is pretty easily corrected. Unexpected oversteer could be disastrous. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 17 2007, 11:10 PM | ||
Hm, you're right. Things can definitely be relocated to balance out the weight. But I'm not sure if they can get to a 50/50 distribution like several FRs are. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 18 2007, 01:34 AM | ||||
Well, from my experience driving FFs, the fact most of the weight is in front don't hurt that much. Might be my way to drive them though. I use throttle and steering input to balance weight distribution when cornering. As long as i don't enter a corners too fast (for my car setup), understeer isn't much of an issue.
Because the average driver slam the brakes when things get wrong. Doing that in a car that is oversteering is a sure way to induce a spinout. Getting sideway in a curve (due to unwanted oversteer) with cars coming the opposite way is something you don't want to live through (i did). |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 18 2007, 07:01 AM | ||
You have some chance of getting out of oversteering opposed to understeering where you may potentially hit a wall or outside barricade. Of course I'm speaking in terms of racing on a circuit opposed to the streets. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 18 2007, 07:55 AM |
| Theoretically, understeer would be easier to get out of in a FWD vehicle. You have no actual control over the speed of the rear wheels; therefore, if you induce oversteer your vehicle will slow down tremendously and/or spin. If you spin, there's a good chance you'll either slow down tremendously as a result or lose control. On the other hand, if you understeer, you let off of the gas and maybe put a little brake into it to get some weight shifted onto the front wheels. Voila, you've got traction again. After all, if we're referring to a circuit situation, then your understeer was most likely induced by just nudging too far over your tires' speed limit. Therefore, slowing down a tad will regain the lost traction and return the car to "going where I point it" mode. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 08:20 AM | ||
If you're ever in a situation where you understeer so badly that you end up hitting the outside wall even after you've tried to slow down in order to correct it, you've entered the corner much too quickly. In this case, it's your driving skill, not your car that needs to be fine tuned. Having the car oversteer once you've overcooked a corner just means you'll be spun around when you crash. |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 18 2007, 11:18 AM | ||
The situation goes hand in hand because the vehicle has its limitations and at the same time it is the driver who is at the wheel who makes the decisions, but your missing the point. We were discussing the consequences of oversteering or understeering and which situation would be more damaging as well as how easily it can be corrected. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 11:27 AM | ||
Not really, I'm very well aware of what we're discussing right now. My point is if you make a mistake, I don't see how you can say that if you oversteer, you have "some chance" of recovering, while with understeer, you do not. If anything understeer is easier to correct than oversteer, since all you have to do is slow down to regain traction in the front tires. You lose precious tenths of a second, but you get through the corner safely. I'm saying that if understeer causes you to lose control and plow into the outside wall, having the car oversteer in that same situation will do you no favors, since you were already going too fast. |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 18 2007, 03:02 PM | ||
There are two pairs of situations for oversteer and understeer. One of those pairs is in the severe case where there is heavy understeer and oversteer. If you have heavily understeer you might possibly hit a wall or barricade. If you heavily oversteer like you said there is a possibility you might also hit the wall, but most likely then not you will spin out. Look at the Mako & Saiyuki battle they spun out while inducing oversteer, but entered the corner too fast. At the same time Mako was trying to correct it, but it didn't exactly work out. Now in less severe cases involving understeer and oversteer. It would be better to have oversteer then understeer because like you said you lose time, speed and you also may open up the inside for someone to overtake you. If you were to oversteer you still have the inside line and you still have some chance of correcting it without opening up any chance to be passed, provided that the driver is skilled enough to do so. When I talk about these situations I'm talking about races taking place on a circuit. If you look at it from both situations it is better if you oversteer then understeer. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 18 2007, 03:19 PM | ||
Actually, if you oversteer, you'll not have the grip to accelerate out of a turn, and the others will simply pass you on the straight because of this. A racing car is not going to be set up for expecting accidental oversteer or accidental understeer. The setup may be more prone to understeer or to oversteer, but this will still translate into neutral driving depending on the style of the driver. That the car will understeer or oversteer after going over limit I do not believe is factored into the setup. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 18 2007, 03:25 PM |
| Youre not comparing similar situations. Just as your situaionts talks about a vehicle thats oversteering and remains taking a tight line still, it is possible to understeer and still take a tight line. From a racing stand point, i will admit MOST drivers will prefer oversteering. When you oversteer you point towards the exit of a corner and are still able to apply the power and exit, when youre understeering youre only going to "wash out" as you try to apply the power, and need to wait. For safety however, understeering is far better- Theres no careful throttle control, no finese required with the steering wheel, no moment to moment reactions- all of which youd see with over steer. You just ease on the steering and apply the brakes. For those of you in the mind set that FF vehicles are doomed to understeer on the tracks, please stop. Its apparent those of you who make this claim have never driven a properly set up FF vehicle before. Theres many "tricks" that can make an ff handle incredibly neutral and even lean towards oversteer quit easily on a track. Playing with the downforce, the sway bars, the camber, the toe, and the stagger of the tires can lead to some incredible restults. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 03:56 PM | ||||
Come on, don't reference a 90's CG cartoon show in a physics discussion. If Initial D was realistic, Takumi would get blown out every match for doing those ridiculous parallel-to-the-road drifts. Anyway, if you're going to talk about minor over/understeer, you can keep the inside line by making corrections in both cases, not just oversteer. And in both cases, you lose time.
It's true that with a well developed chassis, tires, and suspension setup, front wheel drives can exhibit neutral cornering character at the corner entry. It's just you end up having to wait to get on the throttle, as understeer is waiting for you if you step on it too early. I think that's all anyone was trying to say. |
| Posted by: DreadAngel Apr 18 2007, 04:11 PM |
| Lol, I said all this stuff in my previous post Please don't use Cartoons, Animes, Mangas and movies to prove a point... they really don't work in your favour lol. Like sidewaysgts has said, NOT all FF are going to Understeer like a mofo into a corner. If you look in the under 1600cc division of national racing etc. You'll find the podium share a mix of FF and FR cars. As a joke, if you want oversteer, get Lift Off Oversteer in your FWD car lol, thats oversteer for ya |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 04:15 PM | ||
Oops, sorry. I just saw a big block of text, and my gut instinct forced me to skip right over it. Nothing personal. |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 18 2007, 04:24 PM | ||
Initial D definitely exaggerates the physics especially drifting, but at the same time it does represent drifting properly. Drifting is a good example of why oversteer is in a way is better since oversteer is induced to initiate a drift. It is much slower, but it gets you around corners which is its main point. As sidewaysgts stated race car drivers prefer a car that has oversteer opposed to understeer because they would rather have a car that can turn then one that doesn't, but this heavily depends on the drivers style. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 18 2007, 04:25 PM |
| So you're saying that suspension and aerodynamics can defeat physics? Can you get a FWD car to handle neutrally or oversteer first when turned hard? Yes. Easily. My old Legacy was prone to snap oversteer if you weren't careful with left-foot braking. It'd do it for lift-off throttle as well. But all you're doing is changing the speed where physics comes into play. Apply power while cornering and you use up traction faster than a RWD car. That's a law, and you can't break it. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 04:43 PM | ||
Funny...I thought the point of a race was to clear the circuit as quickly as possible. Initial D is an anime about racing, not drifting, right? Anyway, while it's open to debate whether or not racers prefer cars with a tendency to oversteer or understeer, I really don't understand your argument that oversteer is better because it's how you initiate a drift. Racers aren't trying to drift, they're trying to clear the corner with as much speed as possible. Loss of traction in the tires contributes nothing to this end; it usually happens as a result of a mistake. |
| Posted by: DreadAngel Apr 18 2007, 04:58 PM | ||
Nah its all good Mitsubooshi, its just sad because about 90% of the previous post were all covered in my uber long post hahaha... I agree with you there though loss of traction = mistake = car vs wall or car vs car... Not good... RacerPaul - Oversteer or Understeer is not good, thats why all of the GT cars try to kerb both attributes with careful setup of their cars. If drift was so fast, they'd be using it in the FIA GT series which they don't. They grip and grip hard, depending on driver preference their cars can be set with hints of oversteer or understeer, but I can still you right now, most want neutral, they don't want either of the others to pop up. Again, using Initial D as a point of reference is weak. If you never been to the Touge and watched it before, then don't talk about it. The races on there that don't specify it as a Drift Battle, they use a mix of Grip and Drift BUT majority is Grip. Anyway quit arguing for Drift because this is FF, FF don't drift to be fast... FF like MR cars need smooth driving to extract the best times and speeds out of them. |
| Posted by: RacerPaul Apr 18 2007, 07:05 PM | ||||
I was using drifting as support that oversteer can be easily corrected. Grip is always better then drift that is just common sense.
I never said drift was faster then grip. No, way in hell is drifting faster then driving grip. Your just wasting your tires trying to race using drift. Drifting is just for show most of the time and like the Drift King said "I drift not because it is a quicker way around a corner, but it is the most exciting way." Your right that a driver would want a balance between oversteer and understeer, but if they were to choose one over the other it is most likely oversteer. Is there anyway to multi quote without doing it manually? |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 18 2007, 08:19 PM | ||
See, here's the difference though. Drifting is induced oversteer, i.e. the driver initiates the oversteer and controls it throughout the corner. This is very different from snap oversteer, which happens as a result of a mistake in weight shifting. Yes, a seasoned race veteran can recover from this mistake. However, I think it's farfetched to stay it's easily corrected, let alone more easily corrected than understeer. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 18 2007, 08:38 PM | ||
The thing is, a driver would never choose between oversteer and understeer. They would choose between an oversteer or understeer bias, but only to complement their style and/or strategy to the purpose of neutral handling in the end. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 18 2007, 10:17 PM | ||
Careful where you step, Nomake. Whos defeating physics? They may not be powered by an engine, but its more then possible to cause the rear tires to slide before the fronts do- which is all you need for oversteer. You will not be able to use throttle-steer in a ff car to make use of oversteer, which obviously means you cant oversteer indefinately, but you can however use momentum to induce the oversteer, and enough of it to last around most of the corners youll come across. You may want to look a little more into those physics that are at play, before you start claiming theyre being broken. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 18 2007, 10:23 PM | ||
That's exactly what he said. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 19 2007, 04:17 AM |
| No, not really. He said you can cause oversteer in an FF by jerking in or with lift off, etc- in response to what i had to say about how an FF can handle when set up properly. Please re-read that "but" he put at the end of his post. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 19 2007, 05:20 AM | ||
And how is he wrong with the "but"? You brought up the traction circle first in this thread. In the middle of a corner, the front tires are handling both the power and the steering of the car. Thus this statement is perfectly correct: "Apply power while cornering and you use up traction faster than a RWD car." FFs have an understeering tendency on the exit due to the drivetrain - it's a fact. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 19 2007, 06:09 AM |
| Don't fight over what I said, guys. Totally not worth it. Sideways has a good point, one which I only weakly made. You can get one to oversteer prior to understeer. All I was saying is that it doesn't mean that the drivetrain won't understeer. It just means it'll oversteer first. Which may or may not be a good thing. As Sideways said, you can't throttle-steer a FWD car. If it oversteers, you have no control over the speed of the rear tires (save locking them with the parking brake). On the other hand, if the car is set up to react neutrally, I would guess that it would understeer first. And you can control the speed of the front tires pretty easily, right? I still think that it would be more beneficial in a track situation to have understeer precede oversteer for a FWD vehicle. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 19 2007, 07:29 AM | ||
Even on a circuit this can be a serious issue : the tail going out could hit another car, or it could be in front and prevent you from accelerating to bring the tail back. And of course, if it happen when the engine is already at it's limit, you may not have enough power left to bring the tail under control. It's much better when it happen because you initiated it than if it happend on it's own due to inertia or unforseen weightshift... |
| Posted by: pwincezs Apr 20 2007, 03:39 AM |
| I never even heard/knew of the whole ff and fr layout until I saw this thread, so I went to google it up and also google up my car and found out it's an FF (oh yeah is there a way to know what layout a car is without having to check it up on net or something) so let me get this straight; FF layout (front wheel drive layout) is where the engine and the drive wheels are at the front of the vehicle. whereas; FR layout (rear wheel drive) is where the engine is in front and drive wheels at the rear. Thats simple enough for me to understand but I don't get what they mean by drivewheels. Drivewheels:"wheel an automotive vehicle that receives power from the powertrain, and provides the final driving force for a vehicle." I still dont get it. and what do they mean by power train? |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 20 2007, 03:47 AM |
| Many many many FF vehicles handle very neautraly is not slightly towards over on the entry of corners, at least when driven properly. Theyre typicaly fairly light and compact, and on the entry you (hopefully) arent applying power, so the 2 tires can do nothing but direct their attention towards turning in, maybe deal with a little braking if trail braking is used. Sabishii, im going to be blunt. Youre coming across as ignorant. Will the front tires start to use up all their traction and probably slide if you floor it too much? Yes, easily. Does this mean the car will start to plow and understeer? No. When set up or prompted to do so (The lfb technique i mentioned before is a great example), the rears can slide -more- then the front tires are currenlty- The car will wash out wide and its line will naturally be pulled out, but the car can maintain an oversteering state. The situation is similar to a drifter whos started to slide too quickly through a corner and gets pulled out. Bear in mind this can only be maintained as long as theres enough rotational momentum on the car. Seriously, look a bit more into properly set up tracked FF vehicles. understeer isnt half as much of a problem as people would like to make it out to be. Slight over/under is a drivers preference, and both have been proven to work efficiently within limitations. Schumacher himself is well known for the oversteer he gets while driving and his odd oliptical line through corners. Many drivers of all drvetrains prefer to make the car oversteer slightly, its a comforting feeling to be able to go onto the throttle as you like within reason and maintain pointing at the exit. But Yes, FFs do have a tendency to understeer on the exit- they CAN however be set up to oversteer, or can be controlled by the driver to do so. Added: To pwincezs, thatd be correct. The other terms to pay attention to are Mr, Rr, and awd. MR is mid engine, rear wheel drive- RR is rear engine rear wheel drive, awd just refers to all wheel driven cars (which can have the engine up front, in the middle, or the rear). Theres a little more but ill keep on topic, PM me if youre curious please. |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 20 2007, 05:27 AM | ||||||
How am I coming across as ignorant when you won't acknowledge the traction circle... that you brought up in the thread in the first place! Anyways, you do realize the whole time I've been talking about the exit of the turn, right? As in the part of the turn where you're accelerating out of the apex. Please let me spell it out for you:
(You wouldn't be touching the brakes at all during this time, by the way) Now, let's read the statement again:
This does not mean that every time you take a turn in an FF you will understeer. Go grab your dictionary. Yes, "faster" is a word used to compare two things. So, back to the traction circle. In an FF when accelerating out of a turn - Front wheels: XX% turning + YY% acceleration. In a RWD - Front wheels: XX% turning, Rear wheels: YY% acceleration. Now, tell me again that I'm wrong that an FF will understeer faster than an RWD when accelerating during the exit of a turn. Edit: Oh, and I should add something before you pull the "never driven a properly set up FF vehicle before" out of your ass again. I drive a Mazdaspeed Protege, one of the best set-up FFs made. I autocross. I lift-off oversteer; in fact, I need to balance the throttle so the rears don't brake out. However, when I pass the apex cone I cannot lay down power like an RWD can. |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 20 2007, 08:09 AM | ||
RWD still suffer from turning and accelerating at the same time, some will over or understeer just as fast as an FF would... |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 20 2007, 08:21 AM | ||
Okay, that's true. What I mean to say is that in the situation you are given equal setups and equal anything else so there are no other extraneous variables, so that you can solely compare drivetrain to drivetrain. |
| Posted by: Mitsubooshi Apr 20 2007, 08:40 AM |
| How is this argument still going on? It seems like everyone here is saying the same damned thing to each other, yet somehow disagreeing. All anyone is saying is that front wheel drives can and will understeer if too much power is applied too early in the corner. No one is denying that with a proper setup and light car weight, front wheel drives can handle admirably. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 20 2007, 03:44 PM | ||||
Tell you what, point out where i wont achknowledge it. I cant comment much on the rest of your post, your ignorance is failing to let you see that (like pointed out above) im agreeing with most of it. The only thing im pointing out is they can be prompted to maintain a slight angle on exit when set up and driven to do so by the driver.
Care to go on about the modifications/changes made to your protege? |
| Posted by: sabishii Apr 20 2007, 06:17 PM | ||||
Oh, I'm so ignorant for not agreeing with you. Because I keep on saying that FFs will ALWAYS understeer. Isn't that right? That sounds right. Oh wait, "This does not mean that every time you take a turn in an FF you will understeer. Go grab your dictionary. Yes, "faster" is a word used to compare two things." Point out where in ANY of my posts that say that an FF can't oversteer on the exit and I'll give you $50. Every time, my point was that an FF has a greater tendency to understeer on the exit than an RWD. Every. Time.
Suspension tuned by Racing Beat that come stock with the car, that allows it to be rival the Integra Type R and the much more powerful 330i and WRX on D Stock autocross? |
| Posted by: Rayp Apr 21 2007, 03:51 AM | ||
And what would be "equal" setups? FF and FR are designed quite differently (from weight distribution to caster settings), giving them the same tires and suspension brand don't make them equal in any ways, it's not just the drivetrain that differ. Also, they can't be driven the same way either, many drivers find it difficult to adapt to another drivetrain. You will always be comparing apples and oranges there. |
| Posted by: Black_MKII Jun 16 2007, 10:14 AM |
| from my experince, FF are REALLY good in circuts and races,becuase they dont oversteer like FR's. |
| Posted by: tofujay Jul 10 2007, 05:03 AM | ||
yeah same here thats why im running an ff corolla at autocross its just like a fool proof digital camera... point and shoot.... hahaha but sometimes understeer happens to me but i think i can control or correct understeer better than oversteer |
| Posted by: Inygknok Jul 12 2007, 07:20 AM | ||
Since the chlidren are bickering, and have completely ignored you, I'll take a quick minute to explain your doubts. The "drive wheels" are the wheels to which power is transferred to. In a front wheel drive car, the front wheels are putting the power onto the ground. While in a rear wheel drive car, it's the rear wheels doing so. And for an AWD (All Wheel Drive)? Logic works! Yes, it's all 4 wheels putting down the power. Usually, the term used is "drivetrain", not "powertrain". It's just how the engine transfers power to the back wheels through the transmission, driveshaft, differential, and half shafts. If you want to know what all of those things are, just use howstuffworks.com |
| Posted by: jamsbong Sep 26 2007, 05:49 AM |
| I own a FWD and lets see what can I do with it. Well, it is very fuel efficient and spacious! the FWD layout usually means you get more power to the wheels and the compact design means for the same size car you'll always get more interior space. FWD are usually lightweight. Most new RWD cars today are heavy. So zipping around windy roads can be fun as well. Thats about it I guess. |
| Posted by: atlantian Mar 20 2008, 03:47 PM |
| well... FF's make great rally cars since they are good in mud and dirt... that's all i can think of... |
| Posted by: Rotisserie Mar 26 2008, 09:41 PM |
| many ppl mention the rally thing as an exception to the so called 'FF cant drift' dogma due to low traction conditions. thing is even with higher traction, the same dynamics apply except now you have more traction to utilize. this means you drive faster to get to traction limit level. |
| Posted by: NismoTime Mar 27 2008, 07:32 PM |
| No FF supercar exists, makes me think twice about using one for racing. |
| Posted by: Rotisserie Mar 27 2008, 08:19 PM |
| lol, you want them to make you one? |
| Posted by: NismoTime Mar 28 2008, 10:37 AM |
| hell yea!^ that would be super dope, like a really long V12 civic looking thing. |
| Posted by: sideways Mar 28 2008, 03:10 PM |
| How about mid engine v12 front wheel drive? |
| Posted by: Hachi_Roku Mar 28 2008, 08:09 PM |
| MF? That sound's REALLY messed up on its own. |
| Posted by: NismoTime Mar 29 2008, 04:53 AM |
| never know till you try right? Time to get on my photochopping skills, after I get out of this damn job of course. |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 2 2008, 08:29 AM | ||
How many supercars go rallying? Is that not racing? Is magic the reason why the "inferior" mk2 golf and renault 11 beat the tar out of more powerful rwd sierra cosworths in the 1987 rally championship (just to pick a year at random)? The F2 class of FWD rally cars regularly tussled with the Group A's (WRC spec) in the early nineties on tarmac. FWD's have very little mass in the tail, which means you can stop a slide/change direction far quicker than in any other drivetrain format. Pendulous mass can be a real b*tch in the twisties, and supercars tend to have that in abundance. It's what makes a FWD hugely confidence inspiring to push, which is part of the reason why they're driven so aggressively by professionals. A sorted FWD is not a boring ball of understeer, they can be just as exhilirating as any other platform. Another racing credential: BTCC/WTCC - The BMW's haven't just romped away from the FWD's every race, despite not being "hobbled" for their advantage (Andy's a damn fine driver though...). If you look way back into the history of touring car racing, this stands true; The Abarth 850TC/1000TCR used to do battle with the mini, never dominating due to its drivetrain. Way too many people jump to stupid conclusions about the ability of FWD's having never driven one designed for performance. America on the whole has missed most of the significant icons, and instead people use their experience of driving their mum's automatic corolla as a massive generalisation of a whole drivetrain (despite probably not being any good at driving that anyway). Most AWD's are boring as pants to drive. |
| Posted by: NismoTime Apr 2 2008, 02:35 PM |
| I wasnt thinking about racing around in the dirt, I was talking about course racing. |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 3 2008, 06:21 AM | ||
Self quote FTW. Just in case you don't understand, BTCC, WTCC, and ETCC are touring car championships run on "courses". By the way, i never said it was "racing around in the dirt" that FWD's were good at, they used to be most competative against the AWD's on dry tarmac. You drive on dry tarmac every now and then, right? |
| Posted by: NismoTime Apr 3 2008, 01:11 PM |
| You say having never driven one designed for performance. Well every "performance" FWD since the 70's and 80's, has allways been a jumped up econo car, Never coming even close to the performance of lets say 911's, corvettes, M series and so-on. My point is, the fwd platform wasnt created to be a racing platform, through the years though, technology has allowed the platform to be modified and perhaps pretty soon compete with top of the line "racing" cars, but as a base platform, it was to save money and to be an eaiser drive for people. Rear wheel drive (or, alternately, all-wheel drive) is still the preferred choice for high performance automobiles because very powerful front wheel drive cars tend to understeer, and the ability to fit a large engine in a front-wheel drive layout while maintaining good fore and aft weight distribution is limited. |
| Posted by: Cyrus430 Apr 3 2008, 05:23 PM |
| What about the GeeWhiz? That car can be quick with some packs of batteries as Top Gear showed lol... Put some off roads and watch it take out Gallardos |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 4 2008, 08:26 PM | ||
You are aware that the 911 has one of the worst fundamental drivetrain layouts ever created, right? That for decades it was merely a trumped up beetle? And that only by stuffing it to the gills with electronics and honing the bejesus out of it actually got it to a point where it wasn't trying to kill you at every bend. The 911's history matches your opinion of FWD's (which were actually competitive from day one, winning isn't a new thing). Also, what do you mean by never coming close to the performance of a 911? Porsches get hosed by fwd's in rallying all the time. As did M3's, and the 'vettes never bothered showing up to the party. What you're getting wrong here is equating performance to power. If something wins a race it would perform well, which makes those very fast FWD's performance cars regardless of their origins. Power and acceleration are only a small part of the package. The Evo/WRX is a trumped up econobox. The 911 was a trumped up beetle. |
| Posted by: The Stig Apr 4 2008, 11:50 PM | ||
This man is speaking the truth. I've seen a 911 with the license plate 'UberVW' |
| Posted by: Cyrus430 Apr 5 2008, 11:17 AM |
It is a jumped up Beetle... but what is his point? I'm missing it... Is he trying to say it sucks because of that?  |
| Posted by: NismoTime Apr 5 2008, 02:17 PM |
| no hes trying to say its like the econo fwd cars im talking about, but it isnt, now is it? we all know porsche 911's have steered a long way away from the beetle, no longer sharing much if anything. My point is that fwd's can do what needs to be done but their design limits them in high power output. You might think im against ff's im not, I like alot of them, im a big fan of the CRX and the maxima, I just wouldnt use an integra for example to be a full flegged racing car, its only my opinion, some of you wont aggree and thats fine. |
| Posted by: Cyrus430 Apr 5 2008, 06:04 PM |
| I get you... the only basic thing 911's have in common are the RR design nowadays right?... Anywho... although I DO agree FF's are limited in "supercar land" they ARE good cars... for what they're made for... |
| Posted by: Cubits Apr 5 2008, 08:15 PM |
| FWD's are limited in deploying large amounts of power, but they are more agile than other platforms because their masses are centred around their axis of rotation. 911's can handle power, but their archaic roots means they can't start or stop rotating as easily as any other platform. You're picking on one flaw of the FWD platform, which is no more detrimental than the flaws of other platforms. Besides, an integra would make a fine full on racing car, for racing against other similarly powered cars. Likewise, a supercar would have it's ass handed to it on most circuits by a 110hp formula ford. There's no use comparing apples to oranges. |
| Posted by: Cyrus430 Apr 6 2008, 01:56 AM |
| "An Integra would make a fine full racing car, for racing against other similarly powered cars." I DO agree an Integra, like any other car has potential and can be MADE into a race machine... but is it worth it? |
| Posted by: EA99 Apr 6 2008, 03:03 AM |
| ^ Yes, an ITR is a fooking awesome base for a race car I myself want to trade in my AW11 for something light and new, was thinking swift sport, but still a bit underpowered |
| Posted by: Ditto_MK3Supra Apr 6 2008, 08:28 AM |
| Nismo, you're right about a few things but comparing an FF to a Super Car or a GT is, with all due respect, retarded. These cars are in entirely different classes and most FF cars that people consider racing, no wait, all FF cars that people seriously consider racing or do race, fall more into the tuning category.(i'm sure you already knew this but I am pointing it out anyway) And yes FF cars do tend to understeer. And as a general rule of thumb tuning an FF car to anything over 300bhp is going to give you really bad understeer. You'd need to have extremely stiff suspension in the rear and plenty of grip up front to compensate. FFs can do this https://youtube.com/watch?v=kOASjjpRnXk and https://youtube.com/watch?v=3nPV4JKRnSs I mean sure keiichi is driving and that counts for something but still FF cars are very capable in racing. |
| Posted by: Cyrus430 Apr 6 2008, 09:48 AM |
| IMO racing is one thing... supercar is another. I ask you guys the question, why is it more difficult for an FF to be a supercar? Weight distribution? |