AG dRizZe:

UnrealChaos321:

Basically proves yalls point 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZlGMX8G3B4

2010 Nissan GT-R

485 hp / 434 tq

3814 lbs

 

2010 Corvette ZR-1

638 hp / 604 tq

3333 lbs

 **Specs were gathered at www.leftlanenews.com

Seriously? What did you think was going to happen? The AWD is giving up 153 hp, 170 ft lbs of torque and it weighs 481 lbs more!!

The intelligence in this thread is mind boggling.....

 

Not to mention that they didn't get the full abilities out of the GTR. Owner of this GTR forum i go to ran a 1/4 mile time of 11.34 @ 122.3.

 

Though i highly doubt that any of those motor trend guys got the full ability out of any of those cars.

---

MOJO Factory Photographer || Team Jaguar FTW || #1252

UnrealChaos321:

Basically proves yalls point 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZlGMX8G3B4

 

car that has more hp and less weight won, zomg didnt think that would happen

I believe Dan.  It's his game.  He should know.

AWD launches faster, RWD quickly makes up for it though. Re-read what the the gearhead from Chicago with the WRX posted. 

In stoplight races, a good AWD is hard to beat, however, at the strip, the power and weight transfer, after launch, of the RWD is hard to beat. Although, I would like to see an AWD, 540-Hemi-Charger.

Everyone needs to stop sounding all physicsy and go race.

---

"In a place where everybody thinks alike, there is never very much thinking going on"

An old American proverb (old for America)

speed7bump:

SigmaHyperion:

Trying to base reality off what you see on Top Gear... Errr.  My favorite show on the planet, but a LOT of what is said on the show is simply factual dead-wrong.  Watch their AWD launches, you can hear from listening to them that they weren't launched properly; revs were WAY too low.

Trying to base reality off what you see at your local track... Yeah, don't do that.  The world of drag-racing, and physics in general, revolves around so many variables between the cars and the drivers that what you see at any one or several tracks isn't gonna be representative of reality as a whole.  It'd be like saying Lambos are slow because 9 out of 10 that I see are being driven around town by some tool that doesn't take it within 10mph of the speed limit.

Looking to Top Fuel or other purely drag-prepped race series... A bit short-sighted.  Top Fuel drag cars are purpose-built from the ground up, to handle INSANE amounts of power in RWD form without the significant detriments that a road car would have -- namely traction.  With the ability to put HUGE amounts of traction on your rear tires, then AWD is a wasted effort of added weight, complexity, and drivetrain loss.  Street cars don't have the luxury of huge amounts of traction on their rear tires.  For them, physics takes over, weight goes rearward, coefficient of friction is exceeded, and every horsepower beyond that is essentially wasted.

AWD cars dont "bog down" on launch unless you frack something up and/or are saving your drive-train.  Because on most stock AWD cars, you've got 50/50 odds of either not having enough power to launch properly or putting so much power down you break something.  A really good launch is pretty difficult to do, only made more difficult by the fact that they're all controlled by computers thesedays.  Feather and you'll bog, dump the clutch and you'll either break something or, if the car is smart enough, it'll pull so much timing and/or adjust power delivery so much the car will bog.

AWD cars don't have some magical things in their drivetrain that makes power delivery slower.  The time it takes from the first cylinder firing to a wheel turning is exactly the same.  The only difference is how much power gets there.  BUT you're gonna give up 5-10% more power wasted in your drivetrain because of the added weight of the moving components.  That doesn't make you bog down, and it certainly doesn't make you slower off the line.  It DOES mean that, all else being equal, you're gonna be slower when you get to the end though.

All else being equal, identical cars (minus drivetrain), on identical tracks, with identical tires, the AWD car WILL get a faster 60' time if launched properly.  This is a matter of basic linear physics.  Your acceleration is just a measurement of your power and your tractive effort (assuming weight and other factors are equal).  It doesn't matter if a RWD car is putting more power to the ground if it's exceeding its ability to put it to the ground and actually move (i.e. spinning the tires).  The AWD car might be putting less to the ground, but it's wasting less of it by not spinning as much and having twice as many tires generating tractive effort, and more tractive effort equal more acceleration.  It starts off the line if properly launched with more tractive effort, therefore it WILL yield a faster launch.  That said, the reduced power at the wheels and weight detriment will, in very short order, put it at a loss.  As soon as the RWD car grips up, it's over.  When it can deliver it's full power to the ground without spinning tires, now it's got more tractive effort, and is quite a bit faster.

Taken to the extreme a Corolla could beat a 1500hp Supra off the line, if the Supra just stood there and did a standing burnout at the line -- i.e. no tractive effort compared to the crappy Corolla.  Is it going to stay in the lead for long?  Uh, no.

That's why a drag race is largely decided at the launch.  And since we're not going to have infinite control over our launch, I'm not surprised if what Dan says is true far more often than not.  Because without the ability to properly feather your launch and/or install a stalled automatic, a RWD can suck off the line.  If you can control your launch, you control your traction, you can theoretically beat an AWD car (or come damn close) off the line.  But without any control (which includes proper slicks), if the game is just gonna dump that clutch, you will lose out to the AWD every time in the 60' time.

has anyone read this?  i guess not, cuz people are still trying to argue

reposted to make sure people read this. It has basically summed up all of the common sense on this thread.

---

I'M KENNY POWERS, AND I'M VERY UPSET WITH THE WAY I'M ACTING RIGHT NOW!
I've got nothing inside me besides bad, horrible, sucky, baddiness. I even speak suckily - Christopher Titus

Chron0sZer0:

AG dRizZe:

UnrealChaos321:

Basically proves yalls point 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZlGMX8G3B4

2010 Nissan GT-R

485 hp / 434 tq

3814 lbs

 

2010 Corvette ZR-1

638 hp / 604 tq

3333 lbs

 **Specs were gathered at www.leftlanenews.com

Seriously? What did you think was going to happen? The AWD is giving up 153 hp, 170 ft lbs of torque and it weighs 481 lbs more!!

The intelligence in this thread is mind boggling.....

 

Not to mention that they didn't get the full abilities out of the GTR. Owner of this GTR forum i go to ran a 1/4 mile time of 11.34 @ 122.3.

 

Though i highly doubt that any of those motor trend guys got the full ability out of any of those cars.

But the video still proves that AWD is better off the line. The first few meters the GT-R is in the lead despite having a worse power to weight ratio.

---

Don't compare real life to FM3.

Real life racing has tons of regulations and it's all about making the cars as good as possible within them.

In FM3 cars are regulated by the PI which is determined by a perfect lap around a test track (not ingame).

UnrealChaos321:

Basically proves yalls point 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZlGMX8G3B4

yeah this shows that the 4wd , even with a ton less hp gets a better start.

and thats what this thread was all about , 4wd's advantage on the 1/8 mile .

---

One thing no one has mentioned so far is that there will be no drag specific parts. This means (among other things) no wheelie bars. No wheelie bars tells me there will not be anywhere close to the amount of grip needed to lift the front end of the car. If this is the case, AWD will always launch better.

Well, I mentioned all drag-specific parts in the very last sentence of that long post, I wrote, but yes, you're exactly right. 

In addition, you don't have to worry about your AWD drivetrain blowing to hell if you dump the clutch either, or any of the various ECU-driven protections that exist in modern cars to prevent damage to the drivetrain.

As a result, iin regards to launching, AWD gets big benefits in-game while RWD gets big detriments.

Polish Person:

In an AWD car, the power goes from a latitudinal engine

You make it sound like all AWD cars have transverse engines, which is not the case. For example the Audi Quattro, A4 and A6 Quattro as well as the Ford Escort RS Cosworth have longitudinal engines.

Polish Person:

In an AWD car, the power goes from a latitudinal engine

ignorance + anonymity = posts like that

---

enigma243: "You are, as a group, immature, petty, childish, brash, aggressive and downright unpleasant."

Scattered3:

Hagans28, what did they run?

 

 With the Laser(mine) I got a 9.3@82 2.3-60'

The Talon(Bros) He got 8.3@85 1.9-60'

All 1/8th mile of course.

---

SCR0NE:

UnrealChaos321:

Basically proves yalls point 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZlGMX8G3B4

yeah this shows that the 4wd , even with a ton less hp gets a better start.

and thats what this thread was all about , 4wd's advantage on the 1/8 mile .

 

+1000000

 

And did I not hear Dan mention there would be leaderboards for each drive type (AWD/FWD/RWD)?? which allows much better comparison..

 

Ty4on:

I just thought of something! If RWD is better than AWD, why do cars then have brakes on all four wheels and not just the front tires?

Brake wear would be astronomically quick, less stopping power, then there the whole if you loss braking power you dont have any back up. 

cardude427:

Ty4on:

I just thought of something! If RWD is better than AWD, why do cars then have brakes on all four wheels and not just the front tires?

Brake wear would be astronomically quick, less stopping power, then there the whole if you loss braking power you dont have any back up. 

Almost all cars do 85-95% of their braking effort with the front wheels anyway, so your brakes wouldn't wear much quicker or your performance change much if you just had front brakes.  But, yes, you'd have no backup in case of front-brake failure (though it'd be extremely difficult for just your fronts to fail as they all share the same braking system).  The main reason is because you get full symmetrical braking force that way, without symmetrical application of brakes your car would get squirrelly when braking.  And because any amount of force more is still more, and when you're slamming the brakes every tiny bit helps.

SigmaHyperion:

cardude427:

Ty4on:

I just thought of something! If RWD is better than AWD, why do cars then have brakes on all four wheels and not just the front tires?

Brake wear would be astronomically quick, less stopping power, then there the whole if you loss braking power you dont have any back up. 

Almost all cars do 85-95% of their braking effort with the front wheels anyway, so your brakes wouldn't wear much quicker or your performance change much if you just had front brakes.  But, yes, you'd have no backup in case of front-brake failure (though it'd be extremely difficult for just your fronts to fail as they all share the same braking system).  The main reason is because you get full symmetrical braking force that way, without symmetrical application of brakes your car would get squirrelly when braking.  And because any amount of force more is still more, and when you're slamming the brakes every tiny bit helps.

I'm pretty sure the number is more like 60-70%, but the point has still been proven: Brakes on all tires is better than on only two and since the same physics apply for acceleration AWD is better than RWD grip wise.

---

Don't compare real life to FM3.

Real life racing has tons of regulations and it's all about making the cars as good as possible within them.

In FM3 cars are regulated by the PI which is determined by a perfect lap around a test track (not ingame).

Scattered3:

This thread is funny. . . . Lol For all these people saying that AWD dominates the Drag Track. . . . Have any of you actually been to a Drag Track & seen the types of cars that run the quickest? Lol

Skyline: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81y1_Ht1pJg

EVO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYLCRuoMe74&feature=PlayList&p=49442A6C05299496&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=39

WRX: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dDJufvLuhw&feature=PlayList&p=116B85C5E087D11B&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=3

Once you're putting down insane amounts of power, it's easier to tub the rear and use a paint roller as rear tires than to keep messing around with AWD gearboxes/drivetrains.. but some people don't care and run AWD insanity anyway.

As for the top fuel debate... I don't know the rules, but I wouldn't be surprised if AWD is actually banned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5OIk1TDygE

Thats my GT against my friends new WRX. As you can see I pulled on him here because it was from a 40mph roll. From a stop on the street he always pulls ahead. We took them to the 1/8 mile track.My best time of the night was a 9.11 his best was 8.98. His 60ft time was always a 1.9-2.0. Mine was always 2.2. I was pulling back on him towards the end but his AWD was too much for me at that track. It also depends upon the track. At another track they sprayed down that good sticky stuff for me and I ran an 8.71. So alot depends on track too but in general an AWD vehicle will win in the 1/8.

---

SO Teeze:

 

As for the top fuel debate... I don't know the rules, but I wouldn't be surprised if AWD is actually banned.

lol, you are right, you don't know the rules.

Truth is, the Top Fuel RWD configuration is simply the most efficient way for a wheel driven car to go from 0-330mph in 4.5sec, to date, no other type of wheel driven car has ever done this inside or outside the NHRA. 

But, back in 1977  the quickest ever quarter mile elapsed time of 3.22 seconds at 396 mph was established by a rocket powered car.

---

IFCA Endurance series 2, 6, and 8 Champion
IFCA Stock Car series 1 Champion
GamingExtreme Challenge 5th
IFCA World Ranking 102nd

SO Teeze:

EVO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYLCRuoMe74&feature=PlayList&p=49442A6C05299496&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=39

WRX: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dDJufvLuhw&feature=PlayList&p=116B85C5E087D11B&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=3

Once you're putting down insane amounts of power, it's easier to tub the rear and use a paint roller as rear tires than to keep messing around with AWD gearboxes/drivetrains.. but some people don't care and run AWD insanity anyway.

As for the top fuel debate... I don't know the rules, but I wouldn't be surprised if AWD is actually banned.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks dude, you solved the thread.....

 That Evo is 1100hp AWD & ran 8.42 @168.7 MPH

That WRX is 768hp RWD & ran 7.795 @176.93 MPH

 But who even needs front wheels anyway....... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urh11C0pEvc ...... they're only for before & after the Race. LOL

---

GTDon2:

SO Teeze:

 

As for the top fuel debate... I don't know the rules, but I wouldn't be surprised if AWD is actually banned.

lol, you are right, you don't know the rules.

Truth is, the Top Fuel RWD configuration is simply the most efficient way for a wheel driven car to go from 0-330mph in 4.5sec, to date, no other type of wheel driven car has ever done this inside or outside the NHRA. 

But, back in 1977  the quickest ever quarter mile elapsed time of 3.22 seconds at 396 mph was established by a rocket powered car.

Ignorant question here:

Do rocket-powered cars have power going to the wheels or do they accelerate by the brute force of the rockets? 

---

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough"

-Mario Andretti