Because we all “obey” speed limits can we still be traveling too fast for conditions
You’re still missing my point…
If a person is driving too fast for conditions in a fwd vehicle…why is it NOT too fast for a rwd vehicle???
I’ve been following this thread since it’s inception and I think we’ve been missing a key point. If a car begins to under steer there is little a driver can do other than reduce power, but in contrast with an over steer you can manipulate the throttle to transfer weight to where it is needed as well as counter steer to keep the vehicle traveling in the direction you want.
I have owned 2 FWD and 2 RWD cars, and I have to say that I personally prefer RWD. I find the handling characteristics much more predictable and easier to deal with. That being said I have only once driven a car to it’s limits (my fault of course) It was a FWD 98 Sable and strangely enough the result was an over steer. I didn’t hit anything, but it was a combination of counter steering and throttle control that saved me. I shutter to think of the outcome if it had understeered.
IMHO, I think we should teach people more defensive driving and engineer in more oversteer than understeer. The complication is, I think, that drivers in general feel more comfortable with understeer.
I hope I didn’t upset anyone, just my opinion.
Can a better handling car, handle an EMERGENCY maneuver more safely than poorer handling car both traveling at the same speed ? Simple question. If you drive at 45 mph on the interstate you may eliminate more problems when the speed limit is 65mph…I’m sure you have equal problems with deer and not every collision was with a speeder. Too fast means too fast to everyone, but a loaded vehicle, a car pulling a trailer or traveling in snow w/o snow tires are all conditions that make too fast different for different vehicles. Do you agree ?
Certainly not me…
Can a better handling car, handle an EMERGENCY maneuver more safely than poorer handling car both traveling at the same speed ?
You’re still missing my point…
YES a better handling car CAN handle the EMERGENCY maneuver more safely…
The real question is…BY HOW MUCH…If two vehicles (one fwd and the other rwd) are traveling at a reasonable speed and an EMERGENCY SITUATION comes along that the drivers have to handle…is there going to be much of a difference between the fwd and the rwd vehicle…I CONTEND THAT WON’T BE. You won’t start seeing much of a difference until the cars are traveling at much higher speeds (i.e. well beyond legal driving limits).
MOST of my driving experience is with RWD vehicles…fwd wasn’t even available (except in some very few vehicles) when I learned to drive back in the 60’s. And some of the first fwd vehicles were NOT that very maneuverable. Cars like the Chevy Citation with it’s solid rear axle was extremely poor maneuvering fwd vehicle. But new fwd vehicles with 4-wheel independent suspension has made DRASTIC improvements and are as good as rwd vehicles unless driving to the EXTREME (i.e. WELL beyond speed limits and common sense).
A Sable weight was 2197lb on front 1183lb on rear with full tank gas and 190lb driver
I disagree, the best tires should still be on the drive wheels for traction, and in the case of FWD, braking and steering. More important is to practice – or take lessons – driving in adverse conditions. I do both. It is important to understand how your PARTICULAR vehicle reacts to snow, ice, mud, rain, gravel, asphalt, and concrete.
Good man,most “accidents” are crashes-Kevin
So a sable is 65/35 which falls under the definition of unstable according to your research. This was my dads car at the time and I don’t know the history of the tires as this incident was over 10 years ago. Do you think that one of the reasons it was an oversteer instead of an understeer could be related to the tires, or just the difference in weight. BTW it was on dry pavement, I was stupid and took a cloverleaf off-ramp too fast.
On a separate note my 93 Civic LOVED to understeer, especially in the snow. I did not care for this characteristic at all. I used to go to empty parking lots and e-brake it into an oversteer and it handled like a champ.
According to Wikipedia the Civic was 60/40. Would the fact that it was more even account for the different handling characteristics. I’m quite interested in this research. BTW my current vehicle is a 2002 s10, believe it or not one of the best handling vehicles I have ever owned (the 88 firebird was the best) except for it being more top heavy (surprisingly it is only 3 inches taller than a matrix.) It likes to Roll about the X-axis.
Mike…
The one feature that makes rwd preferable for me is their inherrant ruggedness compared to fwd and their lower cost of maintenance when stressed by towing, heavy loads and frequent acceleration…all reasons for police rwd.
My experience with fwd has always been very good…but I never expected much out of them like you for towing even their rated loads for safe interstate travel or even carrying rated 850 lbs lbs, which my 2wd Toyota truck could do safer and handle much better doing it.
Regards
Most pick ups are 60/40 and front wheel drives in this range have a fairly
low fatality rate. If you down load the graph above you will see it is ones with a
larger difference that have the most fatalities.Think back to the worst conditions on the road and try to remember which cars you see the most of.
Every tire company says put new tires on the rear to prevent oversteer. This is not that critical on a fairly balanced car.But when you take your car in for winter rotation do they check the weight ratio first.I never suggest tires without knowing the ratio.
The one feature that makes rwd preferable for me is their inherrant ruggedness compared to fwd and their lower cost of maintenance when stressed by towing, heavy loads and frequent acceleration…all reasons for police rwd.
I AGREE 100%…That is one reason I won’t buy a fwd SUV. I have 4wd 4runner on a full frame. When in 2-wheel mode it’s rwd. I do NOT like fwd for towing either. I’ve stated that on this site MANY times before. You have far more control towing with a rwd vehicle.
The other thing I have with your data is it’s not show a % of auto’s in accidents.
Let me give you and example.
Lets assume (right or wrong…it doesn’t matter) that Toyota makes a far more reliable vehicle then Fiat (Personally I think it does).
You data is like making this argument.
There are far less Fiats that need repairs every year then Toyota!!
(That statement is 100% true).
CONCLUSION:
Fiat makes a more reliable vehicle.
(The Conclusion is 100% wrong).
If the person making the conclusion only had the number of cars that were brought into shops for repairs then the ONLY conclusion he could make was that Fiat’s were more reliable then Toyota. But that doesn’t make the statement true. A lot more data is needed to make ANY conclusion.
That’s why insurance companies keep data on EVERYTHING. And why there are some very very sophisticated programs that analyze this data looking for trends. If there was ANY validity in fwd being any more dangerous to drive then a rwd vehicle in NORMAL driving conditions this would be reflected in insurance rates. Insurance companies will take advantage of every opportunity to raise rates.
The data is based on univertity studies where all variables are taken into account. So it is the number of fatalities per million REGISTERED cars.
If you want to look at insurance records see “how does your car rate” Insurance Bureau of Canada> When you see a switch from yellow to red on AB of a manufacturer of cars it is always when the next model iss lighter on the rear
Law enforcement depts. are going back to RWD for a reason. You can trace Detroit’s fall in sales ,going back to the mid 8o’s when FWD was introduced in all product lines. It killed Pontiac and Olds.The Holden platform came way too late.People shifted to BMW’s.I find FWD vehicles more labor intensive to repair.
FWD was introduced in many more vehicles as a wide spread reponse to the 70’s gas crisis. As a space saving package in a light efficient vehicle,fwd has the edge. That they handle as decently as they do with this natural imbalance, I feel is a testimony to the improved engineering.
With the advent of traction control, the advantage of fwd over rwd in initial traction, it’s only real advantage, has seen a resurgence of rwd cars where max power to the road and handling are more important than space saving and economy.
But, stability control has really helped fwd in emergency maneuvers to the point where lane changing speeds differ from rwd in only the top performing sports sedans. Both offer very good over all road manners with this soon to be mandated feature.Only with much higher demands in durability, power and load capacities is the rwd better. This is why ultimately, municipalities returned to rwd PD cars as the long term maintenance of fwd is greater. They are all exc, when used within their individual design parameters.
I think when more cars on the road have stability control, this perceived difference by some in accidents rate between fwd and rwd cars, will be insignificant, and more dependent on tires/conditions/mechanical failure and driver error…But the most efficient people haulers for families in relative safety will still be fwd, and the most functional vehicles where performance demands are greater overall, will be rwd.
I disagree with both of you. The best tires should be on all four wheels, and when any one of them shows even the hint of excessive wear, replace the lot of them.
Read Charles Farmers report on esc. You will see fwd with weight ratios over 64/36 actually increased fatality rates with esc. All new model car are now 63/37 or lower
Have enough studies included stability control which when more common place, may moderate some of fwd balance problems ?
Harvey - you’ve got all the data. Which is like you are holding all the cards in a poker hand. Can’t argue with stats. My experience is the most squirrely vehicle I’ve ever encountered is a full size SUV (my '01 Sequoia) basically a RWD (4WD but driving in 2WD at the time) likely close to 50/50 weight distribution. Wnen put in a curve too fast it was all I could do to get it back and that was likely aided by stability control. Top heavy SUV’s are the worst in my opinion. I’ve had much easier times in “unbalanced” FWD cars.
While I can’t argue your stats, I don’t think they are “gospel”. Excess speed is the issue whatever vehicle is being driven. Bad car designs don’t help but driver ignorance, arrogance, and error are greater contributors to accidents than balanced or unbalanced FWD or RWD cars.