RWD vs (FWD vs AWD) in a spirited daily driver

[rationull]

First of all this is not intended to be a post that debates the merits in absolute terms between FWD, RWD, and AWD cars because that's been hashed out enough (here and elsewhere) and I think we all know where we stand on that individually

That said, my ideal realistic dream car would be a RWD wagon or 3 door hatch in the 2800-3300 lb range with 250-300 hp going through a 5 or 6 speed manual transmission for $22-$28k MSRP. There are cars that come close -- the new BMW 328 wagon fits more closely than anything else I know of but is over on price (until there are 1-2 year old used ones out there at least) and may or may not be problematic long term. I'd really love to buy a 2011 Mustang GT but due to recent change in circumstance if I were going to take the plunge on a faster, sportier car than what I have now, I'd be seriously tempted to go with a wagon or hatchback.

There are plenty of hot hatches and wagons out there, so that's great. Unfortunately, especially when taking price into account, the main characteristic of my ideal dream car that probably has to be sacrificed is a RWD drive train. There are FWD cars that run the gamut (e.g. the GTI on the "nicer" side and the Mazdaspeed 3 on the faster, more raw side) and there are AWD cars like the WRX, but to get a RWD wagon you really have to venture into the luxury territory right now.

I know RWD vehicles tend to have advantages in terms of cornering neutrality and the ability to steer with the throttle (even if that's subtle and muted by chassis tuning). My previous daily driver was a RWD car and while it was not really any faster than my current (FWD) car I do miss its cornering ability. So I'm wondering: Does a good AWD system like Subaru's provide some of the some driving fun advantages that a RWD setup can, or does it give pretty much the same understeering feeling that a FWD car has, just with better traction? My take is that I'd rather not have the complexity of an AWD system in my climate all other things being equal, but I would consider it a decent compromise if it contributed to a more entertaining drive.

Now, I'm not really serious about this yet and haven't driven any of these cars so this is really just a discussion topic. Obviously the real answer is to drive and compare individual vehicles -- but I'm interested in others' opinions.

 

[getnpsi]

1970s/1980s corolla wagon with a performance rebuild. You just saved about 20k. Being in California you can still find them all day long posted on craigslist, and they aren't too popular with the "jdm crowd" YET. A few more magazine layouts and the price will jump.

At the same time if you can afford a BMW you can also afford a second vehicle to cover all "needs."

 

[rationull]

Thanks, but that really doesn't answer the question.

 

[pidster]

Can't AWD systems generally be turned off? I'm asking here as I don't know, I'm only familiar with "locked" 4x4 systems. I'm just thinking that an AWD system, that can be shut off leaving you with RWD would be the ideal drive setup for any condition. Don't know if that's available or not.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: pidster
Can't AWD systems generally be turned off?

On a typical modern day family sedan, no.

 

[d00df00d]

AWD cars can be set up to be like FWD cars, but with better traction; or they can be set up to be like RWD cars, but with better traction and a few faults.

If I had to choose between a RWD car and an AWD car for a Cali climate, I would just test drive them both. The benefits of AWD will be meaningless on public roads, so the total experience is what will make the difference, and that could go either way.

By the way, I share your lamentation that there are no good RWD wagons in the sub-BMW price range on the US market. Something like the old Nissan Stagea (basically a Skyline wagon) would be great.

 

[fdcg27]

FWD?
A lot depends upon the car, as you have noted.
The earlier Civics we had were quite sporty to drive, with eager revving, if not powerful, engines, and tossable manners.
Good turn in, minimal understeer.
These were very light cars, with direct-feeling rod shifters, and light 1.5 liter engines.
The Accords we currently have will corner plenty well, and are much faster than the Civics were, but have noticeably more understeer, don't really feel tossable, have rougher running larger displacement engines, weigh a good thousand pounds more, and have cable shifters.
Big difference, although either Accord can cover any distance on any road much faster than could any of our old Civics.
You just won't have as much fun in the process.
AWD?
Well, our not at all sport oriented Forester has better turn in and less understeer than either Accord.
I can see where a more sport oriented Subie would be a lot of fun.
RWD?
I always prefered the RWD cars we had, from my old MGB, through a few old Benzes to our current summer toy BMW.
Better feel under any set of conditions, and not difficult in slick conditions.
Any drive setup can be entertaining and engaging to drive.
It depends more upon the car in question than which set of wheels take the drive.

 

[JOD]

I had an AWD wagon putting out >300HP that I drove both FWD and AWD for an extended period of time. I broke the bevel gear in my V70R and while is was being re-build, I drove it in FWD for over a year.

In this car at least, the AWD cut down on oversteer dramatically. However, it came at a price. The car just felt sluggish (at least considering it's HP/weight ratio).

I had the bevel gear sitting on my work bench for about 6 months, and only re-installed it when I sold the car. I guess that sums up how I felt about AWD... Yeah, it cut down on oversteer, but overall the car felt quicker and just seemed more nimble running FWD.

So, if you're looking for a RWD, go for RWD. And yeah, the E91 is about the only game in town. A well-maintained E46 wagon would be another option, but obviously you're looking at an older car.

 

[SLCraig]

JOD, I have driven a 2007 V70R. That is an awesome car. I love the interior on it as well.
Excellent wagon!!!!

 

[rpn453]

The C6 Corvettes I drove at Bondurant had more understeer than my Mazda3. They used a stock chassis setup, as required by GM. I won't deny that RWD is inherently better for performance driving though. Transferring the weight off the drive wheels during acceleration is not ideal for exiting corners!

I'd love to have a fully mechanical AWD system on my Mazda3. I'd definitely pay an extra $3000 and take a 10% fuel economy hit and 200 lb weight penalty for that. But that's because I drive on slippery roads five months of the year. If not for that, I'd rather just have it FWD with better control arm bushings and a limited slip differential to keep my car lighter, cheaper, and more fuel efficient. Add some significant power though, and I'd prefer AWD to FWD even in summer.

While I wouldn't want a RWD Mazda3 in my climate, it would be my preferred option in a winter-free climate, provided the change to RWD also included better weight distribution. However, our roads are icy much of the time in winter, and I wouldn't want to have to avoid cruise control for the long drives on slippery highways. So RWD is out.

If cost and expenses were a non-issue, I'd prefer AWD for a daily driver in any climate. It's a far more forgiving configuration for the power level I'd have in that situation!

 

[SteveSRT8]

Too many penalties go with AWD for my taste. But it has unquestionable advantages if correctly set up. But that is critical, and rarely done right for handling.

I'm much more interested in weight distribution and polar moment of inertia as these affect the dynamics I use most in a high performance automobile.

Seems as though many manufacturers ignore these traits in an awd car, and just figure with enough technology they can ignore physics!

 

[rslifkin]

If you enjoy pushing it in the corners, there's no substitute for RWD. Plus, RWD vehicles have better weight balance, in most cases. I personally can't stand FWD, and AWD, while nice for "go traction" in the snow, it's just "ok" otherwise, and nowhere near as much fun as RWD.

My friends give me [censored] for leaving my Jeep in 2wd in snow up until I actually need 4wd for traction, as I prefer the cornering feel, and have more control of where the rear end goes when getting hit by one of those Rochester wind gusts mid-corner.

 

[IndyIan]

For a DD on paved public roads, I don't think AWD really adds anything over FWD. I guess in the 200+hp range and low speed corners its easy to light up the front tires with FWD. But an AWD car will just understeer while accelerating faster around the same corner.
If you watch the Solodriver's videos in the racing forums, if someone told you it was a FWD car you would probably believe them.
The only exceptions maybe the user adjustable centre diffs on the STi and Evo, but you would have to try them.

Also you can setup a fwd car to be sensitive to throttle inputs pretty cheaply. A bigger rear sway bar and and alignment.

Maybe way off of what you want, but I test drove an 03 pathfinder, with a 255hp VQ35 and a very close ratio 5 spd manual. It was very fun to drive as is for an SUV atleast, and maybe with some lower profile tires the handling would sharpen up. If my Tracker burned up today I would get one of these in a second...

 

[saaber1]

Originally Posted By: rationull
Obviously the real answer is to drive and compare individual vehicles...

Rationull, you are already on the right track IMO. If I were you, I would define which cars fit your needs in terms of versatility (such as you have already done: wagon, hatch, etc.) and then drive prospects to see how much of a "smile factor" they offer. By smile factor I mean does it make you smile when you drive it for normal everyday use. Some cars are great on paper but don't excite that much in real life. Some cars make you smile every time you drive them.

In terms of drivetrain, I recently faced a similar quandry. Here are my thoughts for what they are worth. I went from a Boxster S which is RWD and beautifully balanced (at least below 120mph, the nose rises too much and feels unstable above 120mph to me). I then pre-ordered an AWD R32. After driving the R32 I didn't like it as much as I thought I would. I then drove the FWD GTI and it was easily as fun to drive as the Boxster.

The "smile factor" varies with each person. The bottom line is how does the car make you feel everyday. The GTI felt alive and seemed to be always pushing you to go faster and faster compared to the R32 which was a very nice, heavy car. An apt comparison I read was that the GTI was like a samurai sword while the R32 was like a bat with nails in it. For me the Boxster is a better track car no doubt but as an everyday car I much prefer the GTI. I would rate the smile factor for the boxster and GTI the same, but the GTI is much more usable as a daily driver.

So to be honest FWD/RWD/AWD is just part of the makeup of a specific car. It's specific character determines the "smile factor" and teh smile factor may be available in AWD or RWD or FWD. And as you said the only way to tell the smile factor for you personally is to go out and drive them. I would suggest that whatever you drive to drive it hard to get a real feel for it.

The new golf R (AWD 2.0T) is coming out and it may be worth driving but will probably be around $33k I would guess. The press in Europe ravs about it but a person would have to drive it to see what it feels like.

 

[Quattro Pete]

saaber1, is your GTI chipped? If you'd rather not answer on the forum, you can PM me. I'm interested in your experiences with it.

 

[rationull]

Thanks for all the input, I think that pretty much answers my question. While I would still prefer RWD all other things being equal, saaber1, the example you provided of your experience with the Boxster and the GTI illustrates the point very well for me. It is indeed the "smile factor" I'm looking for, not actual on track performance or pure performance numbers.

In fact, if I were to get a FWD hatch, the GTI would be near the top of the list. I like its overall package more than that of the MS3 for instance (again I say this without having driven either yet), although I am a little "afraid" of it due to the direct injection related problems. For what it's worth, I've been following your DI related posts with interest and am looking forward to finding out if the newer GTI engines are still as susceptible to deposits as the previous generation.

 

[Spazdog]

RWD 3-door wagon in that weight range:

It comes in well short on horsepower and you could run a GTi or Mazdaspeed 3 on 3 cylinders and destroy it on any road course.

Then there's the 318ti. I honestly like these cars but even Bimmerphiles question the rear suspension set-up. And it'll require a similar year M3 engine swap to get to the 250-300hp range.

Or you can wait on the 1-series hatchback to make it to North America. Or not. Seems like everytime I read that it is coming, I read something else that says it's not.

Then there's the CTS wagon. No manual tranny, a little on the porky side, D-pillars intrude on rearward visibility, and it's too pricey for what it is but it is one beautiful little wagon.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: saaber1
[I then pre-ordered an AWD R32. After driving the R32 I didn't like it as much as I thought I would. I then drove the FWD GTI and it was easily as fun to drive as the Boxster.



This really hits the nail on the head and echos my experience with the V70R, except that I really liked the R as is...until I broke the bevel gear and turned it into basically a really boosted T5...

The AWD cut down on oversteer, gave great traction driving it hard in the rain and made the car really predictable, but turning it into FWD made it feel about 1,000 lbs lighter for some reason. After that, it was just more fun to drive.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: rslifkin
My friends give me [censored] for leaving my Jeep in 2wd in snow up until I actually need 4wd for traction, as I prefer the cornering feel, and have more control of where the rear end goes when getting hit by one of those Rochester wind gusts mid-corner.


I don't understand how RWD could improve control in that situation. I think 4WD/AWD offers far more control when traction is limited, and I love having it in snow. You can get oversteer anytime you want by being aggressive with wheel spin, and all you have to do is stay on the throttle and the back end will follow the front whenever you feel like straightening out. Every turn is an easily controlled four wheel drift!

 

[saaber1]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
saaber1, is your GTI chipped? If you'd rather not answer on the forum, you can PM me. I'm interested in your experiences with it.

I briefly ran a chip on the car. They are effective. My Peak boost went from roughly 12-13psi (stock) to 21-23 PSI (92 octane program). The reason I removed it is it went into anti-lock shutdown on the freeway. What a nightmare experience that was. That one factor made the chip not worth it to me.

So I have been running stock and actually the car spins the tires in first, second, and a bit in third so I'm not sure what more power will buy you for daily driving. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more power, especially when it can be had as cheap as a chip, but the car is really fun in stock form. Certainly when you pass, the chip gave more umph to squirt around cars. MPG did seem to improve slightly also but I didn't actually log it so can't say for sure. Others have reported mpg gains with a chip.

This is where the golf R (AWD) becomes intriguing as the wheel spin element goes away. So gains from chipping may be more usable.? Or does the AWD cost a lot of the immediacy (is that a word?) in the power delivery similar to that of the Volvo R experience posted above?

I did notice a huge difference in either power or turbo spool up based on what oil you are using. Even my wife asked me "what did you do to the car?" after I changed the oil and she is not very sensitive to such things. This is one car that really responds to different oil types. I can't say I have ever experienced that in any other car. Just typical differences such as noise reduction or something in other cars.