PDA

View Full Version : Do we need another FWD V8?



Gripenfelter
12-04-2003, 02:35 PM
http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111832041_pv.jpg

http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111832060_pv.jpg

http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111831954_pv.jpg

http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111831973_pv.jpg

http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111831993_pv.jpg

http://x.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/11/18/WKA2003111832143_pv.jpg

2004 Bonneville GXP 260hp Northstar V8.

3g4me
12-04-2003, 02:47 PM
Why not. We live in Canada, where it snows. But if you dont like front wheel drive cars i have some good news for ya. By 2006 all caddys will be rwd.:rolleyes:

sputnik
12-04-2003, 02:59 PM
FWD isnt THAT much better in the snow... ive been driving RWD without any issues my entire life.

It's good to see that Pontiac finally figured out that the bodyside mouldings on their cars were ass-ugly.

kevie88
12-04-2003, 03:02 PM
Do we need another FWD car at all? haha

3g4me
12-04-2003, 03:23 PM
Originally posted by sputnik
FWD isnt THAT much better in the snow... ive been driving RWD without any issues my entire life.

It's good to see that Pontiac finally figured out that the bodyside mouldings on their cars were ass-ugly.


The only reason i think rwd cars suck in the winter is because i allways see someone in a beamer or camero or mustang stuck on ice trying to go up a hill that a front wheel drive old ass firefly can make it up.

Also i agree with your pontiac remark. It looks way better without the body mouldings.:thumbsup:

CarCat
12-04-2003, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by 3g4me

The only reason i think rwd cars suck in the winter is because i allways see someone in a beamer or camero or mustang stuck on ice trying to go up a hill that a front wheel drive old ass firefly can make it up.
Also i agree with your pontiac remark. It looks way better without the body mouldings.:thumbsup:

Sound like that is from the 80's or may be early 90's ... :D

3g4me
12-04-2003, 03:49 PM
Yea i guess they are making the rwd cars with snow in mind now. Ill actually check that out.:tongue:

4wheeldrift
12-04-2003, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by 3g4me



The only reason i think rwd cars suck in the winter is because i allways see someone in a beamer or camero or mustang stuck on ice trying to go up a hill that a front wheel drive old ass firefly can make it up. Thats because those people don't know how to drive, its got nothing to do with driveline layout.

hjr
12-05-2003, 05:32 PM
its generally to due with poor tire choice and poor driving. RWD isnt much worse than FWD in snow, its just that FWD is easier for the general public to deal with. As for a FWD v8, do we really need people who think ponitac is cool torque steering into us? Can you imagine? its probably close to uncontrolable in that situation...

littledan
12-05-2003, 05:37 PM
pontiac = sucks

4wheeldrift
12-05-2003, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by hjr
its generally to due with poor tire choice and poor driving. RWD isnt much worse than FWD in snow, its just that FWD is easier for the general public to deal with. As for a FWD v8, do we really need people who think ponitac is cool torque steering into us? Can you imagine? its probably close to uncontrolable in that situation... Assuming pontiac is using the same shit trannys they have in the past. If they actually design one properly, with equal length half shafts then torque steer won't be a problem ;) If they can tune the torque steer out of a saab, they can sure as hell do it to a pontiac.

04blackMAX
12-05-2003, 06:09 PM
wow.....still looks soo cheap inside

Aleks
12-05-2003, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by 04blackMAX
wow.....still looks soo cheap inside

I don't understand why they can't seem to do anything about their nasty interiors.

DeSi
12-05-2003, 08:13 PM
yeah, i think ill prolly kill myself in that

LamE
12-06-2003, 12:51 PM
Ugly ass piece of shit. They'll never improve....

ZorroAMG
12-06-2003, 03:25 PM
Nasty interior, and the drivng of these cars feel the same from the Cavalier/Sunfire all the way up the range. The cars are BORING to drive and even more boring to look at...:zzz:

T5_X
12-06-2003, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Assuming pontiac is using the same shit trannys they have in the past. If they actually design one properly, with equal length half shafts then torque steer won't be a problem ;) If they can tune the torque steer out of a saab, they can sure as hell do it to a pontiac.

Do you know how they engineered the tq steer out of the SAAB? I believe it was slight suspension tuning and electronic power limiting.
Equal length half-shafts hardly help out at all. You'll still have a huge difference in power delivery between wheels if the diff is offset to one side.

And yes, fuck you Pontiac. Kia deserves the "built for drivers" slogan more than you :guns:

4wheeldrift
12-07-2003, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by T5_X


Do you know how they engineered the tq steer out of the SAAB? I believe it was slight suspension tuning and electronic power limiting.My bad, it was done by revising suspension geometry and relocating the steering rack.


Originally posted by T5_X

Equal length half-shafts hardly help out at all. You'll still have a huge difference in power delivery between wheels if the diff is offset to one side. Equal length half shafts do help because you generally don't get torque steer from a car with equal length half-shafts unless one of the wheels starts to slip. Because the distances are identical from the diff to the wheel, the force transmitted is likewise equal. It is not really possible to have equal length half shafts if the diff is offset to one side or the other (they could be equal length, but you would need a smaller prop shaft on one side or the other to actually transmit any power to one wheel).

That being said, its more than possible to tune the torque steer out of a front wheel drive with unequal length half shafts, if the engineers put their minds to it.

benyl
12-07-2003, 05:03 AM
There are many cars that need to work out torque steer. Nissan has two that I can think of.

That car actually looks good on the outside... not so nice on the inside.

GTS Jeff
12-07-2003, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by altima


I don't understand why they can't seem to do anything about their nasty interiors.

its a pontiac trademark

Originally posted by T5_X


Do you know how they engineered the tq steer out of the SAAB? I believe it was slight suspension tuning and electronic power limiting.

i think thats how nissan tried to deal with tq steer in their newer fwd cars. it sucks tho, cuz the steering feels totally different when u are on the gas.

T5_X
12-07-2003, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
My bad, it was done by revising suspension geometry and relocating the steering rack.

Equal length half shafts do help because you generally don't get torque steer from a car with equal length half-shafts unless one of the wheels starts to slip. Because the distances are identical from the diff to the wheel, the force transmitted is likewise equal. It is not really possible to have equal length half shafts if the diff is offset to one side or the other (they could be equal length, but you would need a smaller prop shaft on one side or the other to actually transmit any power to one wheel).

That being said, its more than possible to tune the torque steer out of a front wheel drive with unequal length half shafts, if the engineers put their minds to it.

I don't believe there's any way to get a diff that isn't offset to one side in the typical transverse engine layout.... unless its a V4... probably gets pretty close on a V6 or I3 too. Whenever you hear of front drive cars having equal half-shafts, as you mentioned there's a smaller prop or intermediate shaft that will be driving one outer half-shaft and not the other. See fig 1. This is the layout they put on both my Volvo and my Shelby and both have pronounced torque steer... they've probably had it on SAABs too, not sure.

Figure 1:

[]----X~~~----[]

[] = tire, ---- = outer half-shaft, X = diff, ~~~ = intermediate shaft

Anyway, I don't think its all that hard to engineer torque steer out. The Volvo S80 T6 has a hugely offset diff, and tq steer isn't too bad. And as for the SAAB 9-3 Viggen, check this out (Http://www.abbottracing.com/2003/tuning/9-3/chassis/9-3_vrk.htm)
Apparently this kit eliminated torque steer. Usually I'd pull out the :bullshit: on something like this, but I've seen enough testimonials to believe it.

T5_X
12-07-2003, 08:00 PM
Oh, another criticism of this car: I'd love to be a passenger when that northstar V8 ploughs the firewall into me in an offset crash :rolleyes:

4wheeldrift
12-07-2003, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by T5_X
Oh, another criticism of this car: I'd love to be a passenger when that northstar V8 ploughs the firewall into me in an offset crash :rolleyes: How is that different from any other car? I've seen the motor in a talon split the tranny tunnel in two in a hard accident. If a car hits something hard enough, that motor is almost guaranteed to be sharing space with you. The only cars that don't seem to have that problem is mercedes, where they designed the motor in their smaller cars to go down and underneath the car instead of through.

T5_X
12-07-2003, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
How is that different from any other car? I've seen the motor in a talon split the tranny tunnel in two in a hard accident. If a car hits something hard enough, that motor is almost guaranteed to be sharing space with you. The only cars that don't seem to have that problem is mercedes, where they designed the motor in their smaller cars to go down and underneath the car instead of through.

The width of the engine largely determines how much crumple space is available, it was one of the main reasons for Volvo going to a FWD layout, and the main reason they are continuously trying to "thin out" their engines. Think about it, a 6 inch wider engine will mean 6 inches less of crumple zone in a full forntal collision.

As for the motor designed to go downwards under the car? This idea has been around since the 50s. Volvo has always toyed with this, I know the old 740s were designed to do this, but the way the engine moves is largely dependent on the angle and severity of the collision, sometimes no matter what the design, your engine is gonna smack into the firewall. In fact, your subaru is probably one of the best for this (I believe the forester is the best) as the flat engine sits low and its designed to go under if in a frontal collision. In many situations though, there is still intrusion into the foot area.

4wheeldrift
12-07-2003, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by T5_X
The width of the engine largely determines how much crumple space is available, it was one of the main reasons for Volvo going to a FWD layout, and the main reason they are continuously trying to "thin out" their engines. Think about it, a 6 inch wider engine will mean 6 inches less of crumple zone in a full forntal collision. You'd be surprised what modern engineering can accomplish given the packaging constraints and amount of space available under the hood of a lot of modern cars. In many cases, a well built car even with a large displacement V6 or V8 the passengers inside can walk away with only minor injuries in a 40mph frontal collision. I've seen some pretty nasty pictures of track accidents (head ons into walls, etc) at some pretty harsh speeds and a lot of new cars hold up extremely well. Cars may be getting heavier, but the amount of safety stuff designed into them is a good trade off, IMO.

Looking at the Bonneville specifically, it looks like there is probably a good 8-10 inches of space before anything even touches the motor. Given what modern bumpers are like, you'd REALLY have to crank something to push on the motor hard enough to break all the mounts.


Originally posted by T5_X

As for the motor designed to go downwards under the car? This idea has been around since the 50s. Volvo has always toyed with this, I know the old 740s were designed to do this, but the way the engine moves is largely dependent on the angle and severity of the collision, sometimes no matter what the design, your engine is gonna smack into the firewall. In fact, your subaru is probably one of the best for this (I believe the forester is the best) as the flat engine sits low and its designed to go under if in a frontal collision. In many situations though, there is still intrusion into the foot area. It might not be a new idea, but no one had really implemented it well until the A class hit the streets in europe. The car has a specially reinforced firewall with what basically amounts to a heavy duty skid plate on it to help keep the motor from intruding into the passenger compartment. The fact that its got a tiny motor helps, but the same principals with properly engineered break-away motor mounts would work fairly well on just about anything. Subarus are rated extremely well in front collisions for the exact reasons you stated. The motor is compactly packaged and very low in the chassis. It doesn't take much to get the motor to go underneath the car in a really bad head on collision, since its not very tall to begin with.

Anyhoo, this is straying off-topic.

T5_X
12-07-2003, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
You'd be surprised what modern engineering can accomplish given the packaging constraints and amount of space available under the hood of a lot of modern cars. In many cases, a well built car even with a large displacement V6 or V8 the passengers inside can walk away with only minor injuries in a 40mph frontal collision. I've seen some pretty nasty pictures of track accidents (head ons into walls, etc) at some pretty harsh speeds and a lot of new cars hold up extremely well. Cars may be getting heavier, but the amount of safety stuff designed into them is a good trade off, IMO.

Looking at the Bonneville specifically, it looks like there is probably a good 8-10 inches of space before anything even touches the motor. Given what modern bumpers are like, you'd REALLY have to crank something to push on the motor hard enough to break all the mounts.



That's true, but more crumple space is more crumple space. The Bonneville and Seville both have gotten good full frontal and offset crash test results cause of the space between the bumper and the motor like you said, so my prior comment on this car is probably a little underserving. Still, if you get in a head on collision with a 1/2 ton, do you want to be in this car with the full breadth of a small block in font of you, or a comparable car with twice the crumple space..... it's like the "no replacement for displacement" argument, all things being equal, the car with more crumple space wins every time.

BTW, in terms of weight and safety, it's a double-edged sword. Less weight = better accident avoidance, but in a multi-vehicle collision, the heavier car has an advantage.

Rakinishu
03-01-2005, 06:54 PM
RWD is more fun in the winter. But ever since my Cutlass accident (went sideways on acceleration and in to a tree). I feel there is a clear dominance of FWD in the winter when it comes to control.

lastprodigy
03-01-2005, 07:00 PM
thanks for the revival jesus

Ferio_vti
03-01-2005, 07:13 PM
Nothing wrong with a FWD V8. There's lots of people that like understeer. Same with Honda, they should have made the new TL a RWD instead.

As for those BMW, Mustangs, etc not having control in the winter, that where investing in winter tires pays off.

FiveFreshFish
03-01-2005, 07:47 PM
A transverse-mounted V8 just doesn't look right.

streetarab
03-01-2005, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by Rakinishu
RWD is more fun in the winter. But ever since my Cutlass accident (went sideways on acceleration and in to a tree). I feel there is a clear dominance of FWD in the winter when it comes to control.
let off the gas+countersteer

BumpinTalon
03-01-2005, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by streetarab

let off the gas+countersteer

that's a good idea. take all the weight off the back tires and over-correct.... :rolleyes: try backing off the gas slowly but surely and countersteering very very gently.

cycosis
03-01-2005, 11:24 PM
holy excessive vents batman!

Neil4Speed
03-02-2005, 12:13 AM
Please ignore my ignorance here, but I can't think of any other FWD V8's... (re. the title)

Can you guys name a few? I am not tooo familiar with American Cars, but can't think of any others.

FiveFreshFish
03-02-2005, 12:43 AM
Oldsmobile Toronado is a FWD V8.

http://www.collectorsautosupply.com/about_us/carsandstories/1970_olds_toronado_gt.htm

JordanLotoski
03-02-2005, 12:44 AM
pontiac are horrible cars, and the interior looks the same as it did 10 years ago....

finboy
03-02-2005, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by Neil4Speed
Please ignore my ignorance here, but I can't think of any other FWD V8's... (re. the title)

Can you guys name a few? I am not tooo familiar with American Cars, but can't think of any others.

pretty much every caddy built in the 90's

Neil4Speed
03-02-2005, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by finboy


pretty much every caddy built in the 90's

Really wow! thats interesting lol. I am a little out of touch with american Cars.

Xtrema
03-02-2005, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by benyl
There are many cars that need to work out torque steer. Nissan has two that I can think of.

I drive one of them. Tq steer is a bitch, I want RWD now.

BumpinTalon
03-02-2005, 02:36 PM
you can get a V8 in the new Monte Carlo now apparently.

streetarab
03-02-2005, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by BumpinTalon
that's a good idea. take all the weight off the back tires and over-correct.... :rolleyes: try backing off the gas slowly but surely and countersteering very very gently.
sorry, let me rephrase that, let off the gas and countersteer GENTLY if you know what your doin it should be farely simple...and sometimes there isnt enough time to do things gently or slowly