Evo / Scooby V Comparable Power RWD Cars

[redgriff500]

I've never looked into it and just assumed that when saying that EVOs / Scoobys are giant killing cars we are talking about average drivers being able to get more out of them on the roads as their power is more 'accessible'.

But I've recently been looking at RX7's 968 etc and via "Best Motoring" on track with racing drivers frequently the 4WD cars are winning.

As the 4WD cars are heavier and lose more power through their 4WD systems how is this possible ?

I understand that they can get the power down out of corners better so is this only happening on short twisty tracks ?

[S3000]

i wouldn`t take best motoring seriously, since the NSX is winning against porsches and ferraris because its their domestic car.

[superman84]

AWD drive systems in evos and Scoobies are not as heavy as people think, a classic scooby only weights 1280kg and an Evo 9 weighs less than a Focus RS and considerably less than something like an M3.
AWD drive train loses are also not as extreme as many in the 2 wheel drive camp claim.
You only have to look at the Top Gear track times to realise that the Evo is a better handling car than a lot of RWD drive cars.

[Harry Monk]

superman84 said:

AWD drive systems in evos and Scoobies are not as heavy as people think, a classic scooby only weights 1280kg and an Evo 9 weighs less than a Focus RS and considerably less than something like an M3.
AWD drive train loses are also not as extreme as many in the 2 wheel drive camp claim.
You only have to look at the Top Gear track times to realise that the Evo is a better handling car than a lot of RWD drive cars.

PIN number.

[superman84]

Harry Monk said:

PIN number.

What does that even mean?

[mrmr96]

redgriff500 said:

As the 4WD cars are heavier

The Evo 8 weighs less than the 350Z, so it's an incorrect assumption that all 4WD cars weigh less than all RWD cars.

But the reason that 4WD cars are faster in a drag race (like 0-60) is that they can put the power down better, less wheel spin.

The reason they are faster around a circuit (generally) is because they can get on the gas sooner on teh way out of a corner without the back breaking away.

However a RWD car will generally have comparativly good acceleration once moving, since there's no 'getting the power down' issue, so the 4WD drivetrain losses play in the RWD's favour.

Laptimes will depend on the car, the driver, the tyres etc etc though. So there's too many variables to account for every case, but in general the advantage of the 4WD is grip from standing start and grip from corner exits.

[redgriff500]

S3000 said:

i wouldn`t take best motoring seriously, since the NSX is winning against porsches and ferraris because its their domestic car.

In the one I saw 3 variations of NSX got beaten by an Evo - hence the thread.

[Harry Monk]

superman84 said:

What does that even mean?

The Evo's AYC control is something quite special.

[redgriff500]

superman84 said:

AWD drive systems in evos and Scoobies are not as heavy as people think, a classic scooby only weights 1280kg

AWD drive train loses are also not as extreme as many in the 2 wheel drive camp claim.

But an Evo is heavier and does lose more power than an RX7.

And it easily overtook.

However the track lap only took 1 minute which I'm guessing was a major factor.

TBH I was left wondering why the hell do I want an RX7/968/NSX when I could have none of the size compromises (I have a family) and get the faster more practical car.

(Except I don't WANT a 4WD)

I guess judging from their relative sales figures I'm not the only one coming to that conclusion !

[superman84]

The other point here is that 968s and RX7s don't have that much power and aren't lightweight either (Mazda RX7 weighs 1390kg, the Evo 9 weighs 1400kg.

968 - 172bhp/ton
RX7 - 184bhp/ton
Evo6 - 205bhp/ton
Impreza P1 - 219bhp/ton
Evo8 FQ400 - 292 bhp/ton

Edited by superman84 on Monday 31st January 12:10

Edited by superman84 on Monday 31st January 12:11

[RobM77]

superman84 said:

AWD drive systems in evos and Scoobies are not as heavy as people think, a classic scooby only weights 1280kg and an Evo 9 weighs less than a Focus RS and considerably less than something like an M3.

This is the answer I would say. Imprezas and Evos are not very heavy cars at all. 4WD will give an advantage out of tight corners, especially in the wet, and also off the starting line (Best Motoring races have a standing start at the beginning). Also, many of the Jap guys probably have more experience in the 4WD rally reps than traditional RWD cars.

I think it's going a bit far though to call an Evo 9 "considerably" lighter than an M3 - with the Evo IX tipping the scales at 1420kg, and at launch in 2005, the E46 M3 weighed 1474kg... The E92 M3 is heavier though at 1603kg. Totally different sort of car though, the E92 M3 is one of the best road cars I've driven, and it's just that, a comfortable and refined quick road car. It's a shame that BMW don't make cars conceptually like the Evo, but RWD. I guess the CSL was the closest they've got - 1385kg and sharper handling.

superman84 said:

AWD drive train loses are also not as extreme as many in the 2 wheel drive camp claim.

Hmmm.. I'm sure all I've ever heard on the matter was from a guy on here who runs a rolling road, and I had no reason to doubt his figures.

superman84 said:

You only have to look at the Top Gear track times to realise that the Evo is a better handling car than a lot of RWD drive cars.

You mean faster, not better A car's lap time is not really a function of how well it handles.

[Meoricin]

redgriff500 said:

But an Evo is heavier and does lose more power than an RX7.

And it easily overtook.

However the track lap only took 1 minute which I'm guessing was a major factor.

TBH I was left wondering why the hell do I want an RX7/968/NSX when I could have none of the size compromises (I have a family) and get the faster more practical car.

(Except I don't WANT a 4WD)

I guess judging from their relative sales figures I'm not the only one coming to that conclusion !

All it takes to overtake a 'faster' car is one corner exit where you nail it, and they don't. In a 1min lap slight driver error in a single corner could account for virtually any finishing positions.

[KrazyIvan]

You have to take gearing into account as well.

Having owned/own both an Evo6 RS and Evo 5 GSR, I cant state that the short ratios of the RS with 350bhp make 1st gear almost useless (by 20mph you need to change)and it ran out of gears by 130mph and the standard GSR is not much better.

Then the Evo 7 onwards 6 speed boxes didnt change that much either.

[superman84]

RobM77 said:

You mean faster, not better A car's lap time is not really a function of how well it handles.

Well the Evos are quicker than a number of other cars with similiar power round the track so the handling must have a something to do with it.
I also remember the sequence with the Lambo driven by a Pro driver being unable to shake off Clarkson in the FQ400.
Regarding weight torquestats.com has the 9 FQ360 at 1400kg and the e46 M3 at 1577kg. Quite a big difference in my book.

[R26Andy]

Transmission losses are only in the order of an extra 5% on AWD (e.g. AWD 18% vs RWD 13%).

Things like less weight, more grip, more power can easily make this extra loss into and insignificant factor.

[RobM77]

superman84 said:

Well the Evos are quicker than a number of other cars with similiar power round the track so the handling must have a something to do with it.

Yes, but you still mean faster, not better. Better is a subjective measure of how much someone enjoys the handling; whether that handling results in an efficient and fast lap is another matter entirely.

superman84 said:

I also remember the sequence with the Lambo driven by a Pro driver being unable to shake off Clarkson in the FQ400.

I'm not saying that the Evo isn't fast at all, I agreed with your initial point by just wanted to comment on the other two things you said.

superman84 said:

Regarding weight torquestats.com has the 9 FQ360 at 1400kg and the e46 M3 at 1577kg. Quite a big difference in my book.

Not sure where they got those figures from for each car, but I doubt very much that it's the same type of measurement. Check these out:

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48...

DIN curb weight (preliminary as they call it):

E46 M3 at 1,474 kg = 3,250 lbs

[superman84]

The enjoyment one gets from the handling of a car is clearly subjective and a RWD car with the ability to induce some oversteer is going to be considered to be more 'fun' than an AWD drive car by your average PH. Personally I disagree but thats irrevelent.

By 'better' handling I mean the ability to go round a corner quicker than another car. Which in a thread around objective performance would seem a fair point to make.

Edited by superman84 on Monday 31st January 12:38

Edited by superman84 on Monday 31st January 12:43

[Efbe]

Meoricin said:

All it takes to overtake a 'faster' car is one corner exit where you nail it, and they don't. In a 1min lap slight driver error in a single corner could account for virtually any finishing positions.

from my experience in a 300bhp skyline gts-t (RWD only). at lower speeds, similar bhp subarus and evos will beat you, however after about 50mphish, they seem to run out of legs.
not sure if this is the gearing or transmission loss, or just where the big turbo kicks in on the skyline, but they get left for dead after then.

IMO, 4wd is fun for a change, but gets quite boring quite fast, there is so much more fun to be had with RWD. Then again if you just want it to be a traffic light warrior, then go for it.

[RobCrezz]

They certainly are quick, especially in the cold and damp conditions we currently have.

When out for a ride in my friends tuned 200sx, it reminded me what it was like to have so much less traction!

[The Wookie]

RobM77 said:

superman84 said:

AWD drive train loses are also not as extreme as many in the 2 wheel drive camp claim.

Hmmm.. I'm sure all I've ever heard on the matter was from a guy on here who runs a rolling road, and I had no reason to doubt his figures.

Indeed, all the evidence I've seen is that Evo's lose a fairly epic amount of power through the driveline.

Also, people get quite hung up on peak power figures. My tweaked Evo IX (on a standard turbo) sat at peak power for about the last 2000rpm of the rev range and the gearing was spot on. If you were changing near the limiter it would effectively be sitting at peak power for the entire duration of the run.