Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
Why do you think you prefer more forward c.g.? It would make drifting with modest horsepower easier I guess...
c.g. between front wheels won't work with rear wheel drive. At all.
For FR layout, the more rearward the c.g. the better as far as I'm concerned. 55/45 feels unnatural to me! 50/50 puts 11% more static load on the drive wheels, allowing greater acceleration which further loads up the drive wheels. Pretty critical for higher power/weight cars. I wish I could get it to more like 45/55 on the FD.
Driver location relative to c.g. is probably what you "feel" more so than absolute c.g. location. Driver sitting well aft of vehicle c.g. gives more sensitivity to rotation.
Imagine a 2-seat version of the FT86 with the engine/trans and driver moved 30" or so aft. Better, more rearward weight distribution (50/50 or better, easy), AND you get the classic FR sports car FEEL with the driver sitting just in front of the rear tires. Toyota and/or Subaru should do this...
|
A centrally balanced car feels nervous to me, too easy to overcorrect. I find a forward COG more forgiving and predictable; keep it pointed and steer with the throttle. My driving style is not very smooth, but very aggressive and a bit wild. I'm not really a drifter, but I can do it pretty well, but even there I do it without e braking like a lot of people; it's all weight transfer and power over even in cars with little power. That requires really railing on the car to get it to do what I want, but I like that and it's probably why I don't find the BRZ limiting.