FR-S vs 2012 Ford Focus ST

[SpeedR]

Originally Posted by mines13

Pretty much, it is worthy of note that the people who actually have track experience are the least negative about FWD vehicles. But understanding vehicle dynamics is a bit deeper then internet bench racing, video games and magazine numbers.

I would say just the opposite as people gain more track experience the get rid of their FWD cars and buy RWD or AWD. I have seen this happen too many times to count.

Please keep in mind I have nothing against FWD cars other than dumb people saying there the same as RWD.

[Turbowned]

Originally Posted by Capt Canuck

Don't even bother. We could put down a pretty big eff-off list of great front-drivers, but some folks are just too damn 'ard and way too much of a wheelsman, to dare lower themselves to be caught dead in an FWD

Let me just say that I've owned 3 FWD cars out of the 20-some-odd cars I've owned. The first two were when I was in high school. The third was out of bare necessity as I needed a car to get from point A to point B while I fixed my other car. I've had my fair share of hooning around in different cars and in fact, I've probably driven a few of the cars on your pretty big eff-off list of great front drivers, but you know what? I still will never buy a front-driver, given the choice. It's like running a 3-legged sack race. Sure you can compete and have a lot of fun doing it, but it's not the ideal setup for performance.

That said, I'm still glad Ford has gotten off their laurels and started to bring some fun cars back to the 'States. I'm also glad the Fiat 500 Abarth will be sold here. More fun cars for everyone! Just don't expect to see me plowing around in one.

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by SpeedR

Look there are 3 basic setups FWD RWD and AWD of the 3 (all things being equal) the least desirable for performance driving is FWD. Hello you cannot buy a less desirable setup, its last, the worst way to go, usually that means it sucks. In looser world maybe it’s the best thing ever. But in the real world it sucks. It’s OK I have a FWD DD.

I do have some experience with fast Focusssss I helped (not much but some) build the ZX351

I am filming part of this and at about 20seconds in you can see my M Roadster just behind the white car. Notice we had to convert it to RWD to make it fast ……..LOL…….. JK it was fairly fast in its various turbo incarnations but it did have some wicked TQ steer.

Look if you want to go along deluding yourself that they the same you go ahead but I think you know they’re not equal you just don’t want to admit you got all bent out of shape over nothing.

You really like pulling s*** out your ass don't you? Since you're so damn thick I'll lay down some real world times for you.

E92 M3: Ring time - 8:05
Renault Megane Trophy 265: Ring time - 8:07 (FWD- GASP THIS CAN'T BE!!)
Honda NSX-R: Ring time - 8:09
Viper GTS: Ring time - 8:10

Not to mention the Focus RS and the 350Z got the same laptime of 8:26



PS, I'm confident you just went to youtube and dug up the first video of a RWD focus you could find. I saw that video years ago in college and guess what dropping a 351W motor in a ZX3 does for the car? Makes it f***ing pointless. Give it the slightest bit of throttle and the car eats through the first three gears in a cloud of smoke and it handles like garbage to boot. And if you're talking about going fast in a straight line (meaning you're abandoning your original arguement) all that money and work, the Kruegel komponents swap kit, the T5 transmission, the 8.8" mustang diff and 351 Windsor and the car barely runs 10's. Now your out what? something like 25k? How f***ing pointless. Friend of mine has an EK hatch that runs 10's and only has 6k worth of work put into it.

Your logic is garbage, your "experience" is bullshit, and you're a thick headed RWD fanboy of a liar. How's that?


It's one thing to personally prefer a certain layout, but your claims are both outlandish and ridiculous. There's too many examples that prove the contrary. And you know what? It's times like now that I look back and smile thinking about how many people I scrubbed on the track with your mentality. Feels damn good.

[Turbowned]

^^ ^^

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

^^ ^^

[mines13]

Originally Posted by SpeedR

I would say just the opposite as people gain more track experience the get rid of their FWD cars and buy RWD or AWD. I have seen this happen too many times to count.

Please keep in mind I have nothing against FWD cars other than dumb people saying there the same as RWD.

That sure is a cute blanket statement, and one hell of an assumption. You know what assumption does...

[Turbowned]

Just to stir the pot some more, I'll quote an excerpt from one of my favorite motorsport books: Winning: A Race Driver's Handbook, by George A. Anderson:

"I will not be telling you anything about front-drive cars. There are two reasons for this. First, I do not have any competition experience in such cars. Second, front-wheel-drive is a totally inappropriate configuration for a car that is to be driven fast.

Front drive cars have been popularized for three reasons: they are cheap and easy to manufacture, they are inherently lighter weight than rear-wheel-drive cars (hence, better fuel economy) and they feature huge understeer in almost any situation, which is preferred in cars designed for low-performance, untrained drivers.

(None of the above is intended to demean those who race front-drive cars. To me, racing one of these cars is a little like choosing to compete in a three-legged sack race. You can have a lot of fun, but it is not the configuration for maximum performance"



*Flame suit on*

[Dimman]

Realtime Racing?

[Capt Canuck]

If maximum performance leads to winning races and championships, than the results in the BTCC would point to a FWD car, as IIRC (I may be wrong, it does happen), a FWD car/team has won the championship each year since 2009.

[mines13]

No bias here or anything...

front-wheel-drive is a totally inappropriate configuration for a car that is to be driven fast[/I].

Opinion.

Front drive cars have been popularized for three reasons: [I]they are cheap and easy to manufacture, they are inherently lighter weight than rear-wheel-drive cars (hence, better fuel economy) and they feature huge understeer in almost any situation, which is preferred in cars designed for low-performance, untrained drivers.

Generalization and opinion.

(None of the above is intended to demean those who race front-drive cars. To me, racing one of these cars is a little like choosing to compete in a three-legged sack race. You can have a lot of fun, but it is not the configuration for maximum performance"

No one asked him to. This book was written in 1993 by a guy who pretty much flat out admits to never racing a FWD car period and yet, has quite the bias. It was 1993, by this time there had been plenty of successfully campaigned FWD touring cars competing around the the world. This really is so apples to oranges. I've owned and enjoyed both on track. I am buying an FR-S. I have previously owned an AE86, 300ZX TT, 240SX, S2000 and still own my Integra. My Integra is not going anywhere. Honestly, I just find the FWD sucks comments pretty ridiculous, it comes down to the setup and what it is, period. plenty of horrible RWD, AWD and yes FWD cars as well. There are also some excellent examples of each.

[Oriental Life]

Great car. But people still compare it to Stang all over the net. WTF? People don't get small cars here! It always has to be moster truck and a Big Mac.

[Oriental Life]

If Renault/Nissan would bring Megane into US in a 265 bhp package - I'd take it even over BRZ. I've driven those Meganes, they are FUN to drive cars.

[Oriental Life]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Just to stir the pot some more, I'll quote an excerpt from one of my favorite motorsport books: Winning: A Race Driver's Handbook, by George A. Anderson:

"I will not be telling you anything about front-drive cars. There are two reasons for this. First, I do not have any competition experience in such cars. Second, front-wheel-drive is a totally inappropriate configuration for a car that is to be driven fast.

Front drive cars have been popularized for three reasons: they are cheap and easy to manufacture, they are inherently lighter weight than rear-wheel-drive cars (hence, better fuel economy) and they feature huge understeer in almost any situation, which is preferred in cars designed for low-performance, untrained drivers.

(None of the above is intended to demean those who race front-drive cars. To me, racing one of these cars is a little like choosing to compete in a three-legged sack race. You can have a lot of fun, but it is not the configuration for maximum performance"



*Flame suit on*

FWD are better for:

SAFETY - when its tail comes out, all you have to do is ADD more speed and then slow down
CONTROL and SPEED on a slippery surface (snow, mud, gravel, sand)
EASY to drive

Its takes a lot to make a good hot hatch, Ford ST/RS is iconic (FWD), just as Sierra RS Cosworth was (RWD). Ford knows its shit around the track (minus <30K todays Stang )

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Realtime Racing?

Originally Posted by Oriental Life

Great car. But people still compare it to Stang all over the net. WTF? People don't get small cars here! It always has to be moster truck and a Big Mac.

The Mustang is a metric by which all cheap performance cars are measured. Unfortunately all of the USDM Foci are gimped for whatever reason.