fwd vs rwd vs awd

[userfriendly]

What's the difference between the three? What are the advantages and disadvatages of each system? Any additional maintenance issues with them and should you have dfferent driving styles?

So far I know that RWD has a prop and differential and that its the rear wheels that are powered. Don't know the purpose of the prop and differential. I also know that AWD acts like a 4x4, distributes power to all 4 wheels, when the wheel sensors detect slipping. Don't know if its the front or rear wheels that is powered the rest of the time. Lastly, I kow that with FWD, the front wheels get power directly from the engine.

[HyBrideVo]

This has been discussed before http://tsikot.yehey.com/forums/showt...ht=RWD+AWD+FWD

[userfriendly]

ok thanks. I actually found another thread that answers most of my questions.

What about maintenance issues? Do RWD and AWD have additional maintenace requirements?

[mbt]

in a nutshell, AWD will not offer any additional performance over RWD on a dry road, although if the car is very powerful, AWD can make it easier to drive because it controls wheelspin. otherwise, the added weight and driveline drag of AWD is a liability on dry roads compared to RWD.

FWD is the most dynamically challenged of the three because the grip of the front tires has to be split between acceleration and steering (in heavy acceleration, there's little grip available for steering, hence understeer), and torque steer can be a problem for powerful front-drivers. However, it has big advantages in vehicle packaging (greater interior room, trunk space, etc.), which makes it ideal for mass-market transportation. Also, because a majority of the car's weight is on the drive/steer wheels, FWD is more suitable for snow compared to RWD.

RWD is the enthusiast's choice because it's the most balanced handler of the lot (theoretically).

In the wet and in other reduced-traction settings, AWD is gold.

[mbeige]

There's also the other perspective of engine placement...

FF, front engine, FWD (Jap/Econocars)
FR, front engine, RWD (Most MB and BMW)
F4, front engine, 4WD (Evo, Impreza)
MR, mid engine, RWD (MR2, Enzo, Pagani Zonda)
M4, mid engine, 4WD (Murcielago)
RR, rear engine, RWD (Porsche 911)
R4, rear engine, 4WD (Porsche GT2?)

[niky]

in a nutshell, AWD will not offer any additional performance over RWD on a dry road, although if the car is very powerful, AWD can make it easier to drive because it controls wheelspin. otherwise, the added weight and driveline drag of AWD is a liability on dry roads compared to RWD.

FWD is the most dynamically challenged of the three because the grip of the front tires has to be split between acceleration and steering (in heavy acceleration, there's little grip available for steering, hence understeer), and torque steer can be a problem for powerful front-drivers. However, it has big advantages in vehicle packaging (greater interior room, trunk space, etc.), which makes it ideal for mass-market transportation. Also, because a majority of the car's weight is on the drive/steer wheels, FWD is more suitable for snow compared to RWD.

RWD is the enthusiast's choice because it's the most balanced handler of the lot (theoretically).

In the wet and in other reduced-traction settings, AWD is gold.

Hehe... but like mbeige says, there's the perspective of engine placement to consider...

Traditional Front-engined, Rear-wheel-drive cars are a poor choice for snow, but Rear-engined Rear-wheel-drive cars actually have very good snow traction... of course, functionally, they're a handful unless tuned very well.

RE: reduced traction settings... that's almost any road on the world, compared to a racetrack... which is why Evos and Subarus have a reputation as "supercar-killers", because on bumpy, dusty, rutted and unpredictable roads, many mid-engined rear-wheel-drive cars are a handful.