Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 176 posts

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#91

Post by m463 »

kolinko wrote: post #81
m463 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think that front wheel drive would impair steering in tricky situations, while rear wheel drive would separate steering from drive and be better (with computerized help)

It's the opposite. If you lose back wheel traction in an FWD car, you "just" point your wheels in the right direction and accelerate - the front wheels will have both steering and power, so they will "drag" the car out of a slip. With RWD you need more training for these situations, and it's more difficult to save a car. With front wheels slipping it's also easier with FWD. In either case, it's good to go for trainin…

But the reason you lose rear-wheel traction on a rwd car is usually because of the motor. You are less likely to lose traction on the back tires with a FWD car.

The more things you overload (acceleration, brakes and steering) the harder it is for a tire to do the right thing.

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#92

Post by gnicholas »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #56
gnicholas wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. When I was a kid, I once flipped my bike because I was only braking with the front. I learned not to do that, but to an extreme — I then braked almost always with just the back. It wasn't until I got older and faster that I realized that braking just in the back is not as effective, since the braking action makes your nose dive and puts more weight over your front tire. I now brake with both sides, but always…

My commuter bike only has a front brake. You can shift body position to make it pretty much impossible to go OTB. Meanwhile my DJ bike only has a rear brake, which at best "strongly suggests" you slow down.

Why would a commuter bike (or any bike) have only a front brake?

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#93

Post by ezzaf »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #27

One of the big negatives to sportiness in FWD cars has always been torque steer. But that is due to unequal-length driveshafts, not strictly the FWD-ness. A FWD EV shouldn't suffer from torque steer. I do welcome RWD EVs, but let's not get carried away. Honda has demonstrated again and again that FWD vehicles are capable of very high track performance.

"A FWD EV shouldn't suffer from torque steer."

The torque steer in my FWD EV (BYD Atto) is horrendous. Sure its possible to use clever engineering to manage it, but just switching to EVs isn't going to magically make torque steer go away.

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#94

Post by jcadam »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #85
lukevp wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the land of the free, you can drive with a parent at 15 and get a license at 16 with zero required classes or real world driving test, with just your parent’s signature, a 70% pass rate on a written test and $25. That’s how I got my license in TX at least. I think this is a bad thing, fwiw. The standards of driver safety training here are incredibly low.

It varies by state, but most of them require either a driving exam or a piece of paper from a drivers education class. Texas is something of an exception in it's general lassie faire posture.

When I moved to Alaska, in my early 40s, with a license in-hand from the state I had just moved from, they made me take a written test before issuing me an AK license. At least they didn't make me take a road test.

Weirdos.

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#96

Post by ajross »

kenhwang wrote: post #47
Kirby64 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does FWD vs RWD matter for energy recapture in regen breaking? As long as you're not losing traction on your rear wheels during breaking, there's no difference in terms of energy captured in FWD vs RWD.

"As long as you're not losing traction on your rear wheels" is the key part. The more you brake, the more weight shifts forward, which results in less traction available to use to recapture. People vastly overestimate how much traction is available at the rear during braking, and running out of traction at the rear typically results in the car spinning (especially in an EV with low rotational inertia with most of the…

Regen breaking never comes anywhere near the traction limits though. I don't follow the point.

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#97

Post by nicenewtemp84 »

mrinterweb wrote: post #59

Rear-wheel-drive vehicles have traction problems on slick roads. Losing traction on your front wheels is terrifying. I've had this happen before as I have had the opposite fishtailing with front-wheel-drive. Losing rear-wheel traction is something that can be compensated, but I don't think you can do much when you lose front-wheel traction.

In FWD, you let off and it starts to steer. In RWD, once it's out of shape, you better know what you're doing to keep it in line. Fwd is 10x easier for average drivers.

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#98

Post by ars »

0_____0 wrote: post #75
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter the powertrain layout if you lose traction on the front, ie understeer, you need to create a weight shift forward to restore traction. I've done a couple rally instructional clinics, and one of the introductory drills they spent a fair bit of time on was just a giant circle of cones set up on dirt. You go around it faster and faster until the car breaks free into a slide, then you learn how to control and m…

In Norway, this is basic driver education. The drivers' license there requires "slippery road" training, which involves a more basic version of what you're describing.

In 2019 Norway had around 1/4 the fatality rate of the US. (In deaths/distance.)

But in 2000 it had a slightly higher rate than the US.

The road tests did not change, rather Norway changed how its roads are engineered (due to an initiative called Vision Zero!). So I doesn't seem like the more difficult testing actually helps much.

(BTW If you want to lookup numbers be aware most sites quote death/population instead which I find to be a misleading comparison.)

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#99

Post by jcadam »

jerrysievert wrote: post #79
mrinterweb wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only driven older RWD vehicles so I experienced RWD + traction control. I just remember a couple freaky situations driving in older RWD on icy roads. FWD vehicles definitely had more control, but again that was in older vehicles.

FWD don't have more control under slippery conditions if your front tires break free. RWD + traction control is pretty amazing. of course, it doesn't help too much in ice if you're running on summer sports tires, but that's an entirely different problem.

I keep meaning to get me a set of studded tires for the winter. Next winter, for sure :)

Re: Rear-wheel-drive cars are back and we have EVs to thank

#100

Post by 0_____0 »

ars wrote: post #98
0_____0 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Norway, this is basic driver education. The drivers' license there requires "slippery road" training, which involves a more basic version of what you're describing.

In 2019 Norway had around 1/4 the fatality rate of the US. (In deaths/distance.) But in 2000 it had a slightly higher rate than the US. The road tests did not change, rather Norway changed how its roads are engineered (due to an initiative called Vision Zero!). So I doesn't seem like the more difficult testing actually helps much. (BTW If you want to lookup numbers be aware most sites quote death/population instead w…

I'm not sure we can draw much of a conclusion from the accident data, since as you point out, there are confounding variables.
Post reply on HN