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

131–140 of 176 posts

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

#131

Post by paiute »

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…

Good old zero vision. It is being adopted all over the US now with tragic results for pedestrians and drivers. It's not in your head, the traffic lights are being changed to make you crazy. I both cycle and drive, and zero vision strikes an odd balance of making everything worse, except very specific urban environments such as Stockholm.

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

#132

Post by HyperSane »

vvanders wrote: post #106

> Moreover, modern traction control systems are just plain good. This isn't something exclusive to electric cars—even gas-powered vehicles have achieved decent torque vectoring by modulating brakes independently at each wheel, but modern EVs take it up a notch by performing thousands of software-based every second. While this is not wrong it's also missing the fact that EVs use AC VFD motors that don't need to have a…

so from a traction perspective electric motors are dynamically stable while ICE are dynamically unstable.

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

#134

Post by Hamuko »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #108

I live in a rural mountainous area. FWD cars have a huge advantage over anything RWD: traction going up hill. Nothings funnier than watching delivery trucks going up a giant hill backwards because it's the only way they can maintain traction.

Having switched from RWD to FWD (Mercedes-Benz to Volvo), I'm not sure about this. Climbing up hills in the winter definitely felt worse in FWD, since all of the weight is going into the back and even with studded tyres, it felt like my front tyres were constantly slipping.

If I got to choose my drivetrain, I'd go AWD > RWD > FWD.

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

#135

Post by seanmcdirmid »

Cyberdogs7 wrote: post #117
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Funny enough, after moving back to Texas from out of the country in which my Texas drivers license expired by 6 months, I was required to take both a written AND a practical driving test. Keep in mind I was nearly 40 years old and had a valid Texas license since I was 16.

I was out of country for 9 years, and when I moved to California from China, they didn’t make me take the driving test since I had a California license before (7 years out date), but I was surprised.

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

#136

Post by midoridensha »

lukevp wrote: post #82
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 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's like that in America because it has to be. If you required real driving skill from American drivers just to get a license, most of them would fail. It works in some other countries because people there are able to live without a car, and having a car is a luxury. In America, it's a requirement for basic survival in most places because America decided decades ago that it wanted things to be that way, and built everything with that basic assumption.

You can't expect good competency in something like driving from 99% of the public; you're just not going to get it, no matter what it is.

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

#137

Post by seanmcdirmid »

cblum wrote: post #103
ars wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> So I doesn't seem like the more difficult testing actually helps much. Brazil has a higher rate than the US, but you wouldn’t be able to tell based on the testing there. Mine was: - Backup parking - Parallel parking - Drive around the city with an examiner for a few minutes Any mistakes in the first two and you’re disqualified. You have to get them right the first time with no corrections (or at least that was the…

I only had one driving test when I was 15 in Mississippi. Drive around the court house block, no parallel parking. I moved to Washington the next year and only had to take the written test, and I’ve seen to be able to miss driver tests ever since even though my license has lapsed twice, the last time for 7 years.

I’m now back in Washington (Seattle), and I’m shocked at how often people run stop signs here.

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

#138

Post by seanmcdirmid »

bluGill wrote: post #121
thomastjeffery wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you have that backwards? Maybe at the Apex of a hill, FWD wins; but climbing shifts your weight to the rear. The only time my FWD Civic struggles is when accelerating uphill in snow.

The engine weight is still over the front wheels, so FWD gets more traction.

How would that work for an EV that doesn’t have an engine? I guess that’s a point in the article, however.

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

#139

Post by thomastjeffery »

bluGill wrote: post #121
thomastjeffery wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you have that backwards? Maybe at the Apex of a hill, FWD wins; but climbing shifts your weight to the rear. The only time my FWD Civic struggles is when accelerating uphill in snow.

The engine weight is still over the front wheels, so FWD gets more traction.

I see what you mean: an engine leans a truck forward, particularly because the truck's engine is usually farther in front of the wheels than it would be in a car.

I imagine that's exasperated by the fact that everything behind the cabin is built to be as minimal and lightweight as possible, but the overall design is made to support a heavy maximum load filling the bed. Without significant weight in the bed, the truck will naturally lean forward.

Unfortunately this all applies to trucks, and does nothing to help my FWD Civic accelerate up a snowy hill.

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

#140

Post by dehrmann »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #73
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.

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…

Where did you find this rally clinic?
Post reply on HN