my 944 vs a integra (dont flame!)
04-16-2004, 05:49 PM
#91
Rennlist Member
Originally posted by Campeck
WHOAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
more efficient FRONT WHEEL drive systme PUTTING BETTER POWER TO THE GROUND!!!!
i dont think so!
when you punch it a car squats putting extra weight on the rear wheels.
therefore more traction at the rear and less at the front.
front wheel drive cars also understeer more than anyother drive system.
unless you mean more effiecient for saving gas and being easier to drive then maybe.
but a rear wheel drive car is much better at putting power to the ground and keeping it there.
lol.
sorry
WHOAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
more efficient FRONT WHEEL drive systme PUTTING BETTER POWER TO THE GROUND!!!!
i dont think so!
when you punch it a car squats putting extra weight on the rear wheels.
therefore more traction at the rear and less at the front.
front wheel drive cars also understeer more than anyother drive system.
unless you mean more effiecient for saving gas and being easier to drive then maybe.
but a rear wheel drive car is much better at putting power to the ground and keeping it there.
lol.
sorry
Don't get me wrong here, not trying to be the voice of FWD cars (all mine are RWD - 2 994s, a 911, and an Infiniti G35), just pointing out the engineering facts. I do agree RWD or AWD are clearly the preferred setups versus FWD for racing, but this is due to a number of factors, including the controllability you gain from "steering" the rears with the throttle.
04-16-2004, 05:51 PM
#92
Campeck Rulez
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I see where your coming from.
it may be better in keeping power.
as in not losing it in the drivetrain.
but it still doesnt put it ON the ground due to squat and especially spoilers on the back.
hahaHAHAHa
it may be better in keeping power.
as in not losing it in the drivetrain.
but it still doesnt put it ON the ground due to squat and especially spoilers on the back.
hahaHAHAHa
04-16-2004, 06:00 PM
#93
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Campbeck- you must be referrring to a 1st Gen Integra- a 3rd Gen would be faster & a V-Tech much faster than even THAT- they were 1.8L by then, BTW, & had much more technologically advaced stuff... I would expect any 944NA to outrun my 1st Gen when I had it- EXCEPT in hte corners & mine was modded there, so that's not exactly fair to this discussion...
04-22-2004, 03:03 PM
#95
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: So Cal
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno if you ever found out first hand...but that GSR will chew you up. Just the way it is.
More power and more importantly, less drivetrain sap. So not only does it have more power on paper, but it puts more to the ground. So long as he knows how to launch the car decently, your 944 has no chance of staying in front.
Heck, a good driver in a GSR would be able to keep up with a 944-S. That's more apples to apples as far as straight line performance is concerned, as both are generally "mid 15 sec" cars, give or take.
More power and more importantly, less drivetrain sap. So not only does it have more power on paper, but it puts more to the ground. So long as he knows how to launch the car decently, your 944 has no chance of staying in front.
Heck, a good driver in a GSR would be able to keep up with a 944-S. That's more apples to apples as far as straight line performance is concerned, as both are generally "mid 15 sec" cars, give or take.
04-22-2004, 07:00 PM
#96
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: chicago, IL, in viewing distance of cubs stadium
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
97 GSR, 170HP (thats ok) 128lb/ft torque (pathetic), sorry to jump this to the top again, but although i do believe the GSR would beat a na 944 that would be the end of it. S would win IMHO. i have driven a GSR and I was not impressed. coming from driving my (relativily) high torque Audi, to that.
