AWD vs RWD

[Dan]

OK, guys, I brought up the AWD vs RWD in another thread and wanted to discuss it here. Let's do so in friendly manner, ok?

The reason why I feel that an AWD car is superior to an RWD car in road holding has to do with the way Audi was consistently beating every other make in one of the road races where AWD is allowed (outside of rally.) And I am talking about beating them from the green to the finish. (Not that they are drag cars. I can see where RWD will typically be dominant in drag racing. To me that is inarguable physics at work.)

I forget which race type it is but I know that they had to keep adding and adding weight just to stop 1-2-3 Audi finishes at every event and level the playing field.

A few comments were made about why F1 doesn't do AWD if it is so good. Don't F1 rules disallow that?

And if the F1 rules don't allow it isn't Ferrari very unlikely to ever do it since Ferrari is a major F1 player?

In fact, don't a lot of the other races prevent AWD from racing in their rules?

I guess that is where I am confused. A lot of you seem to think that AWD is inferior because makers aren't making them or races are running them but I am not so sure those are valid arguments. If I knew more about the race type that I am thinking about with reference to the Audi's I would be more assertive on this point.

Dan

[RR|Suki]

OK, guys, I brought up the AWD vs RWD in another thread and wanted to discuss it here. Let's do so in friendly manner, ok?

The reason why I feel that an AWD car is superior to an RWD car in road holding has to do with the way Audi was consistently beating every other make in one of the road races where AWD is allowed (outside of rally.) And I am talking about beating them from the green to the finish. (Not that they are drag cars. I can see where RWD will typically be dominant in drag racing. To me that is inarguable physics at work.)

I forget which race type it is but I know that they had to keep adding and adding weight just to stop 1-2-3 Audi finishes at every event and level the playing field.

A few comments were made about why F1 doesn't do AWD if it is so good. Don't F1 rules disallow that?

And if the F1 rules don't allow it isn't Ferrari very unlikely to ever do it since Ferrari is a major F1 player?

In fact, don't a lot of the other races prevent AWD from racing in their rules?

I guess that is where I am confused. A lot of you seem to think that AWD is inferior because makers aren't making them or races are running them but I am not so sure those are valid arguments. If I knew more about the race type that I am thinking about with reference to the Audi's I would be more assertive on this point.

Danyou are talking the A8 that is in the concept class... that is neither here nor there, because in lemans it's by class not by time, and the cars they are beating are cadallac and austin and a few others panoz makes one too. but honestly they are the only developer that really is pushing those cars. Everyone else is into the production classes. whaen was the last time an audi won a production class race? unless you plan on buying their le mans concept racer...
AWD understeers like heck... not as bad as FWD granted but I have seen a good share of evos run wide right off the tarmac just from too much front pull... heck one day two right after one another in the same spot... two stupid drivers? or a combination with a car that is over rated for the track... hmmm. Also some companies now let you change the bias more to the rear or lock and un lock the difs and so forth. Also pros can make them go fast... very fast BUT they can make the mid rear cars go faster. Evo vs Elise... over Audi vs Elise... over not to mention the exage and the lotus elise is actually near the evo price, so it;s not like comparing a porche to an evo. Heck the Mustang Cobra 03-04 (33K here) held the Subaru impreza STi (35k here) on a track comparison... and the subaru is handeling specific... mustang maybe maybe not ;) So I mean sure, a 4400 lbs marauder... vs a A4 or something... but that's apples to oranges... run similar cars, AWD is not that great and unless you have some serious power it's really boring... I mean unless you have a dirt pit somewhere to drive around in...

*edit* The car Audi runs in the P class that is always dominating is actually a RWD

[Dark_Knight7096]

Typically I would prefer to have the AWD or 4WD on a truck or something of the like, although I do quite like the AWD system on the Skyline. I mentioned the workings of it in the 2008 Marauder post and don't feel like getting into it again, if you would like to know how it works check there. It's pretty good, although i'm not super into AWD unless, like has been said, you were off-roading at the time

[dwasson]

If your world is more than drag racing then AWD is clearly superior. In every other form of racing AWD has to carry a handicap (or conversely, give 2WD an edge) to keep things competitive. A well done AWD system (and admittedly the jury is still out on the Ford system) enables the driver to put more power to the road in a smoother fashion. The inherent understeer is dealt with by using a variable system, one that splits power based on needs and conditions. With modern stablity controls an AWD should always give you more real world performance than RWD.

[RR|Suki]

Stability control is lame I'm sorry. For avoiding accidents on local roads sure... but for racing... meh the day I turn on stability control to help my underseer is the day I stop racing... And I run a 300bhp mini cooper, I'd love to let the computer do all the work for me.:rolleyes: Men have truely become weak. I have been racing since I was 14 and it makes me sad to see this dependance on electronic controls, sure they give faster times and faster cars... but are they giving better drivers? Men should drive their cars, not the other way around. if you have FWD, left foot brake and live with it, if you have rear wheel drive hold your line and come in high on the apex, if you are AWD deal with the underseer. but a computer activly selecting your brake pressure, selecting your drive train power bias, selecting power per wheel. I can see choosing a brake bias, choosing a power bias choosing a dif lock up and then living with it as the laps go on. But active systems? there's something about it that just isn't, I dunno. Perhaps I am too old school. Active controls are weak and cheap and make up for pitfalls in skill. But that's just my $.02

[juno]

When I was still living up in NH, I had a Land Rover Discovery and It was about the best all around vehicle I ever drove. If I were to move back up there I would probably get something similar. I have a 4wd truck, but Iwouldn't waste my time in it in the snow. I don't know about racing, but it is my experience that an AWD vehicle handles better than RWD or AWD. I would love to try out a powerful AWD car with a rear bias.

[GreekGod]

I'm hoping Ford comes up with something trick for the 500 AWD. The 4.6 is just too damn big and heavy for the 500 chassis with AWD. Any know what they are going to do for a more powerful sport version? Perhaps a new V6 engine with 300 hp? I'll bet Jerry Barnes knows but can't say.

[DeepSea117]

i wouldn't say one is superior to the other, i like them all. FWD, RWD, AWD..never gone 4-wheelin though. what i agree with is that there are too many things electronically controlled these days on a car. these are all bandaids for decreasing driver skill--i agree with the need for left-foot braking. i mean because we've become worse drivers overall, car manufacturers have justified all these technological "bandaids" to the tune of an ever-increasing sticker price. like having sensors to determine if you're backing up into something you shouldn't be....just another substitute for drive-awareness and depth perception. or a way to integrate your cellphone (another cause of many accidents) into your car--wow. drive-by-wire is another thing that does too much thinking and can hinder left-foot braking because the computer may thinking the driver is panicking and possibly cuts power. imagine cutting power in an FWD during a high-speed turn and the driver is left-foot braking, right when the power is needed...! and we're paying more and more for these "advances".

a car that does all the thinking for you, such as the evo can do, can make a superhero out of anyone. that's cool, if you like that, i think it's a great car. but i believed i've learned more from driving my underpowered, understeering civic than i ever would have with that car. there is benefits to other types of driverains, since HP on an a FWD can only go so high. either way,i'll take any car that's given to me and drive it like hell!

[BillyGman]

Stability control is lame I'm sorry. For avoiding accidents on local roads sure... but for racing... meh the day I turn on stability control to help my underseer is the day I stop racing... And I run a 300bhp mini cooper, I'd love to let the computer do all the work for me.:rolleyes: Men have truely become weak. I have been racing since I was 14 and it makes me sad to see this dependance on electronic controls, sure they give faster times and faster cars... but are they giving better drivers? Men should drive their cars, not the other way around. if you have FWD, left foot brake and live with it, if you have rear wheel drive hold your line and come in high on the apex, if you are AWD deal with the underseer. but a computer activly selecting your brake pressure, selecting your drive train power bias, selecting power per wheel. I can see choosing a brake bias, choosing a power bias choosing a dif lock up and then living with it as the laps go on. But active systems? there's something about it that just isn't, I dunno. Perhaps I am too old school. Active controls are weak and cheap and make up for pitfalls in skill. But that's just my $.02Excellent POST!!!!! I agree completely with your viewpoints on this!! What are we headed for? Cars on the race tracks as well as on the streets that literally do all the driving for you? How pathetic!! It reminds me of how the cars were in that movie with Will Smith titled "I Robot". Remember how the Psychologist chick riding in the passenger seat was lecturing Will Smith and verbally reprimanding him because he turned the automatic pilot controls of his car off, and actually dared to drive it himself????? :eek:

I think that was just a glimpse into our LAME future when the theory will be that man cannot be trusted to make his own decisions, even while driving a car. ABS is fine, and has real benefits, but I don't even like traction control, and I'm glad my Marauder doesn't have it. Okay, rant OFF.

[Dan]

Stability control is lame I'm sorry. For avoiding accidents on local roads sure... but for racing... meh the day I turn on stability control to help my underseer is the day I stop racing... And I run a 300bhp mini cooper, I'd love to let the computer do all the work for me.:rolleyes: Men have truely become weak. I have been racing since I was 14 and it makes me sad to see this dependance on electronic controls, sure they give faster times and faster cars... but are they giving better drivers? Men should drive their cars, not the other way around. if you have FWD, left foot brake and live with it, if you have rear wheel drive hold your line and come in high on the apex, if you are AWD deal with the underseer. but a computer activly selecting your brake pressure, selecting your drive train power bias, selecting power per wheel. I can see choosing a brake bias, choosing a power bias choosing a dif lock up and then living with it as the laps go on. But active systems? there's something about it that just isn't, I dunno. Perhaps I am too old school. Active controls are weak and cheap and make up for pitfalls in skill. But that's just my $.02

A good driver doesn't necessarily need electronic controls to drive faster but he would use them in a race where they are allowed and the result of using them would allow better times or a win.

Assuming that one still wanted to stay away from electronic means there are still many, many mechanical ways to change bias. Now we are talking about moving weight around, adding clutches, playing with air pressure and so on.

In the end, a RWD guy is going to do all of those, anyway, except that he will be doing it to affect the drive of the rear wheels and not all four.

While AWD may still be in an experimental stage I don't understand why anyone would think that having 2 wheels driving is not as good as having 4. it will be interesting to see what our thoughts are on this 10 years from now assuming that they mfgrs continue their RandD on the AWD platform.

Best,

Dan

[Dan]

Excellent POST!!!!! I agree completely with your viewpoints on this!! What are we headed for? Cars on the race tracks as well as on the streets that literally do all the driving for you? How pathetic!! It reminds me of how the cars were in that movie with Will Smith titled "I Robot". Remember how the Psychologist chick riding in the passenger seat was lecturing Will Smith and verbally reprimanding him because he turned the automatic pilot controls of his car off, and actually dared to drive it himself????? :eek:

I think that was just a glimpse into our LAME future when the theory will be that man cannot be trusted to make his own decisions, even while driving a car. ABS is fine, and has real benefits, but I don't even like traction control, and I'm glad my Marauder doesn't have it. Okay, rant OFF.

Bill,

You're always so "old school." I love that about you!

I am glad that you like ABS. To me, ABS is a very proven technology that few drivers can argue, "I can do better." From everything that I have read only the best drivers can "threshhold brake" the same way that an ABS car allows.

I remember that iRobot scene. What was cool (to me) about it was that, even in the future, there are still going to be guys who take driving as seriously as everyone should take it. I am talking about DRIVERS. REAL DRIVERS. Ones who use blinkers and know how to corner at the top G level or understand trailing throttle oversteer or a neutral slide.

Still, I wonder if you would eschew computer controlled fuel injection with your engine size over manually adjusted carbs. I don't think that you would but I can recall when fuel injection started out a lot of guys did. Now, that all has changed... except maybe with NASCAR. Don't they still use carbs?

I guess, somewhere, there is a line for every driver where a technology reaches a point of proficiency that we accept it and use it.

Right now, we have only the physics of AWD and the promise of it's potential to fuel our enthusiasm for it. On paper it has too much potential to ignore. As I said in my last post, I can only hope that they keep refining it to its potential.

Dan

[RR|Suki]

I still run carbs, twin .45 Webers to be exact, and I also do not run ABS. Like I say, street driving is one thing, ABS is a plus, FI is a plus, Traction contols are a plus. But in racing... it's like hunting with an assault rifle. I have no issues with mechanical AWD, I personally don't find it that helpfull, I personally found it to be a bit of a hinderance on tarmac, better than my front drive, but nothing like mid rears. Add computer controls to the mix and I think it's a different game. All of a sudden it's who's software is better... and maybe that's not such a bad thing. However it kind of changes the question quite a bit. Also I am a firm believer that the more help people get is the stupider they become about driving... less to pay attention to doesn't make them pay more attention to the road, just more attention to other things.

As far as my thoughts on AWD, without dynamic controls they have ALOT of understeer. you can change your bias and change your dif settings and sway bars and so on and so forth and cancel it out very well, HOWEVER I find mid rear to be a better choice, due to balance and the ability to control over and understeer more with your right foot than with your dif... in general. The evo for example, last one I drove was a 6. Beautiful car wonderfull in the dirt, but on tarmac not so much. still runs very hard but hard to overcome the understeer cuz it's 50/50 power. so here is my point and I'll try to be clear. when it comes to a car that I would have my children in driving to and from school in a blizzard or a rain storm, sure AWD it's safer and easier, it would be stupid to deny that. BUT the way I race is me and the machine, no middle man (or middle AI) so from that perspective, I really dislike having to fight understeer, I've been doing it for year and if I had the money I would have bought an elise so I could stay in weight class. I would not go AWD cuz it would return me to the fight to even out the understeer, especially as you add power (which is why more powerfull AWD cars end up with a rear bias) AWD without computer help is a pain, and I am not ready to give up the drivers seeat to a computer just yet. Not in my race car, the place where I can get away from that sort of thing
But again just my $.02

[Dan]

RR,

Your two cents are fine. I am a firm believer in having the skills but using what ever technologies are availiabe to make those skills better.

I guess I should call them "enabling technologies" instead. To use your hunting example, a guy will practice to an expert level with plain old sites but will use a scope when he goes out for a the real kill on a big game hunt. He has the skill all built up but uses the technologies to enable or heighten them.

Dan

[RR|Suki]

RR,

Your two cents are fine. I am a firm believer in having the skills but using what ever technologies are availiabe to make those skills better.

I guess I should call them "enabling technologies" instead. To use your hunting example, a guy will practice to an expert level with plain old sites but will use a scope when he goes out for a the real kill on a big game hunt. He has the skill all built up but uses the technologies to enable him.

DanI suppose you are right, but I'm just not ready to move over to the computer controlled racing thing. I dunno, I love my FI in the marauder, and my ABS, but something about the relationship between me and my car, *my race car*.

I may never be the fastest I may never stop the quickest. But I can feel myself in the car, I can feel what the car feels. We go through it together, both strugle together, the weight of the steering as the tires stick (I don't have powersteering either) the feel of the inperfections in the brake rotors, front end dips into the corner and you hear it cry and the steering shuuders, weight transfers and trys to pull you off the track, drop back down on the gas and run through the gears and you feel the weight chasing you waiting for your next corner where it can grab you again. It's a battle between me an physics, how far can I push, how close can I come to making the perfect equation in my mind every split second every millimeter of that turn, can I guess how well my tires are doing? how hot my brakes are, how much fade I'll have this time, how my springs will react? What is the limit on my anticipation of all these equations? How close to perfect can I get? And how many times can I repeat that? That's why I race, and if I was to let a computer run algorythms for me just so I could be that much faster... then I would have no more reason to race.

[GodOSpeed]

Dan I too belive that AWD performance is the wave of the future.

Two years ago I reluctantly purchased a 96 subaru impreza L sedan as a second car (to keep the miles off of the merc) and that little bugger opened my eyes the wonderfull world of AWD. One would hardly call a naturally asperated impreza a sports car but throw in a little snow, ice, or gravel and this machine is a blast to drive. Pure chewed up one of my buddies Polaris SNOWMOBILE on an icy road. On dry pave rev her up to 4Gs drop the clutch and you cant help but smile over the tenatious grip and the fistyness of that boxer motor. Cookies you say she'll do that too... Forward.

My wife is sold on this trouble free car. She wants a brand new one with a turbo.

Myself I bleed blue.. I'm waiting till 07 for the Sport Trac Adrenaline cause performance vehicles should not be dictated by mother nature in this day and age. Rain, sleet, snow, or sun I'm gonna GITERDONE!!! ;)

[Dan]

RR,

I hear everything you are saying about racing. For you it seems like a very visceral experience. I haven't really said much about my background but I have done more than a few laps at Lime Rock Park in Canaan, CT in an open wheeled car and had a blast. No ABS. No traction control. No nothing. Just me, the car, the track and my nearest competitor.

It's a friggin awesome feeling.

In almost every class of racing there is a limit to the technology that is allowed to be used. It sounds like you and I have both chosen forms that keep us bolted down into the roots of racing. Good!

Those are personal decisions that we make about the types of racing that we like the most. :)

Best,

Dan

[RR|Suki]

True, true. I wanna drive an open wheel some day, that would be unreal
:D I just wish I was rich so that I didn't have to discriminate when it comes to my toys :( .

[BillyGman]

Bill,

You're always so "old school." I love that about you!Yes, you're right. I am, and I like being that way. I think that with most things, old school is better (although I also think that there are exceptions).

I am glad that you like ABS. To me, ABS is a very proven technology that few drivers can argue, "I can do better." From everything that I have read only the best drivers can "threshhold brake" the same way that an ABS car allows.Dan, ABS is great for a street vehicle IMO.

I remember that iRobot scene. What was cool (to me) about it was that, even in the future, there are still going to be guys who take driving as seriously as everyone should take it. I am talking about DRIVERS. REAL DRIVERS. Ones who use blinkers and know how to corner at the top G level or understand trailing throttle oversteer or a neutral slide.That's kind of where you and I differ on our opinions here concerniong STREET cars and STREET driving. I don't see how you can link the correct and curtious use of turn signals with things like "trailing throttle oversteer", or "neutral slide", or cornering at top G level. because those latter three things are mostly for all out on the edge driving on a track, and NOT for street driving unless you're a cop training for high speed pursuits.

Still, I wonder if you would eschew computer controlled fuel injection with your engine size over manually adjusted carbs. I don't think that you would but I can recall when fuel injection started out a lot of guys did. Ofcourse fuel injection is better. It's better for fuel efficiency, economy, and even for dialing in the correct air/fuel ratios on supercharged engines. But using fuel injection doesn't help nor aid your driving skills, nor does it drive the car for you in any way like traction control, or some torque management programs do.

I guess, somewhere, there is a line for every driver where a technology reaches a point of proficiency that we accept it and use it.

Right now, we have only the physics of AWD and the promise of it's potential to fuel our enthusiasm for it. On paper it has too much potential to ignore. As I said in my last post, I can only hope that they keep refining it to its potential.

DanIf there's any benefit to AWD (and this thread and the other one has proved it to be debateable) then it's on the race track, and not on a high perf street driven vehicle. And that is very relavent here, since this debate started in that thread which was about the "2008 Marauder" which would be a STREET car if it ever did exist, NOT a car primarily for the track. And below here is my post in that other thread, which was an effort on my part to separate the use of street cars and their requirements, from cars that are fully for the race track alone. because i think you're mixing the two together in your assertions and your commentary about AWD vs. RWD comparisants......

Dan Dan Dan, you're comparing lightweight cars to heavy cars aren't you? Mike had a good point there about the handling of the new Vette...it's a RWD vehicle and pulls over 1 G around the twisties. What more can you possibly use on the street? And how many places will you ever find on the public roads to even pull 1 g??? I think that's more than enough for street driving, don't you? How many times during the life of the car will you pull 1 g??? Twice perhaps? .....earth to Dan....come in Dan.....:P<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
__________________

[Dan]

Bill,

I started this thread here because I didn't want to take the other thread off topic. At the time I did not have it in my mind to limit it to one application or the other.

I put using blinkers in the same line of thought as the high performance driving actions because, in my mind, a top notch driver applies the same level of discipline and practice to be automatic with either one.

I think that the advantages in real world application are debatable... today. On paper, the physics behind the technology do not seem as debatable (to me). I think that we need to look to racing to see where cars are headed tomorrow. Not everything that we see in the experimental classes makes it down to us but those that do are frequently superior to what we are using today.

Best,

Dan

[Dan]

True, true. I wanna drive an open wheel some day, that would be unreal
:D I just wish I was rich so that I didn't have to discriminate when it comes to my toys :( .

Hey RR,

I'll be taking the Skip Barber 3 day race program this fall. Why don't you come up for a weekend and we can run it together?

Yes, the price tag is kind of high (around 3K) but you know how much fun it will be. And Lime Rock!??? If you have never driven it you should. It is such a challenging and fun track to learn.

Best,

Dan

[ADE 1000]

Stability control is lame I'm sorry. For avoiding accidents on local roads sure... but for racing... meh the day I turn on stability control to help my underseer is the day I stop racing... And I run a 300bhp mini cooper, I'd love to let the computer do all the work for me.:rolleyes: Men have truely become weak. I have been racing since I was 14 and it makes me sad to see this dependance on electronic controls, sure they give faster times and faster cars... but are they giving better drivers? Men should drive their cars, not the other way around. if you have FWD, left foot brake and live with it, if you have rear wheel drive hold your line and come in high on the apex, if you are AWD deal with the underseer. but a computer activly selecting your brake pressure, selecting your drive train power bias, selecting power per wheel. I can see choosing a brake bias, choosing a power bias choosing a dif lock up and then living with it as the laps go on. But active systems? there's something about it that just isn't, I dunno. Perhaps I am too old school. Active controls are weak and cheap and make up for pitfalls in skill. But that's just my $.02


I would not buy a high performance car without stability control. I attend a few track events a year in my Z06, and everytime I go out the stability control is on in "competition mode". If I take the right line around the track, it never even engages. If it does engage, it tells me that I am doing something wrong or somebody just spilled something on the track.

A non-intrusive stability control system is an excellent safety net for a novice or intermediate driver. I agree it would be lame in a competitive/professional racing environment. But it is indispensible for street driven cars that make it to the track on weekends.

[Dan]

The funny thing is that, from a winning point of view, it probably wouldn't be lame at all. Note that I am talking about DSC to the max. Correct me if I am wrong but I think that F1 outlawed this sort of thing because it would make the cars too automatic.

My understanding is that DSC science got so advanced that they were looking at being able to dial a car remotely for every section of the track. Imagine that... having your suspension dialed perfectly for each corner while you were driving to it. Now, like RR said, we have software programmers winning races.

Of course, in other forms of racing we do sort of have that now, don't we? I think that drag racing is an example where software programming controls a lot of what happens to the car as it goes down track.

It's kind of funny (and confusing) about where the lines get drawn.

[BillyGman]

A non-intrusive stability control system is an excellent safety net for a novice or intermediate driver.. Hmmm, I find that to be an interesting viewpoint. But aren't most cars that have that equipped with systems that are very "intrusive"??? I know that the GTO's are very intrusive, and will push your gas pedal right back at you during wheelspin, just as the brake pedal on ABS systems will be pushed back at you during slippery road surfaces while braking hard.

[RR|Suki]

Hey RR,

I'll be taking the Skip Barber 3 day race program this fall. Why don't you come up for a weekend and we can run it together?

Yes, the price tag is kind of high (around 3K) but you know how much fun it will be. And Lime Rock!??? If you have never driven it you should. It is such a challenging and fun track to learn.

Best,

Dan
That would actually be sweet, BUT I'll have to see what happens when the final bill comes for my Marauder motor :(. Very compelling offer though I must say :D

[RR|Suki]

Hmmm, I find that to be an interesting viewpoint. But aren't most cars that have that equipped with systems that are very "intrusive"??? I know that the GTO's are very intrusive, and will push your gas pedal right back at you during wheelspin, just as the brake pedal on ABS systems will be pushed back at you during slippery road surfaces while braking hard.
It also controls your shifting which is a little strange:confused: I think it's the 1-2 shift... I'll look for the place where I found that info (when I was interested in buying one)

[ADE 1000]

Hmmm, I find that to be an interesting viewpoint. But aren't most cars that have that equipped with systems that are very "intrusive"??? I know that the GTO's are very intrusive, and will push your gas pedal right back at you during wheelspin, just as the brake pedal on ABS systems will be pushed back at you during slippery road surfaces while braking hard.

The GTO does not have stability control. Just like my MM, it only has traction control. There is a key difference. Traction control limits wheel spin, stability control controls yaw ( the rotation of the car around its vertical axis).

Traction control is usually very intrusive, and so is the stability control on most cars. However, on certain performance cars the stability control systems have different driver selectable settings and can be quite handy during agressive driving. They allow wheel spin and a certain amount of rotation, and only kick in when things really get out of hand. Cars with this type of system include C5 and C6 Corvettes, the Cadillac CTS-V, certain Porsches, certain "M" BMWs, and most newer Ferrari models.

[BillyGman]

The GTO does not have stability control. Just like my MM, it only has traction control. There is a key difference. Traction control limits wheel spin, stability control controls yaw ( the rotation of the car around its vertical axis).

Traction control is usually very intrusive, and so is the stability control on most cars. However, on certain performance cars the stability control systems have different driver selectable settings and can be quite handy during agressive driving. They allow wheel spin and a certain amount of rotation, and only kick in when things really get out of hand. Cars with this type of system include C5 and C6 Corvettes, the Cadillac CTS-V, certain Porsches, certain "M" BMWs, and most newer Ferrari models.But the GTO DOES have a much more "intrusive" traction control than Marauders do, since it takes over your throttle position as well as the brake pressure. That's what I meant by my comparisant. other than ABS, I don't care for technology that actually drives the car for you.

[Bradley G]

The Marauder T/C does interupt the fuel delivery too.

Ask me how I know!:P


But the GTO DOES have a much more "intrusive" traction control than Marauders do, since it takes over your throttle position as well as the brake pressure. That's what I meant by my comparisant. other than ABS, I don't care for technology that actually drives the car for you.

[BillyGman]

The Marauder T/C does interupt the fuel delivery too.

Ask me how I know!:PI'm glad my MM doesn't have it. ;)

[ADE 1000]

But the GTO DOES have a much more "intrusive" traction control than Marauders do, since it takes over your throttle position as well as the brake pressure. That's what I meant by my comparisant. other than ABS, I don't care for technology that actually drives the car for you.

The GTO does have some kind of throttle feedback feature, but I am not sure it actually takes over throttle position. When I drove a GTO, the first thing I did was shut the traction control off so I have no first hand experience on how it feels. My Marauder is currently too wimpy to overwhelm its rear tires on dry pavement, but in the wet the traction control engages constantly.

The GTO system might feel more annoying due to the pedal feedback feature. But in function both systems work the same and will spoil your fun either way.

[GreekGod]

I'm sure the US military has all kinds of yaw, pitch, g-force and other controls on their aircraft, so isn't that technology going to trickle-down to the return of the Ford Pinto (the 'Pinto II'?) and the ('7 Litre') Marauder II? All the fly-by-wire limiters in a dog-fight might help a good pilot defeat an equal with a lesser equiptment. The Marauder II could be a real good 3000 pound AWD handler with fighter tech applied. Just trying to think outside the RWD box some of you dinos and fossils are caged in.