Best Car 2008 Series : The R8 Takes It!

[gator of kana]

YSSMAN can't decide who goes against who except for making up the brackets. And the Lancer Vs. Impreza poll would never come up. Only 1 Japanese car makes it into the final bracket.

The only reason the comparisons are like this is due to us nominating & voting for what car we thought was best from around the world.

I didn't know you guys turned this into a championship. Where have I been? Well maybe if he does this again sometime in the future, I'll be sure to be one of the nominators. I'll be rooting for Japan

 

[Famine]

I have a feeling that that debate may come down to deciding whether the 500 is better at being a fun, funky, practical subcompact than the SL is at being an all-out supercar for guys between 15 and 22 to have wet dreams over...

... that has yet to see a single production vehicle being made.

 

[homeforsummer]

You guys can't honestly expect a crowd of mostly young car enthusiasts, who have gathered on this forum to share the interest of virtual racing, to pick a practical subcompact over a rip-roaring supercar.

Well I wouldn't exactly consider myself old, but then I am past the "supercar poster on the wall" stage and like to think I'm a little more realistic about cars now.

Beyond the fact that your expectations are a bit unrealistic, what's so "wrong" about picking the SL Black over the 500? This is the "Best Car Series," not the "Most Influential, Unique, Innovative, or Flexible Car That Isn't a Sportscar or Supercar Series." For different people, "Best" could mean anything, and in the context of this poll, it's practically a synonym for "Favorite." And I know we've been over this before.

I refer to this quote:

I have a feeling that that debate may come down to deciding whether the 500 is better at being a fun, funky, practical subcompact than the SL is at being an all-out supercar for guys between 15 and 22 to have wet dreams over.

In other words, it's not about deciding point blank whether the Fiat or the Merc is the better car, more about deciding how good they are at what they've set out to achieve. Personally if I wanted a high performance, massively quick coupe, the Black wouldn't be very high on my list, because it's just a glorified coupe cabrio with a fancy bodykit. If I were in the market for a small car though, the 500 would be very near the top, with only the Mazda 2 and MINI competing for my attention.

Nothing personal, homeforsummer, but voting for the 500 simply because most people will vote for the SL65 seems just as lame as what you and YSSMAN are complaining about. I almost did that with the FAW Vita C1, if only as a joke, but decided against it. Of course, if you have other reasons for choosing the 500, by all means, go for it.

I think I've mentioned my reasons above, but assuming I'd be voting for it just to make a point is equally as ignorant as calling FWD cars "wrong wheel drive". I don't give two-fifths of a s*** who votes for the Merc (though it's a pity that as a forum full of car enthusiasts, many do suffer from the whole "teenagers' wet dream" thing Philly mentioned rather than opening our eyes to cars that actually matter), I just happen to think that most of the cars in the big German power race are pretty irrelevant and manufacturers could be doing something better with their resources.

 

[Joey D]

You guys can't honestly expect a crowd of mostly young car enthusiasts, who have gathered on this forum to share the interest of virtual racing, to pick a practical subcompact over a rip-roaring supercar.

I'm a motoring enthusiast and would take a practical, fun to drive, compact over a overpriced supercars that looks like it came out of a Hot Wheels package any day of the week.

I'm not crazy about Mercs, but I'm not crazy about tiny wrong-wheel-drive cars, either, regardless of how "neat" they are.

Wolfe, I typically respect you and your opinion in various things, but it's this attitude I can not stand, and it's not just you either, it's many members. Why do people call it wrong wheel drive? Having owned both front and rear drive vehicles I can think of about 20 reason why I would rather have FWD over RWD in everyday situations. I can have more fun in my car then most rear drive vehicles I've driven, despite it being "wrong wheel drive".

Honestly if people can't respect a good vehicle because of which drivetrain it uses, then you shouldn't call yourself a motoring enthusiast.

 

[gator of kana]

I'm a motoring enthusiast and would take a practical, fun to drive, compact over a overpriced supercars that looks like it came out of a Hot Wheels package any day of the week.



Wolfe, I typically respect you and your opinion in various things, but it's this attitude I can not stand, and it's not just you either, it's many members. Why do people call it wrong wheel drive? Having owned both front and rear drive vehicles I can think of about 20 reason why I would rather have FWD over RWD in everyday situations. I can have more fun in my car then most rear drive vehicles I've driven, despite it being "wrong wheel drive".

Honestly if people can't respect a good vehicle because of which drivetrain it uses, then you shouldn't call yourself a motoring enthusiast.

I think people say that front-wheel drive cars is wrong wheel drive is because

1. power issue
2. people can't stand understeer
3. people think the most crappy cars are front-wheel drive
4. drifting has gone to their head

and I go against these reasons.

 

[Philly]

Having owned both front and rear drive vehicles I can think of about 20 reason why I would rather have FWD over RWD in everyday situations. I can have more fun in my car then most rear drive vehicles I've driven, despite it being "wrong wheel drive".

How many of those 20 reasons have to do with winter?

FWD cars really are incredibly fun to drive. When I'm tossing the car around corners, I always get a huge smile out of hearing the tires squealing as I use the throttle to get that perfect corner exit.

1. power issue
2. people can't stand understeer
3. people think the most crappy cars are front-wheel drive
4. drifting has gone to their head

1. My GTI has plenty of power to get it to do anything I want with it. And put a huge smile on my face in the process. And it can put all the power down all the way through all the gears, with only slight slippage in 1st. So unless you're doing intense racing, FWD cars can put down as much power as you'll ever need. And those guys usually have a separate car for that anyway.

2. Unless you are a very good driver, understeer is going to be your best bet. It's a lot easier to lay off the gas a little than it is to countersteer and apply the right amount of throttle to save yourself from hitting that tree.

3. Yes and no. It is true that all the premium brands are still RWD. But they're in their own class. Nobody compares a Camry to a BMW 3-series. It just so happens that all the "budget" cars are FWD. And not all hatches are Chevy Aveos either. They are a blast to drive, and Joey can vouch for that too.

4.All those people drive Civics anyway. Throttle lift and e-brake, anyone?

 

[niky]

@homeforsummer: That's the point I'm trying to make...

If you had R8 money, would you buy one as a first choice? If you had CCXR money, would you buy one as your first choice?

It's not whether the R8 or CCXR is 1,000,000 times/hp/$$$/whatever better than the other... it's whether it makes you say: hmmm... if that were exactly what I got at the lottery, that'd be the only thing I'd get.

Which is why the R8 won for me... though it's a toss-up between that and an M3 or a GT-R, it's high on my list... while for CCXR or even CCX money, I'd be seriously thinking about a Zonda.

The Fiat 500 versus the SL65... hard to say... but likely the Fiat... just because the SL65 isn't even on my list, and the Fiat 500 holds a place right behind the Mini, for me.

Wrong-wheel what? Understeer what? Tell that to a guy I know who spun three or four times a few races ago in his FWD touring car... it's all in the suspension geometry, is all. Only modern cars I've driven that don't head straight for the shrubbery in every single corner are an MX-5 and, strangely, a Honda Fit. The X6 doesn't count... it has active electronic differentials... and that's cheating.

 

[Muzaffar]

Maybe I'll try and help point out what he tried to say.

I think people say that front-wheel drive cars is wrong wheel drive is because

1. power issue
2. people can't stand understeer
3. people think the most crappy cars are front-wheel drive
4. drifting has gone to their head

and I go against these reasons.

1. Yes, could quite agree there. Most FWD drive cars aren't really powerful enough for some people and probably the most powerful FWD car was only 300HP stock. Compared to some other cars that could deliver 3-400HP to the rear without having much issues......

2. Well that was the case in most scenarios with FWD cars (and playing GT4 with that problem really pisses me off ) but it should now have been mostly eliminated. Oversteer seems to be much better than understeer because controlling the car going sideways is better than to lift off the gas and braking hard. Like they saying goes, "its better to oversteer out of control than to understeer into a tree" (well maybe thats just me.....)

3. Well that is the sad truth. I think Hyundai was accused of that back then as well as a few other manufacturer, but nowadays most cars should be available in RWD, so its not really a problem to live with anyhow. Some FWD cars are fun to drive as Joey D and Philly pointed out. 👍

4. Well that is a lie. Drifting has nothing to do with FWD cars. I've seen a few people who could drift with FWD cars no problem at all. But the truth is, FWD is never competitive in motorsports anyways (well, except a few) and using a FWD car in D1GP or Formula D is like asking for trouble....... Drifting needs some serious skill and those poseurs who liked to go mad tyte drift 🤬 around parking lots are just idiots......

I think FWD is boring to some of us really. I mean you really have little potential to do anything on a FWD car. You could probably build it any way you liked to make it fast, but some FWD cars are never meant to be fast. So its really obvious why most hatchbacks are only in FWD and why sports cars and supercars never come in FWD........

 

[homeforsummer]

but some FWD cars are never meant to be fast. So its really obvious why most hatchbacks are only in FWD and why sports cars and supercars never come in FWD........

Plenty of RWD cars are never meant to be fast either The reason most hatchbacks are FWD is cost: It's cheaper to build and much easier to package a FWD car (most small FWDs have more rear legroom than a BMW 3-series due to the packaging of the Bee-Em). Also, drive a 3-series in a normal, quick fashion on a twisty road and it'll understeer before it'll oversteer, so in most situations there's no discernible difference between different drives. It's only as the cars gain more power or the road conditions change, that the characteristics become more apparent (same goes for 4WD too).

Most cars used to be RWD, but I'd hazard a guess that only a percentage of those were genuinely fun to drive. And we all know there are dozens of hot hatches around at the moment, and have been for some time, that can match the fun of most RWD cars on most roads (205gti, Integra, Lotus Elan S2, Clio Williams, Clio 182, Focus RS/ST etc... I could go on).

But I agree that you could never have a FWD supercar!

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

The new Focus RS should change the game for FWD, as they have a new suspension setup that allows much more power through the fronts without the negative side effects. Should be interesting to see how that performs.

 

[Joey D]

How many of those 20 reasons have to do with winter?

Only one to be honest, they are much easier to handle in the snow than a RWD car when completely stock...meaning no addition of winter tires. The MINI isn't great but it's worlds better then the Blazer since I don't go through every turn sideways.

1. Yes, could quite agree there. Most FWD drive cars aren't really powerful enough for some people and probably the most powerful FWD car was only 300HP stock. Compared to some other cars that could deliver 3-400HP to the rear without having much issues......

Do you really need a ton of horsepower though? I mean the Lotus Elise is fast with what 190hp? Performance all comes down to the weight of the car and how it uses the engine at hand. Honestly if you gave me a choice between the 190hp Elise and a 505hp Z06 I would take the Elise without a second thought.

4.But the truth is, FWD is never competitive in motorsports anyways (well, except a few)

FWD does just fine in drag racing, rally, touring cars, autocross, targa, gymkhana, and there are probably more I'm missing. As niky pointed out, it's all about how the car is set up. My buddy's Neon ACR will run rings around Corvettes with similar modifications at autocrosses because his car is set up better.

So its really obvious why most hatchbacks are only in FWD and why sports cars and supercars never come in FWD........

Hatches tend to be FWD to give the people more room in the cabin. If my car was rear drive it would be very cramped inside but since it's FWD it isn't that bad.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

FWD does just fine in drag racing, rally, touring cars, autocross, targa, gymkhana, and there are probably more I'm missing.

I have heard of them doing well in all those motorsports except rally, but I wouldn't doubt it, and drags I disagree with. Once they hit the go pedal all the weight shifts off the drive wheels, not good for drag racing really, no matter how you look at it.

 

[Joey D]

I have heard of them doing well in all those motorsports except rally, but I wouldn't doubt it, and drags I disagree with. Once they hit the go pedal all the weight shifts off the drive wheels, not good for drag racing really, no matter how you look at it.

The classic Mini Cooper was an excellent rally car, there are also several modern cars that do just fine with FWD on the rally scene. We have a rally here in Michigan during the winter and tons of Neons and Focus show up and do quite well.

FWD does just fine at drag racing too, GM is probably the leader here with it's Cobalt that does a 7 second quarter. Once again it comes done to how that car is set up.

 

[homeforsummer]

Do you really need a ton of horsepower though? I mean the Lotus Elise is fast with what 190hp?

The original Elise S1 had 118bhp and did sixty in around 5.5 seconds. I'd call that pretty quick too! Fair enough, it topped out at around 120mph, but again that's 45mph quicker than the fastest limit I saw in the States (75mph) and 50mph quicker than the fastest UK limit. The Isle of Man is de-restricted outside urban areas and I'd bet that the Elise's 118bhp would be enough to have fun there too...

I have heard of them doing well in all those motorsports except rally, but I wouldn't doubt it, and drags I disagree with. Once they hit the go pedal all the weight shifts off the drive wheels, not good for drag racing really, no matter how you look at it.

I've been a rally fan for years now, and I can remember the old 2000cc F2 FWD rally cars beat the WRC cars on a number of tarmac events (Corsica, dry Monte Carlo stages, San Remo etc). That always amazed me, but those F2 rally cars really were amazing, cars like the F2 Xsara, Megane, Ibiza etc. Even the modern Super 1600 FWD cars sometimes get close to the WRC ones on tarmac events, which is even more impressive.

 

[Joey D]

I don't know much about the original Elise, I just googled Elise + horsepower and got the 190hp figure. But it's just another example of why you don't need a ton of power to have fun in a car.

 

[Muzaffar]

Well yeah, I do agree with what you said. I did missed one or two crucial points about FWD though......

Plenty of RWD cars are never meant to be fast either The reason most hatchbacks are FWD is cost: It's cheaper to build and much easier to package a FWD car (most small FWDs have more rear legroom than a BMW 3-series due to the packaging of the Bee-Em). Also, drive a 3-series in a normal, quick fashion on a twisty road and it'll understeer before it'll oversteer, so in most situations there's no discernible difference between different drives. It's only as the cars gain more power or the road conditions change, that the characteristics become more apparent (same goes for 4WD too).

Totally forgot to point that out. Thanks for sharing the knowledge man. 👍 Yeah, I know most hatchbacks are fun and all but when it comes down to overall performance (in terms of speed, handling, etc.) most RWD cars do excel at that more than FWD cars.

Do you really need a ton of horsepower though? I mean the Lotus Elise is fast with what 190hp? Performance all comes down to the weight of the car and how it uses the engine at hand. Honestly if you gave me a choice between the 190hp Elise and a 505hp Z06 I would take the Elise without a second thought.

Well not really, but you got to look at it overall. Of course there are some cars that doesn't need good power to be fun and have serious performance advantage, but I was simply pointing out what limitations the FWD cars has in terms of power. You know most FWD cars starts to have problems when they have too much power on those front wheels.....

FWD does just fine in drag racing, rally, touring cars, autocross, targa, gymkhana, and there are probably more I'm missing. As niky pointed out, it's all about how the car is set up. My buddy's Neon ACR will run rings around Corvettes with similar modifications at autocrosses because his car is set up better.

Well if they are a heavily funded team that is. Like I said, there are a few sports which the FWD excelled more. But if you put it into a big scope, how many FWD cars are there that is as good as a RWD/4WD drivetrain? Surely it would be almost impossible for a FWD car to be competitive in Le Mans or NASCAR or even WRC. Sure they are good on tarmac rallies or autocrosses, but what happens when they have to race on dirt or snow rallies? In drag racing, there are a few FWD cars that are competitive but they are mostly heavily funded teams (well I only know about the Scion and the GM Cobalt team that are FWD) or need serious modifications to make it competitive. Cars like the Supra, Skyline, etc. don't need to be heavily modified to run some good times on the drag strip. But again, they are only a few of them in drag racing and most drag cars are RWD for a reason..... (especially the funny cars)

Sorry but I missed the point about how the car is set up after typing that.

Hatches tend to be FWD to give the people more room in the cabin. If my car was rear drive it would be very cramped inside but since it's FWD it isn't that bad.

Well yeah, can't complain about that. FWD platforms cars are usually more towards usability than sheer performance. But I don't mind having a RWD Clio V6 either as well......

 

[niky]

ACtually... 300 hp and FWD only happens with the midsizers... and even then it's not pretty... Ford will be trying to push it with the new Focus RS... official line is, the new Quaife ATB is good enough that you don't need AWD... but then they said that before... still, I reckon it'll be a great drive.

FWD is great in rally. Think of it as an AWD minus the off-the-line traction advantage. It's stable, very light, and just like an AWD car, keep your foot to the floor while countersteering and you'll avoid a nasty spin.

Of course, short wheelbase RWD machines made terrific rally cars... incredibly nimble and pointy... so pointy you could kill yourself by sneezing...

It's actually in drag racing that FWD suffers... it's very hard to get around the fact that your drivewheels are too far forward. Custom built FWD dragsters often involve stripping the rear end to a sketchy tube frame and shopping cart wheels and shoving the engine far forward of the rear axle... sometimes in a longitudinal position (similar to the back end of a supercar, actually)... this makes for a dragster that's only slightly traction compromised compared to a RWD dragster... but it's only at this level where FWD can approach RWD in drag... and such a configuration is completely unusable anywhere else.

It's hard to get a FWD car to perform well in standing acceleration... but it can be done, thanks to new tire technology and more creative tuning. Still... it takes just 300 hp for an AWD or RWD compact to hit sub-5 second 0-60 mph times nowadays... while it takes some 400 hp for a FWD to do the same thing.

But the 400 hp FWD will still have a better top speed and 60-100 acceleration.

----

True, there may never be a FWD supercar, but Lotus did try to make a FWD sportscar. And they succeeded... unfortunately, it was a market flop... despite a brilliant chassis and handling... because it was just too expensive for a FWD convertible, no matter how much clever engineering went on under the skin.

----

Hmmm... A FWD supercar or sportscar... would require at least 500 bhp (must be a turbo 2 liter or a 2.5, since anything bigger will hurt the weight balance... hmmm... turbo 2-liter V6 with direct injection... yummm...), 265 width front tires, 245 width rear tires, active rear-steering and a Quaife LSD... it'd probably hit 60 mph in 4 seconds, achieve over 1 g of cornering grip, go through tires like crazy and drink oil like a race car.

 

[McLaren]

Well not really, but you got to look at it overall. Of course there are some cars that doesn't need good power to be fun and have serious performance advantage, but I was simply pointing out what limitations the FWD cars has in terms of power. You know most FWD cars starts to have problems when they have too much power on those front wheels.....

And what would you call too much power? Because, it seems to me as time goes by, a lot of FWD cars are starting to gain more power from the factory.

 

[Muzaffar]

And what would you call too much power? Because, it seems to me as time goes by, a lot of FWD cars are starting to gain more power from the factory.

Well that is true, but if there was ever a 300,400 or even a 500HP FWD car, wouldn't it have serious issues such as tire wear, weight distribution and driving instability? I know some of these manufacturer could mare more powerful version of their FWD car range, but it takes a short time to push the car really hard to only find out how much harder it is to drive the car compared to a RWD/4WD car of a similar horsepower range. But it does depends on the setup of the car of course.....

 

[McLaren]

Well that is true, but if there was ever a 300,400 or even a 500HP FWD car, wouldn't it have serious issues such as tire wear, weight distribution and driving instability? I know some of these manufacturer could mare more powerful version of their FWD car range, but it takes a short time to push the car really hard to only find out how much harder it is to drive the car compared to a RWD/4WD car of a similar horsepower range. But it does depends on the setup of the car of course.....

There are 300Bhp FWD cars, or close enough. My Acura has close to 290Bhp, and none of those issues have ever been a problem in the close to 2 years I've had her. The only problem that keeps popping up is the material that hold the spoiler down keeps coming out.

Your second part confuses me a bit. Are you saying it only takes a short amount of time to see how harder it is drive a FWD at the limit than a RWD?

 

[niky]

RE: NASCAR, F1, etcetera... FWD won't work in those formats... since they're basically "spec" races... F1 is very strict about it... RWD, no turbos, exactly the same displacement, the same ECU... running on the same gas... there was a time when F1 was quite adventurous... all wheel drive, six wheelers, turbine cars, boxer engines... 1500 hp turbocharged four cylinders... nowadays, it's basically a spec race where everyone spends millions of dollars to make their cars faster and faster every year... despite the horsepower and aerodynamic restrictions.

Front-wheel drivers were used in the past in Indy-racing... and were not just competitive... but winners... look up the Miller cars (those were amazing machines)... the economical packaging of the front-drive layout, the low drivetrain losses and the aerodynamics made them good oval racers.

It's only when the lack of traction became a really big issue due to higher power outputs that FWD became really uncompetitive... then because AWD was kicking ass that restrictions were brought in that basically made all high-spec racing RWD only.

Some racing teams and efforts, though, persevered... and prevailed... note the unbelievable story of the Pikes-Peak winning Toronado... and the success of JWRC and FWD in (admittedly, rule-balanced) touring car formats.

(gads, it's almost impossible to find any info on racing Toronados online! I've been looking for hourse for a link to an article I read in print before, but I give up!)

With new tires, new differential technology and better suspension design, we're entering a new era of FWD performance... Tire wear is an issue, but this is an issue facing anyone who owns a RWD supercar... ever try to find rear tires for a Corvette? Prices are insane! And a few drag runs will scrub them clean off...

Look up the VW Golf GTi R. It's a 400 hp front-driver that can hit 60 in under 5 seconds. Tire wear? Just do what the big rear drivers do... get wider tires... it's got 265mm tires, all around, under wider fenders. How hard to drive? It goes down a race track fast... really fast.

Any car with 400-500 hp will have handling problems unless you design for them... terminal oversteer, terminal understeer, poor power delivery... (even with AWD, unless you have wide enough tires and good differentials) etcetera.

And with today's active differentials, or even with a simple LSD, you can dial out much of the understeer inherent in FWD. True, you'll never get power oversteer... but that's never the fastest way around the race track, anyway.

 

[gator of kana]

Well that is true, but if there was ever a 300,400 or even a 500HP FWD car, wouldn't it have serious issues such as tire wear, weight distribution and driving instability?

The word "technology" solves issues like that.

 

[homeforsummer]

The word "technology" solves issues like that.

The word "physics" would like a word with you...

 

[Leonidae]

The "Japanese" will bend the "physics" with "technology".. Oh wait, Ford Focus RS will have 300bhp and trick front suspension and differential. nvm then. it just takes WRC experience to make a good FWD.. but I'd still rather see AWD in Focus RS. it deserves it.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I almost forgot:

Supercharged 3.5L V6 making 240kw through the front wheels. Clearly, TRD never got the "technology" message though, and it's not a great handler, gets beaten by the Mazda 3 MPS, but it shows what manufacturers are willing to try.

 

[Famine]

The "Japanese" will bend the "physics" with "technology".. Oh wait, Ford Focus RS will have 300bhp and trick front suspension and differential. nvm then. it just takes WRC experience to make a good FWD.. but I'd still rather see AWD in Focus RS. it deserves it.

It doesn't deserve to weigh 200kg more and have 10% more of its power eaten by its own drivetrain before it meets the road.

Plus it laps Ford's Lommel #7 track faster than the Evo X and Impreza WRX STi.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

It doesn't deserve to weigh 200kg more and have 10% more of its power eaten by its own drivetrain before it meets the road.

Plus it laps Ford's Lommel #7 track faster than the Evo X and Impreza WRX STi.

Is that the forthcoming Focus RS or the previous one (which beat a WRX on Top Gear didn't it?)?

 

[homeforsummer]

The "Japanese" will bend the "physics" with "technology".

They don't "bend" physics, merely make better use of existing physics.

 

[Famine]

Is that the forthcoming Focus RS or the previous one (which beat a WRX on Top Gear didn't it?)?

The new one. Ford are quite excited about it

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

The new one. Ford are quite excited about it

Aren't we all? The revo-knuckle front suspension they're going on about, it sounds oh so interesting.