BRZ trade in for Type R

[Kevin29]

Edit: granted this is more focused on rally racing, it's still a thing. Scroll down to "front wheel drive" (it's in all caps).[/QUOTE]

The only thing you're going to lose is RWD, but the Type-R in overall performance eats the BRZ alive. I don't think you'll care about the BRZ any longer.

LOL i imagine so! Yeah the RWD is prob one of the items that makes the BRZ a better racecar than an Si out of the box but that being said the Lightning lap doesn't show that lol , but its hard to beat the feel of a RWD. Although the RWD can scare the hell out of you on a racetrack but so can a FWD lol i have put both of them off track but thankfully didn't hit a wall etc.

Sponsored

 

[Jwolf]

Swapping an FR to an FF is rarely done because of the technical requirements to do so. Additionally, most homologation rules would go against it. As I stated before, FF has its advantages (power output) and its disadvantages (understeer and torque steer). Most drivers prefer an FR car over the FF car because of the handling characteristics that FR has over FF, but that's not to say that FF doesn't have its advantages on a track, and if you can set up an FF car to oversteer, then a driver could in theory use it well to their advantage.

FF race cars are very rare. Most manufacturers that build a race car from the ground up go after an MR setup because it has the advantages an FF car has (power) while still maintaining the advantages an FR car has (handling) which is why you rarely see an FF purpose-built race car. To be honest, FR purpose built race cars are pretty rare nowadays as well since MR is simply better. AWD offers the ability to torque steer without needing to use the brakes which is why it's been used in motorsport.

There was one FF purpose built race car I can remember, the Nissan GT-R LM Nismo prototype that was created. It utilized a very backwards setup with super wide wheels up front, thin wheels in the rear and a full-fledged FF setup. The exhaust outlets were on the hood of the car and it shot flames. Was a pretty cool car that would need a lot of work to make it work against MR cars since they simply had the physics advantage all around. That said, it didn't do so well on its debut running 1:50's over the Porsche's 1:30 times. This is kind of expected in a field of all cars that are either hybrid or MR based vehicles. It was considered a failure, I'll admit, but does show that an FF car can work out in terms of a race car.

Edit: granted this is more focused on rally racing, it's still a thing. Scroll down to "front wheel drive" (it's in all caps).

I didn't want to mention Rally because that fool you're replying to doesn't know what he's talking about. He's just going to come up with some more BS. Lol

 

[CivilciviC]

Once moving, there is very little downside to FWD. Can it understeer if going too fast? Yes. But RWD can also oversteer under the same conditions. And AWD does not gain you anything besides more weight, once already moving. Let's not also forget how AWD systems vary greatly. Some are fwd biased, some rwd biased... In effect, you still end up getting the results of fwd Vs rwd.

Due to the inherent weight associated with AWD, you have to brake earlier, your cornering speeds decrease, etc. Where it makes sense is when a car is putting down mad horsepower and torque, then AWD helps maintain traction in those situations over fwd or rwd. But at sub 400hp? Eeehhhh...

 

[FlexRex]

I didn't want to mention Rally because that fool you're replying to doesn't know what he's talking about. He's just going to come up with some more BS. Lol

At least he replied with something. You just slid in for an insult and no substance. That’s ok, it shows what level of intelligence we are dealing with.

So, then there are a lot of cars running fwd setups in racing, I get it @tinyman392. Too numerous to count in fact. Call me a fool again but I will select a rwd or awd for racing purposes like I said in the beginning. I like to go against the grain I guess.

 

[FlexRex]

Due to the inherent weight associated with AWD, you have to brake earlier, your cornering speeds decrease, etc. Where it makes sense is when a car is putting down mad horsepower and torque, then AWD helps maintain traction in those situations over fwd or rwd. But at sub 400hp? Eeehhhh...

And no inherent cons w fwd? Hmm..

 

[CivilciviC]

This is further proven by the current hot hatch battle. Enter the STi, Golf R, Focus RS and Type R... And yet the CTR is faster than all three AWD cars on various tracks, regardless of fwd or rwd biased AWD system, and regardless if the focus RS puts out way more power from the factory than the CTR.

 

[CivilciviC]

And no inherent cons w fwd? Hmm..

So you're saying rwd and AWD don't have cons? Hmmmm..

And yup, once moving, the cons very equally level out.

Once again, the CTR is faster than three different AWD turbo monsters.

 

[CivilciviC]

At least he replied with something. You just slid in for an insult and no substance. That’s ok, it shows what level of intelligence we are dealing with.

So, then there are a lot of cars running fwd setups in racing, I get it @tinyman392. Too numerous to count in fact. Call me a fool again but I will select a rwd or awd for racing purposes like I said in the beginning. I like to go against the grain I guess.

Go for it. It's way easier to drive fwd balls out, then rwd.

At the end of the day, if you want any sort of advantage at the track, drop the vehicle weight. That will be an actual advantage. That's why the CTR outshines it's competitors on the track.

 

[Jwolf]

At least he replied with something. You just slid in for an insult and no substance. That’s ok, it shows what level of intelligence we are dealing with.

So, then there are a lot of cars running fwd setups in racing, I get it @tinyman392. Too numerous to count in fact. Call me a fool again but I will select a rwd or awd for racing purposes like I said in the beginning. I like to go against the grain I guess.

You lack coherence in most of what you say, you also don't listen to what others are telling you.

 

[Jwolf]

Go for it. It's way easier to drive fwd balls out, then rwd.

At the end of the day, if you want any sort of advantage at the track, drop the vehicle weight. That will be an actual advantage. That's why the CTR outshines it's competitors on the track.

I thought the RS was still the faster car? It's close I know that much.

 

[FlexRex]

Go for it. It's way easier to drive fwd balls out, then rwd.

At the end of the day, if you want any sort of advantage at the track, drop the vehicle weight. That will be an actual advantage. That's why the CTR outshines it's competitors on the track.

Agree on both accounts. Also why miatas are a popular platform for tracking.

 

[samji]

Nurburgring times are useless when comparing cars. We all know the CTR that ran that time was not a stock car. It you want to compare the track prowess of cars that roll off a regular assembly line, the C&D Lightning Lap is probably the best resource we have.

Only 2 things were done, a roll cage (for safety) and rear seats that were taken out because of the added weight of the cage to bring it back to the same weight as it comes factory.

I wouldn't say it's useless as it gives you a bench mark of how the car would run over a long stretch of road. Its just a different metric one can utilize of many others. Yeah, those cars are faster on a short track but its like comparing a sprinter to a long distance runner. Thats why the CTR is able to even be in the ball park as other super cars at the end of the day. The M2/M4 are definitely faster cars in short distances, but without mods, they fade (brakes, heat, etc) and it shows with the times they are clocking in at the ring. The new Supra is another example, a lot of journalists talked about how they can keep driving without brake fade or heat issues so I know it will probably put a very competitive time.

Moreover, every track is going to be different, and various cars will do better on certain tracks. You shouldn't use any one track to gauge the performance of a car, let alone, draw absolute conclusions on whether or not car A is faster than car B.

 

[CivilciviC]

I thought the RS was still the faster car? It's close I know that much.

It might depend on the track, but I remember at least on two occasions the CTR being a smidge faster than the RS. I wonder if different drivers could get different results with which is faster, but suffice to say that FWD and less horsepower is not a hindrance of the CTR, when compared to the RS

 

[CivilciviC]

Only 2 things were done, a roll cage (for safety) and rear seats that were taken out because of the added weight of the cage to bring it back to the same weight as it comes factory.

I wouldn't say it's useless as it gives you a bench mark of how the car would run over a long stretch of road. Its just a different metric one can utilize of many others. Yeah, those cars are faster on a short track but its like comparing a sprinter to a long distance runner. Thats why the CTR is able to even be in the ball park as other super cars at the end of the day. The M2/M4 are definitely faster cars in short distances, but without mods, they fade (brakes, heat, etc) and it shows with the times they are clocking in at the ring. The new Supra is another example, a lot of journalists talked about how they can keep driving without brake fade or heat issues so I know it will probably put a very competitive time.

Moreover, every track is going to be different, and various cars will do better on certain tracks. You shouldn't use any one track to gauge the performance of a car, let alone, draw absolute conclusions on whether or not car A is faster than car B.

I believe Honda also removed the AC or something like that, to equalise the weight. That, and the much better tires they used. I don't consider the tires to be a game changer though. While they can greatly vary the performance of a car, they're the easiest part to swap out and most nobody goes for the same oem tires whenever they go to replace them on any car. They all go to something stickier in most cases, espwically on a sporty car.

I'm ok with Honda adding the cage in for safety purposes, so long as it didn't truly increase the chassis rigidity, like they claimed. But I wish they left the other bits as is. The 40-50 pound weight savings wasn't exactly necessary and it would've made arguments for or against the CTR that much more clear. But oh well.

 

[FlexRex]

Much better tire than what? Tires absolutely matter.

Is this in the context of lapping the ring? Im sure all manufacturers try to “cheat” in ways to chase numbers so i dont know that we can just straight compare to others or our factory setups even.

Like im sure that they ran different pads too if they went with grippier tires. Its not like there is some standard is there?

Sponsored