Quote:
Originally Posted by enkeivette
. . . Sorry guys, I believe the makers of these front engine rear drive supercars over yall when it comes down to what's best for a front engine rear drive car. . .
|
These are street cars home slice. I was talking about idealized race cars. Ultraperio described it in more detail. And here's still some more.
Quote:
Center of gravity forward or back
In steady-state cornering, because of the center of gravity, front-heavy cars tend to understeer and rear-heavy cars to oversteer, all other things being equal. The mid-engine design offers the ideal center of gravity.
When all four wheels and tires are of equal size, as is most often the case with passenger cars, a weight distribution close to "50/50" (i.e. the center of mass is mid-way between the front and rear axles) produces the preferred handling compromise.
The rearward weight bias preferred by sports and racing cars results from handling effects during the transition from straight-ahead to cornering. During corner entry the front tires, in addition to generating part of the lateral force required to accelerate the car's center of mass into the turn, also generate a torque about the car's vertical axis that starts the car rotating into the turn. However, the lateral force being generated by the rear tires is acting in the opposite torsional sense, trying to rotate the car out of the turn. For this reason, a car with "50/50" weight distribution will understeer on initial corner entry. To avoid this problem, sports and racing cars often have a more rearward weight distribution. In the case of pure racing cars, this is typically between "40/60" and "35/65." This gives the front tires an advantage in overcoming the car's moment of inertia (yaw angular inertia), thus reducing corner-entry understeer.
|
In short, if you need/want a car that will easily change direction, you want a rearward weight bias. You'll also tend to get oversteer in steady state cornering, but that's not the reason for the rearward bias.