it should be all N/A 4 bangers lack torque

and my 3.0L v6 is gutless with no horsepower or torque

:haha::D

Thats true. Most people who buys Merc and BMWs are old men who likes the title of "owning a european car". They are not going to go 0-60 as fast as possible in their M5 because they have kids.

Don't forget the parent-powered honger/mainland boys and girls that cruise around No. 3 Rd...

LOL why are we even disputing it? larger displacement = more potential to yield power,

But anyways, I believe an FWD performance car is very valid, won't be a lemans track car but for a daily driver with a good amount of performance FWD isn't impossible

em too.

Old Honda's were awesome. Double-wishbone suspension, light chassis, and a reliable 4-cylinder gas miser with so much potential, how can you lose? Sure, they may be a SOHC 1.6L 4-cylinder motor pushing 110hp, but who the hell cares when you're saving all that money from the get go? I'm sure there are people out there who rake in a 6-digit salary and are laughing all the way to the bank!

We can thank Initial-D. :D

Here in my opinion are some good FWD (quick, nippy, or fun to drive)

Honda Civic SI
Acura RSX Type-S
Mazdaspeed 3
Acura TL Type-S (latest gen and previous gen)
Cobalt SS

As for your question as to what supposedly makes a Honda FWD "better". If you're talking about cars like the FD2, I think Honda's suspension and chassis design works well as a FWD platform.

Go drive a Civic SI, or a RSX Type-S, they're really neutral, no torque steer.

I can't speak for other FWD cars, but as far as I know, the FD2 is the fastest track stock FWD you can buy? Or perhaps the Mugen RR.?

^
he pretty much said it. Light chassis and double wishbone suspension. Some swaps are pretty much bolt on and yet you get good gas mileage out of it.

But being a Honda owner I feel ashamed of what your friend has said.

In General:

Most FWD fundamentally are limited due to the weight and layout of the engine.. There are several tricks like Ford's Revo Knuckle that partially solve the problems eg torque steer. not to mention Honda's SH differential. However it adds to R&D and manufacturing cost.. since FWD is relegated to economy cars.. it is just not worth it.

The bottom line is it is harder to have a good handling FWD.. it is even harder to modify / add power to a stock FWD car without causing a lot of other problems.

In the end RWD is easier, hence require less investment etc.

I would say Revo Knucle is probably the best FWD setup right now (for high HP ~300HP and general driving). and guess what? Ford licenses it from ZF.

Actually it is the suspension geometry that affects the handling more.. double wishbone or not is more of a packaging issue.

And yes the suspension geometry is also limited by the packaging of the engine and the drivetrain.

Fundamentally FWD is designed for manufacturing efficiency and low cost.. much like CVT. If you want real good performance that is on par with RWD, in the end you have to spend more to get the same results.

^

Yup. For example. the RSX uses front McPhersons.

VTEC! :thumbsup:

You can do decent things with McHappy struts, but if one is designing a performance car from the ground up, one generally wouldn't start with a strut setup.

FWD is never going to be able to put down power like RWD or have the handling balance quite like RWD either.

How do you feel having 2 back wheels doing nothing at all other than rolling?

LOL
4 bangers lack torque? My 2.5 sentra puts about 180 torque at around 2500 rpm...The SRT-4 Caliber pushes around 285....

^


2500rpm?
try again

With these modifications, the power achieved is 200 horsepower at 6,600 rpm and 180 lb-ft of torque at 5,200 rpm (when using premium unleaded fuel). Helping to put all this power to the ground is an optional Helical Limited-Slip Differential (available with Spec V only). The Spec V model is available only with a close-ratio 6-speed manual transmission. It also has unique suspension, brakes, tires and body structure changes (versus the base SE-R).

Most people would rather get the 180lb-ft@5,200rpm than the 139lb-ft@6100rpm, unless he/she is a honda fanboi.

not to say, the spec V is 6 grands cheaper than the Civic. :eek:

Unless you are tracking your car, or breaking road laws on a regular basis, RWD is a novelty.

:rolleyes::rolleyes: and u are comparing with Si because?

did i say SER is a bad car? no i love it, its affordable yet its a huge improvement over the last gen. And i mean HUGE!


why not compare apple to apple, u are comparing a 2.5L to a 2.0L in terms of torque because?

TSX K24
4-cyl 172 @ 4300rpm torque
201@7100rpm hp

are you gonna apply that faggot logic of urs?

most people would prefer the 172@4300rpm torque over the 180@ 5200rpm logic again? oh wait, this time honda is being placed in the first place so i know u will apply someting else

+1

a stock civic SI will stomp your stock Mazda 3 anytime

to op: watch for r18 civics
cuz
si is outta ur league

LOL guess who's back! :eek:

the 148hp mazda 3 is slower than an si? :Orly:

lol u are alive again

Mazda 3 is a fine automobile. But a modified Honda is a bit more superior. I believe your friend was talking about Type R, SIR, B16 swapped Civic Hatch or even a H22 Prelude. I've driven the Mazda 3 and owned a Protege5. I have to agree that the Mazda 3 have a nice firm suspension and handles really well when breaking the municipal law. But I've to agree that Honda does built a better car in terms of FWD performance. I've also owned a H22 Prelude which is a very fun car to drive which i would rate it higher than a Mazda 3 or Protege 5. Let alone the Type R and B16 swapped Civics, these Honda have way more fun than a slightly suspension tuned Mazda 3. If you wanna compare Mazdaspeed 3 with hondas, you better stack it up with a Type R or a RSX-S or even a WRX for comparison.

and my car can smoke both those cars. lol who gives a shit.