Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They handle poorly. Especially in snow and slick conditions.
As for drivers who need to come to a complete stop to make a turn, push em.
Road armor bumpers for everyone
Tail gate, pick up the pace if not get pushed. Can't stay in their lane, report them for possible DWI
Actually rwd vehicles perform poorly in slick and snow conditions. More so than fwd. Sure tires play a big part in traction when it comes to weather conditions, but I feel more confident in a fwd vehicle in snow conditions.
Actually rwd vehicles perform poorly in slick and snow conditions. More so than fwd. Sure tires play a big part in traction when it comes to weather conditions, but I feel more confident in a fwd vehicle in snow conditions.
I never had a problem with rwd. Over steer is much more controllable than understeer. I've owned 2 wheel drive pickups, a Cadillac Fleetwood brougham. Had 2 cars that were fwd Buick Riviera 3.8 Supercharged and Cadillac Deville, both were pretty horrible on unplowed roads.
Once the front end breaks loose you're at the mercy of whichever way it decides to go whether you have the wheels cranked one way or the other. I used to use the rear parking brake in both to kick the rear end around to be able to bring it into a controlled slide opposed to the front wheels just plowing.
2 wheel drive pickups town cars/crown vics the Fleetwood never had an issue. Much more control. Mono beam front end pickups on the other hand handle just like a fwd car. Front end plows in the corner/turn.
I never had a problem with rwd. Over steer is much more controllable than understeer. I've owned 2 wheel drive pickups, a Cadillac Fleetwood brougham. Had 2 cars that were fwd Buick Riviera 3.8 Supercharged and Cadillac Deville, both were pretty horrible on unplowed roads.
Once the front end breaks loose you're at the mercy of whichever way it decides to go whether you have the wheels cranked one way or the other. I used to use the rear parking brake in both to kick the rear end around to be able to bring it into a controlled slide opposed to the front wheels just plowing.
2 wheel drive pickups town cars/crown vics the Fleetwood never had an issue. Much more control. Mono beam front end pickups on the other hand handle just like a fwd car. Front end plows in the corner/turn.
Meh. I used to put my RWD Mustang in 2nd gear in the ski area parking lot, pop the clutch, get out, and push it to get it rolling. I went to college in Burlington, VT and drove a 3-on-the-tree Ford Maverick with summer tires. I could get around but you really had to plan ahead. There's no way you could do a hill start at a stoplight on a snow covered road. You had to really pay attention to where you parked or you'd never get out. Any FWD car with good snow tires is going to blow away a RWD car for winter driving unless you put chains on it. A Vermont cop car Crown Vic with chains will go anywhere. A ski house roommate of mine years ago used to own a 320i. The ultimate skidding machine. Even with snow tires, I must have pushed that thing 100 times.
That Mustang used to be fun to drive in downtown Boston when it had the old elevated central artery. At 70 mph on an empty road, you'd shift 1/2 lane on every expansion joint. You'd start in the left lane on a left sweeping corner and end up in the right lane.
For fun to drive, there's no question. RWD is more entertaining. If you're looking for an appliance car that will cope with the snow belt, FWD with snow tires is going to be better.
many here mention safety when suggesting more power is better. in the end the best safety device EVER created is the one between the drivers ears. my last car was an inline six powered fairmont making a grand total of 85 horsepower, on a good day with the stars properly aligned, and god was feeling happy. needless to say it kept up with traffic, usually. it was the epitome of momentum car. you had to keep your momentum up, especially when going up hills and such. if you didnt, the car struggled to get it back.
my current car is an 05 grand marquis with a 225 hp V8. push the throttle pedal it goes, punch it goes faster. no need to maintain momentum like in the fairmont.
in a collision, the merc will be a safer car due to the better design, heavier weight, and added safety features. avoiding the collision though requires a driver that pays attention to what is going on around around the car, and drives like others are not paying attention. it also requires that the driver have a plan in case someone does something stupid, so you can drive around an issue. sometimes that means more throttle to escape, sometimes that means good brakes to avoid a collision, and sometimes that means a suspension able to handle sharp maneuvers necessary to avoid a collision. but it all start with the person behind the wheel.
She drives a lot of very fast cars, from this Subaru to Porsches and Corvettes. She's one of a LOT of women who like to drive fast that i know of (my wife included) and sees cars as FUN (driving like in that video).
Cars can indeed be fun, like roller coasters that you control. High power, low power, whatever. Here is my 400 hp V8 RX7 when I was giving rides at a slalom race event:
That car was very quick and pulled over 1 G of force laterally (that means when cornering your full weight was pulled to the side of the car when riding in it). I enjoyed that car on the street and on the track for 5 years.
Have you ever ridden a fast roller coaster? That's what's fun about fast cars, except that you aren't just riding in it, you are in control of it, and that's not a male or female thing. BOTH genders can love that feeling, which is why members of both genders have fast cars.
Yes, there are cars that are utility vehicles, but there are a lot of cars that are not, for those of us that want something more when we drive than the bare minimum of mobility.
To be honest, I witnessed "all that power" application last week.
friday night, local FWY. Usual go home traffic. Suddenly we got a Mustang and some Dodge neon looking something chasing it, hit FWY. Skipping lanes, playing tag with Mustang lead.
To rid of his tail, Mustang HIT IT and passed everyone on the shoulder. Literally dusted his chaser. Crap was flying all over R hand lane. But he did it.
So yeah, SOMETIMES all that power comes necessary.
I haven't been in any cars lately that are slow enough that they worried me. The last one I did was the first generation Prius was the last one but the subsequent Priuses were adequate. The Chevy Spark with 84 horsepower would probably be as bad or worse.
But, its kind of like a good stereo in a car. Its just nice to have the power available.
My fiance has a Civic with an automatic. Its perfectly adequate. Its geared as such that it leaps off the line from a stop. However, when you are travelling at highway speeds, it takes a hot second to build revs and downshift. I joke that its a car begging for a stick shift. Compared to my V6 impala, hardly a muscle car by any standards, its annoying. I have the power and torque to apply and take me away whenever I want to.
So, I don't think its all about testosterone. Its just that its nice to have when you care to apply it.
While it is true that driving a high performance car is exhilarating,the majority of people drive congested roads where this rarely happens. Not to mention the very costly tickets and loss of licenses if you ever attempted touse that much power. I drive a 160 HP 5 speed manual hatchback and cannot everthink of a time I did not feel safe merging or passing someone when I neededto. Unless you live in an area with car free twisty roads most driving ispretty boring. If that is what makes you happy though more power to you. Myself I chooseto spend my spare money on bikes that every time I go riding (mostly woods and dirtroads) I can get all the excitement I want without having to floor a gas pedal.
Last edited by tgmath; 06-05-2017 at 03:28 PM..
Reason: size
People who appreciate a powerful (and/or beautiful, good handling, etc.) car are not utilitarian car users... we actually like cars as cars (and/or bikes) so it's not just about A to B.
The utilitarian A to B types who own a car only because they don't have good enough public transport are deaf to this. I can't explain a "fun" car to them any more than I can explain why I like the music I like to a deaf person. One who was born deaf, stone deaf.
That said I am always wanting to stand out from the herd, so a 60's Moskvitch would be an excellent addition to my "fleet" - even though it's not so powerful, it's certainly different.
I have said this before, to me, the A to B people are very analogous to winos drinking Mad Dog just to get drunk. Just want the cheapest and easiest way to get from where they are (sober) to where they want to go (drunk).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
