Last post on Nov 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM
You are in the Acura RL
What is this discussion about?
Acura RL, Sedan
#2617 of 7386 Re: Acura's RL AWD system [ksoman #1175]
Jun 08, 2004 (7:03 am)
Actually I thought the "debate" was going down a path concerning the Lexus ES300 and the Camry (fraternal twins, or very similar cousins so to speak). If you engineer the AWD system for the Lexus, you essentially get "two for the price of one" for your engineering and tooling budget.
This particular forum is not the place, but it would be interesting to see a list of FWD, RWD, and AWD cars from 2003, 2004 -- planned for 2005 and "reliably rumored" beyond that.
Acura's RL with SH-AWD ought to trickle down to the Honda line in the not too distant future. Don't you think?
The "we swear its true" crowd here in cyberspace, claims the TL will get SH-AWD next -- how soon thereafter will the Accord offer it, then who knows which model?
The comparisons -- when there is THIS much shared engineering between the regular and the premium lines are, IMHO, inevitable.
Jun 08, 2004 (9:51 am)
Lexusguy - Yes, it is true that not all AWD cars will exhibit understeer. In addition to the Evo, I believe that the Audi S4 has nabbed a 1.0 on the skidpad. The WRX Sti does not have the same udnersteer problem as the "regular" WRX. But that is because of some other work-arounds to get past the balance issue. Uber-sticky tires would be one possibility.
"And, AWD inherently is neither balanced or not balanced, FWIW." - Mark
First, I thought I was pretty clear in specifying FWD-biased AWD in my original post. With FWD, you have a tendency toward a forward weight bias. A RWD-biased AWD system, such as in the BMWs and Nissan's, does not necessarily have the same challenges to overcome.
And just to clarify...
On my remarks regarding SH-AWD being a work-around: it is a work-around to compensate for the inherent balance problem with the typical FWD layout. By that I mean that it does not resolve the balance issue. I fully expect that the car will still have a forward weight bias. I doubt that adding SH-AWD will correct that. SH-AWD may correct the understeer and acceleration issues associate with a forward weight bias. That makes it a work-around, not a solution to the inherent problem.
Jun 08, 2004 (10:34 am)
Isnít this like sayingÖ extending wheelbase and installing drive train behind front axle is a work around to achieving 50-50 weight balance?
I donít understand the fuss on a theoretical weight split when all that really matters is how the chassis holds up in terms of handling.
Rally-cars are designed to understeer, so Iím not surprised the WRX is so. How many rally-cars are RWD? They are usually front drivers or AWD.
Understeer/oversteer is not necessarily a result of weight balance, it is also a result of chassis set up. One can achieve oversteer in a nose heavy front driver or understeer in a 50-50 weight split rear drive, by adjusting the camber. Most RWD cars around have mild to moderate understeer built into them for it is considered safer than oversteer.
Jun 08, 2004 (1:45 pm)
I agree that what matters is what the car is actually capable of doing. That is more important than the theoretical advantages of one design over another.
That said, the number of hurdles you have to jump to make a car equally capable is a factor in other considerations. I mean, sure, if you mod it enough, you can make a Civic Si that will accelerate and corner just like an Evo. But that Civic will end up costing you $40K by the time you've jumped all the hurdles involved. The Evo would have cost you less.
You can jump any hurdle you want if you have enough money. But why not start with a car that doesn't have so many hurdles in front of it?
Now, I'm not saying that the new RL should be a RWD car. Not at all. I just don't agree with the notion that AWD is going to replace, displace, or swap places with either FWD or RWD. AWD has its own crosses to bear.
Take a look at it this way. The new RL might prove itself very formidable against the RWD competition because of SH-AWD's ability to send torque to the outside rear wheels. I expect it will do quite well despite the balance issue. Well, what happens when the RWD competition comes out with a rear differential that also acts like ATTS or SH-AWD and powers the outside wheel? Now those RWDers have both the power-distribution advantage and the balance advantage.
Jun 08, 2004 (2:12 pm)
True enough -- but the AWD will always have one thing: traction!
Jun 08, 2004 (2:14 pm)
You're forgetting one thing. Yes we bought an RX300 for my wife for the AWD, but also because it can have about 90 cu.ft. of space in there. No camry will ever be able to do that. I dont see the wagon coming back any time soon.
#2623 of 7386 Re: [varmint #1178]
Jun 08, 2004 (2:43 pm)
How you figure that FWD biased AWD is nose heavy and RWD biased AWD is not. One of the advantages in balancing RWD vehicle is placing front wheels as far front as possible to shift the weight of the engine and trany to rear wheels. in AWD set up it's not that easy if any possible. Lets take TL for example it weight about 3500 lb and has 60/40 balance, 2100lb/1400lb if you add 250lb for new SH-AWD and move battery back, you endup with 2050 lb/1700 lb 54/46 and thats without making car lighter or re configuring transmition placement(which would shift weight forward).
Take any 50/50 balanced BMW and add AWD you will end up with nose heavy vehicle(without any other mods).
So the point is there is no problem making FWD or RWD biased AWD vehicle 50/50 balanced.
Jun 08, 2004 (4:14 pm)
Does anyone know the weight distribution of the RL?
Jun 08, 2004 (4:43 pm)
The WRX Sti does not have the same udnersteer problem as the "regular" WRX. But that is because of some other work-arounds to get past the balance issue. Uber-sticky tires would be one possibility.
The WRX STi AWD has absolutely no similarity to the AWD employed in the "regular" manual-transmissioned WRX.
The regular WRX uses a cheap viscous coupling Center differential, an open front differential and a weak viscous coupling rear differential.
The WRX STi on the other hand, uses a rally-derived dual-planetary gear center differential, a mechanical torque-sensing front differential and a mechanical torque-sensing rear differential. It also biases a majority of the power to the rear wheels and continuously varies power/torque front to rear and side to side to aid handling. In no way shape or form is this setup similar to the MUCH CHEAPER setup above.
The RL's SH-AWD is intriguing too.
#2626 of 7386 Anything New on the 2005 RL?
Jun 08, 2004 (5:59 pm)
Back to the new RL for a moment. It seems that some of you guys follow the auto market pretty closely.
Is there anything new about the RL that has not been mentioned in the last few weeks?
Anyone know what exterior/interior colors will be offered?
Will Acura offer any kind of gas saving feature? How long before a hybrid engine in an Acura?
Separately, I will be selling my 1991 Legend LS this fall. Any suggestions on how to sell it, and where I could get the most money? I understand that the Legend has become quite popular and sought after; there are a number of websites just dedicated to Legend fans.
Thanks in advance.