Ted Baldwin

........there is a long standing joke about Immodium and Immodium AD. The Imoodium Ad works faster. So why would anyone want the slower one?

.......HP wars are so out of hand now, that traction is becoming the limiting factor. Is there some disadvantage of an AWD system that prevents car manufactures from having only AWD in their high HP cars? Looks like Nissan took advantage of all the things we talk talk about in this forum to build their apparently astonishing new GTR. Twin turbo, AWD, launch control to prevent wheel spin. MB still builds 600HP cars without even an LSD. So why take the Immodium if Immodium AD is available?

Ted

MRAMG1

One word "WEIGHT", usually ALOT of it!

See yeah

Merry Christmas

Ted Baldwin

.........good point. However, it is not as if MB cars are known for their light weight. I get your point though. If you add AWD system to say an W211 E55 will that make it that much more heavier?

Ted

mclarenm8d

I'll start by saying I know I'm being subjective and I should keep an open opinion about the GTR.

My experience with AWD "performance" cars is that they are a blast in wet and snow conditions, but understeering pigs in the dry. They feel like understeering pigs when even driven lightly in the dry. They drive nice in wet and snow because I modify my driving style to what would be considered bad practices in the dry.

So, in general, I also chalk this up to the weight. This is a relative thing (my CL isn't a lightweight). They also seem to move the drivetrain stress to the clutch/torque convertor and transmission. I'm certain there will be a ton of recalls because of drivetrain problems with the GTR. The net is that a vicious circle is created of beefing up the drivetrain (adding weight), then having more drivetrain problems because more weight is added.

JAYCL600

weight + drivetrain loss.....examples are the original RS6 with 500hp that could barely run low 13's, Gallardos and Murcis are relatively slow but come on light platforms, you can overcome these losses by adding more HP

chiromikey

typically i would agree that the disadvantages are weight and drivetrain loss but you can't really use the gt-r as an example. it's already overcome all the problems you've brought up. it's variable awd system only transfers power to the front wheels when rear wheel spin is detected. otherwise it behaves much closer to rear wheel drive car and steering is quite precise. the drivetrain has been proven to be able to handle MUCH more than 480hp since it's been handling modified 600+hp r34's since '00 without a problem. launch control may be another story but it's probably easier on the drivetrain than dropping the clutch at 5500rpm like they do now.

blkamgsl55

Fuel economy, higher center of gravity, and weight, but can't beat it when it comes to driving in wet and snow conditions.

Ted Baldwin

......all good points. In summary the consensus is that AWD results in more drive train loss and more weight. I wonder at what point they will become an absolute requirement. What good will the rumored furure V8TT 63 be with an open diff and no AWD? I notice that Kleemann chose the ML63 for their 800HP TT project. I don't think it is an accident.

Ted

stevebez

"One day all cars will be made this way..."

Lets face it ... whats the point of having a +700hp super car when u can't get the power down?

MACHC5

Guys don't forget about the great handling AWD little 4-cylinder Mitsubishi EVO that has to be one of the best bangs for the buck. The vehicle cost new is approx $30k then if you want to add $5-7k in mods... you'll be on par with anything that anyone puts out from any factory... and is sold in the USofA.

In 2005 I had looked at the Porches. and the EVO MR offerings. Was not a real hard decision.

Birdman2

Maybe there's a marketing angle too. Apart from weight, cost, reliability issues there's also branding. Audi is recognised as a 4WD brand but maybe Mercedes-Benz has decided to remain distinctive and not to be seen to follow that route (except where it has traditionally done so), especially in the US market.

hkpooh

is always weight and drivetrain loss.
problem for AWD is they are relatively slow after certain speed.
assuming same weight and same or more hp on a AWD, the RWD ALWAYS
perform a lot better except launching. Launch is the only advantange AWD has, any thing like rolling start or mid end acceleration will get the AWD killed.

ProjectC55

Here's your answer again!
RWD M3 vs EVO MR Tell me which will be better on a dry surface road race course? AWD has more advantages than just launching.

MB_Forever

I'm sure cost is a big factor as well. An AWD on a Mercedes will probably cost a lot more than on japanese brands. Not including all the "additional" maintenance headaches that will result from the integration. Combine that with all the "famous" Mercedes maintenance issues that already exist, and things could start to get really bad

hkpooh

Sure! of course you can always add more hp to the AWD, thats why it has disadvantage. We are talking about AWD disadvantage and you are switching it to the car set up now instead of AWD vs RWD.
same engine in same car the RWD set up will always be faster after launch. especially at higher speed.

ProjectC55

My post was based on your comments you made here not so much on the topic but more on what u r saying: The only thing here that you r saying that I can agree with is that the RWD car will have more topend. Handling,launching stck vs stck,I will say that the AWD car will perform better on the road course all around.

areuv

what about fun factor, I was ready to buy a 993 twin turbo back in the day, but then right before I was about to do a deal I got a chance to romp around in a GT2 and loved it, the AWD was great for traction, wet roads and Pikes Peak, but the GT2 was so much more fun, I was buying it to have fun with, the occasional street race and some wild 3a.m. runs, my point is that to me a rwd sports car is just more a drivers' car, I just enjoy getting sideways, but when it's wet or snowy I also enjoy blowing by most people but that's in the wifes' s/c Range Rover sport, again for me the AWD 993 TTwaas great but it took away too much drivers' instinct and required less driving skill and was not nearly as much fun as the rwd GT2,
sorry I kind of strayed off topic but my point is yes AWD gets better traction, is better on wet roads, and is probably better for real high HP cars but a rwd sports car is a drivers' car, I couldn't afford a GT2 so I just bought a 993 C2s widebody car and had the motor built to a 3.8l twin turbo with bigger Garrett turbos(we used ball bearing units which didn't come on factory turbo) huge intercooler, and 30k price tag, car made over 700hp and definately had traction issues but it was fun and challenging, so to me the disadvantage of AWD is fun factor, sorry for the novel,is how my head feels now

kip

WIEGHT is the only thing,

If they get a light AWD it will be in all cars. Trust me. My E55 vs AWD 996 turbo in the dry= tough match. In the wet or snow=no match.

Then again look at the AUDI's all the AWD modells, even with huge BHP advantage, are usually much slower than their BMW and MB rivals, but when you see these guy is the wet/Snow they disappear on you.

sack5000

My car is in the garage during the wet and snow periods. If that "is" the only advantage, it would be like driving around with a couple of heavy people all the time. Adding more HP also adds weight. Last, how can the GTR be so heavy (almost 4,000 lbs) and turn out the numbers they are posting for it?

ProjectC55

Clarify! On the Skyline an ECU flash will add hp but not weight! Same thing with an E55K. If anything chging pulley,ECU flash, adding headers and chging the exhaust will increase HP and make the E55k lighter not heavier