Porsche test driver argues the 'perfect' sports car has 4WD
07-01-05, 08:53 AM
#1
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Porsche test driver argues the 'perfect' sports car has 4WD
By MARTON PETTENDY 1 July 2005
CONTRARY to popular opinion among ‘performance purists’, all-wheel drive – not rear-wheel drive – is a vital prerequisite for any series sports car.
So said Monte Carlo Rally icon and accomplished Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl, who demonstrated exactly why over a narrow, broken alpine pass at the 911 Carrera 4 launch earlier this month.
"I always argue with people who say rear-drive is best," the softly-spoken German told GoAuto. "Many people don’t understand what I mean about the feeling of traction.
"The feeling of traction makes me crazy. The better driver will always show in a rear-wheel drive, but the perfect car must have four-wheel drive. If a person comes to a slippery place, 4WD will save them. In the same place in a rear-wheel drive, they will have an accident."
The lanky, 196cm driver, who last triumphed at Monte Carlo in 1984 and has won for Fiat, Opel, Lancia and Audi, said proof of this was the fact that in the dry at the Nurburgring the Carrera 4 was as quick as the regular Carrera – despite an extra 55kg. However, in the wet the C4 was 20 seconds faster.
The 58-year-old, who revealed that his dream car would be a stripped-out, lightweight 911 Turbo AWD, said the C4 produced less understeer than any other AWD road car and that he "would have been happy to have a competition car as good as the C4 just 10 years ago".
"For a standard road car it’s very impressive. It has impressive tyre grip, amazing roadholding and offers an even greater level of safety and security than the rear-drive 911 – without affecting steering."
While Carrera 4 is just one step short of the all-wheel drive 911 Turbo, Mr Rohrl said the ultimate Porsche was the Carrera GT supercar.
He rated stability as its best attribute ("I would never have believed it could be so stable"), followed closely by "unbelievable" brakes, a "perfect" gearbox, an inspiring exhaust note, stunning engine performance above 4000rpm and, finally, the impression of quality.
Carrera GT niggles? Only that the speedo indicated a 350km/h top speed when, in fact, on-board diagnostic equipment revealed he achieved "just" 331km/h.
In the real world, Mr Rohrl owns a new Golf GTI, which he rates as "one of the best affordable cars ever".
"Nobody believes me the new one can be so good, because the last few weren’t so good. It’s a quality car with a big boot, 17-inch wheels, amazing brakes and unbelievably good performance. A fantastic car," he said.
source HERE
CONTRARY to popular opinion among ‘performance purists’, all-wheel drive – not rear-wheel drive – is a vital prerequisite for any series sports car.
So said Monte Carlo Rally icon and accomplished Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl, who demonstrated exactly why over a narrow, broken alpine pass at the 911 Carrera 4 launch earlier this month.
"I always argue with people who say rear-drive is best," the softly-spoken German told GoAuto. "Many people don’t understand what I mean about the feeling of traction.
"The feeling of traction makes me crazy. The better driver will always show in a rear-wheel drive, but the perfect car must have four-wheel drive. If a person comes to a slippery place, 4WD will save them. In the same place in a rear-wheel drive, they will have an accident."
The lanky, 196cm driver, who last triumphed at Monte Carlo in 1984 and has won for Fiat, Opel, Lancia and Audi, said proof of this was the fact that in the dry at the Nurburgring the Carrera 4 was as quick as the regular Carrera – despite an extra 55kg. However, in the wet the C4 was 20 seconds faster.
The 58-year-old, who revealed that his dream car would be a stripped-out, lightweight 911 Turbo AWD, said the C4 produced less understeer than any other AWD road car and that he "would have been happy to have a competition car as good as the C4 just 10 years ago".
"For a standard road car it’s very impressive. It has impressive tyre grip, amazing roadholding and offers an even greater level of safety and security than the rear-drive 911 – without affecting steering."
While Carrera 4 is just one step short of the all-wheel drive 911 Turbo, Mr Rohrl said the ultimate Porsche was the Carrera GT supercar.
He rated stability as its best attribute ("I would never have believed it could be so stable"), followed closely by "unbelievable" brakes, a "perfect" gearbox, an inspiring exhaust note, stunning engine performance above 4000rpm and, finally, the impression of quality.
Carrera GT niggles? Only that the speedo indicated a 350km/h top speed when, in fact, on-board diagnostic equipment revealed he achieved "just" 331km/h.
In the real world, Mr Rohrl owns a new Golf GTI, which he rates as "one of the best affordable cars ever".
"Nobody believes me the new one can be so good, because the last few weren’t so good. It’s a quality car with a big boot, 17-inch wheels, amazing brakes and unbelievably good performance. A fantastic car," he said.
source HERE
07-01-05, 09:07 AM
#2
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by AmethySC
By MARTON PETTENDY 1 July 2005
CONTRARY to popular opinion among ‘performance purists’, all-wheel drive – not rear-wheel drive – is a vital prerequisite for any series sports car.
So said Monte Carlo Rally icon and accomplished Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl, who demonstrated exactly why over a narrow, broken alpine pass at the 911 Carrera 4 launch earlier this month.
"I always argue with people who say rear-drive is best," the softly-spoken German told GoAuto. "Many people don’t understand what I mean about the feeling of traction.
"The feeling of traction makes me crazy. The better driver will always show in a rear-wheel drive, but the perfect car must have four-wheel drive. If a person comes to a slippery place, 4WD will save them. In the same place in a rear-wheel drive, they will have an accident."
]
CONTRARY to popular opinion among ‘performance purists’, all-wheel drive – not rear-wheel drive – is a vital prerequisite for any series sports car.
So said Monte Carlo Rally icon and accomplished Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl, who demonstrated exactly why over a narrow, broken alpine pass at the 911 Carrera 4 launch earlier this month.
"I always argue with people who say rear-drive is best," the softly-spoken German told GoAuto. "Many people don’t understand what I mean about the feeling of traction.
"The feeling of traction makes me crazy. The better driver will always show in a rear-wheel drive, but the perfect car must have four-wheel drive. If a person comes to a slippery place, 4WD will save them. In the same place in a rear-wheel drive, they will have an accident."
]
Rohrl is correct. Unless you want to drift or powerslide there is no comparison. My next car will almost certainly be AWD.
07-03-05, 10:16 AM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by adidosc
sure it's extra weight, but i'd never shy away from an AWD car. i'm still hoping for an AWD G35c. 
Trending Topics
07-06-05, 11:30 AM
#8
Lead Lap
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well there y'all have it, straightt from a pro, rather than just bunch of car guys taking sides with journalists.
The way I see it, AWD is like sex with a condom, RWD is sex with no protection. Most situations, RWD will be rawer and more pure, but venture too much into the unknown and you'll most likely die.
The way I see it, AWD is like sex with a condom, RWD is sex with no protection. Most situations, RWD will be rawer and more pure, but venture too much into the unknown and you'll most likely die.
07-06-05, 12:35 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by Celicamaro
The way I see it, AWD is like sex with a condom, RWD is sex with no protection. Most situations, RWD will be rawer and more pure, but venture too much into the unknown and you'll most likely die.
07-06-05, 01:15 PM
#10
EV ftw!!!
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Rohrl is correct. Unless you want to drift or powerslide there is no comparison. My next car will almost certainly be AWD.The next time (and it will inevitably happen), in winter I see SUV's and Subarus (AWD vehicles mostly) in the ditch beside the road because the drivers of those vehicles over-estimated the traction their vehicle's had and were going too fast, I will remember this post.
The whole point of this post and arguments I have made in the past about AWD cars still stands. For the average driver who does not race or drive irresponsibly, a RWD car with winter tires is still a better alternative to an AWD vehicle for the simple fact that traction is the key here, not the drivetrain configuration (I am making the point of winter tires here as that seems to be most peoples argument for getting an AWD car - to drive in the winter).
When turning or braking in normal conditions, you foot will be on the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. And guess what happens when your foot is on the brake pedal? Your car becomes no-wheel drive. Plain and simple. Your drivetrain configuration at that point (when you need traction the most) is completely irrelevant. Winter tires with good traction, is what is important.
The attendant weight, complexity, and added gas consumption of an AWD car will still sway me from getting one for the reasons stated above.
If however I wanted to race in a controlled environment and the roads were wet, Rohrl arguments make perfect sense. I am not disputing those arguments.
But how many of us race on a track professionally where even a few seconds are important?
Last edited by Hameed; 07-06-05 at 01:20 PM.
07-06-05, 01:21 PM
#11
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MD
Posts: 1,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hameed
No comparison? That is a bit of a stretch IMHO.
The next time (and it will inevitably happen), in winter I see SUV's and Subarus (AWD vehicles mostly) in the ditch beside the road because the drivers of those vehicles over-estimated the traction their vehicle's had and were going too fast, I will remember this post.
The whole point of this post and arguments I have made in the past about AWD cars still stands. For the average driver who does not race or drive irresponsibly, a RWD car with winter tires is still a better alternative to an AWD vehicle for the simple fact that traction is the key here, not the drivetrain configuration (I am making the point of winter tires here as that seems to be most peoples argument for getting an AWD car - to drive in the winter).
When turning or braking in normal conditions, you foot will be on the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. And guess what happens when your foot is on the brake pedal? Your car becomes no-wheel drive. Plain and simple. Your drivetrain configuration at that point (when you need traction the most) is completely irrelevant. Winter tires with good traction, is what is important.
The attendant weight, complexity, and added gas consumption of an AWD car will still sway me from getting one for the reasons stated above.
If however I wanted to race in a controlled environment and the roads were wet, Rohrl arguments make perfect sense. I am not disputing those arguments.
But how many of us race on a track professionally where even a few seconds are important?
The next time (and it will inevitably happen), in winter I see SUV's and Subarus (AWD vehicles mostly) in the ditch beside the road because the drivers of those vehicles over-estimated the traction their vehicle's had and were going too fast, I will remember this post.
The whole point of this post and arguments I have made in the past about AWD cars still stands. For the average driver who does not race or drive irresponsibly, a RWD car with winter tires is still a better alternative to an AWD vehicle for the simple fact that traction is the key here, not the drivetrain configuration (I am making the point of winter tires here as that seems to be most peoples argument for getting an AWD car - to drive in the winter).
When turning or braking in normal conditions, you foot will be on the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. And guess what happens when your foot is on the brake pedal? Your car becomes no-wheel drive. Plain and simple. Your drivetrain configuration at that point (when you need traction the most) is completely irrelevant. Winter tires with good traction, is what is important.
The attendant weight, complexity, and added gas consumption of an AWD car will still sway me from getting one for the reasons stated above.
If however I wanted to race in a controlled environment and the roads were wet, Rohrl arguments make perfect sense. I am not disputing those arguments.
But how many of us race on a track professionally where even a few seconds are important?
07-06-05, 01:27 PM
#12
EV ftw!!!
Originally Posted by Incendiary
You are comparing RWD with snow tires to AWD with all-seasons, correct?
The point I was trying to make is that a RWD car with snow tires is better simply because of the other benefits of that drivetrain configuration - less complexitiy, less weight, better gas consumption etc. The benefits of AWD are lost on me because of those factors as the AWD would only be better than an RWD car on starting from a stop as all wheels will be driving. However on corners or stopping when your foot is on the brake pedal, AWD does nothing for you then. Remember traction is the key here.
07-06-05, 02:08 PM
#13
Lead Lap
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hameed
No, I was comparing it to an AWD with snow tires which would ultimately have better traction than a RWD car with snow tires.
The point I was trying to make is that a RWD car with snow tires is better simply because of the other benefits of that drivetrain configuration - less complexitiy, less weight, better gas consumption etc. The benefits of AWD are lost on me because of those factors as the AWD would only be better than an RWD car on starting from a stop as all wheels will be driving. However on corners or stopping when your foot is on the brake pedal, AWD does nothing for you then. Remember traction is the key here.
The point I was trying to make is that a RWD car with snow tires is better simply because of the other benefits of that drivetrain configuration - less complexitiy, less weight, better gas consumption etc. The benefits of AWD are lost on me because of those factors as the AWD would only be better than an RWD car on starting from a stop as all wheels will be driving. However on corners or stopping when your foot is on the brake pedal, AWD does nothing for you then. Remember traction is the key here.
I think the comfort of knowing that one can do ridiculous thing in an AWD vehicle is worth all the minor loss in fuel economy, complexity or added weight of AWD. If one ends up in the ditch, it's ones own fault, but if one can manuever out of a situation that's not possible in a RWD to save ones azz, then it's also ones own fault. AWD can be enjoyed all the time since we don't always get the chance to hit the track to get the best time where RWD will have a chance to shine. With RWD, you always have to think about if your tires have enough traction left whenever the weather acts up.
07-06-05, 03:59 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by Hameed
No comparison? That is a bit of a stretch IMHO.
The next time (and it will inevitably happen), in winter I see SUV's and Subarus (AWD vehicles mostly) in the ditch beside the road because the drivers of those vehicles over-estimated the traction their vehicle's had and were going too fast, I will remember this post.
The whole point of this post and arguments I have made in the past about AWD cars still stands. For the average driver who does not race or drive irresponsibly, a RWD car with winter tires is still a better alternative to an AWD vehicle for the simple fact that traction is the key here, not the drivetrain configuration (I am making the point of winter tires here as that seems to be most peoples argument for getting an AWD car - to drive in the winter).
When turning or braking in normal conditions, you foot will be on the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. And guess what happens when your foot is on the brake pedal? Your car becomes no-wheel drive. Plain and simple. Your drivetrain configuration at that point (when you need traction the most) is completely irrelevant. Winter tires with good traction, is what is important.
The attendant weight, complexity, and added gas consumption of an AWD car will still sway me from getting one for the reasons stated above.
If however I wanted to race in a controlled environment and the roads were wet, Rohrl arguments make perfect sense. I am not disputing those arguments.
But how many of us race on a track professionally where even a few seconds are important?
The next time (and it will inevitably happen), in winter I see SUV's and Subarus (AWD vehicles mostly) in the ditch beside the road because the drivers of those vehicles over-estimated the traction their vehicle's had and were going too fast, I will remember this post.
The whole point of this post and arguments I have made in the past about AWD cars still stands. For the average driver who does not race or drive irresponsibly, a RWD car with winter tires is still a better alternative to an AWD vehicle for the simple fact that traction is the key here, not the drivetrain configuration (I am making the point of winter tires here as that seems to be most peoples argument for getting an AWD car - to drive in the winter).
When turning or braking in normal conditions, you foot will be on the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. And guess what happens when your foot is on the brake pedal? Your car becomes no-wheel drive. Plain and simple. Your drivetrain configuration at that point (when you need traction the most) is completely irrelevant. Winter tires with good traction, is what is important.
The attendant weight, complexity, and added gas consumption of an AWD car will still sway me from getting one for the reasons stated above.
If however I wanted to race in a controlled environment and the roads were wet, Rohrl arguments make perfect sense. I am not disputing those arguments.
But how many of us race on a track professionally where even a few seconds are important?
In fact, when it comes to stopping, rear-engine, RWD Porsches seem to do better than just about anything else on the road......because of the forward weight transfer under heavy braking which places the center of gravity roughly in the middle of the car where all four brakes ( usually Brembos ) and all four tires bite just about evenly....but again tire size / type is important. Low-profive dry-weeather tires in general are just about worthless in snow.....one reason stock WRX's and Sti's don't do as well as other Subarus in winter.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
