Something me and my friends always seem to do is get into arguments about cars. My friend is the type of person that is way into japense cars ya know the guys you hear saying "it runs an 11 on 20lbs boost, its got a front mount intercooler and a jdm body kit straight out of japan". He also hates on 914s and doesn't agree that its a good car for real racing (none of this drifting or drag racing crap that he's into) and thinks that integras, 240sx, skyline, crx, and what not are much better performance cars.

Anywase, today we were arguing the topic of front engine front wheel drive vs. mid engine rear wheel drive in handling. I was saying that mid engine is the best platform for performance/handling. The weight is off both of the axles, the center of gravity is lower, better balance. I mean why else would all the top performing street cars(enzo, cgt, murcialogo, s7) as well as racing(F1) use this platform.

Most of this pointless debate was over what would handle better: a well prepared 914 or a front wheel drive vehicle(any, i think he was arguing a CR-X though) that was equally prepared. Am I insane to think that front wheel drive is a crappy platform for good handling due to too much understeer and torque steer?

QUOTE (jgiroux67 @ Aug 4 2005, 10:14 PM)

Am I insane ???

that is settled pretty easy. have him come out to one of our AX events here in the bay area. we'll get him in a 914 as a passanger with an instructor.

there won't be any arguments after that ...
Andy

Keeping weight towards the center of the car is better. Mid engine wins.

Mid engine doesn't mean lower CG, but 914s do have a fairly low CG because of the flat cylinder engine layout.

QUOTE (jgiroux67 @ Aug 5 2005, 01:14 AM)

...what would handle better: a well prepared 914 or a front wheel drive vehicle(any, i think he was arguing a CR-X though) that was equally prepared....

it is hard to give away 20 years of development...

do you mean "handle better" (a very hard to quantify term...) or do you mean 'go faster' ?

equally prepared, a CRX will have 30-50 HP on you and a much more sophisticated suspension.

front-drivers require radically different driving technique but they can be very quick in the right (experienced) hands. my E-Prepared SOLO-II ur-GTI turned times like a stock 911, plus or minus a couple of seconds, at most courses.

i *prefer* 914's but CRX's can be very capable.

personally, i don't much care. there will always be some car faster than mine...

with Rich.

I've got both a 914 and a CRX. They're both fun cars to drive, and they both handle very well. They drive quite differently, though, and require a different driving style.

In general, the CRX will give you understeer, or more understeer. The 914 will give you oversteer or understeer, depending on what you're doing with the throttle. Oversteer is A Bad Thing to 90% of the people on the road, but to me (and to other autoXers and road racers and such) oversteer is A Good Thing--at least, when it's controllable.

For the general overall layout, mid-engined RWD is better than front-engine FWD. But the CRX has 20 years of suspension and chassis development on the 914...

--DD

Just kick his ass and tell him to shut up.

If he says that a front engine, front wheel drive car will handle better or will be "faster" than a mid engine car with similar build levels. Ask him how a hot rodded integra would do compared to an NSX. I am sure he will say the NSX will handle better.

QUOTE (Headrage @ Aug 5 2005, 09:00 AM)

Just kick his ass and tell him to shut up.

Why bother arguing? Be satisfied that you know better and forget it. I went through most of high school more than fifteen years ago, nothing has changed. Everybody wants a bigger penis, or at least the bragging rights. A drag race is not an autocross, a street race is no substitute for an hour on the track. He who wins usually spent the most money, and invested the most time. You can build a VW rabbit that can kill a Ferrari if you want to. I however recommend Porsche, as there is no substitute. In twenty years what will all those Honda's be worth? Big fat zero. Wise investment. Once you own a Porsche, it's in your blood. You will never be without one for long, and some of us have actually multiples of them. Don't let people diss on you for what you drive, what you like is what you are, it just takes a while to figure that out sometimes.
I had a 72 914 that I drove from April till November every day. It was my best friend to a certain degree. It always started, could carry my drumset, or camping gear or at least 2 girls, but I had to buy a case and a half of beer to fit in the front trunk to keep the bottles from slamming from side to side around tight corners. It leaked in the rain, it always smelled like burning oil, and wasn't very fast by any means, but it could corner at 100 mph like nothing. I sold it when I got married and bought a house. Since then I have re-bought all my toys.... life goes on. BUT I NEVER EVER EVER CONSIDDERED A HONDA. I DROVE THEM, I WORKED ON THEM, I SAW THEM IN THE WRECKERS, NEVER NEVER NEVER. Put one up on the hoist next to any Porsche, 20 years of development or not... Porsche builds sports cars, Honda builds econo shite boxes. Cheers!

QUOTE (jgiroux67 @ Aug 5 2005, 06:14 AM)

My friend is the type of person that is way into japense cars

you need to pick your friends more carefully

compare a 1972 porsche to a 1972 honda 600 (600CC)yes those are 10in rims no fender rolling required, need i say more

You'll never win that debate, and neither will they. Im in a car club here at UCI (university of civics and integras ) and people try to convince me their civics with jdm cup holders (no joke!!!) will smoke my stupid old car. I just roll my eyes and think about the movie Le Mans. I love Porsche partly because of the heritage, and thats something Honda, Toyota, or any of the Japanese companies will never have.

I love Porsche partly because of the heritage, and thats something Honda, Toyota, or any of the Japanese companies will never have. [/QUOTE]
shhh ...dont let mr Honda hear that! Over 40 years of motorsports is a bit of heritage. S 2000 and the NSX show some of that expereince.

Honda spent 5 years racing F1 in the 60s before they backed out.

Compare that with Porsche, Ferrari, Lotus, Alfa, Ford, Chevy, etc.

IIRC didn't Honda have a neat little sports car back in '66 or '67 called the S800?

QUOTE (MattR @ Aug 5 2005, 01:22 PM)

Honda spent 5 years racing F1 in the 60s before they backed out. Compare that with Porsche, Ferrari, Lotus, Alfa, Ford, Chevy, etc.

How long was Porsche in F1 again?

QUOTE

Honda spent 5 years racing F1 in the 60s before they backed out. Compare that with Porsche, Ferrari, Lotus, Alfa, Ford, Chevy, etc.

(Quote didn't work, for some reason - box came up blank...)

Yeah!! and Toyota is running NASCAR, SO THERE!!

actually, i have no doubt that any number of current-production econoboxes can outperform my 911 -- today. it's 35 years old. my feeling is - bring your car back here in another 35 years, and we'll compare notes...

QUOTE (Headrage @ Aug 5 2005, 05:23 PM)

IIRC didn't Honda have a neat little sports car back in '66 or '67 called the S800?

Yup.

Yellow, so it must be fast.




I would never fit in it though.

QUOTE (grantsfo @ Aug 5 2005, 01:23 PM)

QUOTE (MattR @ Aug 5 2005, 01:22 PM) Honda spent 5 years racing F1 in the 60s before they backed out. Compare that with Porsche, Ferrari, Lotus, Alfa, Ford, Chevy, etc. How long was Porsche in F1 again?

Im not talking exclusivly about F1, just racing in general. I dont know of any other racing stints by Honda on 4 wheels. Im assuming the "40 years of racing" is refering to the 1963 F1 venture with the British chassis builders. Was there any other 4 wheel racing done by Honda in the 60s or 70s that wasnt F1?

I dont want to start the same debate. I like Porsches. Good enough?

I found proof that FWD Honda's are faster than 914's. Half way through this video two FWD tuners (one's a CRX) pass the "superior" mid engine 914.

http://www.tangerineracing.com/images/Glen...tional%2005.wmv

Its so nice to have concrete evidence. Okay okay, the argument is over.
every car honda has ever made is better then any porsche ever made



If your friend runs "20 lbs of boost, a fmic, and a jdm body kit" he's not racing against a 914, period. The argument is really useless. If you're talking track racing, its all about the rule book, car classification, and money. For the street, we're not going that fast, so everyone has a criteria, whether it be looks, how the car feels, and how the car works. In the end, its my belief numbers dont mean anything for a street car, its all subjective.

QUOTE (MattR @ Aug 5 2005, 04:45 PM)

You'll never win that debate, and neither will they. Im in a car club here at UCI (university of civics and integras ) and people try to convince me their civics with jdm cup holders (no joke!!!) will smoke my stupid old car. I just roll my eyes and think about the movie Le Mans. I love Porsche partly because of the heritage, and thats something Honda, Toyota, or any of the Japanese companies will never have.

I find it kind of funny that you talk about your car smoking.


M

QUOTE (redshift @ Aug 5 2005, 01:54 PM)

QUOTE (MattR @ Aug 5 2005, 04:45 PM) You'll never win that debate, and neither will they.  Im in a car club here at UCI (university of civics and integras ) and people try to convince me their civics with jdm cup holders (no joke!!!) will smoke my stupid old car.  I just roll my eyes and think about the movie Le Mans.  I love Porsche partly because of the heritage, and thats something Honda, Toyota, or any of the Japanese companies will never have. I find it kind of funny that you talk about your car smoking. M

OK I will just have to bring this out to the AX in Santa Rosa tomorrow and kick some mid engine 914 butt with my superior FWD JDM Tuner. Trekkor are you sweating?

I just reach into the back of my 40, 35, or 24 year old Porsche(s), grab a tire iron bash his headlight and then hand them fifty bucks.....the arguement ends and never comes up again......

QUOTE (SEEMORE BUTZ @ Aug 5 2005, 02:21 PM)

I just reach into the back of my 40, 35, or 24 year old Porsche(s), grab a tire iron bash his headlight and then hand them fifty bucks.....the arguement ends and never comes up again......

Which argument is that? German car owners are ass holes? LOL

QUOTE (MattR @ Aug 5 2005, 03:24 PM)

QUOTE (SEEMORE BUTZ @ Aug 5 2005, 02:21 PM) I just reach into the back of my 40, 35, or 24 year old Porsche(s), grab a tire iron bash his headlight and then hand them fifty bucks.....the arguement ends and never comes up again...... Which argument is that? German car owners are ass holes? LOL

ZING!!!

Nope....just me.....

It does end the stoopid arguement....arguing new cars versus 40-30 year old cars is just fuching stoopid.

German cars are like fine china. Durable, quality materials, and last a long time.

Hondas have all the durability of a paper plate. They work fine for a short while then go to hell.

After using my engineering analysis skills on myrids of problems with purchased my brand new 78 Honda Accord LX, I 'll never own another piece of crap like that again!

Resuts- 73 VW Superbeetle lasted 25 years and 250,00 miles.... 78 Accord- total crap at 70k. Gears in the tranny look like flame cut bike chain sprockets- low inertia- high wear.

My Honda results- they can't do trannys (1), waterpumps (6), plastics (dash anything else), rubber (any), gears, seals, AC systems(explode) , seatbelts that won't break (sorry kids, yer gonna fly), exhausts, hydraulics that won't get eaten by the fluids, exploding glass, failing starters, failing distributors, 14 crappy capacitors, and 2 alternators.

Oh yeah, you think 914's rust....Honda HVLP steel rusts just looking at it. Ever had your shock tower come through the hood? Ever have your Drivers windshileld pillar rust in two?

Quality- works good...

Durability- lasts long...
When was the last time you saw a 70's Honda? I rest my case.

Ken

QUOTE (kwales @ Aug 5 2005, 08:03 PM)

78 Accord- total crap at 70k. Gears in the tranny look like flame cut bike chain sprockets- low inertia- high wear. ... they can't do trannys (1)...

allowing a bit for marketeering, the guys who sold me my 915 opened it for inspection and verified that at 70,000 mi it was just getting broken in.

a transmission made for a 3,2 oughtta last a lifetime fronting a 2,8 ...

My son was 1998 E production Champ in SCCA Southeast region driving a 1800CC 914. He now drives a CRX in G production. I quess he would be a good one to ask. I do know that he and his friend (1999 National SOLO II C street prepared Champ) took the CSP CRX to a PCA AutoX and beat everything there by 4 sec. Remember the CRX has a stock engine.

A well prepped Anything will proll'y go good at an AX. I even heard that a Yugo can be made to haul A** ( has a Dodge/ Mitsu ohc eng.) and NO weight.
But for the most part street Hondas are just like having good sex: Loud, Obnoxious, Slow and to top it off- having the neighbors Yelling at you to Stop that noise

What the hell. Drive what you like. Somebody will always say they have something faster, better, cooler.

Most of us will never be good enough drivers to get everything out of our cars anyway. Argue who's the best driver.

Dave

From a theoretical standpoint, mid-engine is superior than front-engine, particularly FWD. The mid-engine car can have its weight concentrated in the middle of the car for a low polar moment of inertia, which means the car likes to change directions more easily than a car with a heavy engine out at one end or the other. FWD cars also have significant problems trying to put down the power while the car is still turning. High-powered RWD cars also have problems, but even low-powered FWD cars do. It is also not very good engineering practice to ask one set of wheels to do everything--accelerating, braking, and turning. If you can offload one or two of those functions onto a different set of wheels, you don't have to compromise things as much for a "one wheel does all" design.

Finally, name one car at the top levels of racing (racing that goes around corners, at least) that is not mid-engined. The only ones that are not are specified by the rules--a la NASCAR. I am not aware of any top-level racing cars--cars designed from a blank sheet of paper--that are anything but mid-engined. Certainly none are FWD.

Now, that's fine for top-level racing cars. We have to drive cars on the street. For street cars, the FWD cars have significant advantages. They are relatively cheap to engineer and build. They generally give you unflagging understeer, which is safer for most drivers on the road. They offer significant packaging advantages--like a rear seat--over mid-engine RWD designs.

Plus, "details" really are what make or break street cars--the specifics of all of the suspension bits, the weight of the car, the kind and size of tires, and on and on and on and on wind up having more influence over the handling of most cars that are driven on the street than the basic chassis design does. So a car with a theoretically "inferior" layout can definitely be made to out-handle a car with a theoretically "superior" layout.

As I mentioned earlier, I have both a CRX and a 914. For a daily driver, the CRX is a really great car. The ride is comfortable, it has quite a few amenities that the 914 does not, it only has modest HP (just over 100 HP) but makes the most of it due to light weight, it can carry a surprising amount of stuff, it can get out of its own way when you get on the gas, and the handling really is excellent.

But when I really want to throw a car around a bunch of corners, or if I want to go autoXing or on the Big Tracks, what car do you think I choose? The loud, obnoxious, uncomfortable, primitive, low-powered, poor-braking, less-than-entirely-reliable 914. It really is much more fun, to me, than the CRX.

--DD