| tarheel91 said: That first review is a joke. It is impossible for a FWD car to "kick the tail out." You need a longitudinal force on the rear wheels in order for that to happen (i.e. rear wheel drive). What he did was powerslide the car which is caused by jumping on the brakes and turning sharply. The rear tires begin to slide, losing grip, and the tail end comes around. This guy has no clue what he's talking about. While that's technically oversteer, it has nothing to do with how the car's set up. You can make absolute boats that refuse to turn oversteer by overloading the tires and making them slide. Still doesn't change the fact that a train is more responsive than those cars. Maybe if you actually quoted the whole review instead of that snippet, you'd see he felt underwhelmed. It performed poorly in the tight autocross section (i.e. where this car can actually reach max corner speeds). He only liked it on the larger track because it was slow and easy to drive. He didn't have to brake as much, and there wasn't as much he could screw up through these corners. Citing some guy from about.com is hardly the best source on how well a car handles. Spoon does not modify cars for performance. Body kits and useless exhausts? That's not performance, that's entirely an image thing. Your "Top Gear" quote is from a site called Top Speed. Wonderful "source" right there. It looks like some BS blog trying to get hits. It's just got a bunch of riced out CR-Z's. A bodykit and 22 inch wheels (which hurt performance because of all the unpsrung weight they add) is not tuning a car to make it faster. Look, how about you answer me this. If the CR-Z really had the potential you claim it does (and you're clearly an expert when it comes to cars, and you're not arguing with a mechanical engineer with a good amount of vehicle dynamics knowledge and experience tuning race cars), why does Honda continue to use the Civic in all the Touring Car Championship Series it races in? Because the whole sporty image is all marketing and a complete joke. It's a heavier Honda Fit (there's a FWD low power car I actually like) with a weaker powertrain and worse balance. It's going to continue to have idiot reviewers review it as nimble because it's got a short wheel base and thus rotates very quickly and it's slower than molasses and thus very easy to drive around a track. That doesn't make it fun. I've read several CR-Z reviews, and they all say the same thing. It's slow. It's not bad on some country roads (because they're only taking it to 7/10), but the moment they push it to the edge it's pretty underwhelming. I was pretty psyched when Honda promised a CRX successor, but this is a pretty pathetic one. |
Ok because you insist on spreading false information here.
"It is generally perceived that front-wheel-drive cars - that is, cars in which the front wheels do both, put power to the road and steer - are understeering wrecks that fly off the road if you go into a corner too quickly. This is generally true, but it is possible to eliminate understeer and actually oversteer to a certain degree. Oversteering fun is not just the domain of rear-wheel-drivers.
One way to induce oversteer in your front-driver is to plow hard into a corner and then lift off the throttle in the middle of the corner. Lifting off the throttle will cause the weight of the car to "shift" to the front, thereby putting more weight over the front wheels and, ultimately, adding more grip to the front tires. However, if you are lucky, the rear tires will lose traction and start to slide outwards while you're turning. You are now oversteering."
http://www.modernracer.com/tips/frontwheeldriveoversteer.html
Just because i know your going to question the site here is a video
You even contradict yourself you say its impossible and then (guessing what the reviewer did) say it was still technically a oversteer.
Also you seem to forget the topic we are debating here. Should the CR-Z be in GT. I have shown multiple links of people in racing that are interested in it. It having Racing geared parts being manufactured for it shows there is a market out there for it (otherwise they wouldnt make them). So if the racing community accepts it and some of them play GT then guess what...
My solo reasoning for putting it in my reply is that it contradicts everything you said the car is going to be like and its from someone who actually has driven the car.
"While the steering lacks feel, it’s fairly accurate and well-weighted, and due to the low ride height and relatively short suspension travel, body roll is also relatively modest. The CR-Z responds well to steering inputs, and feels agile and capable in the corners. Gather enough speed and leave the throttle, and you’ll even manage to induce some old school back slips. "
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/review-2011-honda-crz/
The spoon article also mentions ECU modifications.
It does have the potential. The tech is new they are still creating parts so its an up and comer as opposed to the civic which has tech thats been around for a while. Not saying anything will come from hybrid tech in racing, who knows. However, this question/paragraph has no relevance to the topic we are debating.
This is what it seems like you want to discuss and your main problem with it being in GT. I could care less.
EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!
Coffee is for closers!
