| JamaicameCRAZY said: 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. |
Oversteer simply means the car has more yaw rotation than it should vs. lateral acceleration. Kicking the tail out is a specific type where you use a longitudinal force on the rear wheels to cause the rear end to rotate around (i.e. giving it too much gas in a corner). He just explained the same thing I did. In a FWD car, you can only cause the car to powerslide by shifting weight onto the front wheels (and off the back wheels), and trying to change direction (by turning). Powersliding and "kicking the tail out" are two VERY different things. The reviewer couldn't tell the difference between the two, and that's the issue I took with it. If he can't understand something as simple as that, I should really trust his review (that was lukewarm at best)?
The reviews you keep posting are from no name sites that look about as legit as that white van sitting outside the local convenience store with "FREE CANDY" posted on the side.
Here's an excerpt from Autoblog's review of the CR-Z:
"Overall, the CR-Z isn't worthy of a sports car badge, but it is by far the best-driving low-cost compact hybrid we've come across. It feels less like an appliance (Prius) and more like a focused driver's car, even though you won't have much to show for in terms of sheer performance or mileage numbers. And this is where the CR-Z starts to lose its appeal. As soon as you consider the larger scope of what the Honda hybrid is trying to accomplish, your disappointment will start to outweigh any of the good vibes felt from behind the wheel."
Here's what your quoted review said in the concluding three paragraphs:
"Is the Honda CR-Z a sporty coupe? Not really. Is it an exceptionally good hybrid? Afraid not. After driving Honda’s newest hybrid and only real sporty car in its lineup, I returned with more questions than strict answers and criticism.
In many ways, the CR-Z is a disappointment. Aside from its exterior design, it seems to be doing all its tasks halfheartedly, and the resulting feeling is that this car has a lot of unfulfilled potential. Fifty more horses could have made it a true enthusiast’s choice in a segment rarely represented in the US. Ten more MPGs would have made it a just ambassador in the hybrid club.
But in a different sense, the CR-Z is one of those ‘first’ cars, like the first Caravan or the original Grand Cherokee. While Honda surely was not the first to toss ‘hybrid’ and ‘sport’ into the same sentence, they were the first to massively produce and market such a car. It does fall between the chairs, and in many ways is inferior to its more traditional rivals – like the VW Scirocco TDI in Europe – but it represents a future. And if that’s the future of hybrids, color me green with envy."
It's a step above a Prius from an enthusiasts perspective. But that's like saying you're a step above a guy with no legs at running the 100m. Both reviews point out that the VW TDIs are more fun. That's a 3,000 lb hatch with a diesel engine that revs up to an INCREDIBLE (this is sarcasm) 4500 rpms and runs out of breath around 3000. Having driven one hard through the mountains, they're really not that enjoyable either.
Finally, you admit that you're not an engine guru, and you clearly aren't a big car expert in general, and you're trying to tell me what kind of potential it has? There's this wonderful thing called volumetric efficiency and it means that you can only get so much power out of a certain displacement because you can only take in so much air without turboing the car. But see, here's the problem with the engine. It's horrendously undersquare by design, and that means that its volumetric efficiency is going to drop off in the high rpms. You simply can't make much torque up top with this engine. Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252. You can see that if you want a lot of horsepower you need a good amount of torque at a high rpm. There simply isn't a lot of room for improvement without going forced induction (turbo or supercharger). This engine's running some pretty high compression though, so you'd have to drop that down some (which is going to hurt your numbers) and you can't really run much higher than 4-6 psi without the engine dying in 10k miles. Max you might be able to get out of this car NA is about 130-140 hp and 180ish with forced induction. That's a joke.
