Quote (Morphmcmanerson @ Dec 27 2012 12:14pm)
You're so bad at making arguments it hurts.
Limo's arn't successful in road courses either are they?
To sayallcars are better at putting power down if their longer, is straight up false. Thanks for pointing it out yourself in the example of rear engine, or mid-rear cars.
Going off on you? i just said you arn't a a race engineer, was i wrong?
Ok here we go. I'm a little late but deal with it. Nowhere did I say that the longest wheelbase possible is better. You are putting words in my mouth. There is a fairly direct correlation between power and wheelbase amongst all cars of the same
TYPE. You used a rear engine car as an example when all of the other cars we are talking about are front engine. The BRZ and the Mustang are both front engine RWD. These cars are sold to the general public. The general public are not trained in maneuvers like counter steer and trail braking. The general public need a car with slight understeer, not oversteer, in order to keep them out of the trees.
So when we put a lot of power in a car with a short wheelbase (and lighter weight) what do we get? Easy power induced oversteer. AKA the back end passing the front end. If the car has pretty neutral handling leaning towards understeer and you have enough power to break the back end loose in a corner and induce oversteer the wheelbase of the car has a direct effect on how fast the rear end moves out.
Example. Spin around in a long ass crew cab truck. Now spin around in a ZX-14 powered Smart car. Anyone that has ever played around in a RWD vehicle has felt the phenomenon. So, a car with a shorter wheelbase is harder to control once traction has broken than a car with a longer wheelbase. That is common sense. Where you fucked up in this argument is founding your counter argument on an example car of a different type. A rear engine porshce has NOTHING to do with what we are talking about.
No, I'm not a race engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.