I almost went to The Dark Side (RX content)

The MR2 needs the lugs to fit the OEM wheels I started using, plus the hesitation on the highway makes for a crappy 2hr drive. So when our neighbor region hosted a last-minute "fun" event 2hrs away I thought I'd see if I could co-drive another car.

A friend let me drive his Subaru 2.5RS in SA. Thankfully he rode with me because my first 1-2 runs I tried to drive it like a RWD. He told me to basically floor it & turn, the car will do what it needs to. I have to say it was a fun car and a fast course today.

He mentioned he's been thinking of getting a RWD for a change, I joked "maybe we should trade cars?" Then we actually talked about it a bit. And I was tempted to go the AWD route but I think I'd miss my MR2 too much. I think I need to redo the suspension (for handling and better piece of mind if nothing else) & just keep going.

Interesting. I drove the PA class champ's 2.5RS GC at a test and tune last year. it was definitely faster than mine and is definitely point-and-shoot and just stay on the throttle and it'll go where you want it to.

But I found it oddly not that much fun compared to RWD. Like it was almost too easy to go fast. And this was in a car that was built using the front and rear halves of two wrecked GCs, lol.

And this is coming from someone (me) who dail-drives a WRX. I enjoy how fast and great the WRX is as most everything, but when I want to cruise a hilly/woody road I take my e30 or my triumph. More raw just seems like more fun to me.

For you, might I suggest you try a front-engine RWD car while you're at it. I've driven an MR2 and love them, but they feel decidedly WAY different than, for instance, an e30 or RX7 or Miata when being pushed.

But if you get a subie for rallycross, just make sure it's blue just like all the others ;)

2.5RS driven RWD style:

In reply to irish44j:

That's more or less how I feel about them. I've driven a friends NA, stock, 2.5 TS wagon a few times, its actually kinda annoying, because you expect it to lose grip in certain situations and the damn thing just won't let go. Though I'm sure it does eventually, violently.

irish44j wrote: ...point-and-shoot and just stay on the throttle and it'll go where you want it to.

At the time, that was fun, for a one-off lark. But I think that would get boring after awhile. I think I'll stick with the tail-happy RWD.

Still thinking RWD is more fun...

And here I was expecting rotary content.

Jerry wrote: Still thinking RWD is more fun...

It is. Might not be as fast, but def more fun.

Storz wrote:

Jerry wrote: Still thinking RWD is more fun...

It is. Might not be as fast, but def more fun.

At the same event my Miata was faster than all the cars except the two at the top end of MA. Most of the cars were Subarus.

scardeal wrote: And here I was expecting rotary content.

Same here and was wondering where Jerry was going with that!

scardeal wrote: And here I was expecting rotary content.

+1 but I was okay with rallycross content too, a lot of that going around recently...

stan wrote:

scardeal wrote: And here I was expecting rotary content.

Same here and was wondering where Jerry was going with that!

Nope, just the fact that 97.685% of rallycross seems like Subaru. They could rename the AWD classes SS PS and MS almost. (I did see my first Evo this weekend.)

Jerry wrote: A friend let me drive his Subaru 2.5RS in SA. Thankfully he rode with me because my first 1-2 runs I tried to drive it like a RWD. He told me to basically floor it & turn, the car will do what it needs to.

I had a feeling I knew who it was when you said this, but I wanted to wait and make sure

His driving style certainly works, and I learned some interesting things from co-driving with him at the last OVR regional, but as I found at the last WOR regional, it COMPLETELY screws you up for RWD.

Which is fine, because the first time I drove that car was Nationals, and I drove it RWD style, which worked great in mud but was nowhere near the fast way 'round when it got grippy. I was braking and countersteer-flicking it through corners where the car owner was just lifting slightly to start the turn and mushing it through. He gained something like six positions between the mud runs and the grippy runs...

Storz wrote:

Jerry wrote: Still thinking RWD is more fun...

It is. Might not be as fast, but def more fun.

at our event yesterday, the top 2 Mod RWD cars (4cyl e30 and RX7) would have finished 3rd&4th in stock AWD class behind the two GC's that dominate that class and ahead of about 10 other subies (running in the same heat with the same conditions). So depending on course, RWD can be as fast or faster than AWD, particularly on a dry, tight, technical course - but of course there are other factors involved, including the level of preparation.

On a loose/muddy course, AWD kills us though.

Jerry wrote:

stan wrote:

scardeal wrote: And here I was expecting rotary content.

Same here and was wondering where Jerry was going with that!

Nope, just the fact that 97.685% of rallycross seems like Subaru. They could rename the AWD classes SS PS and MS almost. (I did see my first Evo this weekend.)

We've had one Evo, one Audi, and a couple 4WD trucks at an event in AWD class this season, but yeah, that's totally true. Subies. Mostly Blue Subies.

From yesterday: SA class: 10 cars - 10 Subarus PA class: 11 cars - 11 Subarus M4 class: 11 cars - 11 Subarus (+1 Saabaru)

The funny part is that we had 32 Subies, but we had 23 non-AWD cars as well, which seems pretty rare for rallycross.

Our region does pretty well with mixtures, but it's pretty much 1rst heat is MR MF PF SF, and the 2nd heat is Subaru. ;)

Go to Detroit sometime... the Subarus tend to be outnumbered by weirdness.

I remember one time there were something like SIX Porsches entered.

Ok, AWD was certainly fun. (But I STILL think RWD is more fun.)

Knurled wrote: Go to Detroit sometime... the Subarus tend to be outnumbered by weirdness. I remember one time there were something like SIX Porsches entered.

That's interesting. One would thing that in the snow belt, there would be a proportionally higher number of Subarus than here in the "occasional snow" zone.

But tell us more about "weirdness." That sounds way better than more blue Subarus.

irish44j wrote: That's interesting. One would thing that in the snow belt, there would be a proportionally higher number of Subarus than here in the "occasional snow" zone.

You have it backwards. Where there's a lot of snow, you find a lot of people who are Manly Men (and equivalent Women) who nut up (and, um, ovary up?) and drive a 2wd pickup on bald tires and no heat because it's just snow and it's as simple as that.

Meanwhile, the Subaru-heavy local groups are in areas of Ohio where it basically never snows and the world comes to an end if two inches falls. The watershed divide is about 30ish miles south of the Lake and it is pretty funny how the snow seems to stop right there. I've been to mudcrosses and drove up through green grassy medians until I got to the divide and then it started snowing, and then there was a foot-plus of fresh snow on the ground at home and you know what? When you've been rallycrossing all day and you're still in that mindset and you come up on deep virgin snow on an interchange, a little voice in your head is saying "Come on, rail this corner, you know you can do it"...

(image: A2 Golf cornering at full throttle, full inside lock, tail out, attitude controlled with the brakes, snow flying everywhere)

Meh..... I can drive a RWD or FWD car just fine in the snow. But I can drive an AWD car faster and safer in the snow. The whole "manly men" thing when it comes to snow translates to me as "stupid/lazy people." I don't need to prove how manly I am by doing things the hard way. I'll take my AWD and wintersport tires, and I'll be on the ski slopes while Macho guy in his 2WD truck is still trying to creep up the windy mountain roads in the snow ;) When someone is seen as a "Macho" guy, that usually indicates he likes to do things the hard way just to prove his manhood. I'd rather do things the easy way/smart way.

I like RWD for hooning in the snow (and motorsports), not for getting places during a snowstorm in the safest/fastest way possible. And I drove a Triumph GT6 through many a heavy snowfall back in college, lol. It got me where I needed to go, but not in a fast or enjoyable manner.

--

All that said, many people think AWD/4WD is a magical panacea that allows you to ignore things like speed, braking, and having good tires. Or brushing the damn snow off the roof of your car. I've towed more than one 4x4 pickup out of ditches. With my WRX.

If you know how to drive in the snow, AWD is better than 2WD. If you don't know how to drive in the snow, AWD/4WD is arguably worse since it lets you get going faster but doesn't improve your braking or turning.

--

All that said, I've spent a good deal of time in the Rockies, where it snows a hell of a lot. And there are a lot of Subies, Audis, and 4x4s there. The guy going up the mountain with the 2WD pickup on bald tires is roundly hated. Not for his "skill" but for his utter slowness

(note: I live in DC, where even the THREAT of snow sends most of the populace out raiding the supermarkets and filling up spare gas cans as if the apocalypse is arriving......Ohio is proably downright sensible compared to the morons here on the roads.)

I still think my Golf was the best snow car I've ever had, and I've had a Subaru and currently own an AWD VW.

And, I think I need to call Car Hoarders Anonymous, I'm having a SECOND one delivered on Friday. Because the only thing cooler than an unbreakable Audi drivetrain with a 5 cylinder engine is wrapping a boxy Volkswagen around it.

On the flip side, it drives like it's on rails. You want to turn? Too bad, you're going straight ahead.

An AWD car is a bit easier to get rolling than a FWD one, sure, but I've yet to get a FWD one on all season stuck anywhere an AWD one wouldn't have been equally berkeleyed(like high centered on a snow bank). In real world use I really don't understand them, if you need that much traction, you really need a lot more ground clearance than a typical passenger sedan, now jacked up AWD cars, that's cool.

AWD gets better fuel economy above a certain speed, owing to tire loss being nonlinear with respect to power transmission since traction by nature involves a small amount of slippage. There's less loss when the power is divided among four tires instead of only two, plus there are still other losses in non-driven tires anyway. At some point the gains from reduced tire loss overcome the additional drivetrain losses.

At least, so sayeth Audi in '81. Back then the figure was around 100mph, but the drivetrain in the ur-quattro was very lossy, so I suspect that the modern cars' figure is much closer to 60-70mph.