Absolute nonsense. The GT2, GT3, GT3 RS, GT4, GT4 RS are all RWD, for a reason. AWD not only adds weight but also alters the handling. The AWD 911 doesn't handle as well as the RWD when pushed to the limit. The AWD exists due to customer demand...and lack of driving skills.

 

If money were no object I would definitely have a ZR1 or X but I don’t so the SR excites my soul enough.

 

AWD has been permitted and tested (experimented with) over the years in various professional racing circuits. In some cases, the AWD competitors were significantly faster, and thus were penalized with ballast weight. In other situations, the RWD cars were better (except for in the rain). It's more than likely track layout dependent, as well as power level and traction limits of the vehicle platforms in the circuit.

In the end though, I believe it was actually the governance nightmare on how to regulate fairness with AWD and RWD competing side by side which made each of those experiments fail; and thus no one really permits AWD today. Not because one is faster than the other (which they may or may not be), but because the impact to the rule set is pretty much unmanageable.

A 911 is probably not the best example to use though LOL! The development over the years on that platform is pretty much unmatched. People don't really complain about "traction problems" with a race-ready 911

 

No doubt AWD has been tested in all kinds of racing series. There's also a lot of variables. The more power a car has the more AWD will help pull down the straight. Approaching a corner, entering and exiting (until the wheel is straight) does not favor AWD. That extra weight on the nose and the front wheels trying to pull you straight hurt handling.

The 911 platform has 60 years of development across several generations. The Vette has more...and with the C8 they have knocked it out of the park. The big challenge with the 992 or 718 is that they're balance and handling are perfect.... until they aren't. They are far less forgiving, especially the 718.

 

Not Nonsense The cars you mentioned are track cars and as I'm sure you already know AWD is banned. If you ever heard of the Nürburgring the record for fastest lap ever set is from a Mercedes AMG One which is AWD
Corvette recently set some Ring track records with the ZR1X another AWD car.

 

I think it's all situational, but from memory (which to be fair, isn't the best since I crossed 50 LOL!), in one of those experiments, they found the corner exit speeds of the AWD vehicles were consistently much better than the RWD vehicles. This was a case where they added a rule t include ballast for AWD cars .. but how to you measure the appropiate amount? It's not like a simple power to weight calc ... I wish I could remember the series, but I don't think it was high powered platforms.

I'll ask ChatGPT to see if it'll know ...

 

So I asked it:

There was a professional racing series in the past which experimented with allowing AWD cars to compete. During this experiment, the regulators found that the AWD cars were consistently achieving higher corner exit speeds and thus added a rule to require ballast weight to be added to the AWD cars for fairness. But determining the amount of weight wasn't very accurate considering the different AWD setups, and since it isn't as simple as a power to weight calculation. Are you able to find record of something which matches my above recollection? I cannot seem to remember the series, or when, or if it was high powered platforms or momentum cars, etc ...

And it replied:

And as you probably already know, corner exit speed advantage trumps everything else about a corner. Entry speed and mid corner speed advantages are nice, but it's the exit speed advantage which makes the difference.

 

Those Audi platforms were FWD if they weren't optioned with AWD so I don't really think that applies here. AWD is definitely going to be an advantage over FWD. I also agree that in limited traction situations AWD is going to hold an advantage...as long as you know how to use it properly.

Take a 911 S and a 911 4S to Sonoma on a sunny day and I can tell you which one will be faster.

 

They're actually production street cars but who's counting?
There are racing series that have a 911 and 718 in it, yes. I'm referring to all the above cars that are sold to the track enthusiast for track days. There's a reason they're RWD.

 

Lots of bench racers here… for pure speed on dry surface RWD is king.

 

Actually that is exactly what the front electric drive is for...tracking and better traction throughout the turns, not about wet surface traction. It assists all four wheels digging throughout turns. The front drive cuts out at 70mph.

 

Yup. No bench racing.

What's to "dig" throughout a turn? Approaching, entering, apexing have literally nothing to do with AWD. As you exit, AWD can help put power to the pavement. However... that power is going to pull you (literally) in a direction you don't want. Try it out sometime. That's probably why the AWD cuts out at 70mph.

 

Front motor cuts off at 150 in the E-Ray, 160 in the ZR1X, not at 70.

 

my 25 e is still pulling on electric at 70 mph and a tad beyond ....do you own one

 

Get what you want. And enjoy what you have.

 

My wife asked me once "when is it going to be enough" LOL please excuse the car it's on right now...

 

Have you ever actually driven an X or ERAY? I would guess no based on your last statement.

 

British Touring Car Championship (BTCC) wasn't just Audi's in the series, but it was the Audi AWD system in the Quattros which provided a significant advantage:

https://1990sbtcc.com/btcc-regulations/

Eligible Cars

The series is open to four door family saloon cars that have an overall length of no less than 4.2m. This removes the eligibility of small hot hatches or sports coupes, which could have an unfair advantage.

There is a required production run of at least 25,000 identical cars before any car can be homologated with the FIA, which was increased from the initial 2,500 units in 1995 in an attempt to remove the new breed of ‘homologation specials’ that were appearing, such as the Alfa Romeo 155 Silverstone.

Minimum Weights

To equalise performance between the front, rear and four-wheel drive cars a series of minimum weights are imposed. These weights can be adjusted if one car is seen to be too dominant in the series. The technical scrutineers check these weights frequently and, since this is often done with the driver on board, an allowance of at least 80kg is made for the driver and his kit. This means additional ballast is required in cars with lightweight drivers to bring the weight up to the allowable limit.

These are the weight limits imposed from 1991 – 2000:

03-1991 – FWD 950kg RWD 1050kg 4X4 1050kg
07-1992 – FWD 950kg RWD 1025kg 4X4 1050kg
03-1993 – FWD 950kg RWD 1050kg 4X4 1050kg
03-1994 – FWD 975kg RWD 1025kg 4X4 1040kg
07-1995 – FWD 975kg RWD 1000kg 4X4 1040kg
05-1996 – FWD 975kg RWD 1000kg 4X4 1070kg
05-1997 – FWD 975kg RWD 1000kg 4X4 1040kg
03-1998 – FWD 975kg RWD 1000kg 4X4 Banned

Then there's also this:

https://www.autosport.com/btcc/news/...-era/10630563/


Four-wheel drive wasn’t new and had already scored success in the period thanks to the Audi 80. But the A4 was one of the cars that pushed things forward as the competitiveness of Super Touring ratcheted up in the mid-1990s.

The solid A4, with its excellent traction and balanced tyre wear, was a winner immediately, Emanuele Pirro easily taking the 1995 Italian crown. Biela led an Audi 1-2 in the FIA Touring Car World Cup at the end of the season and a remarkable 1996 followed in which the A4 took titles in Australia, Belgium, Britain, Spain, Italy, South Africa and Germany, as well as winning the Macau Guia race.

Audi’s UK attack was led by Biela in a new team under Richard Lloyd and John Wickham, and Biela won five of the first eight races. Perhaps predictably, the Audi was then hit with an extra 30kg, but Biela carried on racking up podiums and points. Three wins in the second half of the season and incredible consistency meant he still easily won the title at his (and the A4’s) first attempt.

Williams and Renault moved things on in 1997 but Audi remained a frontrunner, particularly in wet or damp conditions when traction was at a premium and when the 30kg was dropped after the early rounds. Biela and John Bintcliffe scored seven wins between them and the German finished second in the standings before Audi pressed on with the front-wheel-drive version of the A4.

That car, as driven by Yvan Muller in the 1998 BTCC, was never as effective, but the full-house 4WD A4 continued winning in Europe until the end of the era.

Pirro says: “There was a lot of technology behind that car. Of course it had the quattro technology, which gave it an advantage over a rear-wheel-drive car, which had an advantage over a front-drive car. There was the weight compensation to make things equal, but it was always difficult to know how much that should be.

“With the 4WD you could exploit the limit of the tyre grip. You could brake later by exploiting the engine braking and get on power a little bit earlier. The real advantage was on braking and turn-in – you could exploit the grip of the four tyres on the entry phase of the corner.”

Pirro was speaking to Gary Watkins

 

Not necessary, though I'd love to drive the Eray. I have no doubt it's a wonderful car. At the same time when you start pushing to 7/10ths and beyond, regardless how good the system is it can't rewrite physics or chassis dynamics. There are a few factors at play. First, anything that provides power to the front wheels is going to want to pull straight ahead when on throttle. A good system can mitigate that but not eliminate it. This pull induces understeer. Period. Second is weight distribution/balance. The more weight you put on the nose the more it can upset the balance, again typically leading to understeer. Why do you think the C8 is mid engine? They reached the limit for what a front engine car can do. Weight distribution/balance.

Ever played around with a RWD and AWD car on a road course or wet skidpad? I'm going to guess no. Try it sometime, you'll learn real quick. No substitute for the real deal.

A bit more extreme, but to illustrate the point. Go into a snow covered parking lot. Turn the wheel and floor it in a RWD car. What happens? Do the same thing in a FWD car. What happens? Right. As I said, a good torque vectoring system can mitigate the impact of front wheels pulling, but not eliminate it.

I don't dispute that AWD will put the power down better once the wheel is straight. What it WILL do is pull you off your intended line when you apply power coming out of a corner. Again, go try it out. There's a reason the Huracan STO, GT3 RS etc...are RWD. It's not because of racing rules, they could easily make street going versions of them in AWD but don't.

 

Sounds like you want a stick-shift transmission, too.

In all actuality, the C8's will be bricks in 30 years, due to unavailable components that are obsolete. Electronic devices is what I'm talking about. You won't find any C8's 50-60 years from now, like you do C2's still.

Couple these with traffic that crawls, and you have a recipe for frustration. Nobody needs all the power in the world, when the Camry in front of you is doing 5 under the speed limit...