general Q...rear and front wheel drive...
 

ok...this is an argument i was having with a friend...he seems to think that rear wheel drive cars handle better than front wheel drive cars...he said "take a look at all the performance cars...like lambourghini, ferrari etc. they are all rear wheel drive..." i said that they are rear wheel drive coz the engine is mid mounted and sitting right infront of the rear wheels...ofcourse you would make it rear wheel drive...

i have some ideas as to why front wheel drive is better for handling...but am having trouble putting them into words...can anyone give me reasons, for or against front wheel drive cars handling better in general?

Rear wheel drive is superior. Indy cars are built with so much money, they could do them any way they wanted.

Physics of tires 101: Tires have traction. This traction is finite in its amount (think of it as a bank account). The traction can be "used" in any direction, it does not discriminate. It takes traction from the front tires in the "sideways" direction to make the nose of the car turn. If some traction is "used" to turn the car, there is less left to accelerate the car (out of a corner for example). Rear tires do not turn the car, so more of their "bank account" can accelerate the car (out of a corner for example). If a car is being driven to the traction limit of all four tires simultaneously more of the time, the lap times decrease. Add to this weight transfer (always to the rear of the car under acceleration) and the argument for rear wheel drive in race cars becomes even greater, but that is another physics lesson.

Front wheel drive is for low powered sedans that may see inclimate weather with inexperienced drivers. In those cases, the weight over the driving and turning tires of the engine etc may have merit. Additionally, since the driving tires are in the front, the inertia of cornering will not tend to kick the back end out (oversteer) in snow, ice etc... the car may be safer in the general public's hands.

Just my take:
Front drive cars were promoted for reasons unrelated to performance...economy and production cost (NOT maintenance cost to the owner!). There are some very good front drivers, but in my opinion, for performance use the front drivers put too much dynamic load on the front tires...they provide the traction for acceleration, and because they carry most of the weight, they do most of the stopping; meanwhile, they turn the car as well. The rear tires almost do nothing but hold the rear end off the ground.
Front-engined rear drivers at least share the tire load, with acceleration forces on the rear, braking somewhat balanced and front tires doing the steering. Rear-engined rear drivers load up the rear tires somewhat (good for acceleration traction), but not like a front driver, and braking is enhanced due to weight transfer toward the front. And finally, with both rear drivers, the front tires are doing less work, so they are able to provide a greater part of their total traction to steering the car.
Just my twopence...but this ought to get interesting.

hmmm interesting...there is also torque steer with front wheel drive cars...which, if you have a really torquie engine could make life very interesting...

what i have experienced in driving both front wheel drive cars and rear wheel drive cars is that front wheel drive cars tend to be able to handle corners at much greater speeds without losing rear traction...as much...with a rear wheel drive car i have experienced some pretty hairy cornering when the back just seems to slip n slide out of the corner...can be fun...