Focus RS
Everything in that quote you posted is technically correct. If you press and hold ASC, the HUD does say "AYC brake off", which is where your confusion stems from.
You know this already, but you can prove it easily if you ever overdrive the car on purpose, especially in the wet. Press ASC once to stop engine cut intervention. Press and hold to disable the engine cut and SAWC braking, making the X behave exactly like an Evo IX SAYC system with zero brake intervention that the rest of the world (except the USA) has. You cannot override SAYC by pressing any button combination, nor would you want to, because you'd effectively have an open rear differential.
SAYC itself transfers torque, it doesn't limit like the "e-diff" in the STI or XDS in a VW.
Source: I know how SAYC works. I've owned 3 SAWC Evo Xs and driven 2 SAYC Evos pre X (VI & VII).
If you're stubborn:
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/en/...ary/s-awc.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_S-AWC
You know this already, but you can prove it easily if you ever overdrive the car on purpose, especially in the wet. Press ASC once to stop engine cut intervention. Press and hold to disable the engine cut and SAWC braking, making the X behave exactly like an Evo IX SAYC system with zero brake intervention that the rest of the world (except the USA) has. You cannot override SAYC by pressing any button combination, nor would you want to, because you'd effectively have an open rear differential.
SAYC itself transfers torque, it doesn't limit like the "e-diff" in the STI or XDS in a VW.
Source: I know how SAYC works. I've owned 3 SAWC Evo Xs and driven 2 SAYC Evos pre X (VI & VII).
If you're stubborn:
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/en/...ary/s-awc.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_S-AWC
I want to start by tackling a few things:
1st) In response to me saying the evo uses brakes to induce yaw, people keep saying it doesn't use brakes to induce oversteer:
It does. Brake intervention is part of the stability control. The Evo does not use the brakes to induce oversteer, or act as any kind of a "limited slip differential". The brakes are purely used for stability control and it is full defeatable. At which point you only have the Active center and rear diff, and the passive/torsen (mechanical) front diff.
First: Let me tackle the statement that it doesn't use brakes to function as any kind of "LSD": vehicles that use brakes to act as a LSD do so because they are running an open differential. By individually braking a low traction wheel while applying throttle, then (due to how an open differential works) you cause an increase in torque being applied to the wheel with traction. The effect is that you don't sit there spinning a tire and not moving anywhere. It is not a system used to induce oversteer in any way, just to provide traction in low traction conditions.
Second: That "braking to act as an LSD" functionality is completely different than what I am saying. Nobody has disagreed that the evo can individually brake certain wheels. This effect (even if it is to maintian/regain control of the car) is inducing yaw.
If anyone needs a refresher on what yaw is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_(rotation)
Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer. Yes there is yaw rotation when going into oversteer or understeer, but that's simply because yaw is just the rotation of a vehicle that changes the direction it is pointing.
2nd) Noize, you keep focusing on the function of the AYC unit saying that it is the only thing capable of inducing yaw movement. I think your point is that it's the only thing capable of inducing oversteer maybe?
If you individually brake wheels on one side of the car you will induce yaw. Even if this yaw is intended to maintain control of the car, it's still inducing yaw. This has nothing to do whatsoever with the function of the AYC rear differential. It's simply another system that the computer can use to control yaw.
Further: brakes can be used to induce yaw even when you aren't applying gas. The rear AYC differential can only ever induce yaw under throttle.
There is a clear difference in the way the car feels at the limit with the ASC one off vs off-off. Which way you prefer to drive it is personal preference. But from an engineering standpoint using individual wheel braking in conjunction with the AYC unit to rotate the car is easily arguable as the fastest way to turn the car (or take a corner). It is, for me, part of why the evo SAWC system is soo awesome.
The programming of the individual wheel braking system isn't such as to just slow you down and maintain control and limit performance of the vehicle, it's designed to work in conjunction with the AYC to make you look like tommi makinen, and it works well!
So anyway, my point is I still disagree full-heatedly with this statement:
I am an engineer, I do know how the differentials in the evo function very well. I've had arguably as much experience with this platform as you have. I do not mean any of this to be condescending or offensive.
I think your statement just assumes that people (which probably many do) think inducing yaw is equivalent to inducing oversteer.
I look forward to your reply!
Last edited by ddawg1130; Feb 2, 2016 at 09:17 AM.
Thank you for this reply. I hope you don't mind, I'd like to discuss this some more as I enjoy these conversations.
I want to start by tackling a few things:
1st) In response to me saying the evo uses brakes to induce yaw, people keep saying it doesn't use brakes to induce oversteer:
I'm not sure what the statement has to do with claiming it uses the brakes to induce yaw though.
First: Let me tackle the statement that it doesn't use brakes to function as any kind of "LSD": vehicles that use brakes to act as a LSD do so because they are running an open differential. By individually braking a low traction wheel while applying throttle, then (due to how an open differential works) you cause an increase in torque being applied to the wheel with traction. The effect is that you don't sit there spinning a tire and not moving anywhere. It is not a system used to induce oversteer in any way, just to provide traction in low traction conditions.
Second: That "braking to act as an LSD" functionality is completely different than what I am saying. Nobody has disagreed that the evo can individually brake certain wheels. This effect (even if it is to maintian/regain control of the car) is inducing yaw.
If anyone needs a refresher on what yaw is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_(rotation)
Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer. Yes there is yaw rotation when going into oversteer or understeer, but that's simply because yaw is just the rotation of a vehicle that changes the direction it is pointing.
2nd) Noize, you keep focusing on the function of the AYC unit saying that it is the only thing capable of inducing yaw movement. I think your point is that it's the only thing capable of inducing oversteer maybe?
If you individually brake wheels on one side of the car you will induce yaw. Even if this yaw is intended to maintain control of the car, it's still inducing yaw. This has nothing to do whatsoever with the function of the AYC rear differential. It's simply another system that the computer can use to control yaw.
Further: brakes can be used to induce yaw even when you aren't applying gas. The rear AYC differential can only ever induce yaw under throttle.
I've raced the car. There is a clear difference in the way the car feels at the limit with the ASC one off. Using individual wheel braking in conjunction with the AYC unit to rotate the car is arguably the fastest way to drive a car.
If you've driven the car at the limit with the asc one off you can't claim that the programming is such to totally prevent any oversteer. The car is blatantly using brakes to induce yaw, but it isn't doing it in the same way that the AYC unit is used at times to induce oversteer.
Anyway, I still disagree full heatedly with this statement:
yes, the brakes are part of the SAWC, but that doesn't mean they have nothing to do with inducing yaw movement. I do agree with you that calling it "AYC BRAKE" is misleading in that braking isn't a part of the AYC function. I agree with that. But I disagree that the car doesn't use braking to induce yaw.
I am an engineer, I do know how the differentials in the evo function very well. I've had arguably as much experience with this platform as you have. I do not mean any of this to be condescending or offensive.
I think your statement just assumes that people (which probably many do) think inducing yaw is equivalent to inducing oversteer.
I look forward to your reply!
I want to start by tackling a few things:
1st) In response to me saying the evo uses brakes to induce yaw, people keep saying it doesn't use brakes to induce oversteer:
I'm not sure what the statement has to do with claiming it uses the brakes to induce yaw though.
First: Let me tackle the statement that it doesn't use brakes to function as any kind of "LSD": vehicles that use brakes to act as a LSD do so because they are running an open differential. By individually braking a low traction wheel while applying throttle, then (due to how an open differential works) you cause an increase in torque being applied to the wheel with traction. The effect is that you don't sit there spinning a tire and not moving anywhere. It is not a system used to induce oversteer in any way, just to provide traction in low traction conditions.
Second: That "braking to act as an LSD" functionality is completely different than what I am saying. Nobody has disagreed that the evo can individually brake certain wheels. This effect (even if it is to maintian/regain control of the car) is inducing yaw.
If anyone needs a refresher on what yaw is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_(rotation)
Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer. Yes there is yaw rotation when going into oversteer or understeer, but that's simply because yaw is just the rotation of a vehicle that changes the direction it is pointing.
2nd) Noize, you keep focusing on the function of the AYC unit saying that it is the only thing capable of inducing yaw movement. I think your point is that it's the only thing capable of inducing oversteer maybe?
If you individually brake wheels on one side of the car you will induce yaw. Even if this yaw is intended to maintain control of the car, it's still inducing yaw. This has nothing to do whatsoever with the function of the AYC rear differential. It's simply another system that the computer can use to control yaw.
Further: brakes can be used to induce yaw even when you aren't applying gas. The rear AYC differential can only ever induce yaw under throttle.
I've raced the car. There is a clear difference in the way the car feels at the limit with the ASC one off. Using individual wheel braking in conjunction with the AYC unit to rotate the car is arguably the fastest way to drive a car.
If you've driven the car at the limit with the asc one off you can't claim that the programming is such to totally prevent any oversteer. The car is blatantly using brakes to induce yaw, but it isn't doing it in the same way that the AYC unit is used at times to induce oversteer.
Anyway, I still disagree full heatedly with this statement:
yes, the brakes are part of the SAWC, but that doesn't mean they have nothing to do with inducing yaw movement. I do agree with you that calling it "AYC BRAKE" is misleading in that braking isn't a part of the AYC function. I agree with that. But I disagree that the car doesn't use braking to induce yaw.
I am an engineer, I do know how the differentials in the evo function very well. I've had arguably as much experience with this platform as you have. I do not mean any of this to be condescending or offensive.
I think your statement just assumes that people (which probably many do) think inducing yaw is equivalent to inducing oversteer.
I look forward to your reply!
only in the X introduced the brake help for stability control only. still not for rotation, in fact brakeing help preventing too much unvanted rotation. Hence why you actually can turn it off the brake assist when you track the car, so you can rotate it is much as you want it.
the new system called SAWC.
SAWC is basically unique for a X. SAYC is not.
Brake help in the Evo has only one purpose, to prevent the car to do unvanted rotation not to induce the rotation.
ps:
"Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer."
in the 2 dimensional rotation , yes it is.
Last edited by Robevo RS; Feb 2, 2016 at 09:40 AM.
AYC or the SAYC which is started in the later models from the VIII, and up, doesn't you use any brake force or parts to try to rotate a car around its own axis.
only in the X introduced the brake help for stability control only. still not for rotation, in fact brakeing help preventing too much unvanted rotation. Hence why you actually can turn it off the brake assist when you track the car, so you can rotate it is much as you want it.
the new system called SAWC.
SAWC is basically unique for a X. SAYC is not.
Brake help in the Evo has only one purpose, to prevent the car to do unvanted rotation not to induce the rotation.
only in the X introduced the brake help for stability control only. still not for rotation, in fact brakeing help preventing too much unvanted rotation. Hence why you actually can turn it off the brake assist when you track the car, so you can rotate it is much as you want it.
the new system called SAWC.
SAWC is basically unique for a X. SAYC is not.
Brake help in the Evo has only one purpose, to prevent the car to do unvanted rotation not to induce the rotation.
But, I think your and everyone's point is that it doesn't use brakes to try and increase cornering speeds and performance. And that's ok.
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!
Have any of you driven an Evo 10 on track in the three different modes? If you have, then each level is pretty clear on what is happening.
All on, you will get throttle limits at traction limits. Off keeps the car tidy but allows all the throttle. (as in, no oversteer inducing brake assisting going on) Off off you can drift like Mr. Block if you wish, or you can have the car rotate really nicely on throttle.
It took awhile for me to get used to how the 10 likes to be driven, as I was used to driving my 8 on track. In the 8 if you just gave it throttle it pushed (generalizing here). The 10 likes throttle to rotate, if you don't, it will push.
You could also go to a wet or snow filled lot and try them all out.
It's pretty apparent, unless you are on a parade lap or something...
All on, you will get throttle limits at traction limits. Off keeps the car tidy but allows all the throttle. (as in, no oversteer inducing brake assisting going on) Off off you can drift like Mr. Block if you wish, or you can have the car rotate really nicely on throttle.
It took awhile for me to get used to how the 10 likes to be driven, as I was used to driving my 8 on track. In the 8 if you just gave it throttle it pushed (generalizing here). The 10 likes throttle to rotate, if you don't, it will push.
You could also go to a wet or snow filled lot and try them all out.
It's pretty apparent, unless you are on a parade lap or something...
Ok, we can't say it doesn't use brakes to try and rotate the car and then say it uses brakes to prevent unwanted rotation. the only way to use brakes to prevent unwanted rotation is by creating a rotational force in the opposite direction. So yes, it does use brakes to rotate the car.
But, I think your and everyone's point is that it doesn't use brakes to try and increase cornering speeds and performance. And that's ok.
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!
But, I think your and everyone's point is that it doesn't use brakes to try and increase cornering speeds and performance. And that's ok.
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!"
i think that is correct. But the same time that is why you can run into trouble too. Since makes your car running wider, when it prevents aggressive rotation. Doesnt matter on the surface thought. I hate the brake assist makes me nervous if i over shoot i cant correct it with more roration and added throttle. i highly recommend for advanced drivers to not use brake assistance.
Have any of you driven an Evo 10 on track in the three different modes? If you have, then each level is pretty clear on what is happening.
All on, you will get throttle limits at traction limits. Off keeps the car tidy but allows all the throttle. (as in, no oversteer inducing brake assisting going on) Off off you can drift like Mr. Block if you wish, or you can have the car rotate really nicely on throttle.
It took awhile for me to get used to how the 10 likes to be driven, as I was used to driving my 8 on track. In the 8 if you just gave it throttle it pushed (generalizing here). The 10 likes throttle to rotate, if you don't, it will push.
You could also go to a wet or snow filled lot and try them all out.
It's pretty apparent, unless you are on a parade lap or something...
All on, you will get throttle limits at traction limits. Off keeps the car tidy but allows all the throttle. (as in, no oversteer inducing brake assisting going on) Off off you can drift like Mr. Block if you wish, or you can have the car rotate really nicely on throttle.
It took awhile for me to get used to how the 10 likes to be driven, as I was used to driving my 8 on track. In the 8 if you just gave it throttle it pushed (generalizing here). The 10 likes throttle to rotate, if you don't, it will push.
You could also go to a wet or snow filled lot and try them all out.
It's pretty apparent, unless you are on a parade lap or something...
i think that is correct. But the same time that is why you can run into trouble too. Since makes your car running wider, when it prevents aggressive rotation. Doesnt matter on the surface thought. I hate the brake assist makes me nervous if i over shoot i cant correct it with more roration and added throttle. i highly recommend for advanced drivers to not use brake assistance.
Sounds like your 8 needed a 12 plate rear diff and ACD tune. My car has a tendency to push if being over driven after the apex while off throttle and off brake. If I pick up the throttle a bit in the same situation, understeer is eliminated and in most cases the car just rotates. Similarly, on entry, while on the brakes, the car rotates like a FWD car...lol
came in to see what the latest word on the FoRS was.. turned into ayc discussion?
I for one am really, really interested as a bystander how this awd system is going to perform. it sounds like the perfect realized form of haldex, though it is not "haldex." I've got my old 9 set up pretty well, very neutral on turn in with the acd tuned and lot of power oversteer with the cusco 1.5way.
pretty mechanical/old school compared to the FoRS, with the computers deciding exactly how much power gets etc. I'm sure it is integrated with everything, and the front axle has that braking e-lsd thing going on. for a front heavy awd car, that seems less than ideal to me, but who knows. as the car gets faster and people start to push harder and harder idk how this is going to work out. also just sounds like a lot that could break*/go wrong.
I for one am really, really interested as a bystander how this awd system is going to perform. it sounds like the perfect realized form of haldex, though it is not "haldex." I've got my old 9 set up pretty well, very neutral on turn in with the acd tuned and lot of power oversteer with the cusco 1.5way.
pretty mechanical/old school compared to the FoRS, with the computers deciding exactly how much power gets etc. I'm sure it is integrated with everything, and the front axle has that braking e-lsd thing going on. for a front heavy awd car, that seems less than ideal to me, but who knows. as the car gets faster and people start to push harder and harder idk how this is going to work out. also just sounds like a lot that could break*/go wrong.
Vastly more relevant than some of the segues...
I'm really looking forward to seeing how the FoRS rear end handles more power, and how the overheat system works. If you add an aftermarket cooler, can you pile on the HP?
Thank you for this reply. I hope you don't mind, I'd like to discuss this some more as I enjoy these conversations.
I want to start by tackling a few things:
1st) In response to me saying the evo uses brakes to induce yaw, people keep saying it doesn't use brakes to induce oversteer:
I'm not sure what the statement has to do with claiming it uses the brakes to induce yaw though.
First: Let me tackle the statement that it doesn't use brakes to function as any kind of "LSD": vehicles that use brakes to act as a LSD do so because they are running an open differential. By individually braking a low traction wheel while applying throttle, then (due to how an open differential works) you cause an increase in torque being applied to the wheel with traction. The effect is that you don't sit there spinning a tire and not moving anywhere. It is not a system used to induce oversteer in any way, just to provide traction in low traction conditions.
Second: That "braking to act as an LSD" functionality is completely different than what I am saying. Nobody has disagreed that the evo can individually brake certain wheels. This effect (even if it is to maintian/regain control of the car) is inducing yaw.
If anyone needs a refresher on what yaw is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_(rotation)
Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer. Yes there is yaw rotation when going into oversteer or understeer, but that's simply because yaw is just the rotation of a vehicle that changes the direction it is pointing.
2nd) Noize, you keep focusing on the function of the AYC unit saying that it is the only thing capable of inducing yaw movement. I think your point is that it's the only thing capable of inducing oversteer maybe?
If you individually brake wheels on one side of the car you will induce yaw. Even if this yaw is intended to maintain control of the car, it's still inducing yaw. This has nothing to do whatsoever with the function of the AYC rear differential. It's simply another system that the computer can use to control yaw.
Further: brakes can be used to induce yaw even when you aren't applying gas. The rear AYC differential can only ever induce yaw under throttle.
There is a clear difference in the way the car feels at the limit with the ASC one off vs off-off. Which way you prefer to drive it is personal preference. But from an engineering standpoint using individual wheel braking in conjunction with the AYC unit to rotate the car is easily arguable as the fastest way to turn the car (or take a corner). It is, for me, part of why the evo SAWC system is soo awesome.
The programming of the individual wheel braking system isn't such as to just slow you down and maintain control and limit performance of the vehicle, it's designed to work in conjunction with the AYC to make you look like tommi makinen, and it works well!
So anyway, my point is I still disagree full-heatedly with this statement:
yes, the brakes are part of the SAWC, but that doesn't mean they have nothing to do with inducing yaw movement or are there only for if your screw up. I do agree with you that calling it "AYC BRAKE" is misleading in that braking isn't a part of the AYC function. I agree with that. But I disagree that the car doesn't use braking to induce yaw for performance reasons.
I am an engineer, I do know how the differentials in the evo function very well. I've had arguably as much experience with this platform as you have. I do not mean any of this to be condescending or offensive.
I think your statement just assumes that people (which probably many do) think inducing yaw is equivalent to inducing oversteer.
I look forward to your reply!
I want to start by tackling a few things:
1st) In response to me saying the evo uses brakes to induce yaw, people keep saying it doesn't use brakes to induce oversteer:
I'm not sure what the statement has to do with claiming it uses the brakes to induce yaw though.
First: Let me tackle the statement that it doesn't use brakes to function as any kind of "LSD": vehicles that use brakes to act as a LSD do so because they are running an open differential. By individually braking a low traction wheel while applying throttle, then (due to how an open differential works) you cause an increase in torque being applied to the wheel with traction. The effect is that you don't sit there spinning a tire and not moving anywhere. It is not a system used to induce oversteer in any way, just to provide traction in low traction conditions.
Second: That "braking to act as an LSD" functionality is completely different than what I am saying. Nobody has disagreed that the evo can individually brake certain wheels. This effect (even if it is to maintian/regain control of the car) is inducing yaw.
If anyone needs a refresher on what yaw is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_(rotation)
Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer. Yes there is yaw rotation when going into oversteer or understeer, but that's simply because yaw is just the rotation of a vehicle that changes the direction it is pointing.
2nd) Noize, you keep focusing on the function of the AYC unit saying that it is the only thing capable of inducing yaw movement. I think your point is that it's the only thing capable of inducing oversteer maybe?
If you individually brake wheels on one side of the car you will induce yaw. Even if this yaw is intended to maintain control of the car, it's still inducing yaw. This has nothing to do whatsoever with the function of the AYC rear differential. It's simply another system that the computer can use to control yaw.
Further: brakes can be used to induce yaw even when you aren't applying gas. The rear AYC differential can only ever induce yaw under throttle.
There is a clear difference in the way the car feels at the limit with the ASC one off vs off-off. Which way you prefer to drive it is personal preference. But from an engineering standpoint using individual wheel braking in conjunction with the AYC unit to rotate the car is easily arguable as the fastest way to turn the car (or take a corner). It is, for me, part of why the evo SAWC system is soo awesome.
The programming of the individual wheel braking system isn't such as to just slow you down and maintain control and limit performance of the vehicle, it's designed to work in conjunction with the AYC to make you look like tommi makinen, and it works well!
So anyway, my point is I still disagree full-heatedly with this statement:
yes, the brakes are part of the SAWC, but that doesn't mean they have nothing to do with inducing yaw movement or are there only for if your screw up. I do agree with you that calling it "AYC BRAKE" is misleading in that braking isn't a part of the AYC function. I agree with that. But I disagree that the car doesn't use braking to induce yaw for performance reasons.
I am an engineer, I do know how the differentials in the evo function very well. I've had arguably as much experience with this platform as you have. I do not mean any of this to be condescending or offensive.
I think your statement just assumes that people (which probably many do) think inducing yaw is equivalent to inducing oversteer.
I look forward to your reply!
AYC from the IV and up or the SAYC which is started in the later models from the VIII, and up, doesn't you use any brake force or parts to try to rotate a car around its own axis.
only in the X introduced the brake help for stability control only. still not for rotation, in fact brakeing help preventing too much unvanted rotation. Hence why you actually can turn it off the brake assist when you track the car, so you can rotate it is much as you want it.
the new system called SAWC.
SAWC is basically unique for a X. SAYC is not.
Brake help in the Evo has only one purpose, to prevent the car to do unvanted rotation not to induce the rotation.
ps:
"Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer."
in the 2 dimensional rotation , yes it is.
only in the X introduced the brake help for stability control only. still not for rotation, in fact brakeing help preventing too much unvanted rotation. Hence why you actually can turn it off the brake assist when you track the car, so you can rotate it is much as you want it.
the new system called SAWC.
SAWC is basically unique for a X. SAYC is not.
Brake help in the Evo has only one purpose, to prevent the car to do unvanted rotation not to induce the rotation.
ps:
"Yaw is not the same thing as oversteer or understeer."
in the 2 dimensional rotation , yes it is.
Ok, we can't say it doesn't use brakes to try and rotate the car and then say it uses brakes to prevent unwanted rotation. the only way to use brakes to prevent unwanted rotation is by creating a rotational force in the opposite direction. So yes, it does use brakes to rotate the car.
But, I think your and everyone's point is that it doesn't use brakes to try and increase cornering speeds and performance. And that's ok.
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!
But, I think your and everyone's point is that it doesn't use brakes to try and increase cornering speeds and performance. And that's ok.
I always thought that it used them to prevent you from going into too much of an oversteer condition which is harmful to cornering speeds. I could be wrong in that though!
I agree that the brakes cannot induce oversteer, and only the SAYC can. I think the entire problem of this conversation is when and where we were using "yaw".
I thought you were inferring that the rear "aye brake" pulsed the ABS like an "e-diff" in corners to limit wheelspin on the offending side. Clearly you weren't, and it was all about semantics.
Back a little toward the topic, I'm hopeful that even though SAWC is pretty old, it'll hold it's own against the GKN twinster system in the RS. The Ford engineers saying the STI, Evo, and Golf R aren't competition for the RS is driving a lot of the comparison talk. There's also going to make for a lot of butthurt Focus boys when they try to scrape with cars on the road that have almost ten years of aftermarket support under the hood.
Can't wait until the RS aftermarket starts heating up!
Now that it's all out, I think we agree with everything front to back. A lot of disagreement was semantics or wording. Yes, I agree that by the technical definition of yaw, the brakes can induce it. Yes, I prefer to drive my car with press instead of press and hold, because it has saved my butt from panic lift off oversteer on occasion. Given unexpected things can happen on public streets, driving press and hold seems irresponsible when pushing it, especially at my limited skill.
I agree that the brakes cannot induce oversteer, and only the SAYC can. I think the entire problem of this conversation is when and where we were using "yaw".
I thought you were inferring that the rear "aye brake" pulsed the ABS like an "e-diff" in corners to limit wheelspin on the offending side. Clearly you weren't, and it was all about semantics.
Back a little toward the topic, I'm hopeful that even though SAWC is pretty old, it'll hold it's own against the GKN twinster system in the RS. The Ford engineers saying the STI, Evo, and Golf R aren't competition for the RS is driving a lot of the comparison talk. There's also going to make for a lot of butthurt Focus boys when they try to scrape with cars on the road that have almost ten years of aftermarket support under the hood. Can't wait until the RS aftermarket starts heating up!
I agree that the brakes cannot induce oversteer, and only the SAYC can. I think the entire problem of this conversation is when and where we were using "yaw".
I thought you were inferring that the rear "aye brake" pulsed the ABS like an "e-diff" in corners to limit wheelspin on the offending side. Clearly you weren't, and it was all about semantics.
Back a little toward the topic, I'm hopeful that even though SAWC is pretty old, it'll hold it's own against the GKN twinster system in the RS. The Ford engineers saying the STI, Evo, and Golf R aren't competition for the RS is driving a lot of the comparison talk. There's also going to make for a lot of butthurt Focus boys when they try to scrape with cars on the road that have almost ten years of aftermarket support under the hood.
Can't wait until the RS aftermarket starts heating up!that is why I said, would be real fun to compere the FQ360( which has really 354 hp) to the RS 350 hp on track
Ford say the RS sprints from 0-60 in 4.7 sec
the Fq360 does it 4.1 sec.
So basically if the RS faster in the track vs the FQ360, then they did what they said. Made a best handling AWD car in this segment.
I think that's fair to ask, no?
Last edited by Robevo RS; Feb 2, 2016 at 02:57 PM.
Evolved Member
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 29
From: Tri-State NY/NJ/CT
Thank Ford for the mystery.
came in to see what the latest word on the FoRS was.. turned into ayc discussion?
I for one am really, really interested as a bystander how this awd system is going to perform. it sounds like the perfect realized form of haldex, though it is not "haldex." I've got my old 9 set up pretty well, very neutral on turn in with the acd tuned and lot of power oversteer with the cusco 1.5way.
pretty mechanical/old school compared to the FoRS, with the computers deciding exactly how much power gets etc. I'm sure it is integrated with everything, and the front axle has that braking e-lsd thing going on. for a front heavy awd car, that seems less than ideal to me, but who knows. as the car gets faster and people start to push harder and harder idk how this is going to work out. also just sounds like a lot that could break*/go wrong.
I for one am really, really interested as a bystander how this awd system is going to perform. it sounds like the perfect realized form of haldex, though it is not "haldex." I've got my old 9 set up pretty well, very neutral on turn in with the acd tuned and lot of power oversteer with the cusco 1.5way.
pretty mechanical/old school compared to the FoRS, with the computers deciding exactly how much power gets etc. I'm sure it is integrated with everything, and the front axle has that braking e-lsd thing going on. for a front heavy awd car, that seems less than ideal to me, but who knows. as the car gets faster and people start to push harder and harder idk how this is going to work out. also just sounds like a lot that could break*/go wrong.
