FWD highway dominance- Fact or Fiction? Options

[KOU In3]

OK, it's come up indirectly a number of times but am I the only one that questions this whole FWD highway ownership thing? It seems like it's become an accepted fact that the FWD's are 50% faster from a roll.

Yes, the AWD weigh 400 or so pounds more.

Yes, there is an AWD drivetrain loss.

BUT, turning the AWD components only saps power to a point. I'm not sure I buy into the hype of 400 flywheel HP turning into 300whp as compared to it only losing half that amount in a FWD.

At stock turbo power levels yes, I can see the difference there but when you start really modding things I'm less certain.

This is when I'm waiting to hear the FFF cars (factory freak FWD cars chime in) with some arguements.

*Beware, the "Marucs at 12.6" arguement I plan on countering with though. *

[natedogg]

God stuff, Nate. I guess that is very similar to what I was trying to say, but I lacked the motivation to elaborate as much. However, after the drivetrain loss becomes a relative non-issue, what becomes of the inherent weight disadvantage? It would seem that once a car reaches 400hp, 400lb would make less of a difference, but add 400lb to what is still roughly 5% less wheel hp, and logic says the fwd will still walk away. I believe this whole issue is very subjective, and that it stems from the fact that the two configurations feel completely different. It has always seemed to me that the fwd cars have more "legs," and that they accelerate harder in the top three gears.

I agree. The weight issue is always apparent. My post was focused more on the drivetrain loss issue. Given equal hp, lighter is quicker, no doubt.