2007 TRD Aurion 3500S Road Test
17 Sep, 2007
449 Comments 
2007 TRD Aurion 3500S Road Test
CarAdvice rating: 
Recommended Retail Price: 3500S $56,990 - 6sp Auto only, 3500SL $61,500 - 6sp Auto only.
Options Fitted: None fitted.
- by Paul Maric
While you were sleeping, Toyota engineers have developed what can only be described as a potent weapon. Think 3.5-litre V6, producing 204kW, then add a supercharger and boost that power figure to 241kW, the result is what Toyota like to call the TRD Aurion – where TRD stands for “Toyota Race Development.”
From the outside, the new TRD Aurion looks quick and dare I say it - angry. Sitting on dark grey 19” wheels with 30 profile tyres, the red brake calipers give onlookers an idea of what could happen when the loud pedal is pushed to the floor. Head to the rear and a massive set of rectangular exhaust outlets vent the engine’s soundtrack at high-revs.
Open the driver’s door and a stunning interior is displayed for all and sundry to see. Red seats, along with red alcantara trim hint at this vehicle’s race origins. Supportive seats, along with a red-trimmed steering wheel provide reassurance through corners, adding to the thrill of Toyota’s latest performance offering.
Under the bonnet a supercharged 3.5-litre V6 is used to produce 241kW and 400Nm of torque. Power is sent through a 6-speed automatic gearbox and the claimed 0-100 time is 6.1-seconds. The automatic gearbox is dull and lifeless in automatic mode, shifts are devastatingly slow for a “performance car,” making the manual tiptronic style mode the only viable option for enthusiastic driving. Even then, manual shifts are too slow and require lengthy forward thought, as it’s too easy to hit the fuel-cut at the red-line if you don’t shift early enough.
Unfortunately, such a brilliant looking package is let down – quite fundamentally – by some traits that are obvious to even the mildest of drivers. First and foremost is the fact that power is delivered through the front wheels. It’s nigh on impossible to send such a great amount of power through the front wheels without meeting repercussions such as torque steer and understeer.
Torque steer occurs in Front Wheel Drive cars when you jump on the throttle and the steering wheel darts in all directions in an attempt to maintain traction. Through corners, the front end feels light and uncontrolled when applying throttle, causing the traction control to step in and limit loss of traction. The suspension is also far too biased to normal driving, when you push deep into a corner, the car wallows and the size of the vehicle can really be felt.
The brakes on the other hand are phenomenal. The aftermarket stoppers pull the TRD Aurion up in remarkable speed and are resilient to fade – even after a torturous session through the mountains.
The TRD Aurion is available in two grades – 3500S and 3500SL – priced at $56,990 and $61,500 respectively. Standard features include: 19” alloy wheels; unique TRD Aurion body kit; cruise control; central locking; air-conditioning; auto headlights; electric windows; 6-disc CD player; leather seat trim with alcantara and power driver’s seat.
Safety features include: Electronic Stability Control (ESP); ABS brakes; Brake Assist (BA); driver and front passenger airbags; side airbags and curtain airbags.
Toyota has missed the mark with the new TRD Aurion. It’s impossible to drive this car hard without fearing which direction the car will send you in. There is simply far too much power being pushed through the front wheels to make this car viable.
Toyota should have engineered an All Wheel Drive or Rear Wheel Drive package for this engine. Although the car looks stunning both inside and out, it is totally let down by a drive train which is far too difficult to manage. The TRD Aurion only just scraped through with three steering wheels out of five and that was because of the interior and exterior look.
Location: Home / Toyota, Toyota Aurion, Behind the Wheel / ...
Rate Post: 
(19 votes, average: 3.37 out of 5)
Loading ...
-
Print it:
September 17th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Ouch!
Maybe the TRD Aurion isn’t that much chop afterall?
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
I’m gonna go test drive one myself, before I jump to any conclusions. There’s like just one single paragraph to summarize the whole driving experience.. err doesn’t seem like a comprehensive review to me.
put it in a straight line drag against commos and fords, then a track.. then get the drivers to swap cars and see what they say.. bring up some stats on it, compared to others etc..
pathetic review if anything. :D
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
But Chaser, why would they want to put it on a track when they quote:
“Toyota has missed the mark with the new TRD Aurion. It’s impossible to drive this car hard without fearing which direction the car will send you in. There is simply far too much power being pushed through the front wheels to make this car viable.”
It’s obvious to me from this that the TRD Aurion is NOT a track car! and to be honest, that sounds about right… why do you think there is no other car from any manufacturer in the world with a 240kw/400Nm FWD? That’s because the nature of FWD itself coupled to that much power/torque does not lend itself to favourable driving/handling dynamics.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Yes Chaser, it is a “raod test” not a comparison. Either way, this really just agrees with every other test I’ve read. Now I haven’t driven one of these, and not many non-journos have, but I’m not in the market for a car like this anyway, but a competitive market is generally good for the consumer. It’s a pity Toyota Aus seems to have missed the mark first up.
I had a good look at one last week at the adelaide show, and I like the styling - it does have the look. However, up close it does suffer from a bit of the low volume aftermarket body kit fit/finish. Just stay 10m away and it looks great. Interior is a good effort also.
I don’t believe that this car could ever have been AWD. It’s a local, low volume, parts bin special - they just had to make do the best they could with what they had. I Don’t think they had much help from head office either, for the dollars it starts to get into Lexus teritory.
(And, hey Paul, this thing tows less that a Kluger LOL).
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
“Toyota has missed the mark with the new TRD Aurion. It’s impossible to drive this car hard without fearing which direction the car will send you in. There is simply far too much power being pushed through the front wheels to make this car viable.”
Great cant wait until it hits the roads does that mean there will be Aurions driving all over the road because some numb nuts cant handle the power?? Just interested..
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
true call Ross. I understand this whole FWD dilemma, but seriously I’ve owned fwd and rwd and I know for a fact that my fwd cars were always more safer in the wet, my rwd car almost got me killed and I was well under the limit too when it spun out. Apart from that I want to see for myself exactly how terrible this torque steer is.. I just think that its more hyped up than usual or something..
but thats just me so I’ll have to see..
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
Chaser, I think that the torque steer thing may be a little over stated, but hey I haven’t and don’t intend to drive one. In most everyday situations the electronics will just kill engine output to limit the torque steer, safe but hardly fun from an enthusiest’s point of view.
Funny, I’ve also found that many people who regularly drive FWD cars struggle when they get behind the wheel of a real car(RWD). lol.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Guys I’ve got the TRD Aurion SL at the moment,
I have some differing thoughts to Paul on this car, I will have a review of the TRD done by weeks end.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Chaser:
We had two cars on the test we did - one being the TRD Aurion and the other a new 350Z.
It wasn’t possible to get the TRD off the line without the ESP limiting torque and inducing braking via the front wheels.
Further to that, we switched off ESP (mind you, there is no actual button for it, a special combination of brake and handbrake are required to switch it off) and all the car did was smoke the front wheels.
The TRD really is very difficult to drive hard, there is always a fear of the wheels jerking the car into a direction you don’t want to be going in.
In that sense, you would never buy one of these over an SS or an XR6T. The driving experience from the former, and even still, the latter tramp the TRD Aurion.
It’s a brilliant looking car - both inside and out - but the engine could have been put to much better use through a rear wheel drive or all wheel drive chassis. As it stands, it’s a capable engine and car (in a design sense) in an incapable chassis.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Ive heard comments from people who have bought this car… they seem to disagree with reviews that state this car has ridiculous amounts of torque steer. I wont doubt that it would have the nannys kicking in under hard acceleration… but so would most cars, RWD dont exactly have much weight over their drive wheels do they (and the weight distribution argument doesnt sell for me). But at least it was an honest review. Although maybe driving something like a 350z at the same time and then either purposely or without knowledge comparing it to a TRD Aurion is abit harsh, because the 350z although in the same price range is obviously a very capable performer and targeted to a different market.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
This report really confuses me because every other article i have read has given the car a very good rap, this is the first article to state otherwise.
Apart from that, the article has concentrated on some negative aspects of the car (just like every other car has eg HSV brakes are under done are a prone to brake fade)but has not stated the positive dynamics that so many other reports have been all to willing to highlighted.
Why is that ??
Not only have other reports been considerably more detailed but have described the chassis as well sorted and balanced from front to rear, a suspension that is all to willing to change direction without fuzz with excellant resistance to body roll (and certainly no wallowing comment has never been sighted todate) with genuine handling prowess.
Alborz - i would like to see a far more conprehensive report on this motor vehicle that not only highlights the cars weakness (that all examples have) but obviously the many dynamic strengths the TRD Aurion is sure to exhibit.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
Maybe he couldnt find any positives Kevin (apart from the interior) LOL
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
Paul Maric - your review on the car considerably differs to all of the other reports i have taken time to read so far. You have described the car to be a handful from take off yet others reports differ somewhat to your analysis.
It also appears that your making on the car differs to that of Alborz so it will be interesting reading once Alborz publishes his own analysis.
A question for you if you do not mind !!
Your report about the cars on road ability is limited and concentrates on the negatives but obvioulsy this vehicle has many dynamic abilities of which you have not taken time to edit. Your ‘incapable chassis’ comment conflicts with all other reports of which have highlighted the chassis as being well sorted and balanced from front to rear.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Many years ago at school, I learned some physics.
Nothing has changed since then, - if you put insane power in a FWD car with unsophisticated suspension, and then take off in a hurry the weight transfer will lift the weight off the front wheels which will of course spin uselessly. Want evidence - just look at a FWD trying to tow a boat up a ramp, or read this article. So this also becomes a massive problem going around corners. Let’s fix it by using traction control, and reduce the power to what the chassis can handle, thereby proving the chassis is inferior. But because traction control is on/off by design, the short periods of off can cause really bad trouble.
For those Toyota lovers who think it’s unfair to compare this to a 350Z, I ask why? They cost roughly the same, so would be on the shopping list for a sports minded driver with $70,000 to spend.
For those friends of Paul who have bought one and found nothing wanting, I suggest those people wouldn’t know the difference if you put them in a Camry or a standard Aurion (apart from the look). when you drive within the chassis limits (which would be the vast majority of the time) of course you wouldn’t notice any problems.
Some people just can’t handle a RWD either - In my view RWD is preferable because when the conditions favour spinning out, a FWD would simply respond with plough understeer. Understeer is far easier for an unskilled driver to cope with, because you always see what you are going to hit :)
Toyota’s real problem is they just don’t have a RWD platform suitable for a vehicle that competes with the Holden and Ford. Mitsubishi tried it with the AWD Magna which is a much better chassis setup than the TRD and that failed to compete as well. I’m sure if you bolted the supercharger to the AWD Magna and gave it the same KW, it would blast the Toyota back to the parts bin from whence it came.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Lol here is some physics for you to… its alittle thing called gravity, and you have the heaviest thing in a car, the engine and associated components, being pulled directly down by it!!! I have heard of this weight distribution argument, and yes insame amounts of power like 400kw it will come into play…I dont think its quite powerful enough, certainly not over the regular Aurion, to all of a sudden really struggle with this power.
I think another poster has just said, this place and Drive are the only places I have see negatives reviews from… and even with Drive they mentioned the positives. It doesnt seem alittle one sided, but Im willing to give the benefit of the doubt that it has something to do with driving a 350z at the same time. Maybe drive a Civic Type R and then a TRD Aurion… compare Apples to Apples, both FWD, and no doubt you wont try and bring RWD driving into a FWD… becuase thats when you will understeer into a pole and what not. Eitherway, its a first attempt, looks good… hopefully (however doubtful) an AWD comes out in the ftuure.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Kevin, you should do a search on the internet.
Drive compared the TRD Aurion to the FPV Force6, HSV Clubsport R8, Mazda6 MPS and Subaru Liberty GT-B, they are all priced in the same price bracket as the TRD and guess where the TRD came?…dead last.
They said very similar things to this review.
At the end of the day, it’s a lame attempt on Toyota’s behalf, they should have bit the bullet and actually tried with this car.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
280ZX - or, maybe there were many postives that Paul has not taken the time to highlight for his own reasons.
Because individuals are employed as motoring journalist does not mean some are biased towards particular brands.
Paul could just aswell be correct but i will reserve judgment at this point in time as his review considerably differs to just about all of the others analysis i have read. Apart from that, it was a limited report and has not highlighted the positive driving dynamics that other journalist have been all to willing to discuss.
Obviously Alborz and Paul have some conflicting judgements on this car and it will be interesting reading regardless.
Torque steer has been discussed with the regular Aurion yet i have never had an issue with it probably becuase i have driven FWD vehicles just about all of my life and know how to apply power appropriately. I have driven many RWD platforms with less competances maninly because i am not experiance with the differant character of such platforms.
What i am saying is that individuals like myself who have an interest in cars as much as the next person would most likely be able to handle a powerful FWD more competantly then a RWD all because of my own motoring experiance.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Paul:
The 350Z wasn’t actually driven by me on the same day as the TRD Aurion, so my judgment hasn’t been clouded by a sports car.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Anthony here - I too will review the TRD in a few weeks time and come back with my findings. It certainly looks the part and seems to possess a decent dose of mumbo under the bonnet. Can it be that bad?
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Yeah but fair enough Kevin each to their own and this is Pauls version but maybe someone else thinks differently ( which is 100% bound to happen) and i suppose thats why you can say what you think on this site and others as Paul has done but i g’tee ya if he had have praised the crap out of this car and spotted nothing wrong with it (lied) then he would get slammed as well ….. Remember these are Pauls opinions not yours? but im sure yours a valid as well.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Other comments from Paul i politely ask him to answer is his comment about the transmission as being dull, lifeless and devastating slow to shift yet other reviews have been full of praise for the unit.
MOTOR October 2007 page 81 :
The one size fits all, silky smooth six sped auto - a sweet match with the regulat V6 - is unchanged and interacts with the blown engine beautifully. It’s an intelligent unit that’s buttery in Drive, yet intuitively responsive in sports mode. You can catch it it occasionally snoozing when you up it for the rent.
WHEELS September 2007 page 74 :
The creamy quality of the TRD Aurion’s six speed automatic also impresses when a surge of accelration is required. Yes, it’a exactly the same transmssion as the regular Aurion. No, there isn’t a manual otion and nor is one planned. Neither of these facts is an issue, as this is a truely outstanding automatic. Sensitively and sensibly responsive, it’s shifts in ‘D’ are nicely timed and suavely executed.
Obviuosly Pauls analsysis differs considerably to those two articles and other reports i have also read eg Carsguide and Drive.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Its always been my gripe in front wheel drive cars,there is only so much grunt you can put through drive shafts surely! This would have to be the most grunt in production at the moment any where in the world that is still trying to feed it through the front wheels.
Depends how much of a speed freak you are I guess,but I doubt it would meet my requirements of launching fast.
Oh and to the guy that thinks most 5-10 % of people will drive it to its limits aaaarrrrr wrong!
Read what he says
” After this test we put our findings to one of TRD’s chassis development engineers, Marcus Umlauff. “We understand there will be a lot of customers not used to this, but it’s not wrong; it’s just different,” he told Drive. “If it pulled the wheel out of your hand, that would be unacceptable, but it doesn’t do that. It requires light steering effort and some patience. It is a challenge to transmit that much torque to the road but I think it’s quite enjoyable.”
In our opinion, the TRD Aurion needs to be all-wheel-drive but Umlauff is not convinced. “An all-wheel-drive system would add 100kg to the car. You’d lose fuel economy and you’d lose driveline refinement. It would also add $5000 to the price. This is a performance car. People need to drive it with their hands on the wheel.”
He said most drivers wouldn’t use the potential of the car: “Maybe 5 to10per cent of customers will drive it at the limit.” Drive reckons buyers of performance cars want to experience what they’ve paid for. “We are challenging what people are used to,” Umlauff says. “We can work hard to dial out [the steering pull] but the only way to do that is to have less power.”
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
hmm given the points of the car, what makes me wonder is .. WTH is Toyota Australia thinking then? as far as I’ve read I believe TRD Aurion is only for Australia? Mind you Toyota has some good rwd vehicles overseas (Chaser, Mark2 Grande , then those AWd Blade Corollas something of that name).. I understand the whole concept of alotta power throught fwd and how it can translate in terms of handling.. maybe coz the fwd I had was light, it had lsd and being 4 cyl + supercharged it was well controllable, however I know a mate who’s got the same car and putting out 200kw @ front wheels and says it’s not all that hard to control (well lsd is there mind you).. so what confuses me more is that if Toyota did want to use fwd setup then why not atleast give it an lsd..
I think this calls for an email to Toyota lol.. Actually you (the authors/reviewers) should do that and then publish their feedback here. Would be interesting to see what their take is.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
280zx - point taken and i will not challenge it. I agree, these are Pauls opinions and opinions of others are sure to differ.
The TRD Aurion will not apeal to everyone just like HSV and FPV’s don’t appeal to the whole population but the many strengths of this unit will be favoured by a proportion of the ‘potential market’.
Questionable quality, unreliable traits and underdone brakes of which are prone to fade will turn some customers away from HSV’s just like Torque Steer will turn others away from the TRD Aurion. Different cars for differant tastes and as far as i am concerned, i like the TRD Aurion and i am hopeful that it succeeds.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Chaser - a very late report i read on Cars Guide about the TRD Aurion is that interest has been recieved from the Middle East, New Zealand and the United States but TRD Australia has declined any export deals at this point in time until they are comfortable to proceed further with the new product of which makes complete sense
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
It’s far too expensive, and ultimately caves to both Holden and Ford in this respect.
I think however, that it could have a reasonable future and an export car - this could keep TRD alive in Australia long enough for a new RWD platform. (if wishes were wings)
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Cant compare to H & F I think ,thats their problem !
Toyotas are great cars I have no doubt but dont compare it to a rear wheel drive V8.. Toyota ! A different class ! MMM then again even Fords Phoon is another kettle of fish .Great car by the way!
Where do we compare it ? No one else makes a car in production I believe that is still trying to deliver that power through the front wheels,and why try?
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
There’s no way in hell I’d buy this over an XR6 Turbo or something. 60 grand for a fwd sedan? Hello… Evo 9?!
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
I dont think its in the same market as an Evo somehow… abit more luxury. But I do agree in terms of price, I personally would have liked to see an Aurion with less specs that you dont need, the same power and all that (even if it was has some torque steer) more competively priced against the XR6T. For top mode like $66k TRD Aurion… its hard to justify it given its not THE BEST performer (although I think its still alright for what it is).
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
How many of you have actually driven it?
It seems the only one who hs is the reviewer…
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:20 am
Very true Benjie,but have you driven it to prove other wise?
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Have you? ;)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:48 am
No ,but I asked you first?
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:03 am
Hey I’m wide awake can you get your hands on one now? Lets go for a thrash ! Lol……. seriously I have nothing against Toyotas always thought they have made great cars,but that amount of grunt through the front wheels…..mmmm Im yet to be convinced,perhaps I will take the M3 thats has only 236 kws RWD and see if I will trade her in after ? What ya think ? hahaha Shes not blown though from 3.2 litres I6 !
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:17 am
Yawn……I am off if you cant find the keys .Call me tomorrow if you do! Night, sweet dreams!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:08 am
First off, emailing Toyota will not get you anywhere near the technical answer you need. Those emails go to the marketing people, and 80% of them have no knowledge of dynamics and such.
Okay, I have to say the first time I’ve heard of this “project”, a 240kW supercharged FWD.. I didnt’ think it would be feasible. But to be honest, TRD…. not Toyota, did good job, for what they had. Which was the same platform/terrain as the Camry. Toyota designed the Aurion/Camry… TRD and associates designed the performance enhancers. TRD Oz mind you is very new and this is officially the first TRD brand under Toyota commercial sales.
And, just to be specific, TRD engineers were in charged of this. And from what I’ve gathered, TRD Aurion is just the beginning, a test of some sort on the capabilities of the Oz team. And say what you must, some people will like it, some people won’t.. it happens to all of them. But for what TRD Oz was given… they’ve done a great job… And for the person saying Toyota doesnt have the RWD chassis to compete with Ford and GM… You obviously did not account Lexus… which are all RWD, which is the higher echelon of Toyota. And if the TRD Aurion actually does a decent job, sales wise, TMC (Toyota Japan) will give them more resources, most likely a Lexus-RWD platform or even yet, a Subaru-designed 4WD for the next model.
But believe me, for a 240+ kW supercharged 400Nm FWD… this is actually pretty good. Just don’t drive it like a RW. Its basically as its supposed to be… an Aurion on steroids. And I believe only a small portion of people who actually spend 60K on it will drive it around a corner like a madman. Knowing it as a FWD, I’m sure you have to adjust to it. Heck, I know its irrelevant, but I know people who complained about the Skyline GTR’s “handling” too, who weren’t use to it…. but again thats just comparing apples to oranges.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 7:53 am
This car is a very impressive Front Wheeler and nodoubt the highest capable FWD platform in the world.
My thoughts on the matter sideline with Jamison.
Considering the suits in Japan have a conservative nature while the local outfit is raring for more, TRD Australia has done a commendable job with this car considering the restrictive nature they had to work with. As far as i am concerned, that alone is a testimony to the capabilities of our local engineers and i wish them all the best of luck with success so that thier case will have more strength when convincing the HODS in Japan to open their wallets a little further.
That considered - i love the look of the car, the interior is inviting and i am sure the overall perfromance is impressive for a FWD. I currently drive a SX6 Sportivo with 225/45 instead of the standard 215/55 and the differance is notable. Apart from that, it is smooth, quiet, refined and of high quality.
Congratulations Toyota for making such a more convincing car then the ‘ole boring Avalon.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 8:59 am
I own a high performance Magna TJ 5 speed manual. Believe me, even with sticky Yokohama tyres it can be a real hand full and especially in the wet. I really don’t understand what Toyota was trying to do with this car. In 5 years time some 20 year old kids are going to get their hands on cars like this and who knows what might happen to them on the roads. These sort of cars are a “flash in the pan” meaning they do not hold their value, just a marketing tool.
They look great but are dangerous to drive.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 9:50 am
This vehicle has but one [1] problem, the very high price
[FWD is carp in HoPo use too]
They will sell as many as these as those over WAY overpriced blods you guys recently tested, ie Audi allroad and VW Gold Plated Van……..LOL!
Cheers
F-0
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Toyota should have put the money into a Corrolla TRD hot hatch.
Without AWD the TRD Aurion is a waste of time and resource for Toyota.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Tony no this isnt Toyota doing some unethical trying to relate it to young drivers… they are restricted from driving boosted vehicles. The only people you have to worry about are the people who can afford this car… but this vehicle has stability control and traction control, youd have to be doing something really stupid to crash, something that would crash any car.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 11:28 am
Well all has been said about the Torque steer (evident in the standard car too) but I had to pipe up about one comment “Stunning interior” (!)
Why is it stunning ? - from the nasty cheap wobbly plastics, all the mismatched displays or the contrasting colours ? It looks awful - Would have looked much better in basic black with some dark grey leather inserts or something.
Tacky car. Destined to be worth $30k at most in 12 months… Dealer principals are the only ones driving them at the moment from what I hear !
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Ah Paul Tony is right in some States in Aus young drivers arent restricted to driving these. Like here in W.A young drivers do silly things so its a risk to them.
Its a great looking car, love the seats not the colour though. But Toyota what a waist of an engine in something front wheel drive ,its not like Toyota couldn’t have given it a all wheel drive package is it!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
My comment below is directed at “Paul”, (NOT the author Paul Maric, but the other poster with just the name “Paul” - I repeat NOT the author.
Paul, I have explained to you in another thread on caradvice why RWD has greater traction than FWD. IT IS DUE TO THE NET VECTOR FORCE BEING DOWNWARD WITH A RWD, and the NET VECTOR FORCE ON THE TYRE BEING UPWARD ON A FWD. YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!!
Your comment about the FWD having more weight over the drving wheels thus having more traction is negligible in the scheme of things.
Please do not misinform the people of this forum as what you are saying is blatantly INCORRECT.
To put it simply, if you have a FWD with 400kgs over the driving wheels, and a RWD with 400kgs over the drving wheels, the RWD WILL ALWAYS be able to transfer more power to the ground than the FWD due to the NET VECTOR FORCE BEING DOWNWARD!!
(I’m not sure if you know much about physics, but this concept is something that any year 11 physics student will be able to explain to you.)
I actually tried to draw the vector forces in my post to you last time, but unfortunately this forum changed the formatting of my post and made my drawing (text drawing) unreadable…
Also as someone else mentioned there is also the concept of weight transfer under acceleration which in a RWD car forces the weight onto the rear tyres, and INTO the ground (HIGHER friction co-efficient - GREATER traction), and in the case of a FWD car, lifts the weight off the front tyres and AWAY from the ground (LOWER friction co-efficient - LESS traction).
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Congrats Ross - as an engineer, I’m glad someone cleared that one up. This misconceptions out there rag me at times. Cheers.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
The net vector force is not downward, it has a downward component but it is not downward. However you are correct, the downward component on a RWD will be higher then a FWD under acceleration, hence more traction.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Jumping onboard late here but Toyota have said that this car is not a challenger to the performance Holdens and Fords.
Toyota are marketing the TRD Aurion at people who would buy a Liberty turbo or Lexus IS250 - in other words someone who regards themselves as having some ‘class’.
For that reason I honestly don’t have a problem with all that power going to the front wheels. The car is an ‘executive cruiser’ and as such the majority of people who buy one will never drive it to the limits.
My biggest gripes with the TRD Aurion are the price, 98RON petrol and the interior is not different enough from the standard versions.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Yes Titan, I 100% agree with you - but for the purpose of simplicity, I tried to keep it simple with just “upward” and “downward” so that most people would understand what I was getting at.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Grumps, as a Liberty owner, I can tell you that the Aurion, in any form, does not appeal. Your assertion that people who buy Holdens/Fords have no class is total B/S sterotyping, that misses the maerk by a loooooong way. The trouble here is that the TRD actually has bugger all class at all! An “executive cruiser” is certainly is NOT.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Id just like to say good on you Paul for telling it like it is and not beating around the bush. Just because the big guns have praised the driveline of the TRD Aurion doesn’t necessarily mean all reporters should all follow suit. The person driving the car is what opinion matters most. Despite all the criticism the TRD Aurion is receiving at the moment, im sure those criticising wouldn’t knock back taking it for a squirt for a day
Cheers
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Traction through the wheels must be extremely competant considering the claimed sprint times of 6.1 (0-100km)and 14.2 (1/4 mile) of which are impressive results at the very least.
Even the basic Aurion must have competant traction through the front wheels considering a standard version can eat a Commodore and pinch a Falcon. Without performing traction, these results wil not be attainable.
Considering the Aurion has been on sale for less then a year, it has achieved commendable results with various motoring awards, higher NCAP rating then the over hyped VE - 30/37 to 27/37 - respectable sales and now a performance version to top it all off.
Tony M - a death performance car is those horrible brakes on HSV’s. After some hard braking, the brakes on HSV vehicles quickly become spongey and are not resistant to fade. To me, under-performing brakes have far greater negative repercussions then a vehicle with manageable torque steer.
As for the interior, looks great !!.
Curious, i completely disagree with you. The TRD Aurion has alot of class and many positive attributes that Falcons and Commodores don’t have - quality, refinement, reliability, dependability and no doubt durability. I have been exposed to HSV vehicles in the past and as long as my backside faces the ground, i will never buy one.
This will be a good car and considering the response it has attracted, i believe it will prove many punters wrong. When the Aurion was first released, it recieved alot of flack along the lines of ‘just another Avalon’ but instead, this car has been able gain strenghth in less then 12 months considering the Falcon and Commodore have been selling for many generations.
What i like about the Aurion is that is it challenging the traditional boundries and no doubt Toyota will be working closly to ensure this product remains competitive.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Titan - if RWD have such better traction, then explain why a much more torquey Falcon cannot out-accelerate an Aurion. Even in this instance, the TRD Aurion has commendable perfromance figures of which are only mariginally of the pace then much more powerful examples.
During the ladened uphill sprint, the TRD Aurion performed exceptionally well against the FPV and HSV of which indicates to me that the Aurion has no problem with traction at all despite the torque steer that requires attention. But like i said, the brakes on HSV’s need attention and often nursing when pushed hard.
For all the negative gripes against this car by no-doubt Holden and Ford traditionalist, this car has some impressive figures to boost about.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Big Bear, I stand by my statement. The TRD lacks the class of a Liberty, let alone some of the true “executive cruisers” like Benz or BMW.
Have you actually had a look a real one yet or are you sprouting more Toyota hype after looking at pictures on the net (will send you blind by the way!)
And:”quality, refinement, reliability, dependability and no doubt durability” seams to describe my last Fairmont perfectly (& the Liberty by the way).
The TRD doesn’t yet have the runs on the board to claim most of those yet. How do you know the SC won’t mess it’s undies after 20,000km?
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
Big Bear, there is no simple answer. The dynamics of moving vehicles is extremely complicated, you just need to look at all the R&D that goes into motor racing of all kinds. If I were to have a guess I would say weight.
Don’t get me wrong, I like what Toyota are trying to do here and if the Aurion paves the way more cars like this then I’m all for it.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Curiuos - i inspected a TRD at Scarboro Toyota in Perth less then 3 days ago and i was impressed with the interior and exterior quality. Apart from that, it really does look the part in flesh but if people like yourself disagree then that is no skin of my nose. This product will entice buyers to the floor and no doubt prove many punters wrong just like the standard Aurion has done in such a short time on the market.
I will not put down a Subaru because they are magical cars but they are smaller then an Aurion. I also stand by my statement and agree that the TRD Aurion is a classy cruiser with commenable figures and no-doubt impressive handling and braking capacity for a FWD.
Aiming this car at BMW’s and Merc’s is just silly because anyone who with knowledge of the automotive world understands that is what Lexus is all about.
Talking of Lexus, that is another Toyota off-shoot that has gone from strength to srength.
No the TRD Aurion does not have the runs on the board yet but name me a Toyota vehicle wether it be a family cruiser, a SUV, off-roader or a hard working commercial that is not reliable. Toyota has many powerful traits that has earn’t itself the reputation that it baths in today so i see no reason why the SC will not prove reliable, dependable and durable.
And don’t go on about Falcons/Fairmonts or what ever because thier warranty claims, quality and reliability is the least satisfying of any locally manufactuered vehicle and that is nothing to be proud off considering Commodores have a less then favourable history itself.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Titan - i will accept your response and i am all for the establishment of a local TRD unit, it will prove to be a competant and competitive unit for sure.
Like i said, if the Aurion (wether it be in standard guise or TRD uniformed) must have commendably compliant traction through the front wheels just to be able to offer the acceleration figures it does.
I do agree that there are some short comings with the Aurion but you must also accept that Falcons and Commodores certainly have many short comings of thier own. I appreciate what Toyota is achieving with the Aurion and you must agree that they are challenging the traditional boundries with relative success todate.
No doubt many lessons have been experianced during the development of the TRD Aurion and i hope our local Toyota manufactuering (Altona) applies some of these learnings to improve the Camry and Aurion range during subsequent upgrades. All good for maintain the competitive edge.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Bear, my reference to the Merc/BMW was a repsonce to Grumps.
Perhaps you missed my ealier post where I said that I actually like the TRD styling/interior. Just a bit too low volume kit car type quality exterior bits.
See, thats the thing, impressions vs first hand experience. Most reliable cars I’ve owned were Fords & Subarus, worst all happen to be Toyotas, but I still have that soft spot for them. I was seriuosly considering a new Kluger, but it’s not up to the package I need.
Then again a month with a borrowed Holden was enough to ward me off for a long time.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Ross… Im sorry but what your saying and what happens in life doesnt match up.
Eg1. Its well known FWD is better in the wet, becuase you have more weight over the drive wheels… so why in this case does it have more traction, which is a fact?
Eg2. Ive driven a Camry v6 FWD and a Commodore RWD of the same era’s with roughly the same power, the Commodore has nowhere near the same traction, you can floor the Camry around a corner from a standing start and have minimal underteer you cannot do that in a Commodore, you will get severe oversteer. Same applies in a straight line, cannot floor it or it loses traction, the FWD Camry with similar power has no issues with only alittle wheel squeak off the line.
I suspect the problem comes from your statement..
“To put it simply, if you have a FWD with 400kgs over the driving wheels, and a RWD with 400kgs over the drving wheels, the RWD WILL ALWAYS be able to transfer more power to the ground than the FWD due to the NET VECTOR FORCE BEING DOWNWARD!!”
Because it ISNT a match in weights, I agree with this comment that with same weight we know which wins, but the fact of the FWD v RWD matter is you would have double if not more weight over Front wheels then rear wheels, so even with your ‘year 11 physics’ I would still say gravity wins… which supports what IVE EXPERIENCED.
And as another poster stated, the Aurion despite less torque and marginally more power… both produced higher up… slight weight advantages… smokes the Falcon to 100.
Dont get me wrong, I know its fact in high powered vehicles there is a weight distribution that has an effect….a 240kw TRD Aurion however isnt quite in that range yet.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
QUOTE = Grumps, as a Liberty owner, I can tell you that the Aurion, in any form, does not appeal. Your assertion that people who buy Holdens/Fords have no class is total B/S sterotyping, that misses the maerk by a loooooong way. The trouble here is that the TRD actually has bugger all class at all! An “executive cruiser” is certainly is NOT.
Lol and the Commodore and Falcon are? None are ‘executive crusiers’ but out of them all, the TRD looks the classiest… its got the luxury, its got the look and its performance is half way their.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Paul,
I never claimed that Falcodore was an executive cruiser did I? The TRD ain’t either EOS. And tail lights like that will never be classy.
As far as the FWD traction issue, Paul your problem is you think that everybody has the same low level inetiligence as you. Just because you can’t grasp the concept doesn’t change the facts.
Go and look up inertial momentum. The variables in your examples don’t match up, you need to look at it in a less simple minded way. You are wrong, but you just don’t have the intelligence or education to understand that.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Oh & Paul I forgot to say that the Fairmont was used as a executive cruiser by a CEO of a national company, who didn’t like flying so he drove it Adelaide/Melbourne once a fourtnight.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
At the end of the day, an XR6T or SS is a way better drive and in my opinion, look way better than the T(u)RD.
Even the dated BF design in XR6 form looks better.
I’ll take a red SS-V with red interior thanks!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Paul,
Did you see where I wrote:
“Your comment about the FWD having more weight over the drving wheels thus having more traction is negligible in the scheme of things.”
Maybe you missed it?
OK, to me it’s obvious you have never driven a a RWD car and a FWD car at anywhere near it’s limits…
As I said, you can’t argue with physics, and if you think that the force of “gravity” is not overcome by the other forces I mentioned in my earlier post then what can I say… mmm not much.. perhaps you should take some lessons in physics and perhaps actually drive a RWD car and FWD car of similar weights back to back and see what I mean.
And dont forget, the commodore and camry you have driven that you are using for your comparison have COMPLETELY DIFFERENT suspension setups… All commodores (I.e. your example) before VE are KNOWN for losing traction under aceleration as the car squats and produces extreme negative camber thus casuing a loss of tyre contact patch with the road.
You do realise that you have made quite a nonsensical statement?
You say:
“Eg1. Its well known FWD is better in the wet, becuase you have more weight over the drive wheels… so why in this case does it have more traction, which is a fact?”
Where in anyones language can you find any reputable authority FACTUALLY stating that FWD is BETTER in the wet?? Is FWD predictable in the wet? YES! But does that make it better? (maybe yes?, maybe no?) Just because when you plough understeer in the wet you go in ONE direction with no form of recourse (apart to take you foot of the accellerator pedal) , does that make it BETTER?? (maybe yes? maybe no?) In a RWD car you can atleast control the direction you are heading by purposely inducing oversteer or understeer by modulating the accellerator pedal.
Please find me this “fact” you talk of from some reputable source as to where the FWD has more “traction” in the wet??
And to mix is up further, what is the definition of BETTER??
And another TOTALLY FALLACIOUS statement you made (absolute rubbish!):
“… but the fact of the FWD v RWD matter is YOU WOULD HAVE DOUBLE IF NOT MORE WEIGHT OVER THE FRONT WHEELS then rear wheels, so even with your ‘year 11 physics’ I would still say gravity wins… which supports what IVE EXPERIENCED.”
Now here is where I implore you to PLEASE take some physics lessons or at least read up a *little* bit before posting!!!
NOW, lets think about this…. for your statement regarding weight distribution front/rear to be correct
a car would need to have a weight distribuiton of 66:33 front to rear!!!!!! (at least twice the weight over the front wheels than the rear wheels as YOU quoted.)
WHERE ON GOD’S GREEN EARTH CAN YOU FIND A CAR WITH SUCH A HORRENDOUS WEIGHT DISTRIBUITON?? It would be the worst handling POS EVER!!!!!
Are you aware of what it means when reviewers talk of a “balanced chassis”? They are referring to the balance of the weight distribution!!
The Falcon has a weight distribution of 52:48 (F:R), so given a kerb weight of 1645kgs, that equates to 855kg:740kg F:R.
So assuming a REAL typical FWD weight dist 55:45 F:R
Given the TRD Aurions kerb wieght of 1600kg, that equates to 880kg:720 F:R
What does this mean? This means that the TRD Aurion has approximately 25kgs MORE weight over the driving wheels. Now here is where I point out AGAIN, like i did in my first post, that the weight differential is negligible when you take THE NET VECTOR FORCES into account. Comparatively, it would appear that the Falcon actually has about 50-80kgs MORE downforce on the driving wheels than the Aurion under acceleration. (For an explanation why, see my earlier post)
So now, back to your simply fallacious and incorrect statements, do you still stand by your argument that a FWD car has “at least twice the weight over the front wheels than the rear”???
And one more (unrelated) point… why do you think 99.9% of racing categories in the world are either RWD or AWD based?? PLEASE… I’m sure that the rest of the forum is dying to know the answer..
This is not a personal attack on you Paul, but I don’t think it’s fair that the readers who rely on this forum for information are misled.
Cheers,
Ross
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Honestly Ross, I’m finding Paul’s replies quite comical.
Looks like it’s time for me to ditch my SS-V for a FWD Camry, apparently they handle better in the wet!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
I only have two words for Paul…
“SHUT DOWN” haha
Seriously Paul, grow up and give it up mate. Its clear to everyoen reading that your technical knowledge is lacking.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Hey Paul M I bet you didn’t think your story would create 65 posts in less than a day. Nice job!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Well I was thinking of selling my ‘99 Civic Hatch and looking at an Audi Quattro of sorts, but what’s the point? As Paul said, FWDs handle better! Time to ring up my old high school physics teacher and correct him about the new laws of physics according to ‘Paul’!
Great work Ross ;)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Lol Ross… I tell you what, Im going to go off experiences, you go off your textbook theory. I have driven similar FWD and RWD’s… you make your excuses for why earlier Commodores lost traction, fact is the FWD outperformed the RWD when Ive driven them. It had nothing to do with some special test where I was retarded and contributed to the result, simply sinking your foot to the floor… RWD arse grapples for grip, FWD tyre squeak then away. These were lower powered vehicles in todays world, but the result is still relevant.
Oh and here is an article, albeit an old one, but I think its useful as its a direct comparions of two identical cars:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/test1.htm
You will find apart from their being minimal performance difference, there is mention of superior wet weather performance for FWD. I could link many other articles, not sure if they are an ‘authority’ on it, good lucky trying to find that… but certainly show that this concept isnt just mine. Oh and you talk about maybe and all that crap about safer, lets safe a crash is inevitable, what would you prefer… oversteer and hit a tree side on or understeer and hit it front on? I know which Id choose.. the one with a crumple zone and airbags.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
You hit the nail on the head Ross. :-D Good work.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
More on wet weather…
“One final advantage of FWD is that it puts the engine weight directly over the driven wheels which can improve traction on slippery or snow-packed roads” - http://www.edmunds.com/insidel.....leId=43847 (This article also says alot of things negative about FWD to including dry acceleration)
“Traction is improved by having the weight of the engine and transaxle over the drive wheels. This is a big advantage on slippery roads.” - http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/020619.htm
Many more… I can see what your saying has a basis, and people here can agree all they want… but I know from practical experience, that FWD doesnt have any issues with traction over RWD… this is something I have ‘tested’ so to speak and a number of articles seem to support, so its not all crazy!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
QUOTE = Go and look up inertial momentum. The variables in your examples don’t match up, you need to look at it in a less simple minded way. You are wrong, but you just don’t have the intelligence or education to understand that.
Mate what the fuck is that kind of comment. I dont think Ive gone into personal attacks in this thread, sure I might not have a firm grasp of physics but that doesnt all of a sudden mean I lack any intelligence. You know over the internet it isnt exactly the ideal way to learn something is it, although I still say traction isnt bad in a FWD which as Ive shown has some support.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Paul… you didn’t comment on your absolute rubbish and fallacious theory of the weight over the front tyres in a FWD car is at least TWICE that of the weight over the rear tyres. Care to comment now?? We are all still waiting for this one. It should be quite comical to read your reply after I have mathematically proven to you that is NOT the case with ANY car! :)
PS. you didn’t reply to my question asking you why 99.9% of racing categories are AWD or RWD also. ;)
And for what it’s worth, your experiences aren’t worth the text we are reading. “Experiences” do not hold up when put under any form of scrutiny, be it scientific or legal.. and there is reason for that… ;)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
And MORE support from the same article:
“Traction has always been a problem with RWD vehicles, because of the lower rear vehicle weight over the drive wheels, but modern electronics has changed that. Traction control and vehicle stability systems enable RWD cars to rival FWD vehicles on slippery surfaces. Improved tire designs have also helped” - http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/020619.htm
These sound like people who have actually driven and compared… not people who are attacking others because they have their heads stuck in textbooks more often then their arses in the drivers seat!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
Erm, why does the heck does it have “Nick” above my post??
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Paul… you didn’t comment on your absolute rubbish and fallacious theory of the weight over the front tyres in a FWD car is at least TWICE that of the weight over the rear tyres. Care to comment now?? We are all still waiting for this one. It should be quite comical to read your reply after I have mathematically proven to you that is NOT the case with ANY car! :)
PS. you didn’t reply to my question asking you why 99.9% of racing categories are AWD or RWD also. ;)
And for what it’s worth, your experiences aren’t worth the text we are reading. “Experiences” do not hold up when put under any form of scrutiny, be it scientific or legal.. and there is reason for that… ;)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
wtf?? :S
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Mate it was slightly exaggerated… but yes straight after posting it I thought that cant be right, we all make mistakes dont we.
Racing categories, there are many issues I could mention. Things that come to mind straight away, at high speed you RWD is better as with a wing it keeps the arse planted in a FWD adding something like this would obviously take away speed etc… ummm tyre wear would be a huge issue, FWD dont wear the rears much but the front tyres go quickly as they are doing all the work… there would be many issues, not necessarily related standstill accleration traction!! Did you read that article btw, that was a racing example… performance wasnt an issue there, Id say other factors contribute to it.
As for the last bit, well I really couldnt care what impression I have… I KNOW from my experiences whats what, you read into your thoery and think what you want of it, but my experiences supported by others it would seem (refer to all my links… a handful of MANY) would suggest at the very least the issue of traction can be debated, which I have done.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Oh and something you can answer.. with that weight distribution you say 25kg more in the Aurion but your stats are:
“The Falcon has a weight distribution of 52:48 (F:R), so given a kerb weight of 1645kgs, that equates to 855kg:740kg F:R.
So assuming a REAL typical FWD weight dist 55:45 F:R
Given the TRD Aurions kerb wieght of 1600kg, that equates to 880kg:720 F:R”
That looks like 880kg over drive wheels of Aurion vs 740kg over drive wheels of Falcon? Difference of 140kg… negligible? I think not! Maybe I made a mistake please correct me but I dont think so!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
OK, I will accept your comment saying it was “slightly” exaggerated” even though you said it would be “AT LEAST” twice… hardly a “mistake” as you put it seeing as you EMPHASISED it, but we will leave that for now.
And not wanting to disagree with you again, but you say:
“at high speed you RWD is better as with a wing it keeps the arse planted in a FWD adding something like this would obviously take away speed etc”
Now that makes no sense.. how can having a RWD setup as opposed to a FWD setup change the aero downforce created by the wing?? And just so you know, racing cars have a front “wing” too.. also known as a front splitter or spoiler… just because it’s not high in the air, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t do anything. You need to have aero downforce on the front too in order to increase corner speed (more downforce - more traction)
I will pay you your comment about tyre wear though.
And with all due respect - no, the issue of traction cannot be debated, and there is nothing you or I can do to change that - those are the laws of physics. Sorry. You can either educate yourself by reading the appropriate resources and choose to accept it, or be miseducated and continue to peddle false information. (And to be honest that is an unfair thing to do now that you know better - you owe it to yourself to read up and see why a RWD car has more traction under power than a FWD car).
I can say from my experience (and I’m sure MANY MANY more can attest to this) that you can put the power down harder in a RWD car than a FWD car. Yes, a RWD car is harder to handle with an unskilled driver behind the wheel and can get you in trouble if you do not know what you are doing! I don’t deny that! But a RWD can be pushed harder under acceleration, and most definitely out of corners compared to a FWD (power oversteer correction of RWD, vs. plough understeer of FWD).
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
QUOTE = Now that makes no sense.. how can having a RWD setup as opposed to a FWD setup change the aero downforce created by the wing?? And just so you know, racing cars have a front “wing” too.. also known as a front splitter or spoiler… just because it’s not high in the air, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t do anything. You need to have aero downforce on the front too in order to increase corner speed (more downforce - more traction)
Yes Im aware, I made a broad reference to that. As for downforce by wing, the point was that the more effective arrangement is having a rear spoiler for the rear drive wheels.. ANYWAY the main issue I would imagine is tyre wear. The point, you can hardly use that as an example of why RWD has superior traction…
QUOTE = And with all due respect - no, the issue of traction cannot be debated, and there is nothing you or I can do to change that - those are the laws of physics. Sorry. You can either educate yourself by reading the appropriate resources and choose to accept it, or be miseducated and continue to peddle false information. (And to be honest that is an unfair thing to do now that you know better - you owe it to yourself to read up and see why a RWD car has more traction under power than a FWD car).
I will elect not to… I dont think there are people with experience agreeing with the idea I have forwarded because it has no basis. You can have all your physics textbooks you want, at the end of the day, I dont care, call it blind ignorance if you will… but more weight over drive wheels = better traction.
QUOTE = I can say from my experience (and I’m sure MANY MANY more can attest to this) that you can put the power down harder in a RWD car than a FWD car. Yes, a RWD car is harder to handle with an unskilled driver behind the wheel and can get you in trouble if you do not know what you are doing! I don’t deny that! But a RWD can be pushed harder under acceleration, and most definitely out of corners compared to a FWD (power oversteer correction of RWD, vs. plough understeer of FWD).
Ok you musnt have read that article and you musnt have ever pushed a FWD hard to make those comments in terms of handling, a well set up FWD is comparable to a well set up RWD. And just like your experiences, I have my own, and I will stick to them until I experience something to the contrary… hasnt happpened yet!
And Im waiting a response about the Falcon post, I honestly am double guessing myself now… but it looks like you made an eror about the 35kg difference?
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Actually yes the Falcon example is wrong, the figures dont even add up to 1645kg (855+740=1595) …. the rear weight should be higher so the difference is smaller, but at the same time you should be comparing the RWD vs FWD distribution at the same weight rather then heavier Falcon, because in theory I could say a 4 tonne Camry has better traction with a 25:85 split…. but hardly fair.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Yes, you are right, it should have read 140kg. But you have to rememebr, that as the revs rise, the rate of acceleration increases, thus the relative downward force on a RWD car INCREASES, and the exact opposite is true in a FWD car, as the revs rise, the down force on the front wheels DECREASES as the torque is increasing, so the 140kgs becomes insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
My example of 50-80kgs was talking about downforce from a standstill and engine at lower revs, (ie, less torque). As the revs climb, torque increases, downforce increases in RWD and upforce increases in FWD car - say LESS 50-80kgs.
So in summary, that 140kgs difference becomes insignificant!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Anyways, I think we have all read enough on this… but yes, please just have a think about some of the things I have said.
Cheers,
Ross
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Well I guess thats the theory but as a non-physics person I still find it hard to get my head around it, 140kg is alot of weight… I would think that at the second you floor it (in terms of standing start), the benefit of having that weight at the front when the car has the highest chance to lose grip, is a good thing. Not to mention as Ive shown a number of people, not just me, seem to think FWD has better grip. Either way Im going to agree to disagree on this one.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
No worries good convo, no personal insults by you at least!
L8erz
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
I must agree with Big Bear and to a certain degree with Paul on this matter simply because the TRD Aurion has defied the expectations of many and recorded impressive sprint times.
As Big Bear commented, the traction on the regular Aurion and the TRD version must be compliant simply to allow the car to be as quick across all measurable increments it is and that includes the ladened uphill dash of which was only a smidget slower then much more powerful cars.
I also agree with Bear in the fact that the Aurion has proven to be a far more competitive then many originally gave credit and no doubt the TRD Aurion will soldier on to prove the same.
Besides, the Aurion must be applying pressure in the large car segment simply becuase it has been one of the most hottly contested subjects in recent months and has certainly made a solid stand for itself.
Good to see !!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
QUOTE “As Big Bear commented, the traction on the regular Aurion and the TRD version must be compliant simply to allow the car to be as quick across all measurable increments it is and that includes the ladened uphill dash of which was only a smidget slower then much more powerful cars.”
And you can bet that if the trd aurion was any more powerful its acceleration times would go backwards. There is a reason no manufacturer does powerful front drivers as performance cars and its called traction + handling.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Ross - new technology of which Toyota employs on the Camry and Aurion generates down force to keep the cars stable and from my own experiance in the Aurion - it most certainly makes a notable differance.
There are many sporty models like the Mazda6 for example of which are FWD and extremely stable and compliant at high speeds. Aerodynamic aids of various sorts such as spoliers, splitters, underbody aids etc all play thier respective roll to maintain a stable and just vehicle at speeds wether being of a FWD or FWD nature.
Without being rude, i simply do not buy your theory one little bit and having driven FWD and RWD vehicles at speeds from time to time - i have never witnessed greater instability from a FWD then a RWD.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Erm Kevin, where the heck did I EVER say that FWD cars were less stable at speed than a RWD car??
Can you please read properly before commenting?? Thanks.
Anyway mate, I’m off from work so won’t reply for a while… :)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Matt - what ever !!
The fact is, the TRD Aurions acceleration and sprint times are impressive and certainly betters the expectations of many while defying the so called lessons of physics some bloggers have tried to pull.
I remember clearly some time back that a hard core Holden loyalist tried until he was black and blue in the face that the Aurion required Strut Braces because the chassis is to weak. What an absolute load of bull that try hard story proved to be considering it doesn’t exhibit them (and never intended to) while the basic Camry chassis is used to engineer SUV’s.
Apart from that, many said that the Aurion will just be another Avalon and die a horrid death yet it has soldiered on to be an extremely competitive car with many awards and good sales recorded todate.
And one of the best of all - we had to endure how much of a better crash worth vehicle the so-called 1 billion dollar baby would be but how embarrassing must it have been when the Aurion out scored the Commodore 30/37 to 27/37.
The point i am trying make Matt is a simple one - so far so many weird and wacky stories have been fired from Holden and Ford fanatics yet the Aurion has been an achiever and proven many of them wrong. I have had enough of listening to bullsh*t theory stories because more times then not they get proven otherwise.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
Ok guys simmer down ,yep it seems the the front wheel drive is a mistake for them but you have to admit after you have got hold of it when it has launched to get a 14.2 down the quarter isn’t bad. I am sure a good wheeler with some sticker tyres may do better that or break a drive shaft,anyhow if Motor claim the BF GT will do 13.9 down the quarter then I think the Aurion isn’t doing a bad job! Yep I know a good wheeler will also do better than 13.9 in a GT too but it comes down to reaction time in the end. Obviously if the GT will do 0-100 in 5.5 seconds and the Aurion in 6.1 the problem must be the launch,what you all think?
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Bavarian - what about the considerable more power that the GT has especially torque. Eitherway, the TRD Aurions accelaration times are impressive regardless and what was really a test ’satisfied’ was the fact that the Aurion performed exceptonally well in the ladened uphill dash.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
I agree totaly.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Curious said
September 18 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Quote -”Grumps, as a Liberty owner, I can tell you that the Aurion, in any form, does not appeal. Your assertion that people who buy Holdens/Fords have no class is total B/S sterotyping, that misses the maerk by a loooooong way. The trouble here is that the TRD actually has bugger all class at all! An “executive cruiser” is certainly is NOT.”
Jeez mate, settle down. I obviously hit a nerve there! I am just stating what Toyota themselves have said and who they are aiming the vehicle at.
Gee some people get really worked up over the smallest things :)
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Grumps I think everyone needs to settle down,yes Toyota have made a bad decision putting in a front wheel drive package as Matt states ,all wheel drive yes would have been better but dont take away the fact this is a good engine maybe a little loud in the interior but no doubt its still has Toyota quality! Needs better brakes but hey I bet they know that already by now!
Oh and I am a Ford supporter too!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Bavarian - needs better brakes. You have completely lost me on this matter as the brakes have never been critised. Infact, the brakes are one avenue that have recieved high remarks.
With regards to the FWD layout - i enjoy the fact that Toyota is challenging the abnormal here and has been able to engineer a potent machine with credible credentials.
Not only will they do good with this car but subsequent examples will prove better everytime. TRD setting up shop on our shore will prove to be a worth while adventure.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
i have to agree AND disagree with paul
yes FWD would be better in getting the INITIAL traction but once traction is made and vehicle starts to gain momentum only then would the forces start start to work against traction and that is where RWD has it advantage.
paul is trying to use ice and snow as an example and more weight over the wheels would help only if you are taking off gently but once you break traction you are buggered either in a FWD or RWD. and a heavier RWD i reckon would have about the same over wheels as a traditionally lighter FWD anyhow
oh and just quickly who said earlier that an aurion “smokes” a falcon??pfffft
in my experience with FWD vs RWD under slippery (wet or gravel) conditions i feel safer in my RWD ute (yes bugger all over the wheels) than my missis’s FWD. just my gut feel to. i feel there isnt really a way to correct the under steer. give me over steer anyday. havent you people heard of opposite lock?
(yeah great fun)
when a car understeers no matter what you do with the wheel you cant correct it. (unless someones got news for me)
also with breaking traction in a RWD or anycar for that matter have you guys heard of “fanning the throttle”?
paul to illustrate the vector forces some of these physics whizz kids go on about on here you ought to get yourself to the drags sometime and you will see it is possible to lift the entire front end of a car off the ground. that to me is all the real world theory i need.
also go jump in a go cart a real basic example of using rear drive to control/steer a vehicle and you will quickly find that you turn a hell of a lot better with the aid of rear drive. it is the oversteer that can be induced in a rwd that can be used to your advantage
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
oh yeah with the interior….
all that red is too loud. i didnt like it when holden did it nor did i like the look of the old red velour that came in some telstar ghia’s.
at least the seats look comfy for a change but a pity the coluor wont let you relax in them.
they would have looked much better if it were only red as highlights
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Hey Andrew your back ? Thought you wouldn’t be here till tomorrow so I came to your defence hope thats ok?
Kevin I read something today that made me say brakes need help,will let you know when I find the info.
I haven’t driven one so I guess I shouldn’t comment as its an annoyance I have normally with people that do comment before a first hand experience. Perhaps I should though cause it seems an interesting test drive for me!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
Ah ………Kevin Motor say there “FAIRLY MEAGRE COMPARED WITH OTHER PERFORMANCE VEHICLES IN THE SAME PRICE BRACKET”
They go on but I suggest you read the latest on page 82 first paragraph on the issue.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 10:39 pm
Im prity sure there is a black interior with the TRD as well guys…. and the brakes aernt an issue, every review I have read says they are very capable.
As for the other comments Andrew.M… I agree and disagree as well lol, but one thing comes out of it, the FWD v RWD traction issue is a reasonable debate, contrary to the iditos earlier in this thread (not Ross) who were attacking me like school children whilst sitting on the fence themselves in terms of providing anything useful!
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Andrew - cut the movie style crap.
The fact is - not only has the Aurion been described as a good handler with serious grip but the ability to change direction without fuss with a well sorted and balanced chassis that offers resistance to body roll. That said, it has been able to achieved impressive sprint times across all measurable increments of which has not only exceeded the expectations of many motoring journalist but obviously loyalists of all kinds.
Apart from that it would be very refined, smooth and quiet with quality to match Toyota’s typical traits of reliability, dependability and durability. That may not appeal to you but it sure as hell will entice many others. Infact, Toyota’s current products entice more to their showrooms then any other brand and this car is sure to achieve what it is tended to do.
At the end of the day, these are not Drag Cars, Sprint Cars, NASCARS or even Super Tourers we are discussing but just humble performance family hacks designed and engineered for the public road. That’s it - nothing more and nothing less.
The TRD Aurion has been developled to offer the local outfit more recognition (not that it needs it remind you)and that is exactly what the project will do. Infact, it is working right now !!
F