RussH said:

Jeez everyone is an expert. Based on something a garage said and a test drive. Where's all this "snaps loose" nonsense come from!

If you do something dumb i.e.deliberately lifting off mid corner without knowing what that does then yes expect it to go light at the back. Maybe the asr will recover it, maybe not. And everyone loves this nonsense about "controlling rwd on the throttle". Have you done that, have you practiced it loads, have you tried it in numerous different cars and conditions, with and without electronic intervention? If not you'll be headed through the nearest hedge backwards (hopefully that's as bad as it gets).

Click to expand...

Exactly Isabelle Candisa !
RussH I really wish i had a video of the corner i took when i lost the rear end. I braked well for the corner turned in at a decent speed into the corner, no understeer whatsoever, I make the corner and then suddenly wham the rear was gone! ESP stopped me having a full spin (my foot was on the brake anyway and was only doing 30 mpg or so so would have stopped anyway at a half spin)

It has a very unstable rear end and it breaks away without any warning i made the corner absolutely fine and was neither on the throttle or the brakes when the rear end died, in fact i was about to go on the gas! Now most people would not have gone into the corner 'as hot' as I did, but i easily made the corner without any understeer, as in I took it at an acceptable speed.

RussH said:

Jeez everyone is an expert. Based on something a garage said and a test drive. Where's all this "snaps loose" nonsense come from!

If you do something dumb i.e.deliberately lifting off mid corner without knowing what that does then yes expect it to go light at the back. Maybe the asr will recover it, maybe not. And everyone loves this nonsense about "controlling rwd on the throttle". Have you done that, have you practiced it loads, have you tried it in numerous different cars and conditions, with and without electronic intervention? If not you'll be headed through the nearest hedge backwards (hopefully that's as bad as it gets).

Click to expand...

And I have drifted RWD cars in the UK at the exit on a roundabout as it slipped on some damp leaves and traction control was off. All it needed to correct was to turn into the slide and let go of the throttle a bit! Much less scary than in my Fiat 500 trust me! Yes FWD cars feel very stable when driving them at normal speeds,but if you reach the limit on them they are death boxes. Now of course RWD cars are not saints either especially if very powerful, but in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, I feel you can recover easier than with front heavy Barges that FWD cars inevitably are.

TrevC said:

The only cars I've driven with "loose back ends" have been rear wheel drive. Both my son and I had power-on oversteer in MX-5s, and he (harmlessly) lost the back end on his BMW325i the other day, despite ESP etc. Like me, I regard him as a competent driver, but we are both more used to fwd, which I believe to be inherently more idiot-proof. Never had a nasty moment in my 500 in nearly 5 years.

Click to expand...

= ) I have had between 5-10 moments on my Fiat 500!
Mind you, the two moments i had with my moms old 2002 Polo with 155 tires and no ESP ended up in the kerb (at low speed so only a dent on the rim and a loose wishbone which was only noticed during a service no other damage) God that car had awful understeer, it was the biggest barge ever! Thank god that car's engine blew so I didn't have to drive it anymore, even more dangerous at the limit than the Fiat!

First of all, I never asked to discuss this.
Second, I'm not an idiot, I know basic physics, so I also know about weight shifting and inertia, something I've been confronted with as well in my early driving years.
Third, I've owned a few RWD cars, all without electronic stuff to prevent me going backwards trough a hedge.

Both times I lost the back of my Clio was not because of lifting the throttle, but because of overestimating the safe speed in the conditions, something that simply does not lead to such a brutal loss of control in a longer wheelbase car with a less front biased weight balance.

I never claimed to be an expert, but I do talk out of personal experience, only to be confirmed by people I trust to know what they're talking about.

There is no reason to be rude, question my intelligence or driving skills, and it's not that I said anything new or surprising.
So for me this discussion ends right here, goodbye!

Isabelle

ahmett said:

And I have drifted RWD cars in the UK at the exit on a roundabout as it slipped on some damp leaves and traction control was off. All it needed to correct was to turn into the slide and let go of the throttle a bit! Much less scary than in my Fiat 500 trust me! Yes FWD cars feel very stable when driving them at normal speeds,but if you reach the limit on them they are death boxes. Now of course RWD cars are not saints either especially if very powerful, but in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, I feel you can recover easier than with front heavy Barges that FWD cars inevitably are.

Click to expand...

OK I give up, and no I don't trust you, "drifted a rwd on a roundabout..." umm marvelous

For the record. Yes I've owned rwd but more importantly used them on track (BMW M3's amongst others) and on loose gravel rally stages.

FWD death boxes you really make me laugh.

Candisa said:

First of all, I never asked to discuss this.
Second, I'm not an idiot, I know basic physics, so I also know about weight shifting and inertia, something I've been confronted with as well in my early driving years.
Third, I've owned a few RWD cars, all without electronic stuff to prevent me going backwards trough a hedge.

Both times I lost the back of my Clio was not because of lifting the throttle, but because of overestimating the safe speed in the conditions, something that simply does not lead to such a brutal loss of control in a longer wheelbase car with a less front biased weight balance.

I never claimed to be an expert, but I do talk out of personal experience, only to be confirmed by people I trust to know what they're talking about.

There is no reason to be rude, question my intelligence or driving skills, and it's not that I said anything new or surprising.
So for me this discussion ends right here, goodbye!

Isabelle

Click to expand...

Thank you for your contribution, good to know someone knows what I am talking about!

I've tracked UFI and I couldn't get anything like snap oversteer. Nearest I got was at about 100mph when the road has some bad bumps that unsettled the rear end a bit - esp corrected and so did I so there was a bit of an over correction moment, but nothing too scary considering the speed.

On of our forum members took his TA to the Nordschleife and survived,

If your car is snapping sideways at 30mph something is seriously wrong somewhere.

UFI said:

I've tracked UFI and I couldn't get anything like snap oversteer. Nearest I got was at about 100mph when the road has some bad bumps that unsettled the rear end a bit - esp corrected and so did I so there was a bit of an over correction moment, but nothing too scary considering the speed.

On of our forum members took his TA to the Nordschleife and survived,

If your car is snapping sideways at 30mph something is seriously wrong somewhere.

Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

Any tyre has to be compromise between grip, noise, treadwear and economy; ecotyres are clearly going to be optimised for the latter and whilst they won't have the ultimate grip of a tyre optimised for performance, they've still got plenty of grip in reserve for normal driving. I've been using Michelin Energys for at least the past 80,000 miles and haven't come anywhere close to losing the back end.

Whatever tyre you choose to fit, you respect its limitations and drive within them. Suggesting that ecotyres are inherently unsafe on a SWB FWD car like the 500 is just plain daft; they're only unsafe if you push them beyond the limit for which they were designed. What is unsafe is running with tyres where there is more grip on the front than the rear; easily done if you fit new tyres to the front wheels only.

I'd agree with those that are saying the weight distribution and suspension setup on the 500 aren't up to what you'd expect from a proper modern performance hatchback, but that's not what the 500 is trying to be, and you're not going to change that whatever rubber you choose to fit.

jrkitching said:

they're only unsafe if you push them to what would be the limit for a high grip performance tyre.

Click to expand...

You really just said that, right?
Wow, what a bunch of idiots all those racing teams are to fit very expensive, much faster wearing performance tyres, they all should run on eco tyres if their handling limits are the same!

Yeah... Don't think so...

Candisa said:

You really just said that, right?
Wow, what a bunch of idiots all those racing teams are to fit very expensive, much faster wearing performance tyres, they all should run on eco tyres if their handling limits are the same!

Yeah... Don't think so...

Click to expand...

Yup, I could have phrased that better... even moderators post stupid comments sometimes .

Much better, and that was exactly my point in the other thread: handling limits depend on tyres and a bunch of other things that are less commonly changed on a car, so if a car already tends to brutally oversteer with very little warning at the limit, you better don't lower that limit by installing low grip (that's how they reduce resistance) tyres.

And sorry, the 500 is no different than any other short wheelbase, heavily front biased balanced vehicle.

Isabelle

UFI said:

I've tracked UFI and I couldn't get anything like snap oversteer. Nearest I got was at about 100mph when the road has some bad bumps that unsettled the rear end a bit - esp corrected and so did I so there was a bit of an over correction moment, but nothing too scary considering the speed.

On of our forum members took his TA to the Nordschleife and survived,

If your car is snapping sideways at 30mph something is seriously wrong somewhere.

Click to expand...

never happened with my michelin pilot sports = ) maybe those eco tires i have on arent as grippy = )

oh and i think the fact that i passed a splash of water before the turn didn't help matters. still though i was surprised at how quickly the rear disappeared from the corner = )

That's exactly why I swear by Vredestein tyres. Not claiming they're the best or only good ones, but they last acceptably long, communicate very well, and I never experienced unwarned total control losses with them, while I've done at least as many kilometers on different kinds of Vredestein tyres than I've done with all different brands of other tyres (Michelin, Uniroyal, Kleber, Continental, Pirelli, Dunlop...) I had together.

Both times I lost the Clio with no warning whatsoever was on Michelin Pilot Exalto's by the way.
It came originally on Michelin Energy's, which started to understeer at such low speeds I simply couldn't kick the back out if I tried.

Isabelle, I think what you've been describing is a "low polar moment of inertia" - once a relatively short car loses rear grip, it will rotate relatively easily, much as a mid-engined car will as its mass is centrally located. A longer car will have more inertia to resist rotating.
My car may be a bit more stable than Ahmett's - the TA engine is light, and mine is fitted with 195 width tyres. Sorry Ahmett, can't remember if you mentioned your tyre size.
Finally I try to follow the advice I've heard from several F1 drivers over the years - get all your braking and gear changing done before turning into a corner. It's served me well for 43 years and half a million miles of driving so far!

That's exactly what I mean indeed.

The 500 I tested a few years ago was a TA. admittedly, I was pushing it and it did warn me, but it was already very very unstable and ready to spin by the time I felt the back very slightly kicking out.
I can only imagine this being more pronounced on the 4cyl versions.

TrevC said:

Isabelle, I think what you've been describing is a "low polar moment of inertia" - once a relatively short car loses rear grip, it will rotate relatively easily, much as a mid-engined car will as its mass is centrally located. A longer car will have more inertia to resist rotating.
My car may be a bit more stable than Ahmett's - the TA engine is light, and mine is fitted with 195 width tyres. Sorry Ahmett, can't remember if you mentioned your tyre size.
Finally I try to follow the advice I've heard from several F1 drivers over the years - get all your braking and gear changing done before turning into a corner. It's served me well for 43 years and half a million miles of driving so far!

Click to expand...

yes i went down to 185's from 195's and the car is much less stable. And of course I have the heavy 1.4 engine in the front and the Dualogic gearbox which alone is about 15kgs at the very front of the car. And in the rear except the disc brakes no extra weight than any other Fiat 500 = )

185 vs 195 alone shouldn't make any difference, a narrower tyre is even better on light cars in the wet.
The type of tyre (including speed and load index) has a massively bigger influence than 5% difference in width.

And yeah, after driving a manual TA, and having owned a 1.9 diesel hatchback van, I can imagine the balance of the 1.4 with dualogic isn't exactly optimal.