Where did this fight about FWD vs. gas guzzling American barge come from?
Neither are designed to lap around tracks quickly, the concept of using FWD is to save space and weight, they can't handle excessive amounts of power, but can still be quick in comparison to their rivals (think Mini vs. Morris Minor
).
The concept of shoehorning a massive V8 into an extremely heavy bodyshell with the structural rigidity of a potato is to act as a catalyst for global warming.
It may suprise some people to know that an M3 CSL isn't really a light weight, at I'd guess still over 1400 kg it may be a few tons lighter than the heap of American junk you drive but it is still a big car.
The fact that todays baby supercars can only manage around 10 mpg is pathetic, they all weigh at least 1500 kg, and they really needen't. Maybe we should actually ask ourselfs do we really need to drive around in a 15 miles to the gallon Range Rover or a 15 gallons to the mile Hummer? It isn't needed on the road, modern cars can't be driven fast on B-Roads, simply because pushing an everyday sporty hatch back down a B-Road means driving it at dangerous speeds.
Something like a Mazda MX5 or a Mk1 Toyota MR2 is a good example of what sports cars should be about, well setup for good handling at road speeds, tiny amounts of power in comparison to todays average diesel hatch back, and economical.
Bluntly I think the current trend for very powerful cars should be kept for racing use only, there's no point in driving around in a 240 bhp hatch back that weighs 1500 kg when one could have just as much fun in a 150 bhp, 900 kg hatchback.
Back to the question of handling, anything weighing more than the average HGV is not going to handle well, or be fast round the 'ring. It may suprise you to know that a standard fast hatchback would thrash your heap of scrap iron round the 'ring. Even older lower power cars would out handle your monstrosity of a car, think of an old Escort, Mini, MG and there'd be no comparison to your car in terms of fun. Your junk metal is probably so overly power assissted that you'd get no feel of the car at all, and if not then you'd find that it'll be extremely heavy and probably more prone to simply gliding straight on in a mass of understeer when it met a corner rather than a nice controlable oversteer, which is what a sensibly sized front engined RWD car should do.
I could keep going explaining to you about terms like 'structural rigidity' but you probably wouldn't understand enough about how a car handles to have a sensible debate with.
Bluntly you're a ****ing idiot IMO for flaming someone for no reason for tuning a FWD car, who it would seem to me has more of a clue about going round corners as well as in a straight line. You obviously also couldn't give a shit about the environment, which isn't a good thing, obviously when you go racing it's not a consideration you make, in the end of the day motorsport isn't going to make a difference to the environment or oil supplies, millions of gas guzzling road cars will. Do you really need 6.0 litres of cast iron to propel your 5 ton shed at 55 mph or would 1.5 litres of sensibly proportioned car do instead, would also save a load on fuel.