RWD is back!!!

[bill25]

http://jalopnik.com/why-does-everyone-l ... 1671484918


The article focuses a lot on crappy cheap front drive cars that are zero fun to drive, and drifting.

I think this comment is a big part of it at least on a large scale sale ability aspect:

Ryan AlbaaRaphael Orlove
Today 4:57pm

Maybe because traction control and stability control are advanced enough that they can offer RWD in a "safer" package to multiple audiences (the masses and enthusiasts). Appealing to the enthusiast market seems important, since they have a strong voice in automotive marketing. At least in my opinion.

I do remember back in the early 90s, people that were not car enthusiasts were sick of RWD in the winter. I still hear the stigma today when I talk about getting a new Camaro due to it being RWD. From what I hear, the new RWD cars with Traction Control are not a problem anymore. I had the joy of driving an 85 Monte Carlo SS, no posi, in the winter. I can definitely see the average person not wanting to deal with that. Since auto makers need to sell cars for all climates, this could have had a lot to do with the change to FWD. Now technology looks like it has overcome the winter hurdle, and people are remembering how fun those cars were when not holding on to the wheel for dear life in the winter.


Other good comments:

Dr_WatsonaRaphael Orlove
29 minutes ago

Was all economics. There weren't really any *fun* RWD cars that people could actually afford to purchase, run, and maintain on a $3.25/hr job.

My experiences in GenX car culture:

Everyone wanted: RX7, ZX Turbo, VR-4, Supra, Corvette, 5.0 Mustang

What everyone could actually afford: Eclipse, Civic/CRX, J-Body, (then later the Focus and Neon)

*special note: The F-Bodies were both affordable and RWD though mostly shit and general consensus suggested people would rather just get the cheap FWD and hot it up a bit rather than be perceived as a mulleted redneck drug dealer.

I agree with all of this. In the 90s, the Asian market was blazing: Civics, Integras, Supras, 3000 GTs, RX-7s, Eclipses to an extent, Maximas, and Accords were super popular. Everyone was done with American.


I will say that front or rear drive didn't seem to be the topic of debate, it just had to be Asian. Because Americans were done with the F-Bodies, and the boring American BS that came out of the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

The 00s seemed to be limbo. People were finding out that once the Asian car companies were mass sales entities, their products got very watered down, and lost a lot of the stuff that made them popular to begin with. People were realizing that they did break down, and didn't last forever, and they didn't get great gas mileage when they got bigger as they progressed through time. A Corolla today has to be as big as the Cressida was.


That is all turning around now. Nissan went from one of the best to one of the worst. American brands are moving to the top again. Honda is no longer the Car Maker Golden Child, and Toyotas are dependable, but boring as hell.

Mazda is actually on top of every Car and Driver shootout now, which was actually probably from being helped by Ford.
Hopefully GM gets on the RWD bandwagon, or they will likely lose out to the foreign competition again.

I know that GM has cars that are RWD, but I mean under 40K.

[kevm14]

Because FWD cars, at their absolute best, only performed in SPITE of being FWD, not because of it.

My CTS-V is probably pretty decent in the snow, if I ran the right tires. It has better weight balance than any old body on frame V8 car, working posi and very sophisticated stability control. If I believed more strongly in GM's rustproofing abilities I'd consider driving it. But even then, you still trash the paint and interior. So it stays in the garage.

Also, tire technology has enabled 4 season RWD cars.

[kevm14]

Everyone wanted: RX7, ZX Turbo, VR-4, Supra, Corvette, 5.0 Mustang

What everyone could actually afford: Eclipse, Civic/CRX, J-Body, (then later the Focus and Neon)

I agree with all of this. In the 90s, the Asian market was blazing: Civics, Integras, Supras, 3000 GTs, RX-7s, Eclipses to an extent, Maximas, and Accords were super popular. Everyone was done with American.


I will say that front or rear drive didn't seem to be the topic of debate, it just had to be Asian. Because Americans were done with the F-Bodies, and the boring American BS that came out of the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

Bob? Sounds like your childhood car scene in Maine, except probably still more domestic stuff than what was going on in less rural parts of the country.

[kevm14]

I should also mention that GM made some pretty historic bets on FWD in past decades. Namely the FWD E-bodies starting in 1966 with the groundbreaking Olds Toronado, to the FWD K-body Seville of the 80s, A- and W-body cars and the G/C/K/H-body of the 90s. In 95, the new G platform (Olds Aurora) boasted a 25Hz unibody frame, which was pretty unprecedented.

None of this is particularly relevant to the thread, though, except that they need to keep investing in RWD platforms. And don't let those hotshot chassis engineers go.

[kevm14]

Love it!!

Oversteer scares the passenger; understeer scares the driver.

[kevm14]

Fun fact: I've never purchased a FWD car. The Maxima is on loan, and the Malibu predates me. The next FWD car I buy will be for my wife.

In fact, not only have my cars all been RWD, they've all been V8 and GM, except for the Ranger. A very large proportion of them have been 90s models (of those, the only one with traction control was the Fleetwood). The exceptions are the 1989 9C1 (which doesn't even count) and my CTS-V (the only car with IRS I've purchased), which is also the only car with stability control that I've ever had. But since I'm such a badass, I've engaged that stability control on perfectly warm and dry surfaces, not snow and ice.

[bill25]

I think this was a craze:

Civics, Integras, Supras, 3000 GTs, RX-7s, Eclipses to an extent, Maximas, and Accords were super popular.

The front wheel drive cheap cars in the list were bought by kids that wanted to be in Fast and Furious, and Adults that wanted a car that got good gas mileage and ran to 300,000 miles like the 85 Civic with like 75 HP.

Then they got an Accord that was 3 times bigger, with more HP that didn't get better mileage anymore. It is funny, because if you look at what made these cars popular, you would never actually want one.

The problem was at a lot of fronts: Crazy expectations of Asian cars to last forever with no maintenance, Fast and Furious type movies that gave up on American cars, American Car companies that gave up on American cars, magazines that favored foreign cars (The Accord is a 10 best for 500 years in a row), video games catered to the foreign market (Gran Turismo had like 3 American cars when it came out, and 89 Nissan Maximas), and GM, Ford, and Dodge had NOTHING to compete with the better cars on the list in the after market realm.

What were you going to do? Soup up a FWD 6 cyl Grand Prix? The Supra was being made into 1000 HP with readily available aftermarket parts. The aftermarket really propped up the foreign cars because people at least thought they could get a civic and make it fast and cool. Nobody was thinking that about any GM economy car at the time.

Sure you could get a Viper for 100K, or a Corvette, That really was it because they let the Camaro and Trans Am go for so long (70s and 80s power loss), people lost interest.

[kevm14]

The aftermarket really propped up the foreign cars because people at least thought they could get a civic and make it fast and cool. Nobody was thinking that about any GM economy car at the time.

Maybe it was too little too late but that's why the 2008 Cobalt SS was such a big deal, at least in terms of performance. No, I take that back. Maybe not too little, but definitely too late.

[kevm14]

The real problem with FWD is it's all a show. You can throw on big wheels, a wide stance, even reasonably powerful engines. You can engineer out the funky handling characteristics endemic to a front-heavy platform, but actually, you can't. It just feels that way, and when you pass a certain point, it all falls apart. The better FWD cars let you push it further before it falls apart. But it always falls apart. Because physics. This applies to handling as well as accelerating when you start really pushing it for power output (weight transfers to the rear).

This doesn't matter to normal people, and it shouldn't. But it does to enthusiasts.

Fun random fact: AWD is slower once you get past a certain performance threshold in drag racing. Why? Because the real fast cars transfer ALL of their weight to the rear, or practically all. The front axle can't do anything if it's not on the ground at launch. And the added weight/rotational inertia of the front driven axle just robs power.

[bill25]

The only pro I have ever heard for FWD is having the weight over the drive wheel for better traction in the snow. That's all.