Rented a RWD Magnum in wintery Montana - Yuk!

Front wheel drive is LAME! About time cars switched back......

There's a host of reasons why most automobiles are now FWD, whereas 50 years ago few were. Go take a course in automotive mechanics and get the facts.

No, there isn't. There's only 1 reason. Cost. It's cheaper to make the engine and transmission into 1 unit then during assembly put the single unit in the vehicle.

Ted

"Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote

Wrong, Ted. The entire vehicle becomes more space and weight efficient; the combination of traction and steering on one set of wheels gives control and traction benefits, particularly in slippery conditions (like the OP was pointing out), and a forward weight bias produces a more stable vehicle in normal driving conditions.

RWD is superior in specific conditions, such as racing, heavy load carrying, and heavy-impact duty such as police.

But it's your money. Buy what you like.

I thought the reason that they switched back to RWD was because they went back to V8s and FWD can't handle the torque steer problem with that much power. RWD is better if you live in California but it sucks if you live in a snowy climate. I live in New England, I got the AWD option on my 300C and it works great in the winter and the summer.

"Dave Gower" wrote in news:r9ydnfGiWtmAlOHYnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@magma.ca:

The inherent problem with FWD is that when you lose traction you also lose steering. Not a good thing.

Regards, Joe

"Joe" wrote

Easily corrected - you just back off the throttle. Makes for slower safer driving. I've driven in 40 consecutive Ontario winters now, mostly in FWD cars, and never once got into an accident due to a skid.

"Dave Gower" wrote in news:9OydnUXVOJTgVeHYnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@magma.ca:

The exact same thing applies to RWD. Been there as well. However, you can lose traction with RWD and still retain steering. Not so with FWD.

Regards, Joe

The problem, Joe, is simply that poor drivers do better with FWD.

With FWD, as you point out, when it breaks free you have no control at all, you either have control or not. However due to the weight of the engine, you have to push it harder to break it free.

With RWD due to the weight, it breaks free earlier, but it is a 2 step process, the rear breaks free first then the front. A skilled driver can feel the rear breaking free and can modulate the throttle so that he can still control the car.

With FWD once it breaks free you cannot modulate the throttle all you can do is pull your foot immediately off of it. Which is the typical instinctual response of a poor driver. Another instinctual response is to slam on the brakes which locks the rear which is bad on a RWD car but on a FWD car by the time it's broken the front free, the rear is already broken free and it makes no difference what you do with the brakes.

Our friend Dave probably drives like a an old Grandma in the snow that is why he hasn't crashed - because with a FWD car, once it starts snowing or gets icy that is all you -CAN- do, because the consequences of pushing it mean your gonna crash. With RWD when it gets slick you can go faster because you can feel how far you can push it. (since it will go into traction loss and you can still recover)

Unfortunately it's been, let's see - Dave said he's been driving 40 years now - it's been 40 years since drivers had to have any skill to drive in the snow, so todays drivers are now pretty ignorant of why RWD is better.

Ted

I don't think the automakers really give much of a damn anymore about real performance in a passenger car. If they did, they would still be putting them on the NASCAR circuit instead of the cars today which have absolutely nothing to do with real stock cars.

As to why they went to RWD on V8 cars that's a no brainer. The V8 is too long of an engine to fit sideways in the engine bay. But if it could be made to fit, they would have done FWD on a V8 too.

There were a LOT of really good solid dependible in-line 6 engine designs that disappeared due to the cost savings of going to FWD and a lot of really crappy V6 designs that were substituted in (anyone remember the Olds 3.8L?) for a while there.

Both RWD and FWD suck in the snow compared to AWD, that's not a fair comparison. One of my own vehicles is an AWD. But you pay for it in repair bills with the increased complexity of the power train, unless your buying a new car every 3 years or so.

Ted

I agree. Obviously those here who don't agree with us don't drive in the winter conditions you and I do.

I now have about equal time driving RWD then FWD. I'll not be returning to RWD, even it I have to buy a Toyota.

So true. Joe simply slows his lack of FWD experience.

Who says a FWD engine has to be transverse? My LH Concord is along the axis, no torque steer and great access to the engine.

They have, many years ago. Hint: GM did it! Along the axis as the Chrysler LH cars.

Of course AWD is superior, but I find I don't need it. However the Subaru is on my short list if my Concord comes to it's end and those Subaru's are all AWD.

In addition the Subaru not only can carry a matching spare, it comes with one as standard equipment. Anyone want to talk about those very unsafe in all conditions compact spares, which are often flat when needed when hung underneath?

Some O wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.telus.net:

Might want to re-read before hitting 'send'. lol

Regards, Joe

"Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote in news:newscache$ifm3aj$6jz$ snipped-for-privacy@news.ipinc.net:

Some good points, Ted. The only thing I'd add is a point about braking. Once you lock 'em up, you've lost control regardless of whether you're in a FWD or RWD. As you've said, the only way to regain control is to let up.

Bottom line for winter driving: consistency wins, abruptness loses.

Regards, Joe

Some O wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.telus.net:

And people who blindly claim that FWD is far superior are simply wrong.

You are correct in that higher power engines do not mix well with FWD primarily because of torque steer. More than ever before, todays FWD vehicles have powerful enough engines that torque steer is fairly common.

The exact same thing applies to RWD, except for the fact that you won't lose steering as you would with FWD. It's certainly easier to feel totally out of control when both your traction and steering are gone as opposed to just losing traction.

And that proves what? That people with FWDs ask for trouble before RWD drivers do? ;)

Obviously the BMW driver had nothing in the trunk to weigh the rear down.

BTW, if FWD is so superior in the snow, why aren't there any FWD plows? ;)

Regards, Joe

YES! Fwd is really lame!

RWD cars are for people who can drive cars, fwd is for those who can't ;)

Risto Nevala

"Scott Dennison" kirjoitti viestissä:-qudnfPK2eYDwebYnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com...

"Joe" wrote