RWD stick shift "family" car... and fairly recent?

Says who? properly equipped, a RWD car is NOT difficult to drive in snow. I've driven my 944 in the snow before, and other than the lack of traction that one would expect with wide performance tires (I'd buy dedicated snow tires if I lived anywhere with real winter) it was exceptionally controllable. Of course, the near 50/50 weight balance helps, and the high polar moment of inertia keeps it stable (it has the transaxle in the rear, like a newer 'vette.)

Something like Porsche, BMW, etc. - cars that are marketed for people who enjoy driving, not just as appliances.

nate

Reply to
N8N
Loading thread data ...

Certainly would be fun to drive.

For some real driving pleasure why not revert to mechanical

Nah. Unassisted hydraulic disks are *just* right.

Reply to
Steve

Acutally, good old solid axles and leaf springs have certain handling advantages, too. They're *usually* outweighed (literally) by the negatives, chief of which is unsprung weight, but to deny that they exist flies in the face of physics. Solid rear axles with asymmetric leaf springs don't wheel-hop on hard acceleration and are much better for drag racing than A-arm rear suspension, and almost as good as a

4-link with solid axle. Solid axles in general have a superior roll center height, so smaller sway bars are needed to keep the chassis flat in corners. That's one reason solid-axle trucks and SUVs (like the old Jeep Wagoneer and Cherokee) are much safer and more stable on or off road than independent suspension SUVs (like the Explorer and Expedition) IMO. If all roads were smooth and there were never washboards and potholes in corners, a well-shod solid rear axle car can turn in as good or better lateral G forces than an independent rear suspension car.
Reply to
Steve

That's fine... Toyota has *zero* cars I'd ever own.

And interestingly, they are ALL premium marques. Hmmm.....

The number of car makers that have brought themselves

The vast majority are transportation appliances. FWD is fine for that. Like I said, it packages better for people who neither know nor care what makes the car go.

The 300, the Dodge Charger, the Dodge Magnum, and the Dodge Challenger. Of all the new-generation Mopars, only the Caliber is still FWD. Intersting that Chrysler was the first carmaker to go wholesale to FWD, and is now the first to start moving back.

He meant "get them" as in "understand why some people want them."

Reply to
Steve

Anyone who is pushing the "performance" of his car in the snow deserves whatever he gets.

I will not sacrifice good driving and handling 99.99999999 percent of the miles I drive a car for that .0000001% that I have to drive in the snow.

Reply to
Steve

when was the last time you drove a rwd car in the snow? And you're confusing static weight distribution with performance.

I'm not going to argue this all week with you. Enjoy your Camry.

Reply to
ray

And even in places like Winnipeg, where it's -40 for 6 months of the year, most of the time most of the roads are plowed and stuff like 4wd and studded tires are way overkill. From about xmas to valentine's day, it's just cold, but the roads are usually clear, so you can drive a regular car just fine. I had a Jimmy, and needed to use 4 wheel drive about twice a winter during heavy snowfalls, or I could have just stayed home for the evening and let the plows clean the streets for me.

Ray

Reply to
ray

I have no idea about prices, but obvious options are BMWs and Lexuses. BMWs have very good handling and Lexus is learning...

What you really want is a Mitsubishi EVO or a Subaru (WRX, STi, etc.) Of course they are somewhat expensive and drink a lot of fuel.

Have you tried a good FWD car ? Cars like Peugeot/Citroen, Renaults, recent Alfa Romeos (I think recent Europeans Fords also) have very good handling, although the recent models have become very very heavy (Peugeots, Alfas). Those cars are usually not understeering.

No idea if any of these are available in Canada. And if they are, their suspension setup might not be equal to the European versions. (Many years ago, a VW exec said something like: "if a Golf driver tried to drive a Rabbit at the speed he was used to, he would crash in the first corner".)

You might also want to try a Honda Civic Type-R. It is FWD, but a good one.

Reply to
Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro

Unfortunately the original poster has his own idea of what consitutes a modern safe car that would be appropriate for family use. His requirements are about 25 years behind current technology however. He seems content to argue endlessly that features very few consumers demand and very few car manufacturers provide are still important.

Reply to
John S.

Yeah, requirements like good balance and a manual transmission are just ludicrous.

This is why I do not own a new car.

nate

Reply to
N8N

I have fond memories of my parents rwd Studebaker - it taught 5 kids to drive. Unfortunately it, like all other cars made in the 1950's through 1970's (and beyond) have been seriously outdistanced by advances in technology of all sorts.

Old cars are fine for memories and for collectors, but we should heave a collective sigh of relief that "They Don't Make "Em Like They Used To".

Reply to
John S.

rrrright. Like I told you, the current leading candidate is a nice boring Subaru Legacy Wagon. AWD for the winter, decent suspension and brakes, lots of room for strollers and crap. Decent power - nothing awesome, but definitely acceptable. The weak link is the lousy highway mileage and it's more expensive than some of the other cars. And it comes with a stick and four doors.

You're just pissed because you don't like me making fun of your transportation appliance. You probably don't even like driving, but because I like to drive I'm immediately a redneck goober in your eyes.

Whatever.

Reply to
ray

But the Subaru doesn't even use rear wheel drive most of the time, only front wheel drive. Aren't you compromising principles here????

They are all appliances, or said another way they provide us with some measure of utility.

Actually I enjoy driving in cars that are safe and comfortable at highway speeds. I've driven Volvo's for the past 22 years, but have driven a bunch of other makes before that. As much as I liked driving the rear wheel drive Volvo 960 on the highway, it like it's older rwd bretheren was terrible in snow. The front wheel drive models I currently own are far more tractable in snow. And they are balanced and handle exceptionally well. I've driven long enough to remember when there were only a very few cars with frontwheel drive. Fortunately we have migrated to that design.

It was your choice of words, so please tell us...are you a rednecked goober?

Whatever...??? I don't understand this phrase at all....

Reply to
John S.

not at all. And you're wrong on how the Subie does the torque split.

Reply to
ray

Oh yes, I'd FAR rather drive a new SUV than an older station wagon. There's SO much innovative new technology that makes the SUV a far superior driving experience.

um, that was sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell. There really

*haven't* been any advances in the fundamentals of vehicle design in the last 30 years or so. Now there have been huge improvements in passive safety and engine/fuel controls, but in fundamental chassis design and the like, any real innovations haven't trickled down to consumer grade machinery yet; what you can buy today would be easily understood by engineers of the 70s. Especially when you consider that a good number of the vehicles that I see on the road today are essentially a K-blazer or Bronco in a party dress.

I *wish* they would make 'em like they used to; just take advantage of those real advancements that have been made. But it seems that the quip I heard holds true (and I can't remember to whom to attribute it...) the best damn American cars made today are made in Australia.

nate

Reply to
N8N

Can't tell you about frame or body design specifics. I can tell you about the results though. Todays cars are much much much better at handling, stopping, etc, than the cars of 1970. And of course they are much safer, much longer lived, get better milage, are more comfortable, pollute a lot less, have transmissions that can make seemingly intelligent decisions, etc.

Naw. It was so unusual for a car to go over 100,000 miles that guys would brag about it. Notdays it is common to see 300k miles on a car with no notable repairs.

Reply to
John S.

Mostly due to improvements in tire technology, along with a little help from revised shock tuning and spring rate tuning. Simply putting modern tires and new shocks on a 1970 vehicle (assuming it was equipped with the then-sometimes-optional disc brakes) will get you 90% of the way there.

In passive safety, yes. If you drive not to wreck, it's not an issue.

HA! I think not. If nothing else, a *good* older car can be kept on the road indefinitely, as the cost of any repairs needed (as performed by an able owner/mechanic) will likely never exceed the cost of a monthly car payment, at least over the long term. Today's cars... they're so complex, that once they start going downhill, you might as well give up and buy a new one and save the stress and mental anguish.

Not really that much.

Not really. Sports cars still have good seats, family hawlers still have s**te seats.

This is true, and is due to the improvements in engine management that I was referring to above.

Eh... if you buy automatics, and that's debatable. Personally I wish the transmixer in my company Impala would not think so damn much, as it seems to have a mind of its own and it's always frantically doing something, probably in the interest of getting that last 0.5 MPG on the EPA test. If you're a stickshift man, like the OP, the only real advantage to a newer car is the proliferation of 5-speed transmissions with overdrive that are common (well, common among the rare cars with a manual transmission option) today but were unavailable back in the day; your only options then were a 3-speed column shift, or the sporty

4-speed, both with a direct top gear.

Really? That's odd, my dad's '67 Cutlass was junked with over 300K on it with only routine maintenance; it needed a new carb but other than that it was perfectly fine, it was just junked because the frame had rusted through and he didn't think it was worth having it fixed. I would really love to have that car today... I'd rather have that than just about any new car, short of a Porsche or M3. In fact, the generation of Cutlass and other A-body GM cars that immediately followed my dad's car (1968-1972) are pointed to by many automotive writers as pretty much the high water mark of the American automotive industry, or at least GM. They were solid, durable, good-handling cars the likes of which we haven't seen since - although the subsequent chassis (both 73-77 and 78-87) were good efforts, the anemic engines of the early smog era kept them from developing the same kind of following as the 68-72 cars. The build quality of those cars also hasn't been duplicated since - the damn things were built like bank vaults, with the kind of solidity that seems to be reserved only for German machinery these days.

Can you really, honestly see 20 or 30 years from now someone looking at an "old" '06 Malibu with the same kind of envy and appreciation that we have today for the 64-67 or 68-72 A-bodies? I think not.

nate

Reply to
N8N

Subaru apparently has not one but five different ways of controlling awd. Check the website for details.

Reply to
John S.

now you're just looking to argue for the sake of arguing.

formatting link
Subaru actually builds three different all-wheel-drive systems. Manual-transmission models rely on a viscous coupling, a kind of speed-sensitive automatic clutch, to limit wheel slip at either end of the car. The system is purely mechanical, and nominally distributes driving torque 50/50, front/rear.

Active All-Wheel Drive, standard on automatic Outbacks, replaces the viscous coupling with an electronically managed multi-disc clutch. Torque distribution remains 50/50, but Subaru claims this system can respond more quickly to changing conditions.

Finally, Variable Torque Distribution combines the electronically managed clutch with a planetary gear that splits torque 45/55 front/rear, for a ``performance-driving feel.'' Additional electronic sensors monitor the position of the throttle and steering wheel, as well as the vehicle's yaw rate and the individual speed of each wheel. When combined with traction control, claims Subaru, this system can actually anticipate a loss of traction before it happens. New for 2002 is a switch to turn the traction-control function off, a feature that may be useful in deep snow or mud.

Reply to
ray

You have an odd definition of "behind current technology," since the current trend is rear-drive with traction control and (ironically) it is front-drive which is about 25 years out of date.

Reply to
Steve

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.