The NY and Pa state police use RWD CV's year around, as well.
I wonder what the FWD buyers think we drove for all those years
before FWD? As least with RWD one need not worry about putting
their vehicle into a spin by simply letting of the throttle.
In the forties and fifties. they didn't even plow till the storm
was over and they only put traction materials on the mountains
and in the intersections. ;)
Rich B wrote:
I live in the snow belt. FWD means you slide into the ditch forwards,
RWD means you slide in sideways, and 4wd means you roll it in.
Dumb ass driver + dumb ass driving = crash.
I leave my Jimmy in RWD unless it's bad bad bad weather - I prefer to
not kid myself about the lack of traction out there.
Plain and simple, FWD is cheaper to build. More profit for the
manufacturers. More expensive & complicated to maintain, won't hold up in
heavy duty use, and that's why police and taxi cab companies like RWD.
Actually, although that is a very common conception, FWD vehicles
are more expensive to build than a RWD vehicle of
the same size. The reason being FWD vehicles require more of
the relatively more expensive off line pre assembly of more
components, than RWD vehicles. FWD. vehicle are much more
expensive to insure as well as the things you mentioned.
As a retired automotive engineer, I can not reveal trade secrets
such as cost figures. you can prove it to yourself by doing some
research of the prices of the FWD cars that replaced RWD cars.
The much smaller FWD Chrysler 4cy 'K' cars sold for as much or
more than the larger 6 cy and V8 RWD cars they replaced for
example. The smaller FWD Cadillac was more costly, same was true
of the other GM FWD vehicles. 1981 Escort sold for much more
than the 1980 Pinto it replaced. The RWD LTD that was sold
alongside of the first Taurus, sold for $4,000 less, etc.
Unfortunately, that doesn't work either as cost to build and sale price
often have nothing in common. Take pickup trucks. Not exactly very
high tech - they make a TON of profit on them and yet I don't see them
on clearance very often. How many cars come out that cost LESS than
the vehicles they replaced?
80 Trans Am
01 Trans Am Ram Air - 13.41@104 mph (!CAGS - otherwise stock)
That is true to some extent. Ford sold the first Escorts to
dealers for less than the build cost for CAFE. The profits on
the larger cars still subsidize small car retail price today.
You would be surprised to know how relatively little more it cost
to build a Town Car than a Taurus or a RWD Lexus over a Camry.
RWD fun factor: forward donuts
FWD fun factor: reverse gear donuts
AWD fun factor: drag racing on heavy snow
full 4WD fun factor: 4x4 tug-a-war
they can all survive snow. the limiting factor is how fast you can go.
ABS braking is fun in the snow...
They are doing it because Bob Lutz wants to do it and because it was a fast,
cheap, expedient thing to do.
GM's history of 'mericanizing their foreign designs and trying to sell them
in the states has been a flop every time.
The Cadillac Catera was a warmed over Opel ... and a flop. The CTS which
replaced it is doing great.
The Saturn L series is a warmed over Opel ... and Saturn is having to
bargain basement price them to sell any.
Further back in time there were the Opel by Isuzu for Buick embarrassments.
Why should the GTO be any different?
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.