| RWD vs. FWD is very subjective for sure. But as I said before 80% of the time, I would agree that there is no advantage having RWD over FWD in NORMAL driving. However, that does leave that 20% where it is definately better. And to some, this 20% is more important than the percentage might indicate.
RWD is better for the following reasons:
1. Due to it's full-frame, it's generally safer for occupents in a crash.
2. Due to the body-on-frame design, accident damage is generally limited to the area of the car nearest to the point of impact.
3. Due to the full-frame, the car is able to provide a higher degree of sound and vibration isolation from the road.
4. No torque steer.
5. Lower component repair cost due to lower labor time requirements (engine, trans, etc.)
6. Lower under-hood temps tend to allow under-hood componentry to last longer(hard AND soft parts).
7. Better weight distribution for rough pavement, (less liable to bottom front suspension)
8. Better for towing.
Need I go on?
BTW, a point needs to be made, you (and most other proponents of FWD) keep pointing out that the comparison needs to be made concerning NORMAL DRIVING.
This begs the question; if all you're concerned with is NORMAL DRIVING, why are you buying a performance sedan?
If all you do is NORMAL DRIVING, and that's all you're concerned with, why aren't you all driving sensible economy cars?
Think about it. |