: Rear wheel drive



'90 Eldo
07-22-05, 02:57 PM
When did they stop making rear wheel drive Caddys? Or,do they still make some with rear wheel drive? I'm a newbie here, so any info on rear wheel cars will be appreciated.

EcSTSatic
07-22-05, 04:18 PM
The 2005 Seville is RWD. What do you want to know about RWD?

El Dobro
07-22-05, 05:29 PM
Cateras and CTSs are also RWD.

'90 Eldo
07-23-05, 02:00 AM
I want to know when they stopped making the rear wheel drive Caddys,in general. I have a need for a rear wheel drive big car like a sedan DeVille or a Cpe DeVille as long as it's not too old. I need to know about what years I should be looking at. Thanks for your input.

Jesda
07-23-05, 04:41 AM
GM cancelled the full size RWD platform in 96, but brought RWD luxury back in 2002 with the CTS.

adam_mcd
07-23-05, 04:57 AM
..the devilles are still front wheel right?

i thought they axed rwd in the devilles in 93.

eldos/sevilles were FWD until the 92? i dont know.

rwd is better than fwd, i know that much.

speedyman_2
07-23-05, 12:18 PM
rwd is better than fwd, i know that much.

Not always ;) Depends on the application, weather, etc.

'90 Eldo
07-23-05, 05:11 PM
I really like my '90 Eldo as far as everyday driving. For long trips and roads that are real curvy I prefer the rear wheel drive cars. That is why I am interested in an older Caddy rear wheel Drive.

Jesda says they cut the rear wheel platform in '96 . Does that mean that the '90 Sedan and Coupe DeVilles are rear wheel drive? I really like that body style. If so, I will look into one of them with fairly low mileage if possible. Thanks so much for your input here everybody. I'm just getting back into these cars and I am enjoying it a lot.

Adam
07-23-05, 05:59 PM
Sedan and Coupe Devilles stopped RWD after 1984. in 85 the Fleetwood, Coupe Deville and Sedan Deville went to FWD. the only RWD Cadillac offered was the Brougham. in 93 they brought back the Fleetwood/ Fleetwood Brougham to RWD until 1996. then they got stupid and made the Catera (sorry Catera owners) in 97 which is RWD. so Cadillac never really quit making RWD.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
07-23-05, 08:39 PM
the last Bigass RWD Body on frame cadillac (and to the purists the last true Cadillac) was the 1996 Fleetwood Brougham and God bless it! But if you want any big RWD body on frame car thats not too old (post 1990) you could get a Brougham, Buick Roadmaster, Chevy Caprice/Impala, Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser, Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, or Lincoln Town Car

adam_mcd
07-24-05, 04:04 AM
..or a 03/04 mercury marauder. my god those are sexy cars.

scourge
07-24-05, 04:13 AM
Or, you can make your own RWD Caddy. See my thread in the Allante forum.

'90 Eldo
07-24-05, 05:33 AM
I was hoping to find a newer car than an "80"s Caddy. I will look into the Brougham,they are luxurious cars,but right now I'm a little leary of the Northstar engine. I have another thread on finding a Sedan Deville with head bolt problems,I was thinking of buying it and selling it. I still haven't figured out what it would cost to repair it to be a dependable car for someone. I don't want to sell something that will not be dependable,and it is not the car for me. I want a rear wheel drive big Caddy for the road,so the search goes on.

Night Wolf
07-24-05, 12:38 PM
ummm.....

ya'll are forgetting about the Catera, which was RWD...

and IIRC, didn't the Catera start in 1997?

which means that there has ALWAYS been a RWD Caddy, since the Fleetwood ended in 1996, the Catera took over in 1997, then in 2003? the CTS took over.

Now the DeVille is the only FWD Caddy made....

weister42
07-24-05, 02:06 PM
FWD is great for icy conditions, you don't wanna loost control of that 2 ton boat and hurt someone with it:)

weister42
07-24-05, 02:07 PM
AWD caddys anyone???

Adam
07-25-05, 11:21 PM
I was hoping to find a newer car than an "80"s Caddy. I will look into the Brougham,they are luxurious cars,but right now I'm a little leary of the Northstar engine. I have another thread on finding a Sedan Deville with head bolt problems,I was thinking of buying it and selling it. I still haven't figured out what it would cost to repair it to be a dependable car for someone. I don't want to sell something that will not be dependable,and it is not the car for me. I want a rear wheel drive big Caddy for the road,so the search goes on.

the 93-96 Fleetwood/ Fleetwood Brougham didnt have the N*. the 93 had the TBI LO5 and the 94-96 had the Corvette LT1.

Night Wolf
07-26-05, 12:26 AM
FWD is great for icy conditions, you don't wanna loost control of that 2 ton boat and hurt someone with it:)

yeah, but atleast with RWD when your drive wheels spin you can still control the direction of the vehicle.

'90 Eldo
07-28-05, 01:28 PM
Thanks Low Low for the info on the Fleetwood/Fleetwood Brougham. I will look into these cars,I really don't know what they look like. It's not a car I've ever thought much about to be truthful.

Adam
07-28-05, 01:36 PM
there are some pictures of a 96 Fleetwood Brougham in the FWD Deville section under the thread Are the 93s really that much bigger? on the first page i think. nice picture of one and i believe the picture i posted belongs to someone on the forum. im trying to help Mccombie decide on one. good luck!

N0DIH
07-28-05, 02:29 PM
With the full speed traction control in my 94 FWB LT1, I have yet to be able to lose it, even trying to on wet or icy roads. It just doesn't let you. And to think how much better RWD is, I never lose my steering when it gets slick, like FWD always does (as soon as the wheels lose traction due to wheel spin, the steering is gone)


FWD is great for icy conditions, you don't wanna loost control of that 2 ton boat and hurt someone with it:)

HotRodSaint
07-30-05, 02:43 PM
the last Bigass RWD Body on frame cadillac (and to the purists the last true Cadillac) was the 1996 Fleetwood Brougham and God bless it!

Amen to the last of the 'real' Cadillacs!!! :worship:

'90 Eldo
07-30-05, 03:38 PM
The Brougham in the picture is a beauty. It does look big is it 221" long? Man I'll bet the car drives nice on the open road. I don't know if I've seen one of these cars. I will look for one to drive and check out . Thanks low low I appreciate the info.

'90 Eldo
07-30-05, 03:48 PM
Hot Rod thanks for the picture of your car. That is excellent!!!! I would like to know if the Torque Thrusts are Caddy bolt pattern or do you have to go to an adapter to run them. They really look good on the car. How wide is the wheel you are using ? I like this car,never thought I would see one raked. Very cool.

Adam
07-30-05, 05:26 PM
have you never looked at a Lowrider magazine before?!? these boats are 225.1 inches long (stretched 4.1 inches from the previous body style). in 93 they had the tbi LO5 and in 94-96 they got the Corvette derived LT1. good luck and happy hunting (took me 2 years to find one). (not mine btw) but a nice low low nonetheless.

http://www.layitlow.com/rides/cadillacs/56_450x259.jpg

HotRodSaint
07-31-05, 12:35 PM
Hot Rod thanks for the picture of your car. That is excellent!!!! I would like to know if the Torque Thrusts are Caddy bolt pattern or do you have to go to an adapter to run them. They really look good on the car. How wide is the wheel you are using ? I like this car,never thought I would see one raked. Very cool.

Thanks!! :bouncy:

Any Torque Thrust 18" and above would need to be special ordered, but they will fit with no adapters (I forgot the bolt pattern, but it's on my list).

I went with 18x8 4.75" back space which also means I didn't have to modify the fender skirts. I chose this size after carefully examining the size and the clearance issues most guys were having with stock SS rims (17x8.5 5").

If you are going to do a rear disc brake mod, then 18x8 5" might be better and it shouldn't cause any clearance issues while running drums either. That extra 1/2" on the Impala wheel seems to be the cause of the clearance issues.

The rake comes from using 'stock Impala SS' springs.

I have most of my mods listed on page two, of my Cardomain link.

I'm laggin on getting some of it done, as work has taken priority.

But one day soon, page two will be updated!! I promise!!

Night Wolf
07-31-05, 06:07 PM
I personally hate to call the '93-'96 Fleetwood "last of the REAL Cadillacs" because, in my eyes... they aren't a REAL Cadillac, it is a Chevy Caprice frame with a Chevy engine, at least my '79 has a Cadillac engine... in that respect, my 1993 DeVille is far more of a "real" Cadillac, in that I don't know of any non-Cadillac that used the FWD C body, and the 4.9 is a Cadillac engine.

Still, the Fleetwoods are very nice, I like them alot.

N0DIH
07-31-05, 08:02 PM
98 Olds and Buick Electra ring a bell? They are "C" bodies too. The only body in GM's lineup that is dedicated Cadillac is the D body. All other GM divisions have had a flavor of all other cars. The Bonneville (FWD) and LeSebre are H Bodies, which the C is a stretched H starting in 1985.

1985 - 1993 C Body - Electra/98/Deville/FWD Fleetwood
1971-1976 B Body - Caprice/Impala/Bonneville/LeSebre/Delta 88/Catalina
1977-1996 B Body - Roadmaster/Caprice
1971-1976 C - Body - Olds 98/98 Regency and Buick Electra/Electra 225
1971-1996 D Body - Fleetwood/Brougam/Sedan Deville? 1977-1984?)
F Body was Chevy Camaro/Pontiac Firebird
Y Body was Corvette/XLR
K Body Seville (exclusive to Cad till the Aurora came alone in 1995ish) which really was an high class Mutant X body powered by an exclusive fuelie 350 Olds (first Cad to get non Cad power???)
E Body was Eldo/Toro/Rivera (Rivi from 1979-death, Toro/Olds designed platform and carried the Cad Eldo along for the ride from 68-death)
A/G Body was LeMans/Grand AM/Monte Carlo/Chevelle/Regal/Cutlass/Cutlass S/442/etc
And we will try ever so hard to forget the Cimmaron...
And so on and so on.

Although the Fleetwood/Broughams are only a stetched B Body, they are a unique body style that is, was and always has been exclusive to Cadillac. Although not always powered by Cadillac power (one would wonder why Cadillac didn't produce a big bore/stroke 4.9L to 5.7L or just modernize good stuff on the 368 and make it a LT1 style fuelie motor and keep the exclusivity stuff popular.

The Deville however has (always, except for the Olds diesel and an embarrassing run with a Buick 4.1L) at least from 85-up in FWD fashion, been powered exclusively by a exclusive Cadillac V8. It has always been the high tech car once it went FWD (I guess Cad reallized what was needed to sell cars on a FWD when it has always been RWD, marking blitz and convince people not to go to Lincoln), leading the edge for Cadillac, getting the good stuff until the Seville/Eldo started to take the lead in Cadillac Sales.

scourge
07-31-05, 11:24 PM
I personally hate to call the '93-'96 Fleetwood "last of the REAL Cadillacs" because, in my eyes... they aren't a REAL Cadillac, it is a Chevy Caprice frame with a Chevy engine, at least my '79 has a Cadillac engine...

Could be wrong, but I see this as a major reason in Caddy's image worldwide. Buicks were gussied up Chevys as pseudo-luxury for little blue haired old ladies who can't drive and Caddys were Chevy boats for people who would rather buy American in the hopes qualtiy was what it once was back in their youth even when it wasn't there.

There was no Oldsmobile, Buick, or Cadillac. It was different levels of Chevrolet. Nissan, Honda, and Toyota have been able to avoid this perception why GM seemed to push it...even today with all the rebadging of Chevy products.

Adam
08-01-05, 10:28 PM
There was no Oldsmobile, Buick, or Cadillac. It was different levels of Chevrolet. Nissan, Honda, and Toyota have been able to avoid this perception why GM seemed to push it...even today with all the rebadging of Chevy products.

do what? are you serious? because they shared the same frame makes it a Chevy? that cant be right. had a Chevy engine so it was a Chevy? i wish, that way parts and service would have been cheaper. they are all gm.

Adam
08-01-05, 10:31 PM
I personally hate to call the '93-'96 Fleetwood "last of the REAL Cadillacs" because, in my eyes... they aren't a REAL Cadillac, it is a Chevy Caprice frame with a Chevy engine, at least my '79 has a Cadillac engine... in that respect, my 1993 DeVille is far more of a "real" Cadillac, in that I don't know of any non-Cadillac that used the FWD C body, and the 4.9 is a Cadillac engine.

Still, the Fleetwoods are very nice, I like them alot.

you're joking right? please tell me you are joking. a big rwd Cadillac isnt a true Cadillac? with traditional styling and a tribute to all the years of Fleetwood/ Cadillac? the car that was called "The Cadillac of Cadillacs?"

scourge
08-01-05, 10:47 PM
do what? are you serious? because they shared the same frame makes it a Chevy?

Exactly

Same chassis
Same engine
Same electronics
Same everything that is important




they are all gm.

And Chevy is the image that GM puts forth the most. Every other marque is just along for the ride. Ever seen a Caddy make its way into other GM lines? No, but you've definitely seen Chevy's put into the Caddy line (Escalade).

Hey, perception is reality and GM made a hell-bent effort to Chevroletize every GM brand. If not, why does Saturn (a different kind of car company - :rolleyes2 ) have an Uplander, Pontiac have an Uplander, Buick have an Uplander and if Olds was still around, they too would have an Uplander.

Import brands made certain to avoid GM's dilution of brand.

N0DIH
08-02-05, 12:39 AM
I guess no one pays attention to the Lexus ES300 and the Toyota Camry, or the Honda Accord and the Acura clone and the Infinity and the Nissan Maxima.

They don't do anything different. Lexus Toyota, what's the difference? Ok, the Camry comes std with a 4 popper and the ES300 doesn't. Heck, they can't even come up with an original name, they have to copy Mercedes Benz on the naming convention.

Even Bentley and Rolls Royce share. Ok, BMW doesn't (and may be one of the few in the world that don't share much with any carline), but Mercedes Benz and ChryCo are rumored to start sharing in the very near future, if they aren't already on the new Charger/300 platform.

Dodge and Mitsubishi have been sharing for 25+ years now. Ford and Mazda for 25+ years. Thank GM for that rotary Mazda, GM designed it and sold it to Mazda in the early 70's/late 60's.

Or maybe Audi and VW. They have been sharing for a long time too.

The imports haven't done anything different than GM, Ford, ChryCo have ever done. The imports just didn't have the brands to do it with until later when Acura, Lexus and Infinity came out when they had to in the early 80's. No one can afford to design a whole new chassis/drivetrain when they are already sharing divisions. GM just did it before everyone. But check back a few years, look at a 70 Cadillac Deville, it doesn't share much with anyone. Just the trans maybe. Not much else.

The THM400 has made it into Ferrari's and Rolls Royce/Bentleys, and later the 4L80E. Everyone shares.....

Ford messed with some exclusive engines for Merc and Lincoln, but that didn't last long either (The FE engines were just plain fun weren' they??)

Night Wolf
08-02-05, 03:40 AM
you're joking right? please tell me you are joking. a big rwd Cadillac isnt a true Cadillac? with traditional styling and a tribute to all the years of Fleetwood/ Cadillac? the car that was called "The Cadillac of Cadillacs?"

I joke you not.

Night Wolf
08-02-05, 03:56 AM
In my eyes, the engine is the hart of the car.

Like with the CTS-V, it is very fast.... but I just don't feel right by saying it is such and such and that it proves how fast Cadillacs are... because it is a Chevy engine...

the Cimarion was the same way, except the otherway around... it had leather seats, and the wreath and crest on it... and a touring suspension... but it was a Caviler in all its glory.... same concept.

when I see a '93-'96 Fleetwood, I think they are great look and driving cars, classic American car style, full frame, RWD etc... but I just don't see them as a full Cadillac because of the engine... ah well... they are my thoughts on it... and to think that I sometimes wish I got a '95 Fleetwood instead of my '93 DeVille....

If you were restoring a 1967 GTO, would you use a 426 Hemi? no.... it is the same thing.... with a corporate, or non-correct (so to say) engine, at least in my eyes it dosn't feel right... back in the 50's and 60's, IMO some of the best years for cars, the engine was a very important part of the car, and you would never think about cross branding engines.

My '79 DeVille has a Cadillac engine, my mothers '89 Brougham has an Oldsmobile engine... besides the obvious power difference, it is hard to justify the '89 Brougham being slow, but reliable, runs good/bad etc.... because it is an Oldsmobile engine.... so by saying the "car runs good, but it's slow" are you saying that Cadillac as a whole is slow? or talking about the Oldsmobile engine, which was also used in Cutlas's and other cars? see... it kinda hard to explain...

atleast on luxury brands, my Oldsmobile has the 3800 V6, which is a Buick engine, but in my eyes, it dosn't matter one bit, although the 3800 is now a corporate GM engine... it is kinda different in that respect.

Ford/Lincoln/Mercury are different also, Ford has always corporatized their engines... and it works for them... 400 or 460 in a Lincoln as well as a F250? sure... works for me...

nothing like poping the hood on a $50k Acura and seeing the gool ol' boxed H right on the engine.... the same thing that you see on Civic's....

also it works well for other brands, because for the most part, they are just 2.... normal and luxury.... Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura, VW/Audi, Ford/Lincoln and so on, so enigne sharing is simple, yet works... but with GM having a bazillion different brands, it is different... I mean, would you want a Chevy V8 being offered in everything form Saturns to Cadillacs? and as far as Chrysler goes... they really don't have a luxury brand, unless you count MB, which I still have a hard time uniting the 2....

just my look on things

Adam
08-02-05, 11:40 AM
ok on that line of reasoning, my aunt had a heart transplant so they used a monkeys heart (i dont know wich species) to keep her alive. did tha mean she wasnt a true human? she had her own unique look, different from other people but she wasnt a real human. that is your line of reasoning is what it sounds. oh yeah, my aunt had that heart for a year and they found a human heart so they transplanted again.

just because it had a chevy engine does not make it a chevy. it is the look, the badge, and the interior that also make the car. yes i will admit that the early years of the escalade were the same as a denali but that didnt make it a denali did it. you two look at things all wrong. it has one or two things that share something with another vehicle and all of a sudden it isnt a true car.

scourge
08-03-05, 01:51 AM
I guess no one pays attention to the Lexus ES300 and the Toyota Camry, or the Honda Accord and the Acura clone and the Infinity and the Nissan Maxima.

You are correct because the Japanese luxury cars are far superior to their pedestrian clone (except the Maxima/I30) and are much fewer. GM rebadges nearly EVERY CAR they make as something else. GM has an entire division devoted to rebadging - GMC.

Perception is everything in this business and GM has been losing on this alone regardless of product.

N0DIH
08-03-05, 04:16 AM
GM has 76 different models. Last time I checked, I don't think every car company in Japan has 76 models combined.

I do agree GM has lost much identity, I feel it was when they consolidated engines. (anyone remember the fiasco in the 70's when Olds cars showed up with Chevy engines?) Back when Olds still had a 350 and 455 V8, and Pontiac had the 350/400/455 V8 and even had thier own killer 215hp 215 cid I6 (make that into a BMW killer today!), Buick had a 350 and a 455, and Cad had the 472 and 500 it gave them a lot more uniqueness. But when once 1977 hit and the new B/D body came in, and the RWD C body died, I think a lot of what made GM so unique was gone, Chevy engines came in almost everything (especially Olds B Body now). I think that was the beginning of the end. (yes, I know, the 77-up D body owners will probably flame me now....) But now almost everything was shared (accross B/D Body) except for the unique drivetrain for Cadillac (the "new" 7L 425 V8, THM400 was now exclusive to Cad in cars, and even a unique rear end that the rest of the B/D line didn't get). Now everyone shares, it doesn't matter who, there isn't any uniqueness anymore. I don't like crossbreeds, but if the factory did it, I am not changing it. (well, that Pontiac 455 in my basement with a custom intake and the LT1 computer sure is tempting!)

I always love consumer reports, (they claim unbiased, yeah, right, their own data proves that wrong) they show 2 cars, same chassis, whether it be GM, Ford, ChryCo, Toyota or Nissan and they will show different "quality" ratings on things like drivetrains and other common stuff. And we know there isn't anything different!
And if there is a real statistical difference, then the car manufactures should be hung out to dry for it, than means the plants capabilities are skewed.

I forget when (1974 and older??), but there was a time when Cadillac was by far more unique than any other GM car, they had their own engineering, manufacturing and engines. But that is a thing of the past.

In reality if any car company could afford to not share a platform with another within the company, they don't have bean counters working for them! The stockholders will demand it in profit expectations. and when they spend all that $$ designing a platform, why not share it across all cars they possibly can?

I feel that the quality levels are so close nowdays between any car company, there isn't really that much different in long term (ok, the jury is still out on ChryCo, when I see 2.7L 2002 Intrepids burning oil already, I see that the ring problems on the ChryCo/Mitsubishi 3.0L hasn't been fixed yet.... Even Ford has that one down pat!) GM and Ford aren't putting out the sloppy stuff they did in the past. I still would like to see changes, more focus at GM. If consomer reports would look at DPHU, Defects per hundred units, I am quite sure they would see a difference in the quality they perceve from GM or anyone else. The playing field would be leveled. In the case of GM, they make a boatload more cars than Toyota, Honda, Mitsu or Mazda. So if you see 10 defects on GM cars, might be only look like 1 on Toyota cars. But in reality, if GM makes 10x the cars, that defect level is the same. Or possibly less if they make more than that. (yes, I look at the statistical data when I can, there is too much to try to explain it here, go to http://www.isixsigma.com/sixsigma/six_sigma.asp if you want to learn more)

The Cadillac Deville shares the platform of the Seville now, the "real" Deville platform is even gone after 99. I am not sure now with the new 2005 STS, will the Deville borrow that platform too?

Much of what people don't understand is, each and every part number in any companies PDM systems costs $$. Typically around $1500 per part per year. That adds up to a lot. You have to source the part, qualify the part, maintain the part, PPAP the part, etc. It gets expensive in a hurry. Heck, one of the other reasons for commonality is it costs $$$$ to certify the emissions. So if you can certify an engine/trans combo with a certain gear, in a certain weight class, you can save $$ too. So reduction of parts helps the bottom line of the company.

I think GM needs to spin off some of the divisions, lighten the weight of the company, I think it is gotten too big. But, that is problematic too....

scourge
08-03-05, 01:16 PM
I see GM like the BORG on Star Trek...assimilate instead of innovate. SAAB needs to go because it has no place in GM with SATURN going European. GM should divest itself of Fuji Havy Industries (Subaru) now that it can develop AWD systems on its own. GM nearly killed Isuzu and now they have finally retaken control of their own destiny. FIAT has proven a disaster. Daewoo has also proven costly.

For outsiders looking into GM, what the need to do is so obvious:

GMC=Work trucks only
Chevrolet=meat & potatoes
Pontiac=sports car division
Buick=sports/luxury
Saturn=European style cars across a range
Cadillac=luxury...period
Hummer=will die soon enough as it is

Divest itself of its other holdings and focus on these core brands. Perhaps, cars can share floorpans and some parts, but each can develop things that make each brand unique.

For example, Buick is the only GM turbocharged near-luxury car. Pontiac has AWD V8/V10 monsters that easily take on BMW. Cadillac is once again the standard of the world that other companies chase and emulate. GMC is truly professional grade in their single focus line of work trucks. No more just being a Chevy clone. Saturn becomes what Oldsmobile was moving toward - become an affordable European inspired brand. Hummer will run its course especially with GM cheapening its image. What next, an H4 minitruck lowrider? :rolleyes2

'90 Eldo
08-03-05, 01:47 PM
I'm trying to remember why my Dad bought Cadillacs,given that there are many GM cars that would have been very close in design,almost every aspect. He was convinced for some reason,that Cadillac spent the extra money to make the car better. One thing comes to mind,and that is he said Cadillac engines are more thoroughly balanced than other GM engines,I think he thought that they just went the extra mile to produce a car that was smooth to drive,and of course luxurious to ride in. They were a marque that kept their market share satisfied until the mid seventies when US cars in general were transformed into whatever !!!!!

US cars have come a long way since then and I believe Cadillac weathered that period of time better than most,I am sure they look at a Chevy LT1 as a tried and proven platform why not use it in a limited edition model? They,for the most part, tried to design their own engines for the other models in the line. Like NODIH says the costs of keeping up with emission standards dictates certain avenues they will take in putting their cars in the marketplace.

I know there is a tremendous amount of design testing being done for all sorts of different co's. by Porsche at their Weissach facility,I'm sure they are all in collusion when it's all said and done,to some degree. I am so impressed with Cadillac and their racing efforts this is the kind of effort that leads to some new and exciting technology for the street cars of the near future,I think they are starting to kick some pretty well known butt out there and a lot of people are looking at Cadillac in a much different way now. I think it will be exciting to see where it goes,I know I sure like seeing them out there racing,I hope they do well.