The Cadillac Forums Lounge / Member IntroductionsOnly non-Cadillac discussion goes here. Cadillac discussions belong elsewhere. New members, please take a moment to introduce yourself.
While AWD would be great, the cost, weight, and power loss due to it would be a BIG negative.
This debate seems to keep showing up here, I think it's been in at least 2 or 3 threads that I can think of.
FWD, stock vs. stock will USUALLY outperform RWD in snow. That's a given. But the facts about the two platforms are this:
FWD was brought to market for one reason, manufacturing cost. That's the biggest single reason why there's so many of them out there. They're cheaper and easier to build for the OEM, that's it.
As for actually driving them, RWD has been, and will continue to be the choice of the performance crowd for several reasons. The drivetrain components are seperate and therefore are quicker and easier to modify. The weight distribution is much more balanced (easier to obtain that heavenly 50/50 ratio). Drag racing is MUCH easier with RWD due to the laws of physics dumping traction-giving weight TO the drive tires, as opposed to AWAY from them. As for road racing, generally RWD cars are the choice and WILL outperform FWD cars but, there ARE some VERY good FWD cars that manage to post some very respectable track times.
Overall, the BEST road track car would probably be an AWD one though.
Bottom line, as I've said a million times before, FWD is a great, economical package that can GENERALLY compete with RWD cars in 80% of normal driving, and maybe 50% of performance driving. But that's it.
AWD is great for launching, traction is great especially in a severe weather but it is more expensive, it generally understeers in the corners, and more power loss through powertrain which equates to less top speed and such.
Originally posted by HotRodSaint Then why is it an advatage to drag race an RWD car? Even the import guys convert FWD to RWD.
Well, the answer is weight transfer. When you launch a car, much of the weight is transferred to the rear tires.
Is this a problem on the street? Very rarely. Even my Seville, with 300 lb*ft of torque, scoots right along with FWD. Modulate the power with the gas pedal and you're good to go. Most high performance rear wheel drive cars can overwhelm the drive tires, even with the weight transfer, so you still have to modulate the throttle.
Please list some functional advantages to RWD on the street. Remember, we're talking about average drivers here, not NASCAR or top fuel dragsters. I believe you'll find that most people live better with FWD than with RWD, which is why many manufacturers offer FWD cars. Some like Mercedes and BMW keep the performance aspect of RWD in their cars. Some like Volvo realize the drawbacks of RWD in winter weather and have switched to FWD long ago (with the 850 series I think back in the early 90s).
Having said all that, I prefer the driving feel of RWD cars. I grew up on RWD cars and they just "feel better" to me. I can tell when I'm driving FWD vs. RWD. Does that mean FWD doesn't have many advantages over RWD? Nah. There are many many reasons to make an arguement for FWD and besides the "feel good" factor, I can't think of many reasons I'd rather have RWD.
I continue to enjoy this discussion. If we turn it into a flame war, we don't do anyone any good, but cooperative discussion like this can lead to a lot of learning for everybody.
Originally posted by Katshot
Bottom line, as I've said a million times before, FWD is a great, economical package that can GENERALLY compete with RWD cars in 80% of normal driving, and maybe 50% of performance driving. But that's it.
Kevin, good points. I like the last one. I'd argue, though, that FWD cars meet or exceed the capabilities of RWD cars in normal driving (on the street, in the rain/snow, etc.) When you start talking about road courses, then you're right, RWD has weight distribution advantages. But in normal driving, many manufacturers have produced FWD vehicles that at least as capable as RWD vehicles.
Originally posted by Katshot FWD was brought to market for one reason, manufacturing cost. That's the biggest single reason why there's so many of them out there. They're cheaper and easier to build for the OEM, that's it.
Great post.
I'd add packaging as another reason why there are so many out there. The drive shaft is kinda hard to design around.
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.
If normal driving is purley traveling from point A to point B, then the majority of people could probably live with 3 cylinder FWD car's for their normal driving.
Edit: Kevin got to the normal thing before I did. lol
Kevin, RWD doesn't mean body-on-frame. That's a whole 'NOTHER discussion! RWD can mean Infinity G35, which is a uni-body chassis, and prone to other characteristics as a FWD uni-body vehicle.
Normal driving includes spirited driving. When I say "normal", I mean not towing a 35' travel trailer, not running 12-second quarter miles, not swapping automatic trannies for manuals, etc. I consider normal driving anything my wife would do, for instance, which includes driving very very fast. Performance sedans don't have to be RWD to be safe and efficient. Many times, RWD cars are the most dangerous and inefficient out there (Fox body Mustang for example).
I do agree with you on the full-frame vs. uni-body discussion. I like full frames. I like the isolation. I feel less of the road in my '95 Nissan Hardbody than in the Cadillac! But then again, buyers today want to be "connected to the road", and I speculate that's why there are so many uni-bodies out there. Also, in frontal crashes, a uni-body has engineered crumple zones to dissipate the energy of the crash. A full-frame car does not have this, and transfers much of the energy of the crash straight to the vehicle occupants. There are certainly pros and cons to both designs!
BTW, I'm not a "proponent" of FWD. I'm just trying to lay all the facts out on the table for the discussion. Highlighting advantages of FWD doesn't make me a fan of it. Read above...I generally prefer RWD. That doesn't eliminate the functional advantages of FWD, which afterall, is what this post started about -- why are cars FWD in the first place.
Originally posted by Katshot 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.
I don't think that RWD car's are body on frame anymore. Other than the Mustang (which will change), and maybe some car's produced for use outside the US, most are now uni-body just like the FWD car's.
Originally posted by jadcock But then again, buyers today want to be "connected to the road", and I speculate that's why there are so many uni-bodies out there.
Actually, like FWD, uni-body came about because of cost and packaging advantages.
RWD can mean Infinity G35, which is a uni-body chassis, and prone to other characteristics as a FWD uni-body vehicle.
