This car* started off as RWD, later it became FWD and then

much later it reverted back to rear wheel drive even though

it did well sales wise and performance wise with FWD.

What car am I talking about?

*model

Edited August 13, 200619 yr by Sixty8panther

Cadillac Seville

Cadillac Seville

The Seville never went back to RWD. The current model is the STS, not Seville.

Lincoln, maybe?

The Seville never went back to RWD. The current model is the STS, not Seville.

179651[/snapback]

Hey...I made a one minute guess.

Dodge Charger...and Chrysler 300.

Dodge Charger...and Chrysler 300.

179661[/snapback]

I actually also thought 300, but the way the question is phrased makes me think like...

RWD -----> FWD ---------------------------------------------------------> RWD

This car* started off as RWD, later it became FWD and then

much later it reverted back to rear wheel drive even though

it did well sales wise and performance wise with FWD.

What car am I talking about?

*model

179642[/snapback]

Dodge Charger...and Chrysler 300.

179661[/snapback]

This thing did well performance wise with FWD?

Charger 2.2

I helped my brother rebuild a DeTomaso model as his first car. It was an 'interesting' car, anyway...but nothing really was back in the early-to-mid 80s.

From info: Chrysler's goal was to create an economy car with sporty styling, different from the traditional "econobox". Chrysler originally intended this vehicle to have a motor modified by Maserati, but it never went through.

This just cannot be the car we're thinking about here...

Edited August 13, 200619 yr by ShadowDog

This is 68 posting from 2009.

the answer is the Impala obviously....

I first thought Eldorado for some reason...but that can't be right.

Thunderbird, maybe? I don't know at the moment.

I first thought Eldorado for some reason...but that can't be right.

Thunderbird, maybe? I don't know at the moment.

179807[/snapback]

Nope..Thunderbird never went FWD. The Cougar went FWD but hasn't come back (yet).

The Charger has had the most interesting path--started off as a RWD 2dr musclecar coupe, then morphed into a RWD 2dr personal luxury coupe (Cordoba twin), then a crummy FWD hatchback (Omni O24 variant), then returned from the dead as a RWD 4dr...

The Seville never went back to RWD. The current model is the STS, not Seville.

179651[/snapback]

Details, details..

Yeah, but the Seville had an STS model when it was FWD... and the RWD STS fits in the line in the same place as the FWD Seville did..

Yes of course Fly was right.

STS = SEVILLE touring sedan.

Key word: SEVILLE

Yes of course Fly was right.

STS = SEVILLE touring sedan.

Key word: SEVILLE

I hate to be picky, but there's no second-generation RWD Cadillac Seville. The current model is the STS and is not called Seville.

I believe that 300 and Charger fit your question much better. There isn't any question about the RWD 300 and Charger performance, and, in their day, the 300M and Omni-based Chargers had very good performance.

Why is Fly right and I am wrong?

I hate to be picky, but there's no second-generation RWD Cadillac Seville. The current model is the STS and is not called Seville.

180056[/snapback]

We can argue this until the cows come home but STS stood for

SEVILLE Touring Sedan since the car's 3rd gen. How is it that

suddenly the STS stands for nothing in your mind? Do you

think the Deville has been discontinued too since it's called the

DTS now?

STS = Seville anyway you slice it.

Is a Ford Shelby GT500 still a Mustang? Of Course.

Would you say an AMG E55 is still a Mercedes? I think so.

So how is a Seville Touring Sedan NOT a Seville?

I believe that 300 and Charger fit your question much better. There isn't any question about the RWD 300 and Charger performance, and, in their day, the 300M and Omni-based Chargers had very good performance.

180056[/snapback]

Continuous production? NO.

I think that's the key... the wording of the question eluded to a continuous

production run, not a couple long interruptions and a complete lack of any

flow or continuity.

Why is Fly right and I am wrong?

180056[/snapback]

It was a good answer that I did not think would be offered since

the Letter cars & Charger lack a continuous production run and

have completely shifted their layout/demographic in between

production runs. There was no 4dr Charger in the '60s, '70s &

'80s and there sure as heck is no such thing as a 2007 300C with

a two door hardtop body style like the original, not to mention a

convertible.

The Seville/STS has always been a 4dr sedan with compact or

midsize proportions and a European flair. The biggest shift was

the question at hand:

1976-1979 ---- Longitudinally mounted motor, RWD

1980-1985 ---- Longitudinally mounted motor, FWD

1986-1991 ---- Transverse mounted motor, FWD

1992-1997 ---- Transverse mounted motor, FWD

1998-2004 ---- Transverse mounted motor, FWD

2005-xxxx ---- Longitudinally mounted motor, RWD

Uh, Sixty, for the current generation of STS, the acronym actually stands for "S-Series Touring Sedan". Otherwise, the SRX would end up being classified as a Seville, which it certainly is not.

Uh, Sixty, for the current generation of STS, the acronym actually stands for "S-Series Touring Sedan". Otherwise, the SRX would end up being classified as a Seville, which it certainly is not.

180064[/snapback]

Whatever...it's just trivia to argue over...I think STS now stands for just 'STS'.

Yeah, though I appreciate 'winning,' STS is just...STS.

Maybe the SRX stands for S-series (which is what exactly? )

but as far as I'm concerned the STS is still a Seville. Even if some

moron at GM decided to call the next gen. the "S46" or whatever I

think we all know it's a Seville.

I guess if you wanted to agrue semantics you could say the Ford

"POLICE INTERCEPTOR" is not a Crown Vic. I suppose there's

no Crown Victoria emblems anywhere on it but in the end it's still

a Crown Victoria with a beefier suspension.

I guess if you wanted to agrue semantics you could say the Ford

"POLICE INTERCEPTOR" is not a Crown Vic. I suppose there's

no Crown Victoria emblems anywhere on it but in the end it's still

a Crown Victoria with a beefier suspension.

180101[/snapback]

The difference there is the lack of Crown Victoria badging. With the STS, Cadillac has made several announcements attesting to its 'S-Series' designation.

The new format doesn't make much sense, isn't coherent, and...doesn't make much sense, but its what it is.

We can argue this until the cows come home but STS stood for

SEVILLE Touring Sedan since the car's 3rd gen. How is it that

suddenly the STS stands for nothing in your mind? Do you

think the Deville has been discontinued too since it's called the

DTS now?

STS = Seville anyway you slice it.

Is a Ford Shelby GT500 still a Mustang? Of Course.

Would you say an AMG E55 is still a Mercedes? I think so.

So how is a Seville Touring Sedan NOT a Seville? 

Tell the story anyway you want to. Go to GM and THEY will tell you that there's no Seville anymore. Yes, STS originally stood for Seville Touring Sedan, but today it's simply STS...not an acronym.

Continuous production? NO.

Where did you ask for continuous production? There was no HINT of continuous production. You just said it was RWD then FWD then RWD...and both the Charger and 300 fit that bill.

But, it's your question. I've made mistakes like this in creating trivia as well.

Tell the story anyway you want to. Go to GM and THEY will tell you that there's no Seville anymore. Yes, STS originally stood for Seville Touring Sedan, but today it's simply STS...not an acronym.

180121[/snapback]

Exactly... and we all know what Seville stands for. Just because some

marketing whizz who climbed the corporate ladder from Nabisco &

Phizer and ended up at GM says STS does not stand for Seville T.S.

does not mean we all were brainwashed and forgot what it stood for.

Did you guys wake up one morning and say wow... what does STS

stand for now that it's RWD? Maybe "Sold To Seniors"?

But, it's your question. I've made mistakes like this in creating trivia as well.

180121[/snapback]

Too much info = you give away the answer. I thik the fact that the car

evolved into FWD and then back to FWD measn it was not out of

production. The F-body did not evolve into the 2009 Camaro, it was

killed & now will be resurected as the Camaro. Same with the Charger

it's gone through three differnet life cycles and had one substantial

interuption in production.

Either way Charger was a great, legitimate guess.

I think Charger would also have been an acceptable answer