I think so, they sold far more cars with Fwd in the 70s and 80s to cut costs. Now everything under 30,000 with 4 doors is Front wheel drive.

Down with front wheel drive!

CIMA

Three points.

1. The Americans, GM in particular, were leaders in FWD.

2. FWD isn't bad, it serves it's purpose for those that buy it.

3. You shouldn't have a Rear Wheel Drive mafia sig with a Fusion in it.

Edited October 1, 200619 yr by Oldsmoboi

Three points.

1. The Americans, GM in particular, were leaders in FWD.

2. FWD isn't bad, it serves it's purpose for those that buy it.

3. You shouldn't have a Rear Wheel Drive mafia sig with a Fusion in it.

199898[/snapback]

Couldn't have said it better.

Edited October 1, 200619 yr by corvette_dude729

Know what this car is, cimastain?

What Car Is This?!

From... Captainbooyah ... RWD Mafia Member ...

If you are going to blame people, lets make a list:

The Germans with thier DKW F1

The French with their Traction Avant

The Americans with their Cord Automobiles.

The list goes on. To conclude, the Japanese didn't invent FWD.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to find things wrong with the imports, but lets make sure that they are real hard-core facts we're dealing with. Thanks :]

Wow... this guy is so innocent... so... naive... so... "pure" ...

I think WPBHarry has just found a new friend in cimastain :AH-HA_wink:

3. You shouldn't have a Rear Wheel Drive mafia sig with a Fusion in it.

199898[/snapback]

yes I should

Some other cars responsible for front wheel drive in Sweeden, France, and England.

Who sells more Fwd cars NOW tho as a % of their lineup?

Hon-duh.

Ironic that you're anti FWD attitude contradicts with your sig featuring "Rear Drive Mafia" and a FWD Fusion

Who sells more Fwd cars NOW tho as a % of their lineup?

Hon-duh.

199952[/snapback]

Citreon and Mini are 100% FWD and Saab will be once again when the 9-7 ends production.

Citreon and Mini are 100% FWD and Saab will be once again when the 9-7 ends production.

199987[/snapback]

Until the Kappa based roaster and 2+2 coupe arrive

Greatest percentage of FWD, Citroen and MINI.

Greatest volume of FWD, General Motors.

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US. They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s..

Not that there is anything fundamentally bad about FWD, it's just that GM did it so badly in the '80s, IMHO..

In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

Edited October 1, 200619 yr by moltar

I'd argue the first N-bodies were not dull nor mediocre. Much thought and planning went into the engineering of those cars from what I read and certain iterations, like the Calais 442, were very, very impressive for their day. I believe that Oldsmobile's Quad4 put out 190hp in the late 1980s.

The FWD A-bodies themselves are very much cars - doors, windows, engines, and that's it. However, they're rather strong and durable and you'd be hard-pressed to find one you cannot get running. They were still infinitely dull.

I'd argue that GM got it right in the 1990s, manufacturing some excellent FWD cars, especially the G-bodies, probably the epitome of front-wheel drive.

Greatest percentage of FWD, Citroen and MINI.

Greatest volume of FWD, General Motors.

200023[/snapback]

Greatest builders of FWD, General Motors.

Who else can get 300hp to the front wheels reasonably well?

Such is true. Compare the torque steer from a 275hp, 300lb-ft DeVille or a 260hp, 280lb-ft GTP to that of a 240hp Altima.

I'd argue the first N-bodies were not dull nor mediocre. Much thought and planning went into the engineering of those cars from what I read and certain iterations, like the Calais 442, were very, very impressive for their day. I believe that Oldsmobile's Quad4 put out 190hp in the late 1980s.

The FWD A-bodies themselves are very much cars - doors, windows, engines, and that's it. However, they're rather strong and durable and you'd be hard-pressed to find one you cannot get running. They were still infinitely dull.

I'd argue that GM got it right in the 1990s, manufacturing some excellent FWD cars, especially the G-bodies, probably the epitome of front-wheel drive.

200029[/snapback]

and even the J-bodies, while we laugh at them today, weren't as terrible back then as we make them out to be. I see more '80 Cavaliers on the road today than '80 Civics.

the cavs really arent bad cars at all. crude? maybe....at times but fine transportation and from my experiences very reliable. one in particular i recall too some severe abuse and kept ticking easily past 100k. the seats definately do suck though.

as far as fwd, one of the most striking or memorable moments for for me

was 48 hrs w/ nick nolte/eddie murphy. there a scene with noltes caddy ? peeling out and the front tires spinning and smoking like no tomorrow and it just went.

perfectly executed.

the drive by wire sysyems and general lack of torque steer in the pontiacs, esp for me, are truly un invasive... obviously not the same as rwd but certainly liveable.

FWD sucks a$$, very true... most Japanese cars suck, also true.

But Japan is no more responsible for FWD than GM. There were

plenty of RWD cars from Japan when GM was going mental over

every god damn car haivng to be FWD in the early to mid 1980s.

Thank the J-body, E-body, W-body, N-body... and many other

GM, Mopar & Ford cars for bringing us mass FWD. I will agree

that moreso than the Americans Japanese cars with RWD tend

to be less obtainable.

The Japanese mentality of RWD is either you pay $40,000 for a

Lexus or Infiniti or you can go f&ck yourself in a FWD HonDUH.

If you're going to point a finger, yeah, point it at the Japanese automakers. But not because they had front-drive cars before Detroit did, no. Detriot just wanted to have an advantage over Japan and show they were commited to putting new technology into cars and moving to the future. Too bad it eventually just gave the enthusiast the finger.

my take is Iococca and Chrylser really sold America on FWD by starting with the Omni and Horizon and then with the K car and original Caravan. The Citation was very influential also as well as the Ciera / 6000 / Century.

FWD = more efficient packaging / cheaper / more traction. All in all there's nothing to bitch about.

if you are going to complain, complain that GM etc. didn't update their cutlasses and reagls etc. fast enough. Why? Folks wanted the FWD?

Edited October 2, 200619 yr by regfootball

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

200239[/snapback]

But aside from the Hondas, how many of those cars were actually popular? Like, what the hell is a Strada, if you catch my drift.

FWD has it's place just as much as RWD and AWD have their places.

fiat stradas were awful, horrible quality cars that pounded more than a few nails in fiat's U.S.-market coffin, but they were around; I remember seeing them. Lots of renaults also- wasn't it the first Car of the Year as an import (or was it another renault?)? Then there was this little FWD thing you may have heard of- the VW rabbit..... and the hondas... and the datsuns.... and toyota made a terrific stink over the tercel.... most all of these were far from niche or limited production.

Point being: there were numerous affordable FWD choices from the import column, whereas there was only 1 affordable offering from the domestics and a trio of high ticket luxury coupes. It's clear that the 'inspiration' for mass mainstream FWD came from the imports, not the domestics.

Then the domestics thought they would capitalize on it and went hell bent for FWD.

i saw a magazine advertisement from subaru from the late seventies and was basically bitching toyota out and listing all their shortcomings and all of subarus finer points... one of which was fwd. it was definately perceived as the way to go

for a long long time and still is.

good luck undrilling that message.

good luck undrilling that message.

200347[/snapback]

Exactly. Even today, you hear about mass-market rear-wheel drive cars alleviating safety and handling concerns with reviews saying, "With modern traction and stability control, the ____ is just as surefooted as a front-wheel drive car."

Well, by logic, doesn't that make a front-wheel drive car with TC and Stabilitrak even safer? If nothing else, that's how it looks.

I know from my point of view, I could care less. Drivetrain configuration is very low on my list of 'must haves', probably ranking somewhere with rear hip room or how the trunk lining feels. Most people don't do that sort of driving to really feel the difference between the two; but people do want a confident, well-handling car of either configuration.

For those of us who lived through the gas spikes of the late '70s/early '80s, it was a scary, scary time. My dad had a '76 LTD and it went from $15 to $30 to fill it up in no time.

Anyone who has ever driven ANY RWD, automatic sedan from the late '70s will know what I am talking about: anemic power, questionable reliability, awful gas mileage. Terrible combination.

Then there was the piling on of federal emissions/crash standards. Remember the early generation hydraulic bumpers? Talk about rust and weight problems!

FWD seemed like the only answer, before electronics and high energy ignition systems saved the day. The thought of 140 hp. V-8s is laughable today, but not 35 years ago.

Cars shrank. Lower carbon steel was used. Rust was an epidemic. The original K-car was the epitome of small car/great interior space, which is why it saved Chrysler.

We can all look down our noses at the early to mid-80s Big Three offerings, but they were all products of more desperate times. Europe and Japan, used to high gas prices and shortages, were ready with zippy, small manual shift 4 cylinder econoboxes. Detroit was not.

I undersand the physical properties of RWD and the joy of driving, but for the average driver, FWD is the better way to go for sure: weight savings, compactness of design, relative safety in adverse driving conditions, etc. The recent popularity that RWD is enjoying will be short lived, I am certain.

$100 a barrel will make the Aveo and Fit look very attractive.

Exactly. Even today, you hear about mass-market rear-wheel drive cars alleviating safety and handling concerns with reviews saying, "With modern traction and stability control, the ____ is just as surefooted as a front-wheel drive car."

Well, by logic, doesn't that make a front-wheel drive car with TC and Stabilitrak even safer? If nothing else, that's how it looks.

I know from my point of view, I could care less. Drivetrain configuration is very low on my list of 'must haves', probably ranking somewhere with rear hip room or how the trunk lining feels. Most people don't do that sort of driving to really feel the difference between the two; but people do want a confident, well-handling car of either configuration.

200356[/snapback]

And a good gearbox

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

200239[/snapback]

GM made FWD in mass volume in the '80s... of those '70s models, only the Rabbit, Omni/Horizon and Civic had any volume in US....

Oh go cry a river. The Toyota Corolla was RWD until 1983! So, no can't 'blame' them.

And not everyone who drives is looking to drag race or 'zoom through the twisties'.

GM is to blame if anything, and even then, only die hard primer paint mobile drivers still whine about it.

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

200239[/snapback]

Which, if any, of those listed sold in the numbers comparible to the J-Bodies or X-bodies?

GM made FWD in mass volume in the '80s... of those '70s models, only the Rabbit, Omni/Horizon and Civic had any volume in US....

In my area in the 1970s, the Audi 100 and Fox, Subaru, Volkswagen Sciracco, and Saab 99/900s were popular.

In my area in the 1970s, the Audi 100 and Fox, Subaru, Volkswagen Sciracco, and Saab 99/900s were popular.

200421[/snapback]

Vermont?

Vermont?

Oddly enough, Pennsylvania.

low cost of production for FWD will keep them around forever. It's all a marketing scam about how it's better control. I don't know how anything can be good for you if the torque steer pulls you into the incoming lane.

...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s..

200024[/snapback]

It's all a marketing scam about how it's better control.

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

low cost of production for FWD will keep them around forever.  It's all a marketing scam about how it's better control.  I don't know how anything can be good for you if the torque steer pulls you into the incoming lane.

200508[/snapback]

oh yeah, because that would explain the complete death of the RWD market from November to April in areas like mine (snow).

Oddly enough, Pennsylvania.

200467[/snapback]

Ah, Bucks County then....

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions when idiots are at the wheel.

200521[/snapback]

Fixed.

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

200521[/snapback]

Biggest misconception of all 'effin time. Absolutely 100% WRONG!

BTW: how many RWD cars have you owned?

Let's not and say we did.

Ah, Bucks County then....

Actually FAR more rural.

Biggest misconception of all 'effin time. Absolutely 100% WRONG!

BTW: how many RWD cars have you owned?

200592[/snapback]

What part, FWD being more idiot-proof or FWD usually being better in bad weather?

...............

Like who cares !

Balthazars and Hudsons first posts were very accurate

This is how it went for the comming of popularity, in the NE

In the very snowy 60 & 70's FWD Saabs really made people look as they went flying by

Lancia Beta (Fiat) people try to claim credit for the transverse mounted engine, transaxle, McPearson strut type setup that became so common place, not sure how accurate it is, but the Italians did have a huge influence in Japan with their small cars. OHC, DOHC, FWD ect. Lancia Betas were not common place here in the US so had little impact unless there is truth about their influence on Japan.

Honda Civic came pretty early and did well, Civic CVCC was my first FWD, made all RWD cars look silly in the winter. It was however not a very good car, but I was not very good for a car at that time in my life either.

VW Rabbit blew them all out of the water but was pricy compared to a Civic

So between

Saab/Scandanavian

VW/German

and

Honda/Japanese

we had real economical cars that would get us anywhere we needed to go, trouble free in the late 70's and 80's

In 85/86 Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac proved with the C/H body that you could have size, power, luxury and economy in a sweet looking FWD car

now go cry a river someplace that needs rain, like............Iraq.........

Which, if any, of those listed sold in the numbers comparible to the J-Bodies or X-bodies?

I don't have figures handy and I cannot seem to find them online anywhere. VW's Rabbit/Golf has handily outsold the Beetle --the previous historical volume leader-- to the tune of something like 22 million by 1998, but again; I cannot find any hard numbers. Rabbits sold like crazy on Gary Busey in the '70s and '80s; they were everywhere. Which way would you care to spin the stats: higher percentage of FWD within each brand? Higher percentage of marketshare? Higher straight volumes in a given year?? We can twiddle these a dozen ways, no doubt.

Again, IMHO volume is not the question at hand- the initial inspiration/push is. And that push came to the U.S. market primarily in big barges from across the pond(s).

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

200521[/snapback]

Is that what the rest of your friends tell you on Temple of VTEC?