|
I'm not defending the desire for rear-wheel drive, I'm just stating what I've seen. Because of the climate in which I live, I have a front-wheel drive car and when people ask my opinions about cars, I recommend front-wheel drive or all-wheel drive...unless they live in warmer climates.
Unlike the average car buyers, Americans (and, I must assume, Europeans) who buy BMWs, for the most part, know that their car is rear-wheel drive...or they like the handling properties associated with rear-wheel drive without actually knowing where it comes from.
Rear-wheel drive does have its benefits, especially when it comes to higher powered engines. It has been found that 300hp is about the limit for a front-wheel drive car to be managable. Rear-wheel drive has drawbacks in less than perfect road conditions.
A rear-wheel drive BMW-based Lancia would steal sales from the BMW brand.
Comparing Rover in 1993 to Lancia today is not a good comparison. While Rover cars were Honda based at the time, Rover had its own engines, plants, and vehicles (Land Rover, Mini) as well as a number of dormant brand names with some value. Lancia has Fiat engines, platforms, and plants. If someone were to buy Lancia, perhaps Fiat could sell a plant and, maybe, the Innocenti brand. How much do you think that would be worth? Would it provide enough money to Fiat? Would BMW see any benefit? Would it cost BMW more in the mid-term to earn its investment back? Would Lancia drag down BMW's profit margins?
With the revived Mini brand, wouldn't BMW more wisely invest its money in expanding the English brand rather than reviving an Italian brand that's already on life-support?
|