FWD or RWD

[miata1.6]

WHAT HAVE I DONE???!!! well, I know that the more I do stupid stuff in a RWD car, the better I will be at controlling it, then the cooler I look when I show off in a 240SX after being destroyed by an integra. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[kman10587]

Originally Posted by Brian R.

If you define "better" any way you want, then of course you're right because you're defining the terms. That's not the only definition of better, so live with it.

I'm not defining the term "better", I'm defining the group of cars that it's applied to. If your talking about high-end luxury cars/sports cars, then RWD is better. If you're talking about economy cars and sport compacts, then FWD is better. Really, this isn't about proving that one is "better" than the other; it's about proving that they both have their practical applications, and to say that one is flat-out superior to the other is pretty closed-minded. Again, the only reason I claim FWD to be the winner is because that's what dominates the majority of the market.

Originally Posted by miata1.6

WHAT HAVE I DONE???!!! well, I know that the more I do stupid stuff in a RWD car, the better I will be at controlling it, then the cooler I look when I show off in a 240SX after being destroyed by an integra. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This is why I'm really scared that the whole drifting craze is going "mainstream". Just take it easy with the ass-slides

[Hofmeister]

What's popular has nothing to do with what's good. If everyone jumped off a bridge....

Food for Thought:

"If you tell an engineer to do the ultimate handling car, they will still want to do rear-wheel drive," Bob Lutz, Vice Chairman General Motors

"It's just better" referring to RWD in an interview with thecarconnection.com, Dieter Zetsche, CEO and President DaimlerChrysler

"Your car came with four wheels, why put the stress of steering, braking, and acceleration on only two of them?" , Karl Brauer, Edmunds.com

In regards to cost, here's what Jim Kerr of CanadianDriver.com had to say about the so called FWD cost advantage:

"While front wheel drive would appear to have won the cost battle, there is more to cost than just building the vehicle. There are long term costs. Vehicle down time, repair costs, customer satisfaction. These must all enter into the cost equation. When a mechanical problem develops in the driveline of a rear wheel drive vehicle, the labour it takes to remove and install components is usually much less because of easier mechanical access. Repair parts often cost less too. Have a transmission problem? It doesn't affect the final drive. Warranty costs are lower which translate into lower vehicle costs. Customer satisfaction with lower repair bills? Priceless!"

I could continue but I won't.

[kman10587]

I dunno, I've seen plenty of FWD Toyotas, Hondas, GMs, and many others last well over 200,000 miles with little to no reliability problems, so I don't think RWD would lower the long-term cost enough to make up for the additional initial cost. And I still think an understeering FWD vehicle is easier to regain control of than an oversteering RWD vehicle.

Really, I could care less if every vehicle produced from here on out was rear-wheel-drive, but it's not going to happen.

[drunken monkey]

if you have two cars with 250 bhp (or under) the potential abilities of the cars will be very close depending on how much work or money you are willing to put into it.

[zx2guy]

well miata 1.6... what have you learned? this is a very arguementitive subject, and these guys can go at it for eons, each thinking of point and counterpoint. (which is why im glad noone really decided argue on my points... not that would argue back... i wouldnt) but im sure its mostly your opinion. go out drive rwd, fwd, and awd and see what you think for yourself. on a personal level it depends on application, from the particular vehicle, to the conditions inwhich it will be driven. ( another point that can be argued til the end of time). but its merely my opinion. once you get done reading through all this, its worthless unless you have driven the cars... its second hand knowledge. so go out, con a dealer into thinking you are interested in a particular car, test drive it (alone so you can have fun... and test its extremes) then move on.

[kman10587]

Yeah, I can (and will) argue forever about which one is better, but bottom line, just drive what you like. Sure, AWD probably makes the least sense of the three, what with its high initial cost, high maintenance cost, increased drivetrain loss, and increased vehicular mass. And it's not like I ever see snow in Las Vegas. But I drive it anyways because I like sending power to all four wheels. There is more to life than making the most sensible choice; you've gotta have fun, too.

And hey, ironically, when thought of in that sense, RWD is better than FWD. See, it's all about perspective.

[Brian R.]

Locked

[Jimster]

Just for the record, whoever says FWD has no history, I would like to point you toward the Mini Cooper S, Monte Carlo 1969.


Have fun