- 652
- JUGGAFISH 718
Rear-drive auto fans take heart as Detroit reconsiders benefits
by Eric Peters
There's nothing quite like the ride and stability provided by a full-frame chassis and rear-wheel drive.
But to get it you have got to spend $30,000 or more - because with just two exceptions (the Ford Crown Victoria and its corporate twin, the Mercury Grand Marquis), the only large passenger sedans currently available with rear-wheel drive are luxury models like the Lincoln Town Car, Lexus GS300/400, Cadillac Catera, BMW 5 and 7-Series, Mercedes-Benz E- and S- classes, Jaguars, Rolls-Royce and Bentley.
GM may be about to return to its roots, however. Informal, off-the-record scuttlebutt gleaned from conversations with GM engineers reveals the corporation is investigating the feasibility of a rear-drive platform for a future midsize model - with a possible debut within the next two to five years.
Whether this sees the light of day is another matter, since GM has invested umpteen millions in tooling and R&D in its front-drive fleet of cars - and going back to rear drive means betting that market conditions will be similar five years from now.
Since the late 1980s, the Detroit automaker has converted just about its entire fleet (excepting minivans, trucks and sport utility vehicles) to front-wheel drive. This was done to compete more effectively with the imports - the majority of which have always been front-wheel drive - and to reduce weight and improve fuel efficiency to cope with federal fuel-efficiency requirements.
As of the 1998 model year, only the Cadillac Catera, Chevy Corvette and "F" cars (Firebird and Camaro) retain the once-traditional rear-drive configuration.
The Corvette, Camaro and Firebird are sporty two-doors with designs that would be difficult to transform into the basis for a passenger sedan. But the Catera is a midsize sedan (based on the Open Omega GM sells in Europe). It may be the starting point for GM's future rear-drive models.
Engineers and product planners at GM know that big is back - partly because gas is cheap and expected to remain so for the foreseeable future. That means the "downsized" front-wheel-drive cars that gained ascendance beginning in the 1980s are losing their luster as consumers opt for larger, heavier and more powerful cars.
While it is possible to build a full-size, front-drive car with good acceleration (as in the Buick Park Avenue Ultra and Cadillac Seville), handling suffers and it's difficult to create that "big car" ride esteemed by folks who like large cars.
Powerful front-drive cars have other unique problems as well.
For example, the supercharged V-6 drivetrains of the 1998 Park Avenue Ultra, Regal GS and Riviera are limited in their potential because of the relative weakness of the front-drive transaxles (a combination of the transmission and axle) currently available.
The same Buick-built 3.8-liter V-6 used in these models was offered in 275-horsepower form when it was installed in the rear-drive Regal Grand National of the 1980s (and also the GMC Cyclone/Typhoon and the 1989 20th Anniversary Trans Am.)
But power levels in the current crop of Buick/Pontiac/Oldsmobile models that feature this engine have never topped 240 horsepower because the transaxle won't stand the punishment.
It's true Cadillac has achieved high-output levels with a front-drive V-8 in the Seville and Eldorado - but these cars cost more than $40,000 or twice the price of a Ford V-8, rear-wheel-drive Crown Victoria.
Besides, even if the transaxle issue were resolved, front-drive cars are inherently less well-balanced because the weight of the powertrain (engine and transaxle) is all up front rather than distributed more equally from front to rear.
The downside to the rear-drive layout, if there is one, is more weight resulting from the additional components (irrelevant when gas is cheap) and a "tunnel" dividing the passenger compartment to make room for the driveshaft.
The advantages? Superior handling, no problems with "torque steer" (the loss of steering control when the front wheels break traction under hard acceleration), and a smoother, more luxurious ride (an inherent advantage of the rear-wheel-drive platform).
GM probably realizes it would be to the company's advantage to offer a build configuration typical of luxury cars on modestly priced, midsize machines. It would give the company an edge over its imported competitors.
In fact, rear-wheel drive is exactly what used to differentiate the "rice burners" from American cars. Even the cheapest economy models of the 1970s - Dodge Darts, Chevy Novas, Ford Fairmonts, etc. - had the kind of chassis (rear drive, with V-8 and large six-cylinder engines) that are today found almost exclusively on high-dollar sedans.
Dodge Darts and similar domestic models were rightly perceived as being more "solid" than the comparatively flimsy econ-cars of the day (Toyota Corollas, Datsun B210s, etc.) - even if they did use more gas.
As the domestics shifted to front-wheel drive to be competitive with the imports, they also lost much of their distinctive engineering characteristics. If GM returns to rear-wheel drive, it will be a signal that American car companies are heading back towards building American cars again.
Wouldn't that be grand?
by Eric Peters
There's nothing quite like the ride and stability provided by a full-frame chassis and rear-wheel drive.
But to get it you have got to spend $30,000 or more - because with just two exceptions (the Ford Crown Victoria and its corporate twin, the Mercury Grand Marquis), the only large passenger sedans currently available with rear-wheel drive are luxury models like the Lincoln Town Car, Lexus GS300/400, Cadillac Catera, BMW 5 and 7-Series, Mercedes-Benz E- and S- classes, Jaguars, Rolls-Royce and Bentley.
GM may be about to return to its roots, however. Informal, off-the-record scuttlebutt gleaned from conversations with GM engineers reveals the corporation is investigating the feasibility of a rear-drive platform for a future midsize model - with a possible debut within the next two to five years.
Whether this sees the light of day is another matter, since GM has invested umpteen millions in tooling and R&D in its front-drive fleet of cars - and going back to rear drive means betting that market conditions will be similar five years from now.
Since the late 1980s, the Detroit automaker has converted just about its entire fleet (excepting minivans, trucks and sport utility vehicles) to front-wheel drive. This was done to compete more effectively with the imports - the majority of which have always been front-wheel drive - and to reduce weight and improve fuel efficiency to cope with federal fuel-efficiency requirements.
As of the 1998 model year, only the Cadillac Catera, Chevy Corvette and "F" cars (Firebird and Camaro) retain the once-traditional rear-drive configuration.
The Corvette, Camaro and Firebird are sporty two-doors with designs that would be difficult to transform into the basis for a passenger sedan. But the Catera is a midsize sedan (based on the Open Omega GM sells in Europe). It may be the starting point for GM's future rear-drive models.
Engineers and product planners at GM know that big is back - partly because gas is cheap and expected to remain so for the foreseeable future. That means the "downsized" front-wheel-drive cars that gained ascendance beginning in the 1980s are losing their luster as consumers opt for larger, heavier and more powerful cars.
While it is possible to build a full-size, front-drive car with good acceleration (as in the Buick Park Avenue Ultra and Cadillac Seville), handling suffers and it's difficult to create that "big car" ride esteemed by folks who like large cars.
Powerful front-drive cars have other unique problems as well.
For example, the supercharged V-6 drivetrains of the 1998 Park Avenue Ultra, Regal GS and Riviera are limited in their potential because of the relative weakness of the front-drive transaxles (a combination of the transmission and axle) currently available.
The same Buick-built 3.8-liter V-6 used in these models was offered in 275-horsepower form when it was installed in the rear-drive Regal Grand National of the 1980s (and also the GMC Cyclone/Typhoon and the 1989 20th Anniversary Trans Am.)
But power levels in the current crop of Buick/Pontiac/Oldsmobile models that feature this engine have never topped 240 horsepower because the transaxle won't stand the punishment.
It's true Cadillac has achieved high-output levels with a front-drive V-8 in the Seville and Eldorado - but these cars cost more than $40,000 or twice the price of a Ford V-8, rear-wheel-drive Crown Victoria.
Besides, even if the transaxle issue were resolved, front-drive cars are inherently less well-balanced because the weight of the powertrain (engine and transaxle) is all up front rather than distributed more equally from front to rear.
The downside to the rear-drive layout, if there is one, is more weight resulting from the additional components (irrelevant when gas is cheap) and a "tunnel" dividing the passenger compartment to make room for the driveshaft.
The advantages? Superior handling, no problems with "torque steer" (the loss of steering control when the front wheels break traction under hard acceleration), and a smoother, more luxurious ride (an inherent advantage of the rear-wheel-drive platform).
GM probably realizes it would be to the company's advantage to offer a build configuration typical of luxury cars on modestly priced, midsize machines. It would give the company an edge over its imported competitors.
In fact, rear-wheel drive is exactly what used to differentiate the "rice burners" from American cars. Even the cheapest economy models of the 1970s - Dodge Darts, Chevy Novas, Ford Fairmonts, etc. - had the kind of chassis (rear drive, with V-8 and large six-cylinder engines) that are today found almost exclusively on high-dollar sedans.
Dodge Darts and similar domestic models were rightly perceived as being more "solid" than the comparatively flimsy econ-cars of the day (Toyota Corollas, Datsun B210s, etc.) - even if they did use more gas.
As the domestics shifted to front-wheel drive to be competitive with the imports, they also lost much of their distinctive engineering characteristics. If GM returns to rear-wheel drive, it will be a signal that American car companies are heading back towards building American cars again.
Wouldn't that be grand?
