How come more expensive cars are RWD?
11-04-07, 03:03 PM
#16
Lexus Fanatic
You are correct, though, that for most driving, for most drivers, FWD is a better choice, especially on wet and slippery roads. RWD, as mentioned before, has better weight distribution for handling, braking, and strong acceleration where the car's center of gravity shifts back towards the rear wheels....and it produces more even wear on all four tires because the two front tires don't have to steer, power, and take as much of a front-end-bias while braking....all at the same time.
RWD also has the advantage of much simpler brake jobs up front....on FWD cars, you sometimes have to drop both front driveshafts and swing the two front struts (if equipped) aside to take off the rotors....that, of course, means having to re-align the front suspension once you get it all back together...it can be a mess.
It is true, though, that most of the cheapest vehicles available in the American market are FWD (Kia Rio, Hyundai Accent, Scion xA, Toyota Yaris, etc....), but that is not necessarily a cost issue.....that is primarily for space efficiency in these very small vehicles, where every cubic foot has to be used as efficiently as possible. Yet a few manufacturers.....primarily Subaru and Suzuki......have managed to produced small AWD vehicles almost as cheap as FWD or RWD. AWD Imprezas, for example, now start under 17K, and the AWD Suzuki SX-4 (with a 2WD/AWD/AWD Lock switch to boot) starts at 15-16K.
Last edited by mmarshall; 11-04-07 at 03:10 PM.
11-05-07, 09:16 PM
#18
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MD
Posts: 1,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leedog while what Honda does with FWD is commendable, Acura is not even a true luxury brand. THe question is why are luxury brands RWD. It begins with the1920s as racing became big and these applications were used for roadcars.
Fast Forward to today and 95% of luxury cars over $30,000 are RWD or AWD. RWD is the purists and most luxurious application with AWD gaining speed among buyers for safety.
FWD is there for two main reasons.
1. CHeap to build
2. Packaging efficiency
RR, Bentley, Maybach= RWD. Nuff said!
Fast Forward to today and 95% of luxury cars over $30,000 are RWD or AWD. RWD is the purists and most luxurious application with AWD gaining speed among buyers for safety.
FWD is there for two main reasons.
1. CHeap to build
2. Packaging efficiency
RR, Bentley, Maybach= RWD. Nuff said!
AWD sure is gaining traction (no pun intended) in the luxury market. Not a huge fan, personally.
11-06-07, 11:46 AM
#19
Lexus Fanatic
That, and the fact that with RWD, you generally have a longitudional rather than transverse engine layout...that takes up additional space that would otherwise go in the cabin. You also have less room in the trunk with RWD because you have to leave more room underneath for the rear differential.
11-06-07, 08:14 PM
#20
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SD
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-06-07, 08:53 PM
#21
I got both:
Acura legend=FWD
MB C230SS=RWD
My Acura is harder to turn. My MB is easy to turn and handle. In wet conditions I prefer the FWD. Here's my 2 cents... when engine power and overal size of the car gets big it's better in RWD because if it was FWD, front wheels are under alot more stress if it was RWD. If power and size is relatively small there's no need for RWD drivetrain as front wheels can handle the stress. God I hate torque steer. Makes the car feel cheap
Acura legend=FWD
MB C230SS=RWD
My Acura is harder to turn. My MB is easy to turn and handle. In wet conditions I prefer the FWD. Here's my 2 cents... when engine power and overal size of the car gets big it's better in RWD because if it was FWD, front wheels are under alot more stress if it was RWD. If power and size is relatively small there's no need for RWD drivetrain as front wheels can handle the stress. God I hate torque steer. Makes the car feel cheap
11-06-07, 09:46 PM
#22
11-07-07, 09:22 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
11-07-07, 09:31 AM
#24
Lexus Test Driver
the Continental GT and Flying Spur are both AWD.
However, the Arnage, Azure, and Brooklands models are all RWD.
and FYI, the TL, G35, I350 comparison was rather interesting because the TL was equipped with an LSD.
11-08-07, 03:11 PM
#26
Lexus Fanatic
No, not necessarily true. See my earlier post on this subject....I'll repeat it here:
I'm not sure I agree FWD is cheaper to produce. Many factors, of course, are involved in the cost of a drivetrain, including engine and transmission complexity, materials used, ease of assembly, etc....
FWD layouts usually have transversely-mounted engine/transaxle assemblies, which means that extra gears are needed to route the power back around through the final-drive unit/differential 180 degrees to the front driveshafts. And then, unlike RWD vehicles, both front wheels have to have CV (Constant-Velocity) joints that allow the wheels to turn left and right while power is being fed to them. These CV joints have a lot of stresses on them and have to be made of very durable materials. In addition, the steering system itself has to fit in and be integrated with the front driveshafts, as do the brake rotors.
So, while you don't have the long driveshafts and big heavy rear differential (and rear driveshaft universal joints if it is not a live axle) of a typical RWD layout, FWD is not necesarily easier or cheaper to produce.
FWD layouts usually have transversely-mounted engine/transaxle assemblies, which means that extra gears are needed to route the power back around through the final-drive unit/differential 180 degrees to the front driveshafts. And then, unlike RWD vehicles, both front wheels have to have CV (Constant-Velocity) joints that allow the wheels to turn left and right while power is being fed to them. These CV joints have a lot of stresses on them and have to be made of very durable materials. In addition, the steering system itself has to fit in and be integrated with the front driveshafts, as do the brake rotors.
So, while you don't have the long driveshafts and big heavy rear differential (and rear driveshaft universal joints if it is not a live axle) of a typical RWD layout, FWD is not necesarily easier or cheaper to produce.
11-08-07, 03:17 PM
#27
Lead Lap
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: VI
Posts: 517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not necessarily, sure. there are exceptions to nearly everything.
but if you wanted to mass produce a car for as little as possible, fwd would be the way to go.
...or are you disagreeing with that?
but if you wanted to mass produce a car for as little as possible, fwd would be the way to go.
...or are you disagreeing with that?
11-08-07, 03:38 PM
#28
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Individual component costs are often not the determiner of lower cost in the total vehicle cost differential between FWD and RWD. The assembly process is much more straightforward with FWD and often much of the entire drivetrain is preassembled as a unit and simply bolted into the car. The rear axle in a FWD car is straightforward and does not require any precision in assembly alignment to the drivetrain because it isn't connected. These and other factors contribute to the lower costs of FWD.
One final point, the hump in the floor is often a lot less in a FWD car but many times it isn't gone because the exhaust pipe is tucked up into there.
One final point, the hump in the floor is often a lot less in a FWD car but many times it isn't gone because the exhaust pipe is tucked up into there.
11-08-07, 03:43 PM
#30
Lexus Fanatic
But FWD's space efficiency does not necessarily mean lower cost of production......See my previous posts for details.