What FWD car would you make RWD?
Discussion
unsprung said:
Puddenchucker said:
Alfa Romeo GTV 3.0 V6 and Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo.
GTiWILL said:
Fiat Barchetta.
I came here for these three. No-brainers, really. Might have been magical, back in the day.
That quite a few replies to this thread are about Fiats and Alfas goes to show how they really made a blunder in changing to front wheel drive to save a few bucks, and no doubt losing all of their rear-wheel drive IP in the process!
rodericb said:
Oh yeah - imagine a GTV6 with the Busso mounted longitudinally in the front and a transaxle. Even the twin spark would have been good.
That quite a few replies to this thread are about Fiats and Alfas goes to show how they really made a blunder in changing to front wheel drive to save a few bucks, and no doubt losing all of their rear-wheel drive IP in the process!
Such a shame that never happened but thankfully BMW made RWD Z4s with the N52 engine with similar power to the Busso, as well as Z4Ms with the S54 engine and loads more grunt!That quite a few replies to this thread are about Fiats and Alfas goes to show how they really made a blunder in changing to front wheel drive to save a few bucks, and no doubt losing all of their rear-wheel drive IP in the process!
A missed opportunity for the Italians though I think.
rodericb said:
unsprung said:
Puddenchucker said:
Alfa Romeo GTV 3.0 V6 and Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo.
GTiWILL said:
Fiat Barchetta.
I came here for these three. No-brainers, really. Might have been magical, back in the day.
Some say the Busso sounds different when mounted longitudinally.
That quite a few replies to this thread are about Fiats and Alfas goes to show how they really made a blunder in changing to front wheel drive to save a few bucks, and no doubt losing all of their rear-wheel drive IP in the process!
Phunk said:
( M100 Elan )
They did tests comparing FWD vs RWD and found that FWD was faster in the majority of situations. It
Which makes a great deal of sense, since "getting the tail out" or at least having to worry about keeping the back under control is actually anathematic to making progress on public roads.They did tests comparing FWD vs RWD and found that FWD was faster in the majority of situations. It
Edited by FA57REN on Tuesday 9th June 04:21
FA57REN said:
Phunk said:
( M100 Elan )
They did tests comparing FWD vs RWD and found that FWD was faster in the majority of situations. It
Which makes a great deal of sense, since "getting the tail out" or at least having to worry about keeping the back under control is actually anathematic to making progress on public roads.They did tests comparing FWD vs RWD and found that FWD was faster in the majority of situations. It
The Fwd chassis may have got around their test course faster than their Rwd test mules but reviews suggest it wasn't that much fun to drive, and the public obviously weren't that interested if you look at the sale figures. You might have noticed they went back to Rwd with the Elise, which sold much better.
The Alfas already mentioned are natural choices. I very nearly bought a 147GTA earlier this year which needed some love and I decided it wasn't worth it as I would've ended up spending a fortune putting it right and then upgrading it to the kind of spec where I could enjoy it. With RWD that would've been an entirely different decision. The thought of a transaxled 155GTA also makes me wibble.
Civic Type R's - either the first gen [sub 1 ton] or the EP3 [K20]. Vtec goodness in a rwd hot hatch, yes please. It'd have to be a no to the DC5 if 'everything stays the same' as it would still have a badly compromised rear end.
Clio 182, as that would mean my one [caged, sequential box] would be rwd and so i wouldn't be selling it. The trophy cars would be worth a fortune!
Civic Type R's - either the first gen [sub 1 ton] or the EP3 [K20]. Vtec goodness in a rwd hot hatch, yes please. It'd have to be a no to the DC5 if 'everything stays the same' as it would still have a badly compromised rear end.
Clio 182, as that would mean my one [caged, sequential box] would be rwd and so i wouldn't be selling it. The trophy cars would be worth a fortune!
shirt said:
The Alfas already mentioned are natural choices. I very nearly bought a 147GTA earlier this year which needed some love and I decided it wasn't worth it as I would've ended up spending a fortune putting it right and then upgrading it to the kind of spec where I could enjoy it. With RWD that would've been an entirely different decision. The thought of a transaxled 155GTA also makes me wibble.
Civic Type R's - either the first gen [sub 1 ton] or the EP3 [K20]. Vtec goodness in a rwd hot hatch, yes please. It'd have to be a no to the DC5 if 'everything stays the same' as it would still have a badly compromised rear end.
Clio 182, as that would mean my one [caged, sequential box] would be rwd and so i wouldn't be selling it. The trophy cars would be worth a fortune!
Now, I think they’d all be worse as RWD! Too short a wheelbase as they’re all small hatchbacks. You’d also have packaging restrictions. Imagine sitting in a FE/RWD Clio 182 with a north/south engine and a prop shaft running through a transmission tunnel to the back wheels? It just wouldn’t work in practice. Civic Type R's - either the first gen [sub 1 ton] or the EP3 [K20]. Vtec goodness in a rwd hot hatch, yes please. It'd have to be a no to the DC5 if 'everything stays the same' as it would still have a badly compromised rear end.
Clio 182, as that would mean my one [caged, sequential box] would be rwd and so i wouldn't be selling it. The trophy cars would be worth a fortune!
I’d say an Alfa 156 GTA is a good shout though...longer wheelbase than the 147GTA so less snappy at the limit, and the longer body would lend itself more suitably for packing that 3.2 Busso. It’d be like an N/A daddy to the Giulia.
GTiWILL said:
Now, I think they’d all be worse as RWD! Too short a wheelbase as they’re all small hatchbacks. You’d also have packaging restrictions. Imagine sitting in a FE/RWD Clio 182 with a north/south engine and a prop shaft running through a transmission tunnel to the back wheels? It just wouldn’t work in practice.
its a 'what if' thread, and the OP relieved us of the burden of practical engineering consideration by saying everything else stays the same, so i get the rwd fun of the v6 with the weight of the 182. swb rwd is exactly why i picked them, you're clearly not a rallying fan! my ideal DD hatchback would be a fiesta r5 but they're a tad spendy!
DrEMa said:
Peugeot 405 mi16
Well, you can thank those crazy Iranians - not the Mi16, but they’ve sorted the base car for you 
I give you the Paykan Peugeot RD squiggly writing special edition, complete with RWD
Although it may or may not be able to trace the rootes of its underpinnings to the Hillman Hunter...
Edited by Triumph Man on Tuesday 9th June 07:40
shirt said:
its a 'what if' thread, and the OP relieved us of the burden of practical engineering consideration by saying everything else stays the same, so i get the rwd fun of the v6 with the weight of the 182.
That's probably a good example, as the RWD Clio V6 wasn't considered a good handler compared to the 172 / 182 despite a better front:rear weight distribution.There's a general assumption here that RWD always produces better handling, which is incorrect. Put the same reasonably-competent driver in an S2000 and a Civic Type-R over a public backroad route and the Civic will win in point to point speed.
RWD was the default for so long because it was technically easier than FWD, not because of merit ( in the majority of cases ).
Triumph Man said:
DrEMa said:
Peugeot 405 mi16
Well, you can thank those crazy Iranians - not the Mi16, but they’ve sorted the base car for you I give you the Paykan Peugeot RD squiggly writing special edition, complete with RWD
Although it may or may not be able to trace the rootes of its underpinnings to the Hillman Hunter...
Edited by Triumph Man on Tuesday 9th June 07:40
shirt said:
GTiWILL said:
Now, I think they’d all be worse as RWD! Too short a wheelbase as they’re all small hatchbacks. You’d also have packaging restrictions. Imagine sitting in a FE/RWD Clio 182 with a north/south engine and a prop shaft running through a transmission tunnel to the back wheels? It just wouldn’t work in practice.
its a 'what if' thread, and the OP relieved us of the burden of practical engineering consideration by saying everything else stays the same, so i get the rwd fun of the v6 with the weight of the 182. swb rwd is exactly why i picked them, you're clearly not a rallying fan! my ideal DD hatchback would be a fiesta r5 but they're a tad spendy!
GTiWILL said:
I’m still not convinced. If everything else stayed the same, you’d have a transverse engined small hatchback with a lot of weight up front and power going to barely weighted rear tyres. Yes, it would be drifting nirvana, however in the real world it would be downright dangerous. One of the fundamental advantages of RWD is that the weight can be spread evenly across the car, 50/50. Take that away and RWD makes less of a case for itself!
The Sunbeam Lotus was an example of this arrangement. I've never driven one, although a former colleague had one in the oast and said it was great fun. MC Bodge said:
Are there any cars that people would prefer to be front wheel drive?
Most of the 1 series in all previous generations?The sort of people that usually bought them couldn't tell you which wheels were driven; as a result the entire fleet of 1 series was immobilised by inclement weather. Completely unnecessary as the majority of them were 2 litres or less of miserable diesel clatter.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff