Here's a question that I've been thinking about for a few years and I finally got around to asking it, why Front Wheel Drive? Is there a certian reason car manufacturers are making pretty much all of their cars FWD now? It can't be cheaper can it? there's more complex shift linkage, smaller funny shaped transmissions, CV joints, blah blah

My next car is going to be an 850 Turbo wagon so I'm not complaining, I just want to know if there was a reason why not too many cars besides trucks and stupid SUV's are RWD now, even though FWD cars handle a LOT better than they used to, in my opinion I prefer RWD.

What are your thoughts?
Andrew Woods
--
My 91 245

Why FWD?

Cheaper to manufacture and install during vehicle assembly. Period. An entire drivetrain can be assembled, packed in a container and shipped to the assembly plant where it will be uncrated and plugged into a chassis. Next. In the '80's, when manufacturers really started pushing FWD I recall the "High Performance Advantage" hype. Didn't buy it then, don't buy it now. See my first sentence. Not saying FWD cars aren't performance cars, just that they aren't better or worse than RWD.

Advantages of better traction in snow are correct in my experience but I have to ask why countries that deal with snow regularly had been building RWD cars for ages. Volvo, BMW, Volkswagen and Fiat come to mind.

Regarding your purchasing a 855t, DO IT! I bought my '95 a couple of weeks ago and LOVE IT! Knowing the car's maintenance history is critical. You'll find lot's of information here and at Ozbrick and Volvospeed but my opinion regarding the problems listers bring up here, while common to the model, probably represent a small percentage of the 850's out there. Think about it. If you loved your car and had no problems, would you look for a webforum just to tell others you're happy and motoring along? I never looked for a Nissan Sentra website just to say that in 186,000 miles all I had to do is put tires, brakes plugs and change oil in it. Sorry, I digress.

I stumbled across BrickBoard during the course of researching my purchase which took most of a year. No regrets. My lifters tap occasionally but other than that, the only issues I have with my 77,000 mile 855t are extremely minor. Loose mudflap, missing battery clamp, noisy headlamp wiper motor.

Happy Hunting!
Erwin in Memphis

Yes, cheaper to manufacture and install is another key element I neglected to mention (but it's not the end of the story, see my earlier post).

As to "performance" characteristics, the knock on FWD is handling: torque steer, unpredictable skid behavior, weight distribution, over/understeer which can make for squirrely curve tracking. Over time, I think FWD mechanics will progress to the point where they can be used in major performance venues, but right now, they aren't competitive with certain high-profile RWD classes.

As to driving in snow: I've never been stuck in snow in RWD, nor do I put snow tires on my RWD's. On the other hand, I have had many nasty experiences in winter with FWD because of their tendency to tunnel, snowplow, and fishnose. Yes FWD has advantages, but there are tradeoffs. Superior winter handling is an oversold myth dreamed up in a Mad Ave cubicle. Yet I have to say....I've had a very good experience with my S70 in winter driving. It probably helps that it's manufactured in a country that knows something about winter driving.

And I'm with you. Go for the 850.

--
(98 S70 T5SE misc mods, mostly lighting) (92 940GLE)

Originally, FWD was adopted to help the general driver conduct a car as well as to make the inside of the car larger for a given size of engine, as other have correctly pointed out.

The initial development of FWD engine-transmission packages then had to be amortised across the widest range of vehicles, which means that most are now FWD and the consumer expects FWD for predictable handling and "better cornering".

What the consumer also gets is terminal understeer and harder parking, since FWD has less lock capability.

However, I remember old RWD cars - some of you may be too young - and most of them were appalling driving vehicles, aided by narrow crossply tyres and cart springing.

All modern cars handle pretty well and some are superb, whether FWD, RWD or AWD - the last being the best, provided all the sums are done right and there's enough power to overcome all the extra moving iron.

Top Gear's Driver's Car this year is the Subaru Impreza WRX GTI - nuff said.

My curiosity is aroused by the new BMW AWD system, with drive power split 62% rear/28% front. A couple friends here with V70XC's have complained when the power shifts from front to rear on a slippery surface, the rear of the car can suddenly swing wide. They feel it's actually a little unpredictable on some of New England's twisty, hilly roads.

The Impreza in imprezzive, izn't it? Maybe Volvo will respond with a V50AWD in a rally package. (They already race the Focus in off-road rallies, and that's supposedly the platform for the next generation of 40/50's.)

>However, I remember old RWD cars - some of you may be too young - and most of them were appalling driving vehicles, aided by narrow crossply tyres and cart springing.

The hosts of the NPR show CarTalk suggested during the airing of "1912 House" (or whatever it was) that they sould make a sequel: "1952 Car."
--
(98 S70 T5SE misc mods, mostly lighting) (92 940GLE)

David,

the BMW Xi is 68/32, split...:)

As far as the rear of a XC swinging wide, I have seen that here but in all my ventures with any XC on any type of snow, I have never experienced that. Yes, the car's A$$ moved one or two inches but nothing like "wide"...

Yannis
--
2001 V70 T-5M SR, Classic Red/Graphite Lthr., ipd ME7 ECU Upgrade, K&N Air Filter, Cold Weather, Dolby Surr. Sound, Rear Spoiler, 17' 'Tethys' alloys

for the masses, fwd is easier to drive than rwd (imho) as there really isn't power inducing oversteer and understeer is inherent. torque steer is a big problem with high powered fwd (none obviously for rwd). about the only car manufacturer that has no torque steer whatsoever is cadillac, drove my father's 93 sts, probably because it's so heavy. (apparently alfa romeo has a good setup too, but i haven't tried it as they're not back in u.s. yet.) even though there is more inherently more weight up front on most production cars (exclude mid-engine), it's also true that when accelerating, the weight of car shifts to the back, so the front end lifts and u lose traction; hence some say u put 200lb bag of sand in the back of trunk of a rwd and also that rwd hardly ever get stuck or start slipping in snow/ice...my 850 went slipping up this slight incline on a sideroad in tahoe once. it was a stop sign and i stopped incorrectly near the top while it was still an incline...even had snow tires, tracs, and winter mode (3rd gear start), i still slipped backward...abs/tracs went off like crazy. in any case, you don't have to put the extra weight of drive-shafts in the back of the car and the rear suspension can be relatively simple...the camry (at least the 94 model) has a simple lower arm and two tiny links one in front of the arm and in the back of the arm. that's it.

I'm happy with the 850 as a car in general but still not happy with FWD for the reasons mentioned here. If you drive very slowly they are fine,in my estimation, but if you like to push a car a bit they are not very friendly.
Keep the fath all you RWD fanatics cause more manufacturers are going back to RWD with their performance cars. Having said that the best alternative would be the new AWD S60, except I don't buy new cars. I'll have to wait.

I had a feeling that fuel economy and emissions played a role in inplementing FWD into newer cars. It seems to me that there's a lot less heavy moving parts, driveshaft, larger transmission, and the rearend.

I still prefer taking my RWD 245 out in the snow over my mothers 99 Nissan altima. I feel that RWD is more predictable and easier to drive, but I've driven RWD cars a lot more..

I think that Volvo did a great job with their FWD cars, they drive very well and even when driving hard you kinda have to remind yourself you're in a FWD car.
--
My 91 245

Why indeed? You're quite right in your assessment that it has nothing to do with performance. The great performance cars are, after all, RWD.

The main reason goes back to the EPA fuel performance standards of the 70's and 80's. A transverse-mounted engine mounted above a direct drive transaxle weighs less. More importantly, it takes up less room. So you can make the front of the car smaller without sacrificing interior cabin space. Less sheet metal means less weight, hence better fuel efficiency. The notion that front wheel drive has better winter handling is urban myth dreamed up by a Madison Avenue copywriter in a cubicle.

I've had many a nightmarish winter ride in squirrely FWD cars, and have been stuck in snow in them a couple times. Never got stuck with my RWD 740's and 940's (not even on the 24-degree ice-covered incline with a 90-degree turn into my office parking lot). And I never put snow tires on them!

That said, Volvo's implementation of FWD is pretty damn good. (I'm skeptical of FWD, but I'm impressed by my S70. It's done well under demanding winter circumstances. Still, I wish they'd make a true performance car with RWD, or an RWD-weighted AWD system.)




--
(98 S70 T5SE misc mods, mostly lighting) (92 940GLE)

It helps in the snow since the weight of the engine is over the drive wheels.

Pete

helps in rain too

Andre Citroen pioneered the use of Front Wheel Drive in the 30's with his light fifteen sedan. I owned a 1955 version of this car (three speed manual with the gear shift coming out of the dashboard), the road holding of this car had to be experienced to be believed when compared with similar RWD family sedan's of that era. I followed the Light Fifteen with a Citroen DS19, again this car was so technically advanced, with its presserised brake system with just a brake button on the floor (later licensed to Rolls Royce for their Silver Shadow), Hydraulic suspension linked from wheel to wheel etc etc. Again front wheel drive.
The next vehicles to really market front wheel drive was the BMC mini designed by Alec Issigonis back in the early 60's, this was followed by the enormously succesful Mini Cooper and Mini Cooper S. BMC folowed the mini with larger FWD cars such as the 1100 and Princess 1300.
The basic reason for Front Wheel Drive (or as Andre Citroen called it "traction avant") was for greatly increased road holding ability and to give greater traction in adverse conditions (not the brainchild of some advertising executive, it does work), the additional advantage of a totally flat floor in the rear seems to have got lost on many modern FWD vehicles, the Citroens were totally flat in the rear providing comfortable seating for 3 accross.
In summary FWD is not a modern creation, it has been around for 60+ years and is very well proven.
John Scales (1996 850R)