E.g. CTR
Another Sedan Bites the Dust
- Thread starter Nick1994
- Start date
- Status
Nick1994
$100 site donor 2024
It lives it’s life at 80mph+
If they sold the TRD models back then, she probably would have bought it.
My mom’s FWD V6 200 does awesome 1 tire fires.
Sure once every 180k miles? A lot of RWD car has engines or transmissions or other nonsense that don't last even then. It is also only like $400 each side for OEM parts and then maybe $500 total labor to replace. You probably save more in fuel economy going FWD over 180k miles.
We are talking about Mazda 6, a mid size family sedan, right?
People don't buy too many mid size family sedans these days, they buy CUV, SUV, minivan, trucks, whatever. Do most mid size family sedan do FWD? Yes. Do their customers care? Nope. Ford dropped them, Chevy dropped them, Chrysler dropped them. The only reason Camry and Accord still sell them well is due to their past reliability reputation. Mazda is small and cannot survive on selling 6, they need to focus as a small company.
If you want RWD you can always pay up and get it, other than money you need to sacrifice the interior space. I am not willing to take that sacrifice, despite having a RWD IS250 and love it, I bought it before I have kids and now it won't fit my family anymore.
If I really want to have fun driving I'd get a Tesla Model S or some sort of sport compact RWD (S2000), why would I buy a RWD family sedan? I wouldn't consider an SRT or GS or 3 series or C/E class. It just make no sense, especially for mid size family sedan to talk about traction and which wheel it drives on and how many HP you can handle and torque steer, absolutely no sense.
People don't buy too many mid size family sedans these days, they buy CUV, SUV, minivan, trucks, whatever. Do most mid size family sedan do FWD? Yes. Do their customers care? Nope. Ford dropped them, Chevy dropped them, Chrysler dropped them. The only reason Camry and Accord still sell them well is due to their past reliability reputation. Mazda is small and cannot survive on selling 6, they need to focus as a small company.
If you want RWD you can always pay up and get it, other than money you need to sacrifice the interior space. I am not willing to take that sacrifice, despite having a RWD IS250 and love it, I bought it before I have kids and now it won't fit my family anymore.
If I really want to have fun driving I'd get a Tesla Model S or some sort of sport compact RWD (S2000), why would I buy a RWD family sedan? I wouldn't consider an SRT or GS or 3 series or C/E class. It just make no sense, especially for mid size family sedan to talk about traction and which wheel it drives on and how many HP you can handle and torque steer, absolutely no sense.
Hothatch 147gta was fwd only, like some others.
Lower tiers of wrc were n/a and fwd only. No problem. Full-size wrc are much more powerful and 4wd.
Rwd is overrated for daily use. Stricter emissions requirements are working against it.
And the simple trailing rear axle, are being used in medium sized family cars...yes, cost cutting measures are everywhere...good bye multilink, mcpherson... I'm looking at you škoda octavia..
Lower tiers of wrc were n/a and fwd only. No problem. Full-size wrc are much more powerful and 4wd.
Rwd is overrated for daily use. Stricter emissions requirements are working against it.
And the simple trailing rear axle, are being used in medium sized family cars...yes, cost cutting measures are everywhere...good bye multilink, mcpherson... I'm looking at you škoda octavia..
Last edited:
The original Mini was one of the first FWD vehicles and quickly gained popularity as a result of the Suez Crisis in 1958. Its drivetrain layout allowed maximum use of interior space for such a small car, and the transaxle even used engine oil from the sump for lubrication and cooling. With the wheels literally sitting at each corner, it also handled like a go kart.
Move forward about a decade, in the United States, you had vehicles like the Oldsmobile Toronado and Cadillac Eldorado riding on GM's E-Body platform, with a longitudinally mounted V8 and FWD called the "Unitized Power Package". That there was key; a subframe was the basis for the powertrain and front suspension, allowing for a completely flat floor pan for maximum interior space without a tunnel in the center for a driveshaft; much like the Mini. It wasn't a bad design either, given the GMC Motorhome was built the same way with a high-torque V8.
While Chrysler later used a similar design with longitudinal engines their FWD LH Platform in the late 90s, this pretty much became the standard regardless of brand. Equal length CV shafts also addressed torque steer to some extent. Most FWD vehicles have transversely mounted engines today, but "UPP" made manufacturing easy, allowed maximum use of interior space, and had better traction in slippery conditions, due to the engine sitting between the front wheels. There's also the argument that they are more fuel efficient, but I'll leave it at that.
Having said that, as efficient as it may be, it's not for everyone. Personally, I despise working on transversely mounted V engines if it involves anything other than an oil change. Inline 4s are a different story, but spark plugs are a nightmare, replacing a water pump can be difficult and if it has a timing belt, then it becomes a royal pain in the back. That being said, they're not all like that - I would take something like a 2000s Buck LeSabre over a Toyota Camy of the same era. The 3.8L pushrod V6 allowed for a lot of room in the engine bay, and was very straightforward to work on.
From a driving perspective, however, I am and always will be partial to RWD where torque steer is not an issue, cornering feels more surefooted and, depending on design, there's more traction with weight naturally transferring to the rear under hard acceleration, etc. Different priorities; I can live with less interior room in exchange for all that. Then there's also steering feel, which I don't like very much. At least once a week, if I'm not going offroad, I'll run my Mitsu in fulltime 4WD mode and the difference in steering feel, with power going to the front wheels, is immediately noticeable.
To each, their own, but I do wish there were more RWD options out there for sedans. If you want RWD and don't want a sports coupe, you're pretty much forced to go with an SUV or a truck. While I'll take an SUV if I have to, provided it is body-on-frame, I have no use for a truck and it's just not practical for me when I never will use it for its intended purpose; an SUV will suffice without the open bed.
Move forward about a decade, in the United States, you had vehicles like the Oldsmobile Toronado and Cadillac Eldorado riding on GM's E-Body platform, with a longitudinally mounted V8 and FWD called the "Unitized Power Package". That there was key; a subframe was the basis for the powertrain and front suspension, allowing for a completely flat floor pan for maximum interior space without a tunnel in the center for a driveshaft; much like the Mini. It wasn't a bad design either, given the GMC Motorhome was built the same way with a high-torque V8.
While Chrysler later used a similar design with longitudinal engines their FWD LH Platform in the late 90s, this pretty much became the standard regardless of brand. Equal length CV shafts also addressed torque steer to some extent. Most FWD vehicles have transversely mounted engines today, but "UPP" made manufacturing easy, allowed maximum use of interior space, and had better traction in slippery conditions, due to the engine sitting between the front wheels. There's also the argument that they are more fuel efficient, but I'll leave it at that.
Having said that, as efficient as it may be, it's not for everyone. Personally, I despise working on transversely mounted V engines if it involves anything other than an oil change. Inline 4s are a different story, but spark plugs are a nightmare, replacing a water pump can be difficult and if it has a timing belt, then it becomes a royal pain in the back. That being said, they're not all like that - I would take something like a 2000s Buck LeSabre over a Toyota Camy of the same era. The 3.8L pushrod V6 allowed for a lot of room in the engine bay, and was very straightforward to work on.
From a driving perspective, however, I am and always will be partial to RWD where torque steer is not an issue, cornering feels more surefooted and, depending on design, there's more traction with weight naturally transferring to the rear under hard acceleration, etc. Different priorities; I can live with less interior room in exchange for all that. Then there's also steering feel, which I don't like very much. At least once a week, if I'm not going offroad, I'll run my Mitsu in fulltime 4WD mode and the difference in steering feel, with power going to the front wheels, is immediately noticeable.
To each, their own, but I do wish there were more RWD options out there for sedans. If you want RWD and don't want a sports coupe, you're pretty much forced to go with an SUV or a truck. While I'll take an SUV if I have to, provided it is body-on-frame, I have no use for a truck and it's just not practical for me when I never will use it for its intended purpose; an SUV will suffice without the open bed.
Do the rear wheels turn ?
It's the angles from front wheel drive CVs being where turns are are also made.
Add dirt from a crack in the CV boot, and wear accelerates.
We can also talk about weight distribution.
Long live the U-joint.
Last edited:
I miss the Starlet.
I don't miss the Tercel.
And the rwd Celica. Very capable cars at autocross races.
Devils advocate: the whole “RWD sacrifices interior space” thing is moot since everyone insists on putting massive center consoles in the front of their FWD vehicles. While FWD vehicles tend to have a SMALLER tunnel in the back seat vs RWD, there’s still a hump and is still uncomfortable for anybody with knees.
That is very true, especially when you think about 80s GM C-Body vehicles with column shifters and flat floor pans. If memory serves me well, the Taurus was the same way right up to 2007.
GM's Xs were marvels of this packaging spawning the A Body which ran an absurd number of years. And also when compared with Nova/Granada/Aspen.
- Status
