Jump to content
Server Move In Progress - Read More ×
Create New...

Blame the Japanese for Front wheel drive


Recommended Posts

Three points.

1. The Americans, GM in particular, were leaders in FWD.

2. FWD isn't bad, it serves it's purpose for those that buy it.

3. You shouldn't have a Rear Wheel Drive mafia sig with a Fusion in it.

Edited by Oldsmoboi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three points.

1. The Americans, GM in particular, were leaders in FWD.

2. FWD isn't bad, it serves it's purpose for those that buy it.

3. You shouldn't have a Rear Wheel Drive mafia sig with a Fusion in it.

199898[/snapback]

Couldn't have said it better. Edited by corvette_dude729
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are going to blame people, lets make a list:

The Germans with thier DKW F1

The French with their Traction Avant

The Americans with their Cord Automobiles.

The list goes on. To conclude, the Japanese didn't invent FWD.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to find things wrong with the imports, but lets make sure that they are real hard-core facts we're dealing with. Thanks :]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US. They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s..

Not that there is anything fundamentally bad about FWD, it's just that GM did it so badly in the '80s, IMHO..

In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

Edited by moltar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue the first N-bodies were not dull nor mediocre. Much thought and planning went into the engineering of those cars from what I read and certain iterations, like the Calais 442, were very, very impressive for their day. I believe that Oldsmobile's Quad4 put out 190hp in the late 1980s.

The FWD A-bodies themselves are very much cars - doors, windows, engines, and that's it. However, they're rather strong and durable and you'd be hard-pressed to find one you cannot get running. They were still infinitely dull.

I'd argue that GM got it right in the 1990s, manufacturing some excellent FWD cars, especially the G-bodies, probably the epitome of front-wheel drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue the first N-bodies were not dull nor mediocre. Much thought and planning went into the engineering of those cars from what I read and certain iterations, like the Calais 442, were very, very impressive for their day. I believe that Oldsmobile's Quad4 put out 190hp in the late 1980s.

The FWD A-bodies themselves are very much cars - doors, windows, engines, and that's it. However, they're rather strong and durable and you'd be hard-pressed to find one you cannot get running. They were still infinitely dull.

I'd argue that GM got it right in the 1990s, manufacturing some excellent FWD cars, especially the G-bodies, probably the epitome of front-wheel drive.

200029[/snapback]

and even the J-bodies, while we laugh at them today, weren't as terrible back then as we make them out to be. I see more '80 Cavaliers on the road today than '80 Civics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the cavs really arent bad cars at all. crude? maybe....at times but fine transportation and from my experiences very reliable. one in particular i recall too some severe abuse and kept ticking easily past 100k. the seats definately do suck though.

as far as fwd, one of the most striking or memorable moments for for me

was 48 hrs w/ nick nolte/eddie murphy. there a scene with noltes caddy ? peeling out and the front tires spinning and smoking like no tomorrow and it just went.

perfectly executed.

the drive by wire sysyems and general lack of torque steer in the pontiacs, esp for me, are truly un invasive... obviously not the same as rwd but certainly liveable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWD sucks a$$, very true... most Japanese cars suck, also true.

But Japan is no more responsible for FWD than GM. There were

plenty of RWD cars from Japan when GM was going mental over

every god damn car haivng to be FWD in the early to mid 1980s.

Thank the J-body, E-body, W-body, N-body... and many other

GM, Mopar & Ford cars for bringing us mass FWD. I will agree

that moreso than the Americans Japanese cars with RWD tend

to be less obtainable.

The Japanese mentality of RWD is either you pay $40,000 for a

Lexus or Infiniti or you can go f&ck yourself in a FWD HonDUH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest YellowJacket894

If you're going to point a finger, yeah, point it at the Japanese automakers. But not because they had front-drive cars before Detroit did, no. Detriot just wanted to have an advantage over Japan and show they were commited to putting new technology into cars and moving to the future. Too bad it eventually just gave the enthusiast the finger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my take is Iococca and Chrylser really sold America on FWD by starting with the Omni and Horizon and then with the K car and original Caravan. The Citation was very influential also as well as the Ciera / 6000 / Century.

FWD = more efficient packaging / cheaper / more traction. All in all there's nothing to bitch about.

if you are going to complain, complain that GM etc. didn't update their cutlasses and reagls etc. fast enough. Why? Folks wanted the FWD?

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fiat stradas were awful, horrible quality cars that pounded more than a few nails in fiat's U.S.-market coffin, but they were around; I remember seeing them. Lots of renaults also- wasn't it the first Car of the Year as an import (or was it another renault?)? Then there was this little FWD thing you may have heard of- the VW rabbit..... and the hondas... and the datsuns.... and toyota made a terrific stink over the tercel.... most all of these were far from niche or limited production.

Point being: there were numerous affordable FWD choices from the import column, whereas there was only 1 affordable offering from the domestics and a trio of high ticket luxury coupes. It's clear that the 'inspiration' for mass mainstream FWD came from the imports, not the domestics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i saw a magazine advertisement from subaru from the late seventies and was basically bitching toyota out and listing all their shortcomings and all of subarus finer points... one of which was fwd. it was definately perceived as the way to go

for a long long time and still is.

good luck undrilling that message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good luck undrilling that message.

200347[/snapback]

Exactly. Even today, you hear about mass-market rear-wheel drive cars alleviating safety and handling concerns with reviews saying, "With modern traction and stability control, the ____ is just as surefooted as a front-wheel drive car."

Well, by logic, doesn't that make a front-wheel drive car with TC and Stabilitrak even safer? If nothing else, that's how it looks.

I know from my point of view, I could care less. Drivetrain configuration is very low on my list of 'must haves', probably ranking somewhere with rear hip room or how the trunk lining feels. Most people don't do that sort of driving to really feel the difference between the two; but people do want a confident, well-handling car of either configuration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of us who lived through the gas spikes of the late '70s/early '80s, it was a scary, scary time. My dad had a '76 LTD and it went from $15 to $30 to fill it up in no time.

Anyone who has ever driven ANY RWD, automatic sedan from the late '70s will know what I am talking about: anemic power, questionable reliability, awful gas mileage. Terrible combination.

Then there was the piling on of federal emissions/crash standards. Remember the early generation hydraulic bumpers? Talk about rust and weight problems!

FWD seemed like the only answer, before electronics and high energy ignition systems saved the day. The thought of 140 hp. V-8s is laughable today, but not 35 years ago.

Cars shrank. Lower carbon steel was used. Rust was an epidemic. The original K-car was the epitome of small car/great interior space, which is why it saved Chrysler.

We can all look down our noses at the early to mid-80s Big Three offerings, but they were all products of more desperate times. Europe and Japan, used to high gas prices and shortages, were ready with zippy, small manual shift 4 cylinder econoboxes. Detroit was not.

I undersand the physical properties of RWD and the joy of driving, but for the average driver, FWD is the better way to go for sure: weight savings, compactness of design, relative safety in adverse driving conditions, etc. The recent popularity that RWD is enjoying will be short lived, I am certain.

$100 a barrel will make the Aveo and Fit look very attractive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Even today, you hear about mass-market rear-wheel drive cars alleviating safety and handling concerns with reviews saying, "With modern traction and stability control, the ____ is just as surefooted as a front-wheel drive car."

Well, by logic, doesn't that make a front-wheel drive car with TC and Stabilitrak even safer? If nothing else, that's how it looks.

I know from my point of view, I could care less. Drivetrain configuration is very low on my list of 'must haves', probably ranking somewhere with rear hip room or how the trunk lining feels. Most people don't do that sort of driving to really feel the difference between the two; but people do want a confident, well-handling car of either configuration.

200356[/snapback]

And a good gearbox :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

200239[/snapback]

GM made FWD in mass volume in the '80s... of those '70s models, only the Rabbit, Omni/Horizon and Civic had any volume in US....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, GM is really the company the popularized FWD in the US.  They had a couple niche models for years (Toronado and Eldorado), but from 1980 they went on a FWD binge, turning out some incredibly dull, mediocre cars (X-bodies, J-bodies, A-bodies, N-bodies, etc)...and Chrysler got in the game in the same time frame and became 100% FWD (except for trucks) by the end of the '80s. In 1980, Honda was all FWD, but Toyota and Datsun were still pretty much all RWD, IIRC.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:

audi fox

audi 4000

audi 5000

datsun F10

datsun 310

fiat strada

honda civic

honda accord

honda prelude

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3

mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ

renault 5

renault lecar

saab 99

saab 900

subaru DL/GF/FE

volkswagon rabbit

volkswagon scirocco

There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported.

This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD.

In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns.

To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

200239[/snapback]

Which, if any, of those listed sold in the numbers comparible to the J-Bodies or X-bodies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all a marketing scam about how it's better control.

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

low cost of production for FWD will keep them around forever.  It's all a marketing scam about how it's better control.  I don't know how anything can be good for you if the torque steer pulls you into the incoming lane.

200508[/snapback]

oh yeah, because that would explain the complete death of the RWD market from November to April in areas like mine (snow).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions when idiots are at the wheel.

200521[/snapback]

Fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

200521[/snapback]

Biggest misconception of all 'effin time. Absolutely 100% WRONG!

BTW: how many RWD cars have you owned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: ............... :nono:

Like who cares ! :lol:

Balthazars and Hudsons first posts were very accurate

This is how it went for the comming of popularity, in the NE

In the very snowy 60 & 70's FWD Saabs really made people look as they went flying by

Lancia Beta (Fiat) people try to claim credit for the transverse mounted engine, transaxle, McPearson strut type setup that became so common place, not sure how accurate it is, but the Italians did have a huge influence in Japan with their small cars. OHC, DOHC, FWD ect. Lancia Betas were not common place here in the US so had little impact unless there is truth about their influence on Japan.

Honda Civic came pretty early and did well, Civic CVCC was my first FWD, made all RWD cars look silly in the winter. It was however not a very good car, but I was not very good for a car at that time in my life either.

VW Rabbit blew them all out of the water but was pricy compared to a Civic

So between

Saab/Scandanavian

VW/German

and

Honda/Japanese

we had real economical cars that would get us anywhere we needed to go, trouble free in the late 70's and 80's

In 85/86 Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac proved with the C/H body that you could have size, power, luxury and economy in a sweet looking FWD car

:thumbsup:

now go cry a river someplace that needs rain, like............Iraq......... :pbjtime:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which, if any, of those listed sold in the numbers comparible to the J-Bodies or X-bodies?

I don't have figures handy and I cannot seem to find them online anywhere. VW's Rabbit/Golf has handily outsold the Beetle --the previous historical volume leader-- to the tune of something like 22 million by 1998, but again; I cannot find any hard numbers. Rabbits sold like crazy on Gary Busey in the '70s and '80s; they were everywhere. Which way would you care to spin the stats: higher percentage of FWD within each brand? Higher percentage of marketshare? Higher straight volumes in a given year?? We can twiddle these a dozen ways, no doubt.

Again, IMHO volume is not the question at hand- the initial inspiration/push is. And that push came to the U.S. market primarily in big barges from across the pond(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so much better control, but more idiot-proof or majority-of-car-buyer proof. I laugh everytime I see a Mustang, Camaro, or other RWD V8 powered car trying to pull out into traffic too fast and the back end starting to come around. I almost saw a wreck one time because of it. And these are at low speeds as well, on 30-35mph roads. At worst, a FWD will spin the inside wheel, but you aren't going to lose control.

FWD cars usually perform better in bad weather conditions also.

200521[/snapback]

Is that what the rest of your friends tell you on Temple of VTEC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings