My New Car (idea)

abitdazed

How's this?

Focus/Astra size
3-5 doors
1.6 - 2.0L
yada yada yada....


Most Important Bit.......RWD

There should be an alternative to the FWD compromise most of us live with now. I know all the reasons that FWD has taken over;

Cheaper to manufacture
Easier to engineer
Less interior space taken up by the mechanicals
etc.

Am I alone here in wanting a car that I can put my daughter, my girlfriend, and myself into but enjoy the RWD when I'm on my own?

And clever solutions to FWD will not sway me.

Anyone putting no down might be nice and just say why? Just curious as to your reasons.

Zube

abitdazed wrote: »

How's this?

Focus/Astra size
3-5 doors
1.6 - 2.0L
yada yada yada....


Most Important Bit.......RWD

BMW 1 series?

or an old Corolla twin-cam.

abitdazed

no

The 1 series is too pricey and very ugly, and the old toyota is not baby friendly. No option of rear doors, you see. And they're going for way more than a 20 yr old jap car really has any right to. AND, I don't know about you, but I don't really do the whole boy racer thing.

Ferris

no

Rx8 is a 1.3 and has 4 doors:)

Dealers cannot sell the 1 series to save their lives at the mo so there's bargains to be had. 1.6 is lame nowever, try the 1.8-2L petrol or diesel.

cantdecide

no

Coincidentally, I was reading the thread about the new Focus RS and was practically saying aloud 'please be RWD, please be RWD...'.

FFS, you don't need to drift/ donut to enjoy the balance/ refinement...

Slig

no

Toyota Altezza/is200 is RWD isnt it? and thats a 2L, bit bigger than a focus though.
There arent many options with RWD
Some execs and bmw really, even the sportscars are mostly 4wd and any that arent are usually above 2L

abitdazed

no

You try being 27 and insuring an rx8!! And the beemer is still ugly!

abitdazed

no

I'm talking about an astra like car. Nice and boring for the vast majority of people, balloon tyres, hubcaps, styling (even though I like nice style) fairly bland, but with a good core that can be built on. I don't know if I'm getting my idea across. Imagine the Focus was RWD, same options everywhere else, same pricing, same everything. Just swap the FWD for RWD.

If there's enough people on my side in this, I'm going to forward the link to ALL the car manufacturers. Screw focus groups.

Ferris

no

abitdazed wrote: »

You try being 27 and insuring an rx8!! And the beemer is still ugly!

I am 27 and I got quoted 1100, not too bad. Too thirsty for me tho.

cantdecide

no

I can't believe someone voted no- as if it mattered if there was one odd car out

Zube

abitdazed wrote: »

The 1 series is too pricey

So, you buy a 2 year old 118d instead of a new Focus 1.8d.

Ford cant take a range that's FWD from the Ka up to the Galaxy and cheaply engineer a RWD hatch into the middle. They can't even do 4WD for the flagship Focus RS.

abitdazed

no

Zube wrote: »

So, you buy a 2 year old 118d instead of a new Focus 1.8d.

Ford cant take a range that's FWD from the Ka up to the Galaxy and cheaply engineer a RWD hatch into the middle. They can't even do 4WD for the flagship Focus RS.

Ford and GM both sell in enough markets to do it on one platform and put a host of bodies onto it. GM is especially good at this. Well, maybe not good at it, but they do it lots anyway. They all do, really.

r3nu4l

abitdazed wrote: »

Ford and GM both sell in enough markets to do it on one platform and put a host of bodies onto it. GM is especially good at this. Well, maybe not good at it, but they do it lots anyway. They all do, really.

Have you seen the losses posted by GM recently? To engineer a completely new platform at this time would cost a lot and even one fcuk up would cause major problems. As it is, convincing shareholders to stay with them is a big job.


Audi do an A3 quattro (all-wheel drive). Is it expensive for what you get? Yes, but you could buy an older one. Not quite RWD but at least all wheels are involved in the drive.

Cyrus

abitdazed wrote: »

You try being 27 and insuring an rx8!! And the beemer is still ugly!

have you checked? im 27 and am fully comp on an e46m3 for under 900.

abitdazed

no

r3nu4l wrote: »

Have you seen the losses posted by GM recently? To engineer a completely new platform at this time would cost a lot and even one fcuk up would cause major problems. As it is, convincing shareholders to stay with them is a big job.


Audi do an A3 quattro (all-wheel drive). Is it expensive for what you get? Yes, but you could buy an older one. Not quite RWD but at least all wheels are involved in the drive.

GM have just done it with the new Insignia, and they already have started major work on the new Astra & Friends platform. GM knows that to save itself it needs to spend money on it's cars. The reason they're losing it is because they haven't been.

Cyrus wrote: »

have you checked? im 27 and am fully comp on an e46m3 for under 900.

How? seriously. Am I missing something. I'm with Quinn (sh!t, yes, but cheap) and I'm paying around 600 for the civic and 750-ish (it's currently uninsured while it's getting work done) on my knackered old 520i

bazz26

As long as front wheel drive platforms are cheaper to produce than rear wheel or four wheel drive then car manufacturer's will always choose this for their main stream high volume models.

It is a cut throad market for these cars so cutting costs is the name of the game. Even alot of these companies choose to share platforms across the board and with each other in order to reduce production costs.

Not a car enthusiasts ideal situation but how many motor companies are ran by car enthusiasts?

biko

I voted no as there is no Atari Jaguar option. I don't care about RWD/FWD.
If the rest is good and the car is fun to drive anyway I don't get any particular kick "Wow RWD".

You need a "who cares" option - AJ.

Cyrus

abitdazed wrote: »

How? seriously. Am I missing something. I'm with Quinn (sh!t, yes, but cheap) and I'm paying around 600 for the civic and 750-ish (it's currently uninsured while it's getting work done) on my knackered old 520i

theres no trick or scam. i have a full licence for 10 years and 7 years ncb in my own name but thats it, started with an alfa 156 1.8 then a golf gti 1.8t, then a e46 323ci, then an e39 530i sport and then the m3

r3nu4l

abitdazed wrote: »

GM have just done it with the new Insignia, and they already have started major work on the new Astra & Friends platform.

None of which are rear-wheel drive...why? Costs too much to make that big a change in the current climate.

VH

no

fwd is inherently safer too - the only reason a 25 year old can keep a rwd in a straight line - especially in the wet - is electronics. unless its very underpowered

markos79

no

:Dhave a look at this

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/01/rumoured-new-ae86-more-details/

all we can do is wish!!

VH

no

120bhp - no traction control required - that wouldnt pull the skin off milk

BlackWizard

Defo need more power than 120 alright.

My current car is RWD, 120ish BHP. 1st gear can be lethal especially in the wet. No electronics to help me, kinda fun. But 2nd gear wouldn't spin her in Antartica.

Although a few times while in second gear, I've ended up in the middle of the road because some twat leaked a few litres of oil on a junction in ballymun. But I presume FWD vehicles would do the same or have similar issues...

gd1987

no

I always wondered would there be a market for rwd versions of cars like the focus and mondeo. But I'm not so sure if they were built that the majority would buy them over the cheaper fwd models.

Personally I'd love too see more cars being built FR with good engines, a light chasis and optional LSD.

Balfa

abitdazed wrote: »

I know all the reasons that FWD has taken over;

Cheaper to manufacture

The 1 series is too pricey

Tada! From your first post, it looks like you'd be willing to spend a little more to get RWD. From your second post, it doesn't. Make up mind!

Balfa

abitdazed wrote: »

And clever solutions to FWD will not sway me.

What exactly is your problem with FWD then?? You never even said why you want a RWD car. There seems to be a generation of drivers who grew up with Gran Turismo, and assume that RWD is the be all and end all of everything.

There are plenty of FWD cars that are fun to drive. And if you look at the current standings in the BTCC, there are Vectras, Civics, and Leons all above the best 3-series, so it's not like FWD can't compete on a track, either.

cantdecide

no

Balfa wrote: »

What exactly is your problem with FWD then??

All the electronics in the world wouldn't help a factory FWD road car to lose it's Santa's Sledness without massively hardened suspension. Afterall- why are the premium cars RWD- even the slow ones with the high sales volumes.

Imagine Ford leaving provision for RWD as an alternative version of the RS. A non-rally inspired RWD road car for the genuinely enthusiast, not just the grownup boy racer/ thrillseeker.

That is to say, I wouldn't morally object to manufacturers producing such a car seemingly because it would have to cost more like apparently 17% of those asked would:rolleyes:

colm_mcm

If manufacturers make a big deal about fitting independent rear suspension (and they do!) and say it costs a fortune to include it (how?) there's very little chance they'll throw RWD in any time soon!

galwaytt

cantdecide wrote: »

All the electronics in the world wouldn't help a factory FWD road car to lose it's Santa's Sledness without massively hardened suspension. Afterall- why are the premium cars RWD- even the slow ones with the high sales volumes.

I think you need to look again - current premium performance cars are NOT RWD - at best, all wheel drive. (with exception of BeeEmm).

Imagine Ford leaving provision for RWD as an alternative version of the RS. A non-rally inspired RWD road car for the genuinely enthusiast, not just the grownup boy racer/ thrillseeker.

...you mean rally enthusiast from the 60's/70's/80's........rear wheel drive as rallying championship material went into decline from 1981, when the Quattro appeared. It would have disappeared much earlier if the car manufacturer's hadn't objected to it.........when consulted by FIA to ask if this German odd-ball (!) mfr could enter the (then) WRC in a 4WD, nobody objected, because they knew VAG had been working on the Iltis...and so everyone thought they were building a RR or LR vehicle for endurance events, or similar..................oh dear, bit of a faux-pas there in the marketing department, and the rest, as they say, is history.

There's other reasons, though: they only built rwd because it was cheap and crude - and people wanted better. FWD/AWD is both, but for a long time there were issues with quality UJ's, but once CV's were perfected, the writing was on the wall. Actually, Audi made fwd in the 30's, so they others should have been smarter..........

There is also the issue of safety - rwd is an inherently unstable platform - it's like throwing a hammer handle first..........it'll always want to turn the other way round.......I know, I have an MX-5, and, tbh, you spend more time arguing it than driving it. My 9-3, oth, would actually cover ground better. Oh, and considerably more comfortably, and more economically, too.

A3/S3 etc, outside of factory RS's, are in fact, only part-time AWD. You only get drive to the rear under wheel slip conditions. Such is the efficency of putting down power now in fwd, the new TT is only deemed to need fwd, and yet carries 20 bhp more than the old 180 Quattro.

abitdazed

no

Balfa wrote: »

Tada! From your first post, it looks like you'd be willing to spend a little more to get RWD. From your second post, it doesn't. Make up mind!

I just think that when building and designing from scratch it should be little different. Take out satnav or whatever to keep the cost inline. I'd be willing to pay a little more, but not really ugly, underpowered, 1 series more.

-Chris-

biko wrote: »

I voted no as there is no Atari Jaguar option. I don't care about RWD/FWD.
If the rest is good and the car is fun to drive anyway I don't get any particular kick "Wow RWD".

You need a "who cares" option - AJ.

+1

The reason I'd buy a Astra/Focus style car is because I need practicality and safety. I don't care if it's FWD or RWD. That's not the point.

If you want handling, centre of gravity is at least as important as what wheels drive it - I'd buy a s/h MX5 or similar before a RWD Astra.

And look at the 1 Series, it's RWD and so true to BMW's engineering ethics, but it's got a tiny boot and cramped rear seats because of the transmission tunnel, rear diff etc. Again, the reason I'd pick a family hatchback is practicality, of which boot space and interior packaging is a major factor.

VH wrote: »

fwd is inherently safer too - the only reason a 25 year old can keep a rwd in a straight line - especially in the wet - is electronics. unless its very underpowered

Safety and cost-effectiveness, the main concerns of car manufacturers. This is the reason the RWD Astra idea will never be built.

abitdazed

no

galwaytt wrote: »

There is also the issue of safety - rwd is an inherently unstable platform - it's like throwing a hammer handle first..........it'll always want to turn the other way round

Are you sure you're not thinking of a rear engined car? You're suggesting a car with a Front/Rear balance favouring the arse end (a la Porsche 911, air-cooled VWs, etc). There's nothing inherently unstable about a RWD car. Ferrari use it for their higher end stuff (I know they use MASSIVE amount of gizmos to keep it going round a track) and the premium sector has always been RWD. GM has done the Kappa platfrom, which they use to underpin their mx5 rival, the solstice. When this was new they said they were goin to put it out with saloon and estate versions as well. And I've driven an mx5 (not mine, obviously. My boss's) in anger and they aren't unstable at all, they just like to put the arse out a bit.

abitdazed

no

AudiChris wrote: »

+1

The reason I'd buy a Astra/Focus style car is because I need practicality and safety. I don't care if it's FWD or RWD. That's not the point.

If you want handling, centre of gravity is at least as important as what wheels drive it - I'd buy a s/h MX5 or similar before a RWD Astra.

And how much do you have to pay before you can get a car with decent handling and practicality as well? I'm not sure the price exactly, but if the astra was rwd to start with it'd be a hell of a lot cheaper than it is now. And mx5s are great, but sometimes you want to bring more people along.

abitdazed

no

Balfa wrote: »

What exactly is your problem with FWD then?? You never even said why you want a RWD car. There seems to be a generation of drivers who grew up with Gran Turismo, and assume that RWD is the be all and end all of everything.

There are plenty of FWD cars that are fun to drive. And if you look at the current standings in the BTCC, there are Vectras, Civics, and Leons all above the best 3-series, so it's not like FWD can't compete on a track, either.

I've no problem with FWD, it's just that when you're looking for a car, and you need 5 seats and your budget isn't as optimistic as you'd like, then all you can have is FWD. I'd like a choice.

Zube

abitdazed wrote: »

I've no problem with FWD, it's just that when you're looking for a car, and you need 5 seats and your budget isn't as optimistic as you'd like, then all you can have is FWD.

2nd hand 3 series or LS200 - there's a million of them out there.

-Chris-

abitdazed wrote: »

And how much do you have to pay before you can get a car with decent handling and practicality as well?

abitdazed wrote: »

when you're looking for a car, and you need 5 seats and your budget isn't as optimistic as you'd like

You accept that RWD is more expensive than FWD, and you admit that budget is a big factor in purchasing a car like this. That is the crux of the reasoning that manufacturers use to decide against RWD family hatchbacks.

If Honda were worried about the young lads who buy 10 year old Civics and soup them up, they'd make it RWD. They're not, they're worried about the conservative people who will buy the car new and then trade it back in for a new one in a few years.
By the time the "enthusiast" gets their hands on it it's left the dealer network and it's being serviced with spurious parts. Honda are no longer interested in it.

Pushing the price up would alienate the people the mass-manufacturers are concerned with.

And to cater for the enthusiasts who can afford to stay within the dealer network they create the Type Rs (and S2000).

-Chris-

abitdazed wrote: »

if the astra was rwd to start with it'd be a hell of a lot cheaper than it is now.

And this is absolutely incorrect - RWD is more expensive than FWD. It uses more parts, takes more engineering and is heavier (and therefore less fuel & CO2 efficient, a big factor in the family hatchback).

If all Astras were RWD they'd be cheaper than if there was a run of limited edition RWD Astras due to economies of scale, but as an actual production run, RWD will never be cheaper than FWD.

abitdazed

no

Is there anybody out there that thinks could be done successfully? I really do.

abitdazed

no

Zube wrote: »

2nd hand 3 series or LS200 - there's a million of them out there.

Ok, I'll give in to that one. I do have that old 5 series.

abitdazed

no

AudiChris wrote: »

You accept that RWD is more expensive than FWD, and you admit that budget is a big factor in purchasing a car like this. That is the crux of the reasoning that manufacturers use to decide against RWD family hatchbacks.

If Honda were worried about the young lads who buy 10 year old Civics and soup them up, they'd make it RWD. They're not, they're worried about the conservative people who will buy the car new and then trade it back in for a new one in a few years.
By the time the "enthusiast" gets their hands on it it's left the dealer network and it's being serviced with spurious parts. Honda are no longer interested in it.

Pushing the price up would alienate the people the mass-manufacturers are concerned with.

And to cater for the enthusiasts who can afford to stay within the dealer network they create the Type Rs (and S2000).

The logic of it is irrefutable. There is no rebuttal. I don't care about the boy-racers either. Sell to the people with money, I suppose. I was just hoping enough people would like the idea of it.

abitdazed

no

And, the poll's in my favour.

-Chris-

abitdazed wrote: »

The logic of it is irrefutable. There is no rebuttal. I don't care about the boy-racers either. Sell to the people with money, I suppose. I was just hoping enough people would like the idea of it.

It's a fine idea and I see why you're enthusiastic about it. I'm not interested and voted No based on that. I don't think it'll happen, but it's an interesting thread.