GM Interns Return

[trevormac98]

Well it seems since C&G went down, so did my old username, metal928. Well we are back again. Gave one presentation and it went over great, we used quite a few of C&G comments. I would like to thank you all for helping us out. It is currently in the works for us two to present this to even higher people, which should take place sometimes next week. I have a question, What is the benefits of RWD over FWD? We went to FWD because of better traction and control, so why go back to RWD? Also, any other ideas would be great to hear. Our presentation has to be lenghted about 3 minutes. So we take all ideas into consideration. If you want to know what ideas we used from this forum, just ask. One last point, "Invent rather than mimic, become the styling leader!" I love that quote. Thank you C&G Beat Toyota

[will75]

I have a question, What is the benefits of RWD over FWD?  We went to FWD because of better traction and control, so why go back to RWD? 

[post="553"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

...performance, weight distribution, reliability, repair costs, funner to drive, the fact that I live in Phoenix and don't give 1/2 a rat's about snow traction...

Why is it that all "Ultimate Driving Machines" are RWD??? B)

That said, there is a need for FWD too, just not in Pontiacs, maybe a RWD Chevy or two to go with the Vette. And, by the way, not all of us want LARGE RWD's. A G6/Bu/93/Aura sized RWD would be killer - look at the BMW 3 - ugly now and still sells a ton! Edited August 19, 2005 by will75

[DavidF]

To me, the most important thing is to change your ad plan. You are coming along with product, now change up what you are selling, what I mean by this is: At sites like this, we are so pro-GM that all we talk about are things like RWD, horsepower, etc. But on the street, the other brands are winning on things like quality and company. So, to me, it comes down to this. 1) Sell the company first 2) Sell the sales experience second 3) Sell the product third I spent a lot of times in sales, and it was "sell yourself" then "sell your company" and only then "sell the product" If you can convince people that's it is OK to buy a GM product, then more converts will come over from the other brands. Sell quality, sell how many employees you have that work in the US, sell the advances in technology, talk about the number of gallons of fuel your hybrid busses save, talk about how long you've had on-star, talk about having HUD's in Pontiacs and Buicks, not just Caddies and Corvettes, talk about more vehicles with ABS than anyone else, talk specifically about amount of money you are spending on fuel cells for the next generation of easing our dependence on oil, talk about extensive dealer networks for service after the sale, and on and on.

[cmattson]

I may add that GM adds should show how GM is/does it better than their rivals. If you have a car (Malibu) that's won the jdpa initial quality and vehicle dependability study for 3 out of the last 4 years, when the Camry and the Accord haven't placed in the TOP 3 since NINE years ago, I think the public should hear about it. Unfortunately, marketing has used "best...in it's segment" type adds for so long that the public is numb to it. It's not good enough to be best in your segment, you need to be best in your own segment, advertise the h*ck out of it, AND call attention to the fact that the perceived leaders haven't been leaders in almost a decade.

[2005 Tahoe]

RWD is important for performance as has been stated above. I used to have a 1999 Trans Am and got stuck out in an ice/snow storm and made it home OK, so really don't see the need for FWD. If I had known about / there was going to be a Cadillac CTS / STS, I would have waited but wound up with a BMW 328. I looked and looked and there was nothing like it available from GM at the time. I wanted a 4 door smaller sedan with a 5-speed - the salesman told me it was RWD and that sold me. A RWD Pontiac / Saturn sedan would be fun also... (IMHO) :D

[Matt276]

Why is there so much hard plastic in the new interiors? It feels cheap compare to the competition.

[Bimmer325]

Why is it that all "Ultimate Driving Machines" are RWD??? B)

They aren't, could be the answer.

[regfootball]

my next door neighbor across the street from me, who works for Dodge (not entirely sure in what capacity but its for Dodge, not a dealer), was commenting to me the other day about how it was a big mistake for Dodge to only offer the charger with RWD and also about the under porduction of AWD Magnums. And he flat out stated how poor the RWD Magnum and Charger are in snow, do not believe any of the hype about them being any good with the electronic systems. He said the trac control and stuff hardly does much to help. He knows all the Dodge product well and has first hand knowledge with all of it. Considering how most folks can only afford one car payment (or two if its a family) they want a car they can get around in, and something that won't get stuck, even ONCE (as compared to the aforementioned trans am). FWD vs RWD lessens your chance of foul weather foibles GREATLY. And THAT is why FWD will still be more suitable for mass volume cars. The automaker can make em and sell em in any state. Nowhere in the US will sales tank because the cars won't get around. Plus, FWD is more space efficient and cheaper. The need for folks to get around easier and safer for their hard earned money far outweighs the need for a machine to do 'smoky burnouts'. The trend is also to go from FWD and step up to AWD for even more traction. The RWD only market is destined to be for vehicles with smaller sales volumes and sporting or luxury focus. Manufacturers can't bet the farm on cars that half the states don't want, or can only drive 9 months out of the year, and they don't want expensive inventory rotting on lots all winter if they don't unload them by December.

[Northstar]

A few RWD cars are a must. GM doesn't need to convert their whole car line to RWD, but I think each brand needs at least 1 RWD car. I read in an article that customers want the top model to be RWD because luxury makes use RWD. IMO, here's what each brand needs: Chevy needs 3 RWD cars (other than Corvette): Camaro, "Bel Air", Nomad (Kappa) Pontiac needs 3: GTO, Grand Prix/G8, Solstice Buick needs 2: Velite coupe/convert and sedan version Saturn needs 1: Sky Cadillac should have all models be RWD, unless they have AWD standard From what I've read from owners, the CTS handles fine in the snow. I think RWD cars can handle well in the snow, maybe the LX ones don't handle so well because a large amount of them have the Hemi.

[cavalier36]

I think there needs to be a mix between FWD and RWD vehicles. lets take Chevrolet for example.. of course the Aveo, Malibu and Cobalt remain FWD.. there could be an arguement to shift the Impala to RWD, but i think that would be a mistake. i would keep it FWD it sells quite well in its current form. so id say lets keep the Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu and Impala FWD.. then id convert the next gen Monte Carlo to RWD, this would be a slighly cheaper version of the next gen GTO. and unlike the GTO the new chevy coupe could be had with cloth seats and a standard V6 engine.. id also make a sedan version of this car. probably call it a Chevelle. this would do battle with the dodge charger. it would also be used for taxi and police fleets as well. this new chevelle would slot in between the Malibu and Impala sedans. there also is a case for a new Camaro. this would be a rwd vehicle and would be smaller than the monte carlo. the styling of this new camaro would have design cues of the 67-69 camaro. and would have the same engines as the chevelle/monte carlo. which would be a base 3.9L ohv V6, and with 5.3L and 6.0L V8s as options. as for an assembly location i would probably end up choosing Spring Hill TN. the Ion could be shifted to Lordstown Ohio. and Vue's could roll down the same Ontario assembly line as the Equinox..

[will75]

They aren't, could be the answer.

[post="832"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I was referring to BMW's marketing - are not all BMW's RWD?

[Drew Dowdell]

A few RWD cars are a must. GM doesn't need to convert their whole car line to RWD, but I think each brand needs at least 1 RWD car. I read in an article that customers want the top model to be RWD because luxury makes use RWD.

IMO, here's what each brand needs:
Chevy needs 3 RWD cars (other than Corvette): Camaro, "Bel Air", Nomad (Kappa)
Pontiac needs 3: GTO, Grand Prix/G8, Solstice
Buick needs 2: Velite coupe/convert and sedan version
Saturn needs 1: Sky
Cadillac should have all models be RWD, unless they have AWD standard

From what I've read from owners, the CTS handles fine in the snow. I think RWD cars can handle well in the snow, maybe the LX ones don't handle so well because a large amount of them have the Hemi.

[post="875"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

My CTS is fine in snow, better with snow tires.

[Drew Dowdell]

I was referring to BMW's marketing - are not all BMW's RWD?

[post="901"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Technically, no.

The other ultimate driving machine that BWM makes is FWD.... The MiniCooper.

[Drew Dowdell]

Oh yea... and I'll write out a check right now for a deposit on a Kappa based Cadillac..... who should I make it out to? The SKY is nice... but I wish there wasn't such a huge jump in Roadsters. You have the Solstice, then the Sky, then the Corvette, then the XLR. There is a huge difference between the Sky and Corvette. I like the XLR, but I'm not sure I want to swing the 75 grand for it. A Kappa based Cadillac roadster <mini-XLR> would be great. It would line up exactly with the Z4, SLK, and TT. It doesn't have to be a hardtop convertible, softtop is fine. See if you can squeeze the 2.8 VVT in there... Edited August 20, 2005 by Oldsmoboi

[ToniCipriani]

While FWD is good, but when everything is FWD, something is wrong there.

I have only driven FWD, so can't comment on how better is RWD.

One word: OVERLAP

Answer one thing. What is the difference between a Cavalier and a Sunfire other than different bumpers?

[Northstar]

Other than RWD, I do have one other suggestion: GM should be using the DOHC HF V6 engines in basically all cars. I realize that won't happen, but some brands should not have any OHV V6s. Cadillac obviously doesn't have any, and it should stay that way; Buick shouldn't have any OHV V6s, and neither should Saturn. I suppose they're okay in Chevy's and low-end Pontiacs, but high-end Pontiacs (GTP or GXP) should have DOHC engines, IMO. Having the 3800 in the LaCrosse and Lucerne is unacceptable, IMO. Having the 3500 in the Rendezvous is unacceptable, as is the 3500 and 3900 in the Terraza. Buick should position itself as an upscale brand (as it is trying to do) and therefore should use upscale engines. I also don't think the 3500 in the Aura is acceptable. The 3900 in the G6 GTP is acceptable, but I still would rather have it be the 3.6L HF V6.

[CaddyXLR-V]

A few RWD cars are a must. GM doesn't need to convert their whole car line to RWD, but I think each brand needs at least 1 RWD car. I read in an article that customers want the top model to be RWD because luxury makes use RWD.

IMO, here's what each brand needs:
Chevy needs 3 RWD cars (other than Corvette): Camaro, "Bel Air", Nomad (Kappa)
Pontiac needs 3: GTO, Grand Prix/G8, Solstice
Buick needs 2: Velite coupe/convert and sedan version
Saturn needs 1: Sky
Cadillac should have all models be RWD, unless they have AWD standard

From what I've read from owners, the CTS handles fine in the snow. I think RWD cars can handle well in the snow, maybe the LX ones don't handle so well because a large amount of them have the Hemi.

[post="875"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That sounds good, but with the current Chevy line-up I dont think the Nomad would fit. Theres already the HHR, and Cobalt in around that same price range. It would fit much better as a sedan or coupe for Pontiac, which currently only has the Vibe in that range. Edited August 20, 2005 by CaddyXLR-V

[Cory Wolfe]

Answer one thing. What is the difference between a Cavalier and a Sunfire other than different bumpers?

Okay... since you asked... :D

Front bumper, headlights, fog lights, front quarter panels, hood, wheels, side cladding, rear quarter panels, rear passenger windows and pillars, trunk, spoiler, taillights, rear bumper, exhaust tips, dashboard, door panels, back lighting, and the radio. :P

But, these two vehicles are not made anymore and there are more differences than alot of other rebadges. Take the CSVs for example. Those make excellent examples in this case.

[pontiac1]

this one is probably minor but... the car keys. they are so friggin ugly, especially for a cadillac. it doesnt distinguish it from the other divisions besides the cadillac emblem. i wish they felt and looked more like mercedes or jag. i love how those keys retract when not in use.

[Mike The Canadian]

Bah, personally screw dohc's, I am sturborn when it comes to pushrods, I just love them, and personally thing dohc's are overhyped. If gm put real money into a pushrod (look at the Corvettes power and fuel economy) they could get one kick ass pushrod, that makes those dohc's look like shit.

[mtdavid]

I believe extended warranties should be added to the new "Total Value Promise". I am impressed, a little, with the 4yr/50k warranties (5yr/60k would be better) on Cadillac and Saab. Supposedly Buick and Hummer will get this too, but why not the rest of the brands (Chevy/Pontiac/GMC/Saturn). With extended warranties I believe people will take GM on their TOTAL Value Promise. At the least, GM could offer extended power train protection on all their vehicles.

[JazzyChef]

I believe extended warranties should be added to the new "Total Value Promise".  I am impressed, a little, with the 4yr/50k warranties (5yr/60k would be better) on Cadillac and Saab. Supposedly Buick and Hummer will get this too, but why not the rest of the brands (Chevy/Pontiac/GMC/Saturn).  With extended warranties I believe people will take GM on their TOTAL Value Promise.  At the least, GM could offer extended power train protection on all their vehicles.

[post="1051"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree 100%, why not use the 5yr 60k, it makes the Total value idea really work! If Kia... can offer the 5 yr 60k, why can't GM?

[ToniCipriani]

I was referring to BMW's marketing - are not all BMW's RWD?

[post="901"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Don't forget there are xi BMWs B)

[ToniCipriani]

Okay... since you asked... :D

Front bumper, headlights, fog lights, front quarter panels, hood, wheels, side cladding, rear quarter panels, rear passenger windows and pillars, trunk, spoiler, taillights, rear bumper, exhaust tips, dashboard, door panels, back lighting, and the radio. :P

But, these two vehicles are not made anymore and there are more differences than alot of other rebadges. Take the CSVs for example. Those make excellent examples in this case.

[post="1002"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

DING DING DING! Got it!

Next question: What about Cobalt SEDAN and the Pursuit SEDAN except for the grille and the trunk, wheel badging??

And from some previous news, the Pursuit MAY make it down to the States side. Edited August 20, 2005 by ToniCipriani

[Cory Wolfe]

The backlighting!!! :lol: Anyways, a bit off-topic.... It pisses me off that the Cobalt and Pursuit are nearly identical, yet the Sunfire and Cavalier looked almost entirely different. Aren't we supposed to moving away from rebadging??

[rkmdogs]

Why rear wheel drive cars? Well, if you are an old poop, like I am, and a retired engineer at that, you may recall a technical paper done many years ago by Dr. Ferdinand Porsche, you know the original Dr. Porsche, not the son, in which he divulged some engineering study conclusions. In this paper, he stated that, vehicles that had over 200hp available at the drive wheels should be rear wheel drive due to the phyics reactions called "torque steer" He also stated that as driving horsepower increased, all-wheel drive should be utilized, for the same reasons. FWD was created to maximize passenger space in small vehicles, such as the Mini Cooper. It was not done as a performance enhancement. This concept had the side benefit that, for incompetent drivers, who did not wish to understand the proper techniques needed under less than optimum driving conditions, i.e., snow, rain, ice, these vehicles seemed to be more forgiving of sloppy driving and handling errors. This bonus was exploited out of proportion to vehicles that should never have been built! And the average American driver, who never saw a road course or a driving school needed all the help they could get! When driving became a necessity in life, due to the failure of other means of transportation, people began driving who should never have been allowed to operate any machinery, due to a lack of knowledge & respect for the machines they were using. Mediocre was the catchword --- for driving skills in America! You will note that most of the respected and long-established performance car manufacturers stayed with RWD, and did not play the game of FWD uber alles! Ask somebody who owned an Omni GLH what happened when you planted your right foot to the floor? Yes, tire-smokin' acceleration, but total loss of control! The Buick Skylark with the Brazilian OHC engine was the same way! Those of you that may not have been around when the question originated about the pros and cons of FWD vs. RWD need to go back and read about the results. Yeah, IMO GM needs to re-offer RWD models in other than high-priced luxury lines! I pass on the soapbox................

[RichW5]

As I said before .......

Styling sells ......
Quality sells ......
Warranty sells .....

The original Camaro was years behind Mustang and the HHR is years behind the PT. GM must be a styling leader, not a follower.

GM must continue to refine the quality of its vehicles. Put them at the top of every industry quality list. GM must be a quality leader.

No GM vehicle should have a warranty of less than 4 years and 50K miles. GM must be a warranty leader.

As for RWD/FWD/AWD, luxury models should be moved to RWD/AWD, while small cars can remain on a FWD platform, for increased interior room. Midsize vehicles should move to RWD/AWD where appropriate. The right mix of FWD/RWD/AWD is important. My CTS got stuck in the snow last year. Snow tires might have helped, but AWD would have been better for Northern Illinois.

In the interest of gaining sales, all 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder vehicles should move to OHC (which I hate). They are more expensive to build and service, but it's time to go with the flow. Just make ours better, quieter and more fuel efficient.

OHV performance V8's must continue to improve and be used in the Corvette, CTS-V, Trailbalzer SS and any other performance model. An OHV 12 or 16 cylinder, with DOD, must be put into production for the Slade and full size performance trucks, along with the ULS.

Finally, GM should keep the car buying public informed on new vehicles or advances in technology. Not all car buyers get their info from C&G, or any other forum. It's time to brag about GM's vehicles and technology all year long, not just while discussing the employee pricing. Make people want to own a GM vehicle.

Just remember, GM bragged about DOD long before anyone else, yet some others beat GM to the market. Bragging must be followed through with on time delivery of product. Edited August 20, 2005 by RichW5

[CaddyXLR-V]

RWD isnt really a niche anymore. Nearly 200,000 Mustangs, 100,000+ Magnums, 300s, Chargers, BMWs, soon to be Hyundais, CTS, Nearly all trucks are sold in RWD form. I think that adds up to a significant portion of car sales. But GM is getting left behind. GM doesnt even have AWD available yet on cars it should be available on. How can we have so many choices, but not a single sub-$30,000 RWD coupe or sedan from GM? Most people dont know what wheels drive the car, others dont care, others want RWD. The people who dont know what wheels drive the car will still buy a RWD if it is packaged right. Why cant GM basically just take the 3 series, take out all the expensive luxury stuff, and sell a car like that for $20,000-$25,000?

[dfmoeller]

Got to throw my $.02 behind your post. 1. The advantage that FWD has on slick roads comes at the expense of handling on all other roads. That is, the reason the FWD gets better traction in the snow and ice is because the bulk of the weight is over the drive wheels. That same fact makes a poor handling vehicle. 50/50 is optimum, and its far easier to approach 50/50 with RWD. 2. The advantage in tractive force in the snow is often interpreted as "safer" by the masses. In fact, this is simply not true. Most snow/ice related accidents happen (overwhelmingly) because a driver cannot stop - not because he cannot go. FWD offers NO advantage in stopping power. This is also true for AWD. Additionally, as you pointed out, when traction is lost with FWD, ALL STEERING CONTROL IS ALSO LOST!!!! Not so with RWD. 3. A RWD vehicle actually offers more "usable" room than a typical FWD one. The transverse FWD layout seriously encroaches on front passenger legroom. A well designed RWD vehicle doesn't have this constraint. Don't believe me? I'm 6'5". I pay attention to these things. Sit in a 60's MG. Extremely small car - extremely large legroom! An extreme example, but demonstrable in many other vehicles. FWD does have a place, but its on small vehicles for small people. If you really are that concerned about traction in snow, get something with AWD.

[Drew Dowdell]

Buick and Pontiac need to lose the dups. The Torrent should never have happened. If Pontiac dealers needed a small SUV to sell, let 'em pick up a GMC franchise and sell the Torrent as a GMC. The Montana should have been a GMC if you absolutly had to have 4 vans. I contend that you don't. The Chevy, Olds <oops Saturn>, and Buicks are more then enough. The Pursuit should never EVER exist in the US. If you need a small car for Pontiac, base it on Kappa. The GrandPrix needs to go. Replace the car, keep the name. The W-body line is the oldest car line GM has now that the J-body is gone. Same goes for the LaCross. D- for effort, B+ for execution. The person who thought the 3800 was a good base engine for the Lucerne should be told to apply to Toyota. The way that person can help GM best is by working for the competition. The 3.6VVT should have been the base, and if that wasn't possible, the new 3900. The Rendevous is great, just don't slip behind. Upgraded engines wouldn't hurt. The Rainier is by far the most handsome of all the TB clones. The interior could have been more unique to Buick, but the exterior is great. If you go around killing TB clones, aim for the Ascender and 9-7x. This applies to all divisions. Quit killing off name plates that sell well. You lose brand equity that way. The Century and LeSabre were two of GM's best selling names. I can understand killing a damaged name like Vega or Citation, but LeSabre? Deville? Regal? Edited August 20, 2005 by Oldsmoboi

[regfootball]

Why rear wheel drive cars?

Well, if you are an old poop, like I am, and a retired engineer at that, you may recall a technical paper done many years ago by Dr. Ferdinand Porsche, you
know the original Dr. Porsche, not the son, in which he divulged some
engineering study conclusions.

In this paper, he stated that, vehicles that had over 200hp available at the drive wheels should be rear wheel drive due to the phyics reactions called "torque
steer" He also stated that as driving horsepower increased, all-wheel drive
should be utilized, for the same reasons.

FWD was created to maximize passenger space in small vehicles, such as the
Mini Cooper. It was not done as a performance enhancement.
This concept had the side benefit that, for incompetent drivers, who did not
wish to understand the proper techniques needed under less than optimum
driving conditions, i.e., snow, rain, ice, these vehicles seemed to be more forgiving
of sloppy driving and handling errors. This bonus was exploited out of proportion
to vehicles that should never have been built! And the average American driver,
who never saw a road course or a driving school needed all the help they could get!

When driving became a necessity in life, due to the failure of other means of
transportation, people began driving who should never have been allowed to
operate any machinery, due to a lack of knowledge & respect for the machines they were using. Mediocre was the catchword --- for driving skills in America!

You will note that most of the respected and long-established performance car
manufacturers stayed with RWD, and did not play the game of FWD uber alles!

Ask somebody who owned an Omni GLH what happened when you planted
your right foot to the floor? Yes, tire-smokin' acceleration, but total loss of
control! The Buick Skylark with the Brazilian OHC engine was the same way!

Those of you that may not have been around when the question originated about
the pros and cons of FWD vs. RWD need to go back and read about the results.

Yeah, IMO GM needs to re-offer RWD models in other than high-priced luxury
lines!
I pass on the soapbox................

[post="1154"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

but exactly that is why the mass market wants FWD, was for the exact reasons you stated. Or Ferdi.

Cars are tools, people make car payments to get space and transportation. Those needs outweigh in most cases the need for rear drive handling. FWD is more convenient and safer within most people's skills and limits.

I do think GM needs more RWD cars, but only if AWD is offered on those models as well. That's the only way for GM to cover their backsides in case a model ends up not selling because its RWD only.

Remember, RWD adds many more components into the cost of manufacturing the car and that alone adds another component that keeps RWD from going en masse.

By the way, the chrysler 300 and magnum sales are trending down and the Impala sold a whopping number of cars last year, next year will be even more. The 300 is not a huge sales success for the long term. It is popular due to the hemi name and its penis extender styling.

[regfootball]

As I said before .......

Styling sells ......
Quality sells ......
Warranty sells .....

The original Camaro was years behind Mustang and the HHR is years behind the PT. GM must be a styling leader, not a follower.

GM must continue to refine the quality of its vehicles. Put them at the top of every industry quality list. GM must be a quality leader.

No GM vehicle should have a warranty of less than 4 years and 50K miles. GM must be a warranty leader.

As for RWD/FWD/AWD, luxury models should be moved to RWD/AWD, while small cars can remain on a FWD platform, for increased interior room. Midsize vehicles should move to RWD/AWD where appropriate. The right mix of FWD/RWD/AWD is important. My CTS got stuck in the snow last year. Snow tires might have helped, but AWD would have been better for Northern Illinois.

In the interest of gaining sales, all 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder vehicles should move to OHC (which I hate). They are more expensive to build and service, but it's time to go with the flow. Just make ours better, quieter and more fuel efficient.

OHV performance V8's must continue to improve and be used in the Corvette, CTS-V, Trailbalzer SS and any other performance model. An OHV 12 or 16 cylinder, with DOD, must be put into production for the Slade and full size performance trucks, along with the ULS.

Finally, GM should keep the car buying public informed on new vehicles or advances in technology. Not all car buyers get their info from C&G, or any other forum. It's time to brag about GM's vehicles and technology all year long, not just while discussing the employee pricing. Make people want to own a GM vehicle.

Just remember, GM bragged about DOD long before anyone else, yet some others beat GM to the market. Bragging must be followed through with on time delivery of product.

[post="1166"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

So wasn't it annoying when your CTS got stuck last year? Having AWD would have helped some from avoiding it happening or helped get it UNstuck.

My angle here is most casual car buyers really don't ever want the CHANCE of that annoyance happening.

[RichW5]

So wasn't it annoying when your CTS got stuck last year?  Having AWD would have helped some from avoiding it happening or helped get it UNstuck.

My angle here is most casual car buyers really don't ever want the CHANCE of that annoyance happening.

[post="1253"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Actually, it was my wife who got stuck in the CTS. She's an excellent driver, except for cell phone mania, and was coming up the hill to our house in 5" of wet slushy snow. A neighbor pulled in front of her, so she had to stop. Once stopped, there wasn't enought traction to get started again. I tried backing down the hill and going to the side, feeling the pavement for traction, but there was none. It took three of us to push her up the hill and into our driveway. I wish the CTS had AWD.

Earlier, I drove the '99 STS up the street without a problem. FWD did the job.

Since I'm retired and the wife is still working, I traded the STS for a Trailblazer in late December. Now my wife has 4WD for snow storms and the CTS the rest of the year.

[capriceman]

yes snow is easier to go through in a fwd car but ppl have forgot everything their parents and grandparents told them put a bag a sand or carry bricks or mercery(lol) if u have some laying around. my point is you have to now want your car demends in ceretain contions like counter steering how to prep your vehicle for seasonal driving and stuff like that. the fact is that most people dont care about there cars any more most ppl just get in and go i no in my neighborhood poeple just dont wash and wax and clean cars like they used to i love my car but it is old and starting to look junky from poeple that in parking lots have to find your car and park there beater and slam there door in to your car that u love but they cant see why you parked in the back and walk 50 miles to the store near no other car but they have to find ur car(is it me or does this happen to any one else)???? Palstic is cheap and durable now and can be formed in any shape you want its in every car its just the layout that looks bad i no i like plane straight top the point dashes cause i would get distracted when driving running my hands down the dash going ewww ahhhh. but thats me ANOTHER THING IS EVERYONE WANTS SOMTHING DIFERENT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF GM HAD DIFFERENT DASH STLYES LIKE 3 PER CAR BECAUSE THEy GO IN SO EASLY JUST HAVE THE SAME MOUNTING BRACETS AND VENTS EXIT AT THE SAME SPOT JUST SHAP ALL OF THEM DIFFERENT. also bring back the caprice make it malibuish boxxy like nut bigger and longer and use yur 350 hp 5.7 layin around your factories then make the v6 option to the ultimate vactioner big comfy and nice soft suspetion to not feel all the potholes. Just DONT STEAL HOLDENS CAPRICE but im just one guy and cant change a whole company. if you dont like your internship just say CEO and CHAIRMEN take paycuts thats just millions a year the the company can use they could live off 200,000 a year they dont need 35million a year just a thought!!

[Flybrian]

The thing is people shouldn't have to prep their cars like that by tossing bags of sand or bricks in the trunk. That was one of the early appeals of front-wheel drive - convenience.

[regfootball]

Actually, it was my wife who got stuck in the CTS. She's an excellent driver, except for cell phone mania, and was coming up the hill to our house in 5" of wet slushy snow. A neighbor pulled in front of her, so she had to stop. Once stopped, there wasn't enought traction to get started again. I tried backing down the hill and going to the side, feeling the pavement for traction, but there was none. It took three of us to push her up the hill and into our driveway. I wish the CTS had AWD.

Earlier, I drove the '99 STS up the street without a problem. FWD did the job.

Since I'm retired and the wife is still working, I traded the STS for a Trailblazer in late December. Now my wife has 4WD for snow storms and the CTS the rest of the year.

[post="1262"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

thanks, I wish the CTS had AWD also. That one annoying incident can sometimes be frustrating. I would have a GTO in a heartbeat if I had enough coin to have another car to drive in the winter.

[regfootball]

The thing is people shouldn't have to prep their cars like that by tossing bags of sand or bricks in the trunk. That was one of the early appeals of front-wheel drive - convenience.

[post="1311"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

we are a society and nation that is ALL ABOUT conveinience.

[knightfan26917]

Gave one presentation and it went over great, we used quite a few of C&G comments.

So, it went over great...? What exactly does that mean? What was the reaction of the people to whom you presented? Details details details.


Cort, "Mr Road Trip" / soon2be ex-"Mr MC", 31swm/pig valve/pacer
MCfamily.models.HO.chdQB = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
MC Guide = http://www.chevyasylum.com/mcspotter/main.html
IL & area MCs = http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/imcog/
MC's future = http://www.projectmonte.com/petition/
"You've made a fool of everyone" ... Jet ... 'Look What You've Done'

[w00t_man]

You need both FWD and RWD, with AWD optional on most models. FWD is better for the lesser horsepower cars (AWD if you want them to be "sporty"), but RWD for the bigger ones with more horsepower. It's simple physics. From what i've heard, 300C's with traction control seem to do just fine in the snow, and they're RWD.

[dav305z]

I have a question, What is the benefits of RWD over FWD?  We went to FWD because of better traction and control, so why go back to RWD? 

[post="553"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

A couple of changes have made RWD good again. The first is that there have been many advances in vehicle design that make traction much less an issue. GM RWD cars in the 80's and even early 90's rarely had IRS, and of course did not have Stabilitrak. Todays tires also make RWD a safer option.

A second factor favoring RWD is the fact that so many affluent people own three cars, one of which is often an SUV. When the weather gets really nasty, people often have other options.

Finally, demographics need to be considered. The fastest growing states - Florida, Arizona, Nevada, California, Texas etc, are all in warm weather regions. That means that every year, there are more and more people in this country who don't care about how their cars perform in the snow. That's something to think about. Edited August 21, 2005 by dav305z

[Mikko O]

[quote name='trevormac98' date='Aug 19 2005, 03:44 PM']

I have a question, What is the benefits of RWD over FWD? We went to FWD because of better traction and control, so why go back to RWD?


Driving dynamics are superior, especially for performance vehicles. There is
a reason that all BMW's are RWD. No matter how powerful the engine is
there isn't any torque steer to deal with.
Now with the advent of electronic stablility control, traction control and braking
control systems that can be installed in RWD vehicles, there isn't the huge
advantage of FWD over RWD in bad weather conditions.

[razoredge]

RWD is better only if you are pushing a car to its extremes. Outside of that all the comments made here are bias, unfounded and have nothing to back them up. In many parts of the lower 48 FWD is totally unessary however there is the Northern states as well as Canada. The Swedish car Saab was not FWD because they wanted to be different I believe they had a Northern climate issue. Im 6 foot and do not drive with the seat in my large H & C bodies all the way back and our manufactures can not build cars RWD cars simply to accomodate 6'5" people. :lol: My FWD 90 Regency will run circles on a back road around my RWD 76 Delta 88 Royale. My FWD LSS has 240 hp 280 lbft and has no torque steer issues. A little pull at tire burning dead stop foot to the floor but its little concern to control and certainly less than a RWD limited slip that kicks out to the side. Perhaps the RWD croud need to tune up on their driveing skills if they want me to believe their BS :lol: I can drive any of our FWD cars at speeds on corners that would make most people on this forum scream at me to slow down, I will admit I can drive a RWD car even slightly faster but these fellows are trying to make FWD sound like its dangerous and uncontrolable at lateral G's. FWD does have a huge stopping advantage in snow so theres more BS and it came from someone that pointed out all about the weight distrubition. Perhaps he would like to elaborate on which end of the car does the most brakeing :unsure: So called enthousiasts will always blow the FWD handles poorly and RWD is great in the snow up everyones butt, however as has been pointed out so many times most people drive cars to get from one place to another and frankly have little lasting affection for any vehical after the first 4 payments have been made. They want a car that will get the job done no matter what under normal driving conditions (speed limit to maybe 5-15 over) and anyone that sayds FWD can not do this really does need to learn how to drive. Now that Ive said all of that, I will say if I want a sports car for spirited driving I will want a RWD NOT AWD and I will want a stick but I will take it off the road for the winter and drive one of my many FWD H or C body Buicks or Oldsmobiles. I have no bias either way but I do know the truth about FWD vrs RWD and the cloud of fog that is thrown up by those hellish back roading ultimate drivers :lol: And for the BMW ultimate yadda yaddas just listening to you has givin me the ultimate :lol:

[razoredge]

Also as someone mentioned Porsche I would like to point out that back in the day Porsche was highly critized for having the engine at the wrong end of the car and reasons of weight distrubition were used as well. However Porsche has proven to have the "ultimate" ;-) road racing record of any car company, in fact I dont believe its even possible for any manufacturer to ever catch up to their track record. Most of which have been accomplished with cars that have the engine at the wrong end of the car and very unusual weight distribution. They also had the nerve to do much of this winning with air cooled engines no less. ;-) Then there was that opposed boxer flat 6 engine idea, no V8? Damn, the nerve of that company. Just some food for thought and one final suggestion, GM should kill saturin and get them out of the way so the remaining Divisions can breath and benefit from having build Americans largest auto manufacturer rather than the one that sucked them dry.

[pow]

RWD is nice, but it isn't a priority. Best-in-class design, technology, value, and quality can generate the same amount of hype.

[mjd1001]

I am obviously in the minority, but I actually prefer FWD to RWD in most cars. I agree with the person a couple of posts up that said RWD is usually superior when pushing a car to it's limits..but not necessarily in everday driving. As a matter of fact, I think in everday driving the FWD cars I have driven seem more "nimble and agile" the the RWD cars I have driven, even when they are in the same class. Also, spending my early driving years in Buffalo NY and having family there, I'll say that in extremly harsh road conditions, slush, ice and packed snow...I'd still prefer FWD over RWD. Sure, advances have been made in RWD and with stability controll and traction controll they are much better than in the past...but I still feel much safer having myself "pulled" rather than "pushed" when the roads are awful..esp if my fwd car has stability controll and traction controll also. Offer RWD as an option on some cars....and of course on the sports cars...but don't take away all of my FWD options.

[knightfan26917]

Hmmm....

The FWD vs RWD "discussions" tend to get us no where....

FTR, I don't mind FWD. I've owned 2 FWD cars myself, but I tend to have better luck in any weather with my RWD Monte Carlos....

That, plus I wish Chevy/GM hadn't slapped older nameplates (that were originally RWD) onto FWD cars....

*sighs*

Still interested to know the reaction the interns received at the first presentation....


Cort, "Mr Road Trip" / soon2be ex-"Mr MC", 31swm/pig valve/pacer
MCfamily.models.HO.chdQB = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
MC Guide = http://www.chevyasylum.com/mcspotter/main.html
IL & area MCs = http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/imcog/
MC's future = http://www.projectmonte.com/petition/
"You've made a fool of everyone" ... Jet ... 'Look What You've Done'

[Cory Wolfe]

RWD is better only if you are pushing a car to its extremes.

That's exactly what I have always thought. Overall, I agree with your entire post.

Anyways, as I've said many times before, I like both FWD and RWD equally. Actually, if anything, I like FWD just the tiniest bit more. There's something about the front wheels being driven that enlightens me.

I think FWD provides better proportions and the ability to have a shorter rear overhang as well. The front overhang usually is larger on FWD cars, but vehicles like the Mini Cooper prove that it isn't necessary.

FWD can be performance oriented, too, which enlightens me even more. Some FWD vehicles can outperform RWD ones. However, it isn't because of the drive wheels. There are other factors, but that's kinda my point... ;)

Also, torque steer is hardly ever an issue. Atleast with most GM vehicles (probably due to the criticized electric steering, I would say). Most FWD naysayers exaggerate it as if it's going to cause you to wreck. Well, unless you lack driving ability... it probably will never happen.

The only huge advantage RWD has (imo) is the ability to do donuts and such. Not burnouts, though, as they're possible with FWD. But all this is only important to people who like to show-off. :P

As long as a vehicle has sporty styling, 2-doors, and a stick... I'll take it, FWD or RWD. :D Edited August 22, 2005 by blackviper8891

[CaddyXLR-V]

I just hate the feeling of trying to turn the car fast, and the car keeps going straight. You cant steer with the throttle. At that point the only thing you can do is slam on the brakes and hope the car either turns or stops. In RWD the backend might want to kick out, but you can still let off the gas, or counter-steer.

[turbo200]

RWD is neutrality, it is balanced, and it is poised. Those that are trying to push that RWD is only advantageous in extreme handling; I'm really not sure where you're coming from with that. RWD is just more neutral and balaned. Any FWD car I get into feels more top-heavy, less easy to point and go, and has more body roll. The car that has had the best compromise between handling and ride quality I've ever driven has been RWD.

[razoredge]

I just hate the feeling of trying to turn the car fast, and the car keeps going straight. You cant steer with the throttle. At that point the only thing you can do is slam on the brakes and hope the car either turns or stops. In RWD the backend might want to kick out, but you can still let off the gas, or counter-steer.

[post="2013"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I assume you are talking about turning fast on wet snow not dry roads I hope - right ?