Informal Survey Time

Nothing sells American cars better than RWD and/or a V8. It helps set them apart from a large market of Asian cars, it's what gives them character and you have to play to your strengths. I still think that some FWD vehicles are necessary for small cars and certain non-enthusiast models like some Buicks, but there ought to be a lot more RWD to go around.

As far as Saab is concerned, they should never produce a RWD only vehicle, it's just sacrilege. AWD would be the way to go in my book (FWD-based AWD is fine for smaller vehicles, RWD-based AWD would be great for the 9-5, crossovers, and SUVs).

A hot little Kappa-based RWD coupe or sedan with seating for four would be a great addition to the Chevy and Pontiac line ups. A modern '57 Chevy maybe? Cars like that get serious street cred, and GM needs all it can get these days. Build 'em light enough and the turbo Ecotec will be all the engine you'll ever need. The aftermarked support base for that motor would just about double overnight with this kind of a vehicle.

You are correct that GM has built some of the best sorted out FWD vehicles, especially when it comes to high levels of power output (well controlled torque steer). It should be clear after years of success in this field, that the public simply won't be converted on this issue, and the consensus is pretty clear on what they feel a true American vehicle should be. I just don't see the value in fighting that perception.

Long-story-short, RWD for everything except the following:

-GMDAT small cars from Korea. At that price point, RWD adds too much cost and is less of a priority over the added interior space of FWD.

-Saabs should be AWD.

-Saturns. Gotta leave some cars to battle the imports! Focus your FWD expertise here.

-Some Chevys. It's hard for me to think of Chevy without a FWD compact like the Cobalt, but if you can leave that to Saturn, that would work. FWD crossovers and minivans are okay too, as long as AWD is an option.

-Some Buicks. RWD performance isn't a priority for this market. The lower range Buicks can shave some off the bottom line with FWD (probably shared with several crossovers to keep costs down). But make no mistake, Buick *NEEDS* RWD on at least the top half of their cars, otherwise no one will respect them and they'll go the way of Oldsmobile.

-AWD options on many RWD Cadillacs, Pontiacs, Buicks, and even some Chevys. Of course, SUVs and trucks should have the normal RWD with 4WD or AWD option.

BTW, I'm 26 if you want to know exactly what age group to file this under. Thanks for listening.

Your likely to get some very skewed answers on this blog, as it is mostly automotive enthusiasts. Some with more taste than others.

FWD will and should always remain at the forefront of most passenger cars. It works beautifully for family cars, and people haulers. However, as soon as a car is intended to be the slightest bit exciting, a RWD with AWD mode should be availabe. The passionate cars need the RWD to satisfy the enthusiasts, while integrating AWD will ensure the vehicle is operable by all. I want nothing more than a G6 Coupe with 250+ horsepower and AWD. I think with RWD alone you alienate those comfortable with FWD, and with FWD alone you leave the sporting type at the side of the road. I love a good "sporty" car, but the thought of driving RWD on glare ice or in heavy snow conditions does not appeal to me.

A RWD with AWD option is definately the way to go.

RWD NOOOOOO!!

FWD and AWD/4WD yes!
if youre conscidering RWD you are killing SAAB!!

what SAAB needs is Fwd and 4wd with turbocharged v6 Biopower, output 380bhp!!

I currently drive a 2005 SAAB 9-3 linear. The packaging is very good, although the suspension is a little soft for my tastes. However, I much prefer the driving and handling dynamics of a rear wheel drive car. I am willing to sacrifice some interior packaging for better driving dynamics. What can I say I'm an enthusiast, and proud of it.

I vote FWD with AWD as an option. Course, I'm a Saab nut from way back in the 60's. But Saab won some Showroom Stock A and B national championships with FWD in the 70's, beating some Porsches and Datsun 280ZX's in the process. So, yes, a properly setup FWD car can be a blast to drive--especially when travelling on unknown backroads.

I'd say go for the RWD. I personally prefer rear wheel drive. And at the moment, there are next to no small, sporty entry level, RWD cars. Offering such a product would definately peek my interest.

However, the bigger reason to go RWD, IMHO, is because a small, high performance FWD car is almost like the calling card of a Japanese company. If GM is to compete against the Japanese, they can either offer a similar product and make it better, or offer something they don't. At the moment, there are no small, sporty Japanese RWD compact. Many Americans love drag racing as well and RWD offers advantage there too. I think it makes sense to go RWD.

J

Rear wheel drive, please!

Personally I have never been a big fan of front drive. The greater feeling of control I have in rear or AWD vehicles is one of the reasons look for these vehicles when I car shop.

Now, for the compact sub-compact market..hmmm.. if you can keep the price down shoot for the rear/AWD vehicles. But if it is going to significantly impact price then shoot for the front drive, that is after all the market.
DKK

I think Rear Wheel Drive with an AWD option makes more sense, especially for selling cars in warm weather climes.
GM does worst in California for instance. You could reverse that with an affordable RWD sedan, personally I would call it the Chevelle, with an AWD option which would be popular in the East.
Not every car needs to be RWD. For instance the Malibu could be FWD while the Impala should definitely be RWD with a AWD option. I am still shocked that you put out a Impala SS with FWD. It should have at least been AWD. Not having a AWD option on the Impala is just stupid.
If its a choice between FWD with AWD as an option, or RWD with AWD as an option then most defintely move to RWD.
I hate FWD cars, but on the East Coast an affordable AWD option on a RWD platform would negate any negatives.

Look at it this way-GM's greatest success came when your cars were RWD. As soon as they switches to FWD sales tanked. Not your father's Oldsmobile-remember that one?
OH............and increase your warranties.

Front-drive is only fun to drive if you've got a little econobox that weighs so little it's still fun to fling around, and even then, it would still be more fun with rear or all wheel drive.

If you're going to spend more than $20k on a car you're intending to have fun with, that car had better be RWD.

Why? RWD cars don't have torque steer, and you can't do donuts in a FWD car. (Not, obviously, that your average Saab owner is going to spend a lot of time doing donuts, but throttle steering is an important part of the performance car experience.)

Saab does indeed have a tradition of making spirited vehicles, but it's not the front-drive aspect of the car that excites the average Saab owner, but rather the aircraft inspired designs, the quirky features, the high horsepower small displacement turbocharged engines, and the fact that the cool designs and turbocharged engines also come with a lot of safety features.

If Saab is going to compete with the rest of the import market, some compct/sub-compact RWD vehicles would be a great way to go.

A highly turboed Saab sub-compact competition drift car would be pretty sweet, especially if you made it available to the public.

(Speaking of which, any plans to sell a retail version of the GTO drift car?)

we need to convince people to buy american and save there jobs or everything will be imported

I appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts.

If HP is > 500, then RWD.
If HP If 300

Thank You,
A. Johnson

Rear wheel drive. But then again, I'm more of a muscle car guy, not a compact car driver.

Get that Camaro out already!

i beleave that rear-wheel drive vehicles are better. I personally enjoy the way they handle over front-wheel drives and AWDs.

RWD all the way. design a light AWD for the FWD people!

If its back seats are meant to be used, and it's not a large car, keep it FWD.

Part of the reason so many people like Acuras is that they have a lot more space than equivalent BMWs. Perfect for anyone who doesn't flog their car.

Just work on steering feel, please. It's been GM's weak point in both FWD and RWD models, and don't think that feel should be limited to cars like the Solstice.

RWD cars seem to track better on the freeway and the lack of torque steer and increased traction are additional benefits that can be felt during normal driving.

I would prefer to see front wheel drive in compact and sub-compact cars.

I think there's a market for both. Economy cars such as the Cobalt should remain front-drive mainly for the reasons you mentioned above and because the typical buyer of such a car probably doesn't care about the potential performance benefits.

Small cars with rear-wheel-drive can be enormously fun. BMWs have always had rear- (and recently all-wheel-drive). And look at the success of the Miata with car enthusiasts and weekend racers.

Many car companies have a variety of models to suit various needs. Lexus, for example, has the rear-wheel-drive IS-series for the performance-oriented driver and the front-wheel-drive ES-series for the more luxury-oriented driver.

GM has even embraced these ideals to some degree. Look at the Solstice and new Cadillac models. High-performance front-wheel-drive models can be entertaining, but they are all plagued by understeer at the limit and many have excessive torque steer.

Also, it's nice not to have to replace CV axles every 150k miles.

You pose a good point about front-drivers. My family has two front-drive GM sedans and a 4WD Explorer. For our snow-belt Michigan roads, the FWD cars are as good as the 4x4 SUV 99.99% of the time. Rear-drive with traction control is nearly as good.

We would readily replace one FWD car with a rear-drive sedan or coupe, given it had a reasonable price tag (about half that of a Cadillac STS). Additionally, RWD-based AWD like BMW's xDrive would offer an irresistable opportunity for people in northern states.

A company as big as GM must have rear-drive sedans/sports coupes priced for the masses. The Chevy Camaro Concept has awesome looks and the requisite RWD, now it needs to walk the walk with a fun-to-drive powertrain/suspension setup. Accomplish this, and you're looking at a hit that'll sell far more than the 150,000 units the business case requires to build it. Other rear-drive cars can help amortize the cost.

Most younger buyers don't take FWD vehicles seriously as performance cars. BMW has had it right all along, Lexus got it with the IS. Audi, Saab, Volvo are still trying to catch up. AWD does not equal RWD.

Back before front-wheel drive became popular, Saabs were known as cars that got around good in the snow, and were seen a lot in snow country, ski areas, etc. Nowadays, pretty much everyone has front-wheel drive cars, so Saabs aren't special that way any more. You see a lot more SUVs or Subaru 4wd autos at ski areas today. I think Saab should be looking seriously at 4wd, at least as an option, for its models.

Use fun-to-drive FWD for Saab and Saturn, with an AWD option for high performance models. Use RWD (AWD unnecessary) for all Chevrolets, Pontiacs, and Buicks over 16 feet long.

The best platform developement would be Front wheel drive. With a Rear Biased All wheel drive option. That platform would offer much higher volume potential.

Rear wheel drive platforms have lower appeal in volume segments.

FWD or AWD, never RWD.

I think that there are certain advantages to using both front-drive and rear-drive. There should be a good mix of products from GM that satisfy both. Front-drive is great for family sedans, rear-drive for performance-oriented cars. I think GM should definitely go for Zeta Lite, and it WILL sell.

IMO rear wheel drive is going to be a big selling point for newer small cars that are going to be sold towards the younger crowd who like to "tune" their cars. I myself am part of that crowd and can honestly say that a nice stripped lightweight rear wheel drive platform with lots of room for improvement from the aftermarket would sell like hotcakes.

Hi, I still consider myself as a young buyer at 29 but I'm not considering buying a small or midsize car. I only like large cars. FWD is a good thing mainly for smaller cars as it leaves more interior space and it gives lighter cars better traction.
Bigger ones should always be rear wheel drive. I'm still waiting for GM to make a rear wheel full size Buick that will replace my old ones.
I currently have 4 Buicks and the "newest" is a FWD 1991 Park Avenue Ultra. It's still in good shape but I don't like how it feels on the road. I never liked any FWD car anyway. I never liked 1977 and newer GM cars as they lack the hardtop roofs of the 1976 and older designs and they often have engines from other divisions.
4 door hardtop is my favourite body style and GM has not made one since 1976...
Please, make RWD full size Buicks with real frames, towing capacity, outstanding performance, great handling (fun to drive at any speed, in any conditions) and better style than the ugly 1977-1996 models...

I'd care more about that than "Quiet Tuning!"

See my 3 older Buicks on my CarDomain page to see the kind of cars that I like. I don't like them because they are old but because that's how modern cars should be made!

Regards

Phil Racicot

I see front wheel drive like a small, fun,4cyl 200hp car like a RSX. It's fast but not that fast. Rear wheel drive drive is more like a muscular car with either a big 6 or a 8cyl dev. 250 or more.RWD looks and feel really fast. AWD is more a rally car look just like a Subaru STI. The best car for me would be a 4 cyl, AWD,coupe with 225hp atmospheric with a nice driving experience.I think people dont mind the cost if the car has what it needs.

Economy cars should be FWD
Performance cars should be RWD
For RWD cars that are not as pure performance and are intended to offer more utility, or for FWD that edge into that rally realm, offer AWD as an option.
Examples:
Camaro - RWD
Solstice - RWD
GTO - RWD
GP - RWD/AWD
G6 - FWD/AWD
Cobalt - FWD
Impala - FWD/AWD
Monte Carlo - RWD
...or something like that.

Odd you would ask, I was talking cars with the buds last week and I'm the one in the group that feels the next Camaro needs an all wheel drive option with the high feature V6. Of course the number one consideration is that the Camaro is built. And with no "b" pillar. And with V8 options (note the plural)

Most of all the engineers at GM need to recognize the teachings of Colin Champan rather than the arguement of drive wheels. Get the fricking wasted weight out of the product. No matter what anybody says the term "road hugging weight" is a load of baloney for saying the guys desgning the product were lazy or cheap. (lazy 9 out 0f 10) You can't turn or launch weight but you can go faster without it.

I have driven a good number of front and rear wheel drive cars and I can comfortably say that I will never buy a front wheel drive car as long as I live. It does not matter how "rewarding" a front wheel drive car is to drive sedately, when pushed to its limits they just dont perform the same as a car with a proper, rear drive, setup. The new Camaro concept is a step in the right direction.

Rear wheel.. the only way to go. I drive an e36 BMW M3 (from a Pontiac Sunfire), and let me tell you *nothing* can beat 50/50 weight balance, lack of understeer, and the feedback/control you get from RWD. I'll stay exclusively with RWD (or AWD) from now on.

Just look at the perennial winner for best car in class - BMW 3 series has been there since pretty much its inception. Balance is key - what good is horsepower if you have torque steer to contend with?

Surely future pedestrian safety requirements will eliminate many of the packaging advantages seen with, particular smaller, fwd vehicles. In contrast a large core of buyers are well aware of the performance advantages of rwd in terms of balance and power delivery, even in smaller vehicles with relatively modest power. Stability control and optional awd can easily overcome traction problems on most surfaces. In polls on broad GM enthusiast sites (chearsandgears.com and gminsidenews.com), there has been strong support for a compact rwd Pontiac to replace the Sunfire, while a rwd G6 replacement is favored over a fwd model by as more than 2:1. Witness the continued support for the last rwd compacts, especially the E80 series Sprinter/Corolla coupes and Nissan Silvia, the more recent accolades and cult following generated by the Subaru Impreza, Mazda RX-8 and BMW 1-Series (despite their packaging disadvantages). BMW's reputation n the US was founded upon such a small compact. For GM, the Solstice concept generated a tidal-wave of requests for a small 4/5-seat Pontiac sedan/coupe, purely because it was rwd, and it is an idea which has just not gone away. Many people still call for a rwd Pontiac compact and lament the G4/Pursuit offered in Mexico and Canada. However well it sells it does nothing to support the brand's continued existence. Here is a chance for GM to give Pontiac a unique niche in the market.

On the other hand the transverse engine fwd/awd format will continue to be the mainstream choice, and for Saab is so deeply ingrained in the brand character that rwd models are anethema to the purists.

Rear drive is great for the performance cars such as the Corvette and Camaro. I believe the Monte Carlo and Impala could benefit from a rear drive platform as well. Large cars have the room to benefit from the better balance and handling a well engineered rear drive platform can provide. Small cars, however, would be better off with front wheel drive, which allows a more passenger room on a small platform, and better bad weather traction in a light car. We all want to see the Camaro return, but definitely not the Chevette !
Slightly off topic, I want to tell you how much I enjoy my new G6 GTP Coupe! This car rocks! The quality is excellent, and I find I take the long way home to drive it more. One of the guys I work with has a Solara, and is the typical ToyoSnob, "better quality, OHC better, blah, blah". I let him drive my GTP Coupe, and he was in shock. I told him to floor it up a steep hill, and his response was "Holy Crap this thing has guts!" Everyone who's been in my car loves it. If you can just get the import buyers to take a test drive, things would turn around for GM. Keep up the good work !

Rear Wheel Drive! I think Chryslers success speaks volumes not only that but if chevy is going to build cars and then slap an SS badge on them espeacially when you guys are using nameplates that have a real and visceral fan base (ie the imapala the malibu and the up and coming camero ) these nameplates shouldnt be used lightly the Impala hasnt been cool since 96 front drive v6 and it looks like a rental well at least you brought back the malibu oh wait thats a rental to.

FWD with occasional AWD models. See Ford 500.

Critical here in Minnesota!

FWD, RWD, or AWD can be designed and tuned for maximum performance. FWD benefits from packaging efficiency. RWD gives great performance, but you gotta know that if you try to sell cars that are only available with RWD, then understand that they will be rotting on your dealer lots from November through March at dealers in cold weather states. Any car you plan to offer with RWD, you had better offer AWD as an option, because it would be idiotic and foolish to shut out half your markets.

Simply put--front wheel drive still has its purpose on lower end cars like, for instance, Cobalts and Malibus, but when you build a relatively large luxury sedan, or a car like the new Camaro, it HAS to be rear wheel drive to even be considered legitimate.

You can put all the latest electro gizmos on the dash, the most beautiful materials, etc., but if I'm buying something the size and price of a Lucerne/DTS, it either has to be rear drive or it's not even a consideration. Case in point, had Chrysler brought out the LX cars with the same look and price, but in front drive form, they wouldn't have been nearly the success they are today. Well, that, and do you EVER see a front drive Mercedes or BMW? Didn't think so...

To bring up another mentioned brand, Saab doesn't exactly fit the rear drive image, but a new fwd platform with AWD capabilities certainly would.

I have mixed feelings about RWD. My first car in 1989 was a RWD '79 Olds Cutlass, and I loved driving it. After sending it to the junkyard with a slipping transmission in late 1994, I bought a FWD '89 Buick Regal. It was nice to drive for a few weeks since it was much nicer than the Cutlass, but it quickly became just boring transportation. After lots of little things started to go wrong with it, I traded it in for a new 2001 Buick Regal. This was about the same as the '89, nice upgrade for a while, then dull.

In late 2004, I traded the Regal in for a new RWD 2005 Cadillac CTS with the sport suspension package. It was wonderful to return to a RWD car, and I still enjoy and look forward to driving it every day, even after owning it for more than a year. I'm not sure I could go back to FWD and torque steer again. Fish-tailing a RWD car is almost like having your own personal amusement park ride.

But RWD is not perfect. The car spins a lot more on snow and ice than the FWD cars did. There are lots of things that help like traction control, stability control, the snow mode on the transmission and near 50-50 weight distribution, but I wouldn't try driving it in deep snow or after an ice storm with the stock tires.

RWD cars also tend to be more expensive because of the increased engineering complexity of the drive shaft and differential when FWD cars only have C-V joints. And AWD is even more complex and expensive, and has more problems like lower gas mileage, reduced performance and likely higher maintenance and lower long-term durability and reliability.

I would love to have more RWD choices from GM, but I imagine I am not in the majority of typical car owners in the US. Particularly in northern states where there is more snowfall, and older people who remember the days before FWD, I think lots of people would remember the nightmare of putting snow tires on their car, and still spinning and getting stuck, and they would stay away from RWD. The almost mandatory increase in the price of a RWD car compared to the FWD competition might also keep people away. I think there would be a huge marketing hurdle to overcome before RWD becomes mainstream.

We should also discuss the ethics of car sales here. How many people who have bought a RWD car like a Cadillac or the new Chrysler cars weren't aware and weren't informed by the sales person that the car was RWD, and didn't discover this until they tried to drive it in the snow and ice? I would bet a fairly significant number.

So, should GM make more RWD or AWD cars? I would say yes, but only on select models. Pontiac should be mostly RWD, except for entry-level models like the G6 or a G4. Buick should have a RWD/AWD flagship sedan to replace the Park Avenue. Cadillac should be entirely RWD with AWD available on some models. Chevy should only have a few RWD cars like Corvette, Camaro, and maybe Impala with AWD available. Saturn should have the Sky roadster and maybe a flagship with RWD/AWD.

Many car companies have stayed mostly or entirely FWD for so many years now that bringing back RWD to the masses isn't a decision to be made quickly or lightly. The people in control of financing new car designs at GM have to be convinced of the need for the added price and complexity and the drawbacks of RWD and AWD. You have to make sure not to listen too much to the small but vocal minority (you know who you are) who are constantly demanding a V-8 powered coupe with 400-500+ horsepower that costs under $25,000. That price is not attainable, only a tiny number of buyers who are auto enthusiasts desire that much power, insurance costs will be enormous, and there is such a small demand for coupes anymore, I don't know how any car company can justify or make any money on such a vehicle. But GM can make money on RWD/AWD cars if the models are carefully chosen and properly marketed to the people who have never owned one.

I am about to lease my fourth Saab (900 SE Turbo, 9-5 Aero, 9-5 Aero, 9-3 SC Aero). I live outside of Philadelphia. There are enough hills and enough snow here to make rear-wheel drive a bad idea. (I've watched too many people slide around and into one another.)

I would not purchase a rear-wheel drive car (even from Saab) even though I expect that good-wether driving would be more fun w/RWD. All wheel drive is fine, but adds weight (which can hurt performance and mileage) and expense.

You need front-wheel and all-wheel drive products. Maybe a hybrid with the gas engine driving the front wheels and electric motors driving the rear would get you more of the off-the-line acceleration that folks want without inducing too much torque steer.

Personal I like either front-wheel drive or all-wheel drive vehicles, living in Massachusetts, thats whats needed in 5-6 months of winter driving.

I'm about to turn 30 and I personally prefer RWD. That said, I live in Toronto and my last car (Saab 9-3) beat out the Cadillac CTS for two reasons: first, it was smaller and I like smaller cars; second, it was FWD and my wife hates RWD in the winter (we are a one car family).

So, I guess that wasn't the answer you were looking for. I would like to see the FWD cars (some of which are inevitable) to be as fun as possible, so those of us who are stuck with them can enjoy them. At the same time, if the decision were mine alone I would take a RWD car over a FWD car everytime (and, to be honest, I probably would have got the CTS if it had only 1 of the two problems mentioned above).

>Our belief is that front-
>wheel drive cars can be
>very rewarding to drive if
>properly set up.

The key terminology being "if properly set up." Which rarely happens, especially in a high-volume car by a mainstream manufacturer. Such a set up is reserved for high dollar cars.

And even so, I've still not seen a properly set-up FWD car that was more enjoyable to drive than a comparable RWD or AWD counterpart.

So I vote RWD or AWD.

I like FWD like most Saab
enthusiasts . However Saab
should start to entertain
AWD especially when you are approaching 250hp -300hp
The Saab will work so much
better through an AWD system.
anyway that is what I think
Saab -GM should go to from 2008 on. epsilon 2 Platform ?

It's painfully obvious from the wording of your question that GM prefers the status quo, and doesn't want to invest in the Kappa platform.

Rearwheel drive is better for the sole reason that the front tires don't have to divide their grip between acceleration and turning. Rear wheel drive is waht real drivers want, and as Chrysler has shown the American manufactures, is the way to go.

Its vary simple, if a car is front wheel drive I will never buy it. My moms mini van and my grandmothers car are front wheel drive. I drive rear wheel drive cars with standard transmissions and thats it.

Of all my friends, I don’t know a single person who would prefer front-wheel drive. We are all enthusiasts and here is the general consensus about fast cheep cars. We all like the WRX and Evo (not really cheep), the Mazda 3 and 6 are cool, civic is cool, srt-4 is fast but has zero style, etc. But what we all really want, but won’t talk about ‘cause we can’t afford it is a BMW 3 series. So, build a RWD G6 with 200 horses, and people will be lined up at the lots. The real coup-de-tat would be a G6 that comes in FWD, RWD, or AWD. Then you will rule the industry. Do it with the Cobalt too. Then build a RWD performance version of the G6 with some serious muscle that can beat an M3 on the track. I know you can do it, just look at the Corvette. I don’t expect to be able to afford it, but when someone buys a 325i they think of it as getting a tuned down M3, not 16 fewer horses than a GLI.

Jack,

My friends and I like the idea of rear wheel drive, but bad weather traction is still a concern. Never the less, I think it would be a good idea for GM to offer a rear drive vehicle as part of the Chevrolet or Pontiac line. However, this vehicle should have the option of an AWD system as well. That way buyers in the northern part of the country can choose AWD, while still providing buysers in the southern states the option of not incurring the additional costs and power loss associated with AWD. The main concern I have with front wheel drive vehicles is that some have so much power they can not turn effectively under hard acceleration (G6 GTP). If the G6 was AWD I would love it. The additional cost would not bother me. Good luck with your research. I hope this helps.

RWD

I guess I would be in the demographic GM is pointing to. And to put it bluntly, I don't think I will ever buy another FWD car. If the car was compelling and had a good motor, I would prefer AWD. But the choices for AWD cars that are attractive from the design, power, and cost department are few and far between. That's quite all right though, as RWD has worked for me in my past 5 cars and my next one, a Saturn Sky.

Conventional wisdom is that RWD should be reserved for large cars, since there is a big space efficiency penalty.

Putting it in small cars is brain-dead, despite the current "show car" fad. I gave that up with an '82 Corolla.

If GM makes FWD cars that handle like MINI's, or Subaru style AWD cars that don't swig gas (at least not brutally), customers will come...but I still like FWD for just the reasons you outline - space efficiency, intrinsically safer handling (had a BMW do a 360 on me, but never a FWD problem), MUCH GREATER fuel efficiency than AWD, better snow handling etc.

I wouldn't chase the Chrysler 300/Magnum/Charger series, since DC could economically build on the Mercedes "old technology bits and pieces" instead of having to do the job from scratch. Besides, if RWD were intrinsically that popular, wouldn't the Ford Crown Victoria be ultra-popular? Or the old RWD Impala?

Even the RWD Mustang was languishing until the recent restyle. (Come to think about it, maybe the Chrysler 300's "style" has more to do with its success than the RWD/FWD issue.)

The SINGLE area where GM should have RWD is - well - the Camaro. Just so it matches the Mustang and provides an alternative to the DC RWD'ers. In that context, the "balanced handling" will appeal to "enthusiasts." But be sure to include stability control, which Ford didn't (hey, watch me slide into the snow bank!), and get the weight balance as close to 50-50 as possible (something Chrysler and Dodge was able to do) or all the real-world RWD negatives will be there in spades.

BTW, I drove a friend's New Beatle with the latest anti-slip and stability control technology, and it did super in the snow. How 'bout more limited slip differentials in FWD cars, instead of AWD, which is massive overkill?

I refuse to buy FWD at this point, I only consider a model if it is RWD or AWD. I don't like torque steer or wheel hop(as the tires wear) that FWD is prone to. Also you can make a much better steering system if you have RWD. Finally, weight distribution is helped by RWD as well. All these add up to a more engaging and fun to drive car, and that is what I like to buy.

RWD is more fun, no doubt. Does GM want a piece of the drifting culture?

You speak of "significant power" through the front wheels of the SAAB. 184kW is pedestrian.
Why aren't you putting forward an example of your Australian arm who have their entry level family car with 175kW? Okay, it's a little less than the Saab, but it handles it easily because it's RWD. The platform is also sold with engines right up to 297kW.
Front wheel drive has its place - small to medium cars with sensible amounts of power which have to compete in a very competitive market segment.
That said, give me my V8 RWD anyday. (and AWD if you have to)

Although I almost never push my car to its limits, I would always choose rwd over fwd. The way a car "feels" while taking a turn is one of the main reasons why I like rwd better - in my experience, the difference can be felt even while driving in a mildly aggressive manner (in a way that won't get you in trouble if seen by mr police officer). Also, I think the snow traction advantage of fwd is not as great as people think, especially if you get a second pair of tires dedicated for winter on your rwd car.

There is not even one ounce of doubt: Rear wheel drive cars are more rewarding to drive, more desirable to own, and - beacuse of the mechanical layout - RWD cars have a better stance on the road: Short front overhang, cab-rearward designs that communicate elegance and strength. There is no doubt at all.

I think there's definitely a market for compact, rear wheel drive vehicles.
I do, however, think it's a niche market, as RWD in a compact car will have a number of drawbacks. Longitudinal engine mounting means longer hoods which limits what can be achieved in truly compact dimensions. Transmission tunnels mean center rear seats are basically a waste (it's debatable how useful they are anyway, but people like to have the option). Rear differentials can intrude upon rear cargo space. Modest decreases in fuel economy due to more spinning parts in the drive train. Today's traction/stability control systems and good suspension and tires greatly help the grip and driving safety issues that used to be associated with rear wheel drive (though such things need to be easily disabled for enthusiast approval).
Realistically, I'd say that putting good, lively steering into a compact is more important, or perhaps just an easier way to gain more support from enthusiasts. Mazda3s, Mini Coopers, and older Honda Civics are an example of this.
But, if good steering could do everything enthusiasts wanted in small cars, we wouldn't need the Pontiac Solstice and Mazda MX5. Those vehicles have the advantage of not worrying about practicality very much.
The fusion of the compact sports car and practical compact was fairly well illustrated in Mazda's Kabura concept, though it was slightly lost in the noise of the muscle cars at the Detroit show. I could definitely see a vehicle of similar character being offered through Pontiac especially. The Kappa platform already used at Pontiac is obviously a great place to start with such a vehicle, since it's the right size, it's cost effective, and according to early media praise, quite rewarding to drive. A lengthened wheelbase to make more room for passengers, two doors, a legitimately useful 2+2 layout, flexible cargo area accessed from a hatch, combined with some of the styling and handling success of the solstice, I think would be quite desirable. I think interior space of a Scion TC is a good goal to shoot for in a vehicle like this.
Where a compact, RWD vehicle fits into the rest of the GM world, to me, is a little less clear. Chevy already has a range of quality cars in the compact segment. Adding all wheel drive to the Cobaly/HHR line seems more logical, though theoretically a transfer case like an AWD one could be simplified into a rear wheel drive transfer case for a transverse engine car, and that could avoid some of the packaging and engineering problems of adapting a mainstream vehicle line to RWD to gain more enthusiast approval.
The direction Saturn is going seems to be one that could accept rear or all wheel drive compacts too, since the Ion is expected to be replaced, and Saturn's image reworked somewhat. Whether it would be better to start with Kappa platform (Sky) or Delta platform (Astra) is a larger question.
Either way, in many consumer's eyes, GM isn't a strong player in the compact segment, and I could easily envision some “sexier” vehicles drawing people into the showrooms, just as dodge/chrysler have used their LX platform vehicles as a catalyst for greater success. It's a situation that shows the power that styling and rear wheel drive have to give a mainstream vehicle line tremendous momentum.

I can't stand driving front drive cars. I don't lke the torque steer issue and the "pulling" feeling you get. This greatly limits my choices for a car, and I am getting a little tired of driving trucks.

Rear wheel drive will always rule "fun-to-drive". A setup with reasonable weight distribution and a limited slip negates much of the FWD advantage. AWD, adds weight, cost and complexity.

To begin, I'm a young male (21) just out of college and in the market for a new car. I live in the North East where weather conditions can be a serious consideration when choosing a vehicle.

I'm a domestic car enthusiast, and if I could design the ideal compact car configuration for my tastes it would be a full-time AWD hatch or quad-coupe with a turbo 4. Since I can't afford more than one vehicle, this vehicle satisfies my needs for 1 performance 2 economy 3 utility 4 all season capability. This would be the ideal replacement for my 2 door jimmy 4x4, and a car many different people with varying needs could find enjoyable and useful. I would be willing to put snow tires on a RWD performance car to drive it year-round, but 90% of buyers aren't devoted enough to go to the trouble of buying and storing an extra set of wheels and tires.

You can play in the enthusiast compact segment with FWD successfully, but you need an area of differentiation. THere is no shame in having the base car FWD, but a performance version should ideally be full-time AWD. Part-time AWD systems work fine for car-based utility vehicles, but no one considers it a performance credential, look how many Volvo S60R's you see on the road...

The best way to sell cars to young enthusiasts is to offer the most high-tech/futuristic features at the lowest possible price. AWD and turbo-charging are considered by many to be advanced technology. That is why mitsubishi used to be revered by the youth with beauties like the 3000GT and Eclipse when they were turbo charged and AWD. The problem was that these cars were too expensive when new, but had absolute cult status on the used car market. Another new car I'd look at very carefully is the new Civic. While it seems that young people liking a civic is cliche, the newest generation offers two things that I really like. The high-winding racecar-like engine in the Si, and the LED speedo and the split instument panel. It looks futuristic and advanced to my young eye (the rest of the civic and civics past don't appeal to me in the least). One thing to be careful of, don't go over the top. The Nissan Urge is perhaps the least desirable concept I've ever seen RWD or not. It isn't futuristic, but in the style of a bad japanese cartoon.

I wish I had the opportunity to better answer your questions if I haven't completely. I am an avid domestic car enthusiast and would be proud to help GM's market research if I would be of any use in a focus group or something of the like. ccortazzo@gmail.com

Interesting question... You could spit the difference with AWD like Audi and the A3 S-line. Wait, you had that with the 9-2. The tough part about small rwd is the balance with the car weighing very little and all the weight up front and the rears pushing. I live in Canada and this setup would not work well up here year round. California should be another story. I say make a Solstice Coupe or Hatch with AWD and I would be sold.

Im 16, have a passion for all things automotive and believe that rwd is the only way to go. you would have to pay me to buy a fwd car. end of story (ps my 3 friends sitting here reading this feel the same way).

You know it is obvious one of the reasons GM is doing a little poorly is because performance versions of economy cars like the GXP and SS lines are not either RWD or AWD. It's a known fact RWD is just too fun. Being a 2004 GTO owner I can say that for sure. Les the smaller SS, GXP, and Red Line ranges be AWD. Like an AWD Cobalt SS, G6, and ION.

I believe RWD is far more appropriate for larger cars, were the packaging advantages of FWD are not so important... The BMW 1 series hatch shows how RWD greatly comprimises the space efficiency of the basic hatchback design. As for the Saab brand, I believe just as RWD is BMW's thing, FWD seems a Saab thing. Why not make Saab the best handling FWD cars in the world? Remember, the very cool Sabb Sonett of thge '70s was FWD...

huh... usually, id say rear drive all the way, but its winter so i can see how rear with AWD could really come in handy... i doubt a chevy cobalt ss or pontiac g6 gtp could compete with a mitsu lancer evo or a subie wrx sti, but itd still be cool and probably sell well here up north... although cars like the GTO and that camaro concept should stay pure RWD. but most of your sedans would prolly be more appealing with RWD... and maybe total redesigns (just messing with you!!! not ALL of them need ground-up redesigns :p)... yeah but if you look at how the chrysler LX cars are selling, you gotta start moving back to RWD... a lot of your FWD cars make no sense with V8s... the monte carlo especially needs RWD 1. because the nascar version has it and 2. because a v8 sport coupe should be.

i guess what im trying to say is...
MORE REAR-DRIVE/V8 CARS!!!

it works for chrysler, itll work for you. and you'll catch ford off guard... theyre going all fwd and putting every new car on a mazda chassis...

The only thing making the Cobalt a good car is front wheel drive, if it had rear wheel drive it'd be a GREAT car.

Sports car enthusiasts don't care about bad weather traction, interior design or anything else as long as the seat is comfortable enought to drive in for 8 hours.

Rear wheel drive inspires, front wheel drive leaves much to desire. (You can quote that, name's Ryan).

Depends what you mean by handling. I like my 9-3 and my wife's 9-2. The 9-2 handles very differently to the 9-3 due to its four wheel drive. A rear wheel drive car is more fun, but that's because you can easily lose control with it more than a front wheel or 4WD car. The trick is to get people in to test drive the cars. What would really work with the Saab's is a slightly better grade of materials for the dashboard (they are quite plasticky), and the option of 4WD for the 9-5.

Americans buy cars on looks, and we're being served a whole plate of ugly. We have scads of FWD cars with cavernous interiors, but they are generally stubby, pug-faced things with tall slab sides and no overhangs. When you turn the engine sideways and go "cab forward" until it hurts, you lose the traditional RWD proportions that appear balanced and natural to the eye. Whether they know it or not, buyers have a sense of how a car should fill space.

Also, FWD is mechanically inferior. Poor balance, driveline lash, binding, and torque steer are all very real to anyone with the half-presence to know what is going on. FWD is one advertising campaign away from being established cheap and cut-rate in the eyes of the public. Pile on the technology buzzwords, and RWD is back. Fancy traction control defeats what everyone heard from their uncle's friend about his 1978 BMW being bad in the snow. The anti-FWD counterrevolution is already underway, regardless.

From the enthusiast's point of view, the RWD landscape is barren. Nothing along the lines of a classic BMW 2002 is available to the American masses, and the rear-drive sedans out there are all tagged as "premium" with massive stickers. The 3-series, IS-series, and G35 are nice cars if you're in the bourgeois earning bracket. Even the entry-level BMW 1-series can get spendy in a hurry, and we can't even touch one. We despirately need dynamically good, affordable RWD cars with clean, unpretentious packaging and weekend warrior performance for realistic prices.

Plain RWD Commodores and Falcons are everywhere in Australia. Why is it that a country with a fraction of the population has regular cars that are far better?

My next car purchase will be a Kappa coupe (if produced) or what becomes of the Mazda Kabura concept. Car nuts are still stinging from Nissan selling a watered-down 240SX and then cancelling it in 1998. It was the last car of its ilk, and we want more. Build me a Solstice GT turbo hardtop for reasonable money, and you're mine. Build Saabs that drive like a BMW, and you'll take the respect, too. RWD is mandatory, no matter what.

I really like the idea of RWD or AWD cars. I know in my mind, whenever I hear that I immediately think performance. I've always been told that RWD cars are horrible in the winter, but I still want one. AWD seems really sporty too, but with alot more practicality. This is probably a good thing, it's just really hard to find on an affordable AWD car is my POV. When I think AWD I normally think subaru or something, whose cars are alot more expensive than their non AWD counterparts from other car manufacturers.

As we've seen in the past with variable displacement, fuel injection, I believe that someday a manufacturer will invent a technology that will maximize the capabilities of front wheel drive layouts, one that will enable front-biased cars to acheive near 50/50 weight distribution, allow for high-horsepower engines, and give enthusiasts the fun-to-drive character that RWD enthusiasts currently enjoy.

Obviuosly the auto industry as a whole has not hit that mark yet. The pieces are there: sophisticated transmissions with electronically delivered torque, advanced AWD systems and limited slip front differentials. None of these, however, have been able to sway hardcore RWD enthusiasts from jumping to "the dark side".

The problem is what to do with all that weight on top of the rear wheels. Short of developing an entirely new engine/transaxle layout that can be moved behind the wheels yet maintain the packaging advantages of FWD, that weight isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I'm not going to argue for or againt FWD or RWD, as I believe that both have their places in the auto industry. I will say that whatever drivetrain config that GM decides to go with, let it lead the industry in innovation.

RWD all the way.

Saab, I can understand, I mean, that's their thing. I dont think people are asking for Rear Wheel Drive Saab's though, so that wont work for justifying FWD. With the overwhelming success of DC's LH platform, I think the choice is obvious. Problem is, I cant think of any RWD compacts or sub-compacts offered in America, sans the two seat Mx-5 and Solstice/Sky.

Maybe it's time for GM to make the bandwagon, rather than joining it. The market is there.

Do I sense a bit of front wheel drive bias in the lead-in to this "poll?"

It's all pro FWD and not one mention of the merits of RWD, or am I being too sensitive?

Anyway count one vote for RWD on certain platforms like Corvette, the new Retro muscle cars that are in prototype form at the moment and the Monte Carlo so they match what is on the NASCAR tracks.

BTW, nice selection of "Blogs we Like." (Disclosure: I contribute to Fast Machines.)

I have been a Saab fan for a long time, but you almost lost me to Audi or Infiniti on my last purchase. I purchased a 9-2X over the summer because I really wanted the AWD. But, the car was simply too small to be an effective family car.

This winter I traded it in for a 9-5. I love the car, it is the second one I have owned in the last 5 years -- which is why I went back to it. But, I seriously considered an Audi A6 because of the AWD.

In the end I stuck with the 9-5, because it is so much fun to drive. But, in three or four years when I am ready to trade in my 9-5, I would love to have the option for AWD, or a the option to purchase an AWD cross-over vehicle (I need something with better fuel economy than an SUV).

I am a fan of AWD (all wheel drive). You get plenty of traction in all types of weather and its great for handling during a race. Something along the lines of a Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 AWD or Second Generation Eclipse GSX AWD would be a huge hit for people my age 18-26, as long as it was easy to tune, like the old Mitsubishi's, Nissan's, and Honda's. the main problems that limit tuning are cheap (not well made) parts and ECU's that don't allow more flexablity. AWD is what we want over any kinda of drive train. You come out with an good looking, tunable AWD car and I will buy it. AND PLEASE DONT MAKE IT LOOK LIKE AN AVEO!!!

Personally, when it comes to compact cars, FWD seems to be more popular is fine. When I think of RWD, I think more of sports cars or at least "sporty" cars. Of course, there are sporty compacts that have FWD, like the VW GTI...

Of Course, Saab could use something to set it apart from the rest of GM. No offense, but the brand can get a little...shall we say..."bland"...at certain times, and I think a RWD compact car would be different from what everyone else had and it would fun to drive if you guys pulled it off right...

Plus it would be a good selling point for Saab...

Good question. I recently owned an Acura RSX Type-S, which was a blast to drive. However, despite the best efforts of Honda's engineers, it did suffer from the torque steer inherent to front drive layouts. Also, due to the front drive layout the car lacked balance with over 60% of the weight in the front, which caused terminal understeer. I replaced the car with an Acura TL which suffers the same issues. I also shopped the Lexus IS 250 which is rear wheel drive and the base model costs less than the TL. I enjoyed the rear wheel drive handling dynamics, but I found it impossible to get a good driving position, as I am 6 foot 2 and found the IS 250 a bit cramped. Although I prefer the handling characteristics of rear wheel drive, the better overall value and superior driving position of the TL made the decision easy.

For Saab?

FWD and AWD...no brainer.

I will only buy rear-wheel drive. Other than a front-wheel drive '95 Beretta that I drive to and from work, I have only owned Camaro's, and needless to say, I'm very excited about the new Camaro that will be replacing my Beretta in a few years. I also have a '99 Camaro SS convertible that is kept in the garage.

Some people don't care if a car is FWD or RWD, and don't know the difference, but I think the market is shifting back to RWD for a reason. You can still have ample space inside a vehicle and perform just fine in bad weather with RWD if it is set up correctly. I really love the new Impala SS but I would never want a V8 FWD car because you can't use that much power if it's all going through the front wheels. It baffles me that you would put a V8 in a car, and then handicap it with "Torque Management" software that dumbs it down as it shifts so the transmission doesn't explode. Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

FYI, I'm 24 so I guess I would fall under the younger crowd. I am not interested in sport compacts or small cars, but RWD is a requirement for whatever car I buy new.

Wow, this is not even a question. If you are performance oriented, then RWD is the ONLY way to go. I own a FWD car and at 372whp, traction is a luxury I no longer have. I also drive a, just as powerful, RWD car and it is much better for traction, period. Yes FWD can be fast, but a fast FWD car will be an even faster RWD car. Traction is the name of the game and it is insanely hard to keep a high-powered FWD car's wheels from doing nothing but spinning. Spinning the wheels is only cool the first couple times then it becomes annoying very fast and you only wish you had traction.

While I am quite happy with the current fwd configuration, if SAAB wishes to compete with BMW and Lexus I'm believe RWD will be required.
Having said that, GM needs to pick a strategy and stick with it. We've had the promise of the Alfa-SAAB 9-5 with was cancelled. We've had the 1/2 baked 9-2, the on again off again 9-4. Now we're left without anything new until years from now. Please pick a plan and stick with it.

I would say to stand apart for the crowd, you go the RWD route. Technology can overcome some of the RWD drawbacks in poor weather climates with perception a being a greater hurdle.

To save Pontiac, I say a line of small, rear drivers is the answer. No one can claim it's a rebadged Chevy or something else. It would also be unique in the market place and in my opinion would do very well with the youth and tuner/drifting crowd. Pontiac would be the equivalent of what it was to the youth market in the 1960's, but in a completely different vein. Think a performance oriented Scion brand.

Camaro is long over due and would capitalize on the market for outfitting classic musclecasr with modern running gear, expect it would be from the factory.

Both Toyota and Nissan are sitting on two cult classics, the Corolla SR5 and 240SX that GM can come in and beat to market while cementing themselves as a youth brand.

Fun-to-drive rear-drive with all-wheel drive for the win.

Something rear engine would be nice too.

I think if it is under 200hp a fwd car is a good idea. Much beyond that and a rwd car is more fun.

You are in a tough spot with Saab. It's always been FWD and I don't think GM is committed to making it competitive with BMW and Audi. So keep it FWD and try to be competitive with the Lexus ES series.

There is no doubt that the premium market prefers RWD because it is more fun to drive but there is a niche for premium FWD that the ES serves.

You are sort of admitting that GM's FWD cars have not been "set up correctly." You should be worrying more about your bread-and-butter sedans. You should be cutting three quarters of your brands, consolidating your product line, and making something that's at least marginally competitive with the Accord and Camry. Saab is a distraction.

I think on a fun or sporty car driving dynamics should outwiegh fiscal and production concerns. So I'd lean toward rear-drive on anything but a boring family sedan or econobox should be RWD. Take a cue from BMW. Nobody wants to spend BMW money on a car that drives like a front-drive Pontiac.

GM Has fun to drive FWD Cars already like the Grand Prix GXP. Also the Cobalt. The Pontiac Vibe has great handling and awesome winter traction but is lacking in the power output area.

If you ask me GM needs a RWD to AWD car. A good car to make AWD would be the Cobalt but the frame structure might not be capable. A small sporty RWD car is needed to compeat with the Mazada RX8 and Mustang. If it comes with AWD it will sell better because it will handle better and appeal to a daily driver to us in the Areas where we get snow.

pleeeeeeease no more front wheel drive on vehicles especially not on the NEW CAMARO!!!!!!! Im 24 years of age and waiting for the new camaro to come out so please dont dissapoint a loyal bowtie customer is willing to buy a american vehicle and no foreign tin can!!!

Hi, first of all, I commend you for taking this approach and reaching out to consumers, who ultimately matter most. I think this is an extremely important question, and one that could ultimately lead GM to new directions and unique directives for certain brands. Ultimately the question should be, how many people are willing to drive a RWD car for the sake of the neutrality, balance, and overall sportiness. No matter what you argue, FWD simply cannot replicate the athletic feel and perfect balance that a well-proportioned RWD car can; and the FWD cars you make, aside from the Astra, are not compelling arguments in your favor either. RWD in today's world is a premium feature. Luxury makes and expensive cars have it, but aside from the 350Z, Mustang and a couple other lower priced cars, there are no sporty cars in the 15k-30k region offered. GM has oft-been critized of being late to the party and not understanding where the customer is going and where they would like to be. In the last few years we have witnessed an explosion of all RWD/AWD cars that has amounted to significant market share gains at many automakers. Infiniti, Chrysler, Ford, BMW, MB, Lexus have all seen revolutions in recent times led by RWD cars. Can people in the middle of the country utilize RWD and not suffer because of it? Yes, this is proven. Countless hundreds of thousands of people drive BMWs every year in the Snow Belt. This is not the question GM should be asking. The question GM needs to ask themselves is, what are our brand's positioning and where do they need to go in order to survive. I am talking Buick, I am speaking of Pontiac. Thier death is almost imminent; a drastic upheaval of how cars are designed at those particular brands NEEDS to take place if I am to be thinking of Pontiac and Buick in the present-sense in 2015. This kind of upheaval does not mean abandoning the current market, but offering things even the current market for those makes could relish, and expanding beyond that base and winning back consumers from the imports. A RWD G6, G4, and G8 would be perfect for Pontiac. With the right ocntent, styling, packaging, and pricing of around 15-45k for the entire range, Pontiac would see an intense revival. As you've already surmised, I am a RWD proponent. I am not oppposed to AWD vehicles built off of RWD platforms. RWD with the kind of technology cars are packing today is more than enough for many. I can understand there are some who live in particularly hilly areas of the Snow Belt who might feel they really do need it, but I wager them to drive a new car with modern technology that is RWD and a set of snow tires and experience the reality of it. If they still need AWD, find by me, my plan calls to offer it. The new Camaro platform is something that should leveraged across Pontiac and Buick for smaller sedans, a revival of the Skylark and a new G6. The G6 would be the ultimate sport sedan priced at around where it is now. Make it with a retro Firebird face, a lot like newer Alfa's, don't forget aggressive and sexy body, and it'll sell. Buick's version would be a competitor to the S40, A4, 9-3, TSX. Cars Buick SHOULD be competing against. Come on GM, what is it going to take for you to learn that all a brand needs is new, groundbreaking product for a revival. We've got the quality and reliability, go for it! You did it at Cadillac with massive success despite questionable quality [interior quality and design does not match the competition, no excuses, performance doesn't always match rivals]; and this is only one brand story of the past five years that have seen automakers fighting for whatever piece of the pie they can. To conclude this, I will be in the market in a year for a sporty convertible right about the size of the current 3-series. I know you won't be able to offer that car within a year, but I expect my tastes won't change, and I have always wanted the sporties, most tossable car I could find. Build it for me and I will help revive Pontiac.

I would suggest you look at something like Nissan's FM platform as an example. They are able to make an assortment of well handling vehicles from this platform. Front wheel drive has an advantage in packaging but has perceived limits in handling and performance with car guys. What GM needs is flexibility to change quickly when the marketplace changes. For example, gas prices are high and Toyota has a full hybrid and GM brings out new large SUVs and has only partial hybrids. I really want to see GM succeed but it will take a new vision and a willingness to change some corporate values. Instead of asking about FWD vs RWD how about AWD? A FM type platform can accomplish that in a spectacular way.

I think RWD is far superior in most regards. While it is true that FWD is move drivable in inclimate weather, Any other time RWD has the advantage. Here are a few RWD advantages (IMO): Better weight transfer on accelleration. Able to handle more power. Able to do "fishtails" :). Better balance. Longitudinal motor. No Torque steer. Oversteer vs. understeer. Think about it, the best cars in the world are typically RWD, there is a reason. Why were the Buick GN and Impala SS (early 90's)so d**n popular while thier more powerful and refined FWD offspring are either too boring to be cool or too full of shortcomings to be taken seriously. I have posted elsewhere that a great car for GM would be a large, 5 passenger convertible RWD V8. Thats the formula. A completely unfilled niche. Good modern styling with a few retro cues.

In many ways, this is another case of "GM can do no right".
The fact is for years front-wheel drive has worked fine and been refined and made better...anyone remember several years ago how the 'geniuses' at Audi came out with that complex front suspension system that could handle higher levels of power and not torque steer?
Now, however, the tide of public opinon has been swayed, and I believe largely by the press, that modern, highpower smaller cars can *never* handle the turning, braking and acceleration all through the front wheels.
True? Not exactly, but to come out with a small, sporty, front-wheel drive car is to swim against the tide (acura, anyone?)
It can be done, Acura comes out with the TL and it's still front wheel drive and even THEY are criticized... but the new TSX is highly praised. Front-wheel drive.
Let's face it, GM is absolutely not going to get any slack. _I_ personally would prefer a RWD over FWD in a small sporty sedan, but GM is between the proverbial rock and hard place.
If you buck the current trends and stay (lets say with Saab) with FWD, you'll be criticized for not advancing. If you switch the 93 to a RWD platform, the Saab purists will criticize you for 'further' ruining the brand.
Hope it helps!

The key in my opinion is to offer options. It would seem that the Cobalt and Ion should remain FWD for all the reasons you mentioned. However, a well executed G4 RWD sedan and coupe would fit with Pontiac's image.

Currently, Pontiacs vehicles do not top the class in fun to drive, even against brands that don't proclaim it - such as Nissan, let alone Mazda. In GT form Pontiacs need to outhandle Mazdas. Currently, GT means power pedals and huge sunroofs. Make it mean class leading handling.

Take a look at the Lexus IS exterior, and imagine a sharply defined twin port grill. Standard 2.4L, GT optional 2.0 turbo, GXP 2.8 HF turbo.

Don't go for "value" - for once break open a new segment. Shoot for 95% of the 325i at 70% of the cost. Let Chevy sell the value. Make an exciting car, and people will pay for it. Just make sure it has an AWD option and a backseat that can accomodate adults.

Definitely rear-wheel drive. There is simply nothing else that can match it for ability. Its hard to give a front-wheel drive car a performance image when all serious sports and race cars are rear wheel drive. Devices like traction control can give rear wheel drive cars improved capability in bad weather. Rear wheel drive has not been any deterrent to customers in recent years; Consider popular cars like the Ford Mustang and Chrysler 300C -- successful models employing rear wheel drive.

I know that if I were making a buying choice between two cars of equal specifications, one front wheel drive and one real wheel, I would definitely choose the rear wheel drive car any day.

Front wheel drive may be fine and dandy for cars like Saabs, Cobalts and Monte Carlos (ugh) but let's face it, how many times has Chevrolet considered making the Corvette front wheel drive? How's that GTO front wheel drive prototype coming along?

What GM needs (desperately) is a small, affordable car with decent power, a slick 6 speed manual, a well tuned suspension and rear wheel drive to set the pace in that market segment, instead of just trying to keep up with the likes of the Acura RSX and Civic Si. If the current Cobalt SS were rear wheel drive, the waiting list would be huge.

I have owned a couple of "performance" cars that are front wheel drive (my 258hp 6 speed Acura TL included) and when the lease is up on my car I am returning to rear wheel drive for good. There is no substitute for a well balanced rear wheel drive chassis. Will GM fill that section of the market or will I have to go with a used BMW?

Rear-wheel drive with a v8 that is pretty much the only reason to shop domestic at this point and its what GM should go for. I have a 2004 cavalier and its a handy cheap car but it's one not as fun as a rear wheel drive car and two drives much worse than any front wheel drive car I've ever driven. So instead of chasing other manufacturers down the front-wheel drive road where very few of your buyers even want to go GM may as well play to its strengths and heritage and go rear-wheel drive with an optional v8 in everything you build.

REAR DRIVE!!

I am a 23-year-old automotive enthusiast and member of the Philly region SCCA. I currently own an extensively modified Honda Civic that I autocross in the street modified class, and I love sport compacts. From the standpoint of pure driving dynamics, as far as any car with sporting intentions is concerned, I greatly prefer rear wheel drive; however, I also have no problem with changing to a set of snow tires for the winter.

The car I currently aspire to (and have long wished for) is your new Chevrolet Camaro, assuming you build it. I plan to buy one whenever it is finally produced. I also love your Solstice, but I'd wait for the rumored hard-top turbo version.

Properly tuned, a front wheel drive car can drive beautifully, and often times, at least as good as its rear drive counterparts. For a sporty car, though, I will only consider front drive if it is small (no bigger than your Cobalt), light (preferably below 2800 pounds) and equipped with a limited slip differential. I would also never pay any more than $25k for a front drive sports car.

My biggest problem with a front drive sports car is its inability to properly handle much more than 250hp and still handle well. The limits for rear drive are much higher across the board.

Incidentally, I'm not a big fan of all wheel drive; especially not as an alternative to rear wheel drive. The drive systems are heavy (lightness is very important to me), fuel economy suffers, and they also cover up much of the feedback the car's chassis would otherwise be transmitting.

No problems with FWD. Would not have it any other way.

I'm from Edmonton Alberta and I have to say, I really like FWD, I've had to drive short wheel base RWD vehicles in the winter up here before and it's not only not fun, it's unsafe.

I would not likely buy a RWD car again, I could lean to AWD but only if it had a FWD bias of more than 50% when required.

I am a student at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor and will be purchasing a sport-compact in two years. I'm a 19yr old male who considers himself a car enthusiast. Personally, for compact cars, I prefer fwd WITH THE OPTION OF ALL WHEEL DRIVE!!! For space, winter weather in the midwest, and the fact that the Camaro will be coming out, this is my desire. To be honest, as long as an AWD option occurs, I'm fine either way. But KEEP THE PRICE DOWN, if its cheaper to do fwd (source:delta) with awd option, do it. If its cheaper for rwd with an option for awd (source:kappa 2+2) then do it. Lastly, I really love that Cobalt SS-S/C you are producing, its an amazing car (I've ridden/driven it) and the supercharger is fantastic. Keep us updated.- Brian

I definately want to see more RWD drive vehicles. The performance just doesn't seem to "be there" in FWD and cars have steadily gotten more boring since FWD became popular. I'd also like something that can perform well for UNDER $30K. With today's technology in stability and traction aids RWD should also be able to perform well in the winter. Look at Europe and all the RWD Mercedes, BMW's and Porsches running around in the snow.

I believe GM should be able to provide the "perfect car" to anyone who wants a car. That being said, I fail to wonder why in the world is this question being asked in the first place???

As an owner of a Saab, I fully understand the concept and experience of a "perfectly balanced FWD performance car." I guess you can say Saab are "properly set up." ANd always have been

There should be a set level of FWD competency in every single car GM makes. Cars like Cobalt or G6, while nice, aren't always the most fun to "throw around." Cars like the Mini Cooper and the Civic are.

It won't matter if the next-gen "small car" is FWD, RWD or AWD. What matters to the younger generation is 1) style, 2) affordability, 3) fun to drive. If you don't have that, then who cares?

Do what is smart... build a stylish and fun car that is both affordable and performs well. RWD/FWD/AWD doesn't matter.

Front wheel drive is fine for most applications (especially in the snow belt). However, when it comes to performance, full size luxury, and 'working' vehicles (e.g. police cars) rear drive is the only way to go. Durability and lower cost and complexity are bonuses.

Sorry if this is a bit long winded. It's been a hot topic amongst my friends.

It maybe more practical and even more competitive to be front wheel drive in loose traction situations, but in rear drive it's way more fun. It's like playing Asteriods for real. Controlling all those vectors is a real blast.

I'm personally not convinced that front drive is more competitive, all though some of the younger guys try to convince me of it. Ultimately they look at it from a price point. There is nothing rear drive that they can afford to drive. So they convince themselve that front drive is better. Why do you think the small truck market is popular? It's certainly not because we need trucks, it's just the only cheap rear-drive platform out there.

We REALLY NEED a bare bones, no frills, cheap, easy to mod rear drive platform. Maybe it wouldn't be the top seller, maybe it's not the most practical but MAN what it would do for the brand. It's the tuners that are recommending cars and fixing them. If the tuner can drive a car from the brand they like, that's the brand they will recommend for everything else. And all the tuners I know don't have a ton of cash, unlike the Fast and the Furious misconception. Which is why the old beat-up Civics are being used for tuners. In my area the older 90s Cavaliears are becoming popular. And the mods they do are generally very cheap .... rims, K&N filters, muffler tips (uggg). But despite the fact that these mods hardly do anything, they are still really popular and guys like that are the guys doing the recommending.

I've just turned 30 and have a family and have to put family first. For this reason I can't drop even $20,000 CDN on a toy. I have to think practical. But boy would I LOVE to have a toy to tinker with. I've been a car enthusiast forever and I do all the maintenance and repairs on pretty much everybodies' cars that I know. They look to me for what they should be buying.

I think the Solitice is a cool concept, but the Chevy version is going to be out of my reach. And the Solitice is getting artificially inflated in price and very hard to get a hold of. We have the Optra around here, so I've given that some serious thought since it can be had for $15,000 or even less. That is bare bones. ABS is an option, the stereo is single DIN, air conditioning is an option. What's there is for one purpose, driving.

All you need to produce is one inexpensive rear-drive model and you will have every tuners attention! The rest can all be front drives. For practicality the front drives are superior. More space and better everyday handling characteristics. So for every practical choice the Impalas, Malibus, Grand Prix and Grand Ams of the world are perfect just the way they are. We just need an inexpensive read-drive Camaro that us tuners can tinker with and you will make a lot of VERY happy people. Now, mind you, don't go cheap on what you do put into it. Make sure you have a solid body and suspension so that any mods isn't going to tear the car apart. My wife loves the Mustang and I'm almost convinced on it because it's almost within my price range but if you build a Camaro with damm good style and a solid chasis underneath the rest of the bits just need to get the job done and allow us to do the tweaking and tuning after that.

My opinion is that you guys invented the aftermarket world, but you have completely alienated it. Your cars are complete off the show room floor leaving us no room to make mods and we end up paying for it too. Mods let us pay for the cool bits of hardware as we can afford it. A big purchase price leaves us with a big bill to justify and no fun left when we do manage to buy it.

George

Front wheel drive is definitely preferable. Just be sure to combine it with great handling. Think Civic or 3-Series as your handling target, Passat as your interior target, Civic as your drive layout target, and Civic or 3-Series as your styling target. PLEASE, don't emmulate the 300C. And no pseudo-1970's cars, please. Those were bad enough in the 1970's. I have no desire to buy one. Fresh new designs, not recycled old designs, please.

I have to say that I always associated rear-wheel drive with performance but I recently bought a used '02 9-3 and it's a blast to drive. With the right tires it's even great in the snow.

The only problem is I don't like the torque-steer when I step on it.

This is a daily driver; If I was going to buy a performance minded vehicle that was a second vehicle for sunny days, it would have to be rear wheel drive.

And age, I'm 24.

A rear drive Camaro,with a DEI engine,that would blow the doors off a roush or shelby mustang,would be a real show stopper,

RWD please. :) the most enjoyable cars I ever drove- Mercury Villager, Miata, and 328i...2 out of 3 and RWD wins in my book. For steering feel- the RWD was clearly better in all cases. That is important to me as a young guy who likes to scare his girlfriends in the passenger seat. If y'all could also put in a bench seat in the next RWD car...that would help me immensely.

RWD (or AWD for certain models) for all V8s! FWD should only for small cars with small engines. Look at what Chrysler is doing! Oh yeah build the Camaro NOW!!!

I have a G6 GTP Sedan (manual). The engine is great, but the FWD totally saps all the fun out of driving it. Between torque steer and a low traction limit on acceleration, I'm almost exasperated. My previous car was a Chrysler 300C (bought it at 22 years old). I much prefer RWD, and snow traction was never a major issue.

For Saab, I think AWD would stay closer to the brand's identity than RWD.

But for small sporty cars for other GM brands, RWD is definitely a wise move. It's what I'm buying next. I hope GM has it, or it's back to Chrysler.

Thank you for the question.

The simple answer is Saab needs to be Saab and stick with its roots. Front drive is good for Sweden, snow and Saab. Does that mean you can't have rear drive? Of course not but your image is not to be confused with Pontiac or what it should be.

Saab is quite simply an addiction. These are some of the most beautiful cars in the world the trick is to get new people into your dealerships with something fresh.

Here is the problem. GM put all of its eggs in the front wheel drive basket. Japanese luxury brands did the opposite. This perception as always was to the imports favor. The actual problem is GM left another gaping hole in its line up which the imports kindly filled.

Here is where Saab and GM is still losing and I will use an analogy.

GM and Saab always wear too much of yesterdays make-up. Honda and Toyota have perfected the art of finesse-the annual dress. As we speak the Sienna and Pilot have received subtle changes to their front facias that give these products just enouph new make up to make them look revived and restored, refreshed and renewed. Not a billion dollar makeover but enouph that many will see these vehicles in a new light.

Saab can't wait and sometimes does not need a billion dollar makeover, just new makeup and a new dress every once in a while.

GM does not need to tear apart Saab or the La Crosse nor does it have to wait five years to make them look new. Just learn to finesse and Saab, you need to do it too. Your thinking too hard it's this simple

/////////

Yesterday's dress will no longer impress.

/////////

The Colbolt supposed to replace the Cavalier and the 400,000 Sunfires and Aleros on the road. Now that we are down from three to one will they should finesse it every year. It's carrying the weight of three modles. Okay we know the car is a hot shot it does not need a $1 billion makeover, but it can not wait three years and get old either.

GM, Saab you need to do more finessing, every two years at least, on your high volume cars especially. Now that many of your products are the best in their class, just change the grill and head lights on the G6 next year for example to keep it fresh.

Then three years from now when the rear drive Solstice 4 door comes out it will be ready to blast off when it's ready to replace the million G6's on the road. GM you got to finesse, you need the new dress.

Don't forget to finesse.

We're specifically discussing SAAB here, right? SAAB has never sold a model meant to be a street racer. Off road racing, yes (for which AWD would be optimal). Two of SAAB's core values are fuel economy and environmentalism. The added weight of an AWD setup reduces fuel economy but is preferable to FWD in some applications.

I would suggest FWD with an AWD option in all models. In performance-oriented models (such as a successor to the Viggen or a high-powered BioPower model) with high hp/torque output I would exclusively go with AWD to transfer that power to the pavement. Torque steer tends to be a problem in these FWD applications.

If front wheel drive is tradition at Saab, keep it. I like the idea of a RWD car from Saab, but would never be able to afford one anytime soon. As for other makes by GM, RWD all the way, but you gotta keep FWD too on some models.
Awsome job on the Camaro, hope it gets out faster than I can hope for!!!!

Well, I don't suppose I'm typical, but I'm not buying anymore front wheel drive vehicles.

I've replaced one too many CV joints, and FWD cars are actually not all that good in snow if you're going uphill and lose traction.

I have a used diesel RWD car now, and that's what I'll be looking for next time I buy a new car.

To compete you need a mix. Just look at the following of BMW, Mercedes, etc.

For DOMESTIC use it is darn hard to beat the FWD. It used to not be as reliable and very expensive to repair, but they seem to have this largely solved now -- granted I also favour either strong factory warranties, and/or well price add on warranties like Toyota has.

RWD is better for trucks and larger vehicles (or race cars).

I'm a 19 year old male, I live in NY, and I have never driven a RWD car, but I assume that I would prefer it over FWD. All the video games I played growing up were in RWD race cars, so I'd love to have a car similar to the virtual ones I have raced and crashed. I agree with many others on here that the "performance" cars should be RWD while the others should be FWD. The lack of RWD in models such as the Grand Prix and the Monte Carlo just make those cars somewhat "fake" in my opinion. The Grand Prix looks like a performance car with RWD, but it doesn't. The Monte Carlo is linked to NASCAR, but it doesn't have RWD either. The race cars I've always seen growing up were RWD, so I would like to see true, practical, affordable, RWD performance cars in the GM lineup.

I am a young car buyer. GM needs RWD to stay alive. I will not buy a FWD car. I don't care about a tunnel dividing the rear legroom. Can you imagine a FWD porsche? I am the market for the new Colbalt SS, but I don't care about it. Why? FWD. RWD makes all the difference in the world. Think about any GM car that there has gained a really passionate following. Is it FWD or RWD? If GM wants to make a sports car to compete for todays young car market, it needs to be RWD, well balanced, lightweight, and have an avaliable turbo engine. Not some screw-type blower either. Turbo engines aren't just more efficient, they push the aftermarket and build the reputation of the car. Look at the success of cars powered by the SR20DET or the RB26DETT, the 3SGTE, the 4G63, the F20C (F22C), all legendary engines. I want GM to make a car with an engine like that. Also, think about the layouts of the cars those engines rest in. AWD, RWD. The cobalt SS can't really be taken seriously when compared to those vehicles. How about Mid Engine? Who offers that (besides certain germans for $50K)? My generation knows about cars. They know about them in a different way though. We know less about CID and more about CM^3. We less about boring and stroking and more about Volumetric Efficiency. Take heed. We're a bigger market than you think. GM needs to contend. A new Camaro is a great thing for older guys who have a lot of money to spend and want a big heavy car with a big engine, but I don't. All of the foreign automakers (perhaps honda aside, but they obviously get the light and efficient thing) and even chrysler and ford are getting that RWD is back. At the end of the day, FWD sucks. If you want people to buy cars, make them fun. RWD is fun.

At Saab, there is a long and storied tradition of fast, reliable rally cars. These cars fed significant power through the front wheels and yet remained stable and entertaining to drive, which proved particularly important in long-distance races.

so how about making that new Z06 FWD?

I know I go rallying all the time... especially in my saab...

I don't understand why GM thinks RWD is important in high dollar cars (car?) but not in tuneable sport compacts. Like those people don't know the difference...

RWD and AWD. If GM does not utilise a large RWD platform soon, what will they have to compete with the Chrysler LX cars? An FWD Impala SS? I think not.

RWD seems more popular for large/midsize cars, though it is cool in the Sky and Solstice. A compact RWD sedan/coupe would fit in as a Pontiac ONLY car. I'm a Chevy fan but I'd like Pontiac to be more unique. Keep the G6 as a FWD volume seller though otherwise the dealers would kill you.

Pontiac- Small/Mid/Large RWD
(some FWD aka G6,Torrent)

Chevy- Small/Midsize FWD (Aveo,Cobalt,Malibu)
Midsize/Large RWD
(Camaro,Monte,Impala)

Otherwise just work on Mid to Large RWD cars and improving the FWD compact cars you already have.
Especially the Ion, I mean Saturn was founded with a compact FWD car and all their new products are either RWD (Sky) or Midsize (Aura,Outlook). Though don't just remake an Opel Astra as a Saturn. Let Saturn develop a class leading FWD compact car that is unique, yet not weird (Ion). That is their most important model. Not only does it bring in first-time buyers, it also brings in the people who bought the first Saturns.

Informally speaking, Yes, GM would do good to have RWD compact car that doesn't break the bank at the car lot or when the insurance bill comes in. 200-250hp out of a DOHC V6 (ShortStar?) would be a good start...turbos would be a nice upgrade option. Let Saab do what they want, but Pontiac should have done this with the G6.

What everyone here seems to be forgetting (or not knowing in the first place) is that safety is the number one important thing for a Saab! Saab should be FWD or AWD. The day Saab makes a rear wheel drive car is the day I no longer want a new Saab.

First off, I'm a 17 year old male who is fanatical about Pontiac and have been for most of my life. I currently own a 95 Grand Am GT with the Quad4 and a 5spd. It has experienced critical engine complications and didn't think it was worth fixing. It hasn't been that great of a car. Therefore, I am currently in the market for another vehicle. As I scanned my choices, only one car stood out, the Nissan 240SX for its RWD layout. As much as I wanted another Pontiac, I couldn't justify choosing FWD over RWD. I live in PA, by the way, and usually experience snow from late November to early March. Had Pontiac come out with a compact coupe with RWD during the '90s, I could easily say that I'd own another Pontiac.

Obviously, I am for RWD. While I respect FWD and have had some fun in my Grand Am, the benefits of RWD are far greater than those of FWD, especially for supposedly sporty vehicle.

My wish is for Pontiac to one day consist of nothing but RWD vehicles. Styling would be sexy, sleek, and thoroughly modern designs that are not afraid to be aggressive and soulful (unlike the G6 which is quite bland). My proposal:

-Grand Am would be the compact coupe, sedan, 5dr hatch, and conv at about 2900lbs. The SE would receive a 2.4L Ecotec with D.I. and a 5spd manual/auto. The GT would receive a High Output verson of the 2.4L Ecotec with D.I. and a 6spd manual/5spd auto.The GXP would receive a detuned version of the Solstice GXP's turbocharged Ecotec with D.I. and 6spd manual/auto. The coupe and conv would seat 4 while the sedan and hatch would seat 5. AWD would be optional on all trims. Pricing would ideally start around $16k.

-Grand Prix would be the midsize coupe, conv and sedan at about 3200lbs. The SE would recieve a H.O. 2.4L Ecotoc with D.I. and 5spd manual/auto. The GT would receive a 2.8L V6 with D.I. and 6spd manual/auto. The GXP would receive a turbocharged 2.8L V6 with D.I. and a 6spd manual/auto. The coupe and conv would seat 4, the sedan would seat 5. AWD would be optional on all trims. Pricing would ideally start around $20K.

-LeMans would be the fullsize sedan and wagon at about 3600lbs . SE would receive a 3.6L V6 with D.I. and 6spd manual/auto. GT would receive a Northstar 4.4L V8 and 6spd manual/atuo. GXP would receive a turbocharged Northstar 4.4L and 6spd manual/auto. It would seat 5 and AWD would be an option for each trim. Pricing would ideally start around $26k.

-GTO would be based off the Grand Prix with a coupe and conv. Base engine would be an LS2 V8 and a 6spd manual/auto. Optional engine would a High Output version of the LS2 V8 and a 6spd manual. It would seat 4 and pricing would start at around $28k.

-Torrent crossover would be based off the the Grand Prix's midsize platform. SE would receive the 3.6L V6 and a 6spd manual/auto. GT would receive the 4.4L Northstar V8 and a 6spd manual/auto. It would seat 5 and have standard AWD. Pricing would start around $25k.

That's my dream, however unlikely it may be. I feel going that route would find success for Pontiac and surely make enthusiasts happy. If atleast a RWD compact makes it to market someday, you have a buyer right here.

The GM Holden Torana Concept Car shown at the Australian Auto show in 2004 is a perfect example of what's missing and needed in the GM line-up world wide.

This kind of car would be aimed at the large world-wide market that now belongs to the BMW 3-series & Lexus IS.

RWD with today's traction control technology is a much better & more rewarding setup than FWD. It also affords sportier proportions and street cred.

AWD needs to be applied VERY carefully. In most segments AWD will NOT sell. AWD adds weight, cost and reduces fuel economy. It is also an 'invisible' feature the customer cant touch or fully appreciate. They simply wont pay any extra for it!

I would vote for RWD in small/med aspirational sports luxury segments. FWD for economy/comfort segments.

As for Saab - i don't know what to think. There is no direction for this brand. Where does it sit relative to the other GM brands?
If it is to stack up against the best of the European brands, then clearly Saabs should ride on RWD platforms.

Saab needs a hot aspirational concept car (like the camaro for chevy) to clearly define their direction.

An interesting question, and one that can be debated endlessly, as I can see being done so here. But it seems to me that the phrasing of the question does very little to hide the author's own bias. What about a similar paragraph or two devoted to singing RWD and AWD's praises?

To that end, I do agree that FWD is a better option for compact and sub-compact cars, with exceptions of course.

I don't see the market supporting an AWD Camaro, so I would suggest positioning the next generation GTO as a world class AWD 400HP sophisticated monster available for about $40K to $45K. There is a big gap between the Corvette and the $30K sports cars that needs to be filled with some American attitude. Don't follow the trends. Create them.

SAAB is traditionally a Front-engined, front wheel drive car. Two or four doors and a hatchback, a slightly underpower engine under the hood coupled to a tall-geared transmission. (Unless it's a turbo, then the gears a matched perfectly) The interior is roomy, with nice tall-back chairs covered in buttery soft leather. The Dash is fully-instrumented and curvey. And there are tiny wipers for the headlights.

I don't know why GM has been makign SAABs as they are now, but they medicore. A fully restored 900 is far preferable to anythign you can find on the showroom floor today.

I have often read this blog, but never bothered to comment. This particular entry intrigues me however.

RWD is popular among younger car buyers because it has a longer, more relevant history in motorsports than FWD and younger crowds like sporty cars. This has become INFINITELY more relevant because DRIFTING is now immensely popular among the younger demographics, and DRIFTING requires RWD. The connection is pretty obvious.

Similarly obvious though, is that not all younger buyers like drifting, and those who do don't necessarily want to do it themselves. Therefore a mass shift of focus to RWD for entry level cars is unwarranted.

Also consider then, that the remainder of the younger market is most likely to be made up of enthusiasts.

However, appealing to these enthusiasts with a small sporty RWD car that they can actually afford helps GM in many ways, short term and long term.

It sells small, sporty RWD cars to car enthusiasts, if the product is quality, then it improves GMs reputation with enthusiasts.

When the non-car enthusiasts ask their enthusiast friends about buying a new car, these enthusiasts then hold GM in a higher view and therefore are more likely to recommend a GM purchase, RWD or otherwise. This in turn helps to convince the general public that GM no longer makes the poor quality cars that are so often seasoned with rebates and incentives.

Word of Mouth advertisement is a powerful thing.

To that end:

The following features are appealling to the next generation of car buyers.

DOHC
VVT
Coupes
Forced induction
RWD
Manual Transmission
AFFORDABLE

GM's current line up of small, affordable RWD coupes with available forced induction is seriously lacking.

For that matter, there are few, if any car makers that offer a compact, affordable RWD car, aside from roadsters which are impractical more often than not. This is a neglected segment that GM needs to claim control of first.

If you want to sell/appeal to younger crowds, do this:

Make a sporty, compact, RWD coupe.

Think Nissan 240sx meets BMW 3 series.

To save developement costs with less brand overlap, make a RWD sedan versoin of this car for a different brand.

The coupe needs to seat 4, but not necessarily comfortably.

NO V8. People who really want a v8 in this car will install it themselves, saving GM the developement costs for an option that carries too many gas guzzling characteristics to be a popular selection for the target market.

NO OHV. Young people view this as ancient technology.

6 cylinders at the maximum, but a I4 with a optional turbo/supercharger would be ideal. RWD ECOTEC is a good start and is already engineered for the Solstice/Sky. Even among Die-Hard import fans, the ECOTEC carries respect and credibility, just not so much with the cars they tend to propel. A car such as I am describing create a few converts.

NO PLASTIC ENGINE COVER. These are a waste of money.

A 6 speed manual would help, but a 5 speed will suffice
An optional paddle shift automatic might make a few sales

IRS is not necessary...

Solstice/Sky underpinnings would be a good start.

A simple interior is a must (very symetrical design for easy Left hand drive/Right hand drive swap.DON'T go too cheap on the materials,

Keep in mind that many young people will want to add their own audio equipment (subwoofers, etc...) so leave room for these items, but don't waste money too on the stock sound system.

Saturn style rear hinged doors would be ideal, but keep a traditional 2 door on hand just in case (see "Saturn Ion/Chevy Cobalt")

Offer an array of spoilers and hood styles (ram air, cowl, etc), Optional Striping packages wouldn't hurt either.

Base model MUST cost less than $19,000.

Fully loaded model must NOT cost more than $27,000

When it comes time for the next generation of this platform, make it slightly larger all around. mid/late 90's Chevy Malibu size would be a good guideline. Offer any form of 6 cyl. engine with forced induction. label it the Buick GNX. Do NOT use RETRO styling cues for this Buick. This will vastly improve Buicks image with younger crowds, hence keeping Buick profitable when it's existing fanbase dies out.

If you found this comment to be helpful, and if you want to keep your cars interesting (and selling) for future generations, I would be happy to work for you and to help make sure your product stays competitive.

Seriously. Send me information.

GM already makes a ga-zillion RWD vehicles every year. They're called TRUCKS! 'Nuff said.

I'm going to go against the flow here. I say front drive is still best for most drivers, in most situations, in most of the country. Street dragging stoplight derby junkies will like rear-wheel drive for the traction advantage during the pronounced rearward weight transfer on takeoff. But MOST people don't drive like that!

I think the FWD understeer versus RWD oversteer arguments are specious these days because today's chassis engineers can build excellent handling with either. RWD BMW 3 series are outstanding, but so are FWD Audi A4s. And with the ever more common electronic stability control enabled, it is often very hard or impossible to tell WHICH end is pulling or pushing the car.

On smooth dry pavement, that is. But people forget that the whole country is not Florida, Texas and California, no matter how big they are or how many electoral votes they hold. A lot of this country is like Wisconsin, with frost heaved, potholed roads - most of them rural - and much of the year covered in snow and/or ice. It is POSSIBLE to control a rear-wheel-drive car on ice, but MOST drivers - even in Wisconsin - have received NO training in how to do so. They tend to do what comes intuitively, which is often precisely the OPPOSITE of what they should do, so they end up in the ditch. Indeed, the 4WD SUV drivers are often the worst!

Front wheel drive is much easier to drive on "iffy" surfaces. Misjudge one's speed and the car will tend to understeer. If it is not too bad, correcting with more steering is the solution. If speed is definitely too hot, getting off the throttle - a natural and intuitive behavior - will tend to bring the rear end around.

Rear wheel drive, however, requires just the opposite behaviors in slippery conditions. Getting off the throttle will usually cause sudden oversteer, for which the modestly skilled average driver will over-correct, sending him or her a**-first into the ditch.

In a spin, throttle and steering can almost always pull a FWD car straight. RWD is trickier; throttle and steering will almost always make a spin WORSE!

As for all-wheel drive, its only advantage for most people is traction on slippery roads, especially in hilly country. But for most, the extra weight, complexity, fuel consumption and cost are not worth it.

To sum up, on good pavement, in good weather, a skilled driver can do better with rear wheel drive. But that is an ideal situation that in real life is uncommon. Most drivers are NOT that skilled. And most roads in the U.S. are dilapidated and getting worse. And there are too many places in the U.S. where the weather really sucks a substantial portion of the year.

In real-world, mostly crappy conditions FWD is best all around for its predictability and stability, coupled with relatively low weight, complexity and cost. AWD is for people in more extreme conditions (like really bad weather, road or rally racing) who are willing to pay the cost. Performance isn't ALL about straight-line pavement-ripping acceleration. For driving really fast on the "twisty bits," I find FWD throttle steering to be easier and more predictable than with rear wheel drive.

Logically, I only see two real advantages to rear wheel drive - hard, straight-line acceleration; i.e. drag or street racing. Or parking lot power oversteer "doughnut" tourneys. All these are behaviors that are sophomoric at best (unbefitting anyone past the mental age of 15), and at worst can get one in jail or in the coroner's office. Beyond this, it's just a terrible waste of perfectly good rubber, and at $150-$200 per tire, I can't afford it! There is no real logic behind those who beckon for rear wheel drive. Old muscle car devotees and other traditionalists want rear wheel drive because... well... just BECAUSE!! God intended that cars be made that way!

And don't mention torque steer! A well-engineered modern FWD car shows virtually no trace of it. My own Jetta, with 220 horsepower through the front wheels torque steers NOT ONE IOTA! Remarkably, the new Impala front driver with the small-block V-8 doesn't torque steer either!

Make rear wheel drive for people who insist on having it, but it is not the best thing for the majority. Most people just want safe, predictable handling on the roads THEY drive, regardless of which end is driving the car.

[As I write this, it is snowing - a good 5 inches so far. On my way home, I motored by, cautiously but confidently, in my "weenie" FWD Jetta VR6 while my idiot neighbor down the street was futilely struggling for a running start to get his monstrous, butt-ugly Chrysler 300 Hemi up the slight incline without spinning the car around and bashing the parked cars on either side. Welcome to MY world! Rear wheel drive, my a**!]

I live in F