I have never owned, and most certainly never will own, a FWD car....even if they made my beloved mustang into one.

 

FWD ?.........."I don't think so Tim"

 

NO :nono: ,NO :nono: ,NO :nono: ,NO :nono: ,NO :nono: ..............................and NO :nono: !

 

How about all wheel drive?

 

:nono: That would be horrible. I've been driving FWD cars for the last 10 years and I hate them. I was so glad when my husband said we were buying the 05. RWD is better for many reasons. (These are just my opinions!)

1. I don't like the way FWD handles skids in the snow. I know RWD has a better chance of skidding, but it's way more controlable when it happens. The last RWD I had, that wasn't 4x4, was a 1987 Toyota Pickup. We had a real steep hill and when it snowed, everytime I went up that hill my truck was almost sideways (about 50-60 degrees turned) across the road, I had to use both lanes but it still went up the hill. Most FWD and 2WD cars avoided that hill. Now ICE on that hill is a different story, never could climb it in ICE, but I sure tried. 4x4's are king on ice.

2. Doughnuts, FWD doughnuts in reverse are just not the same. No, I'm not a kid, I just like to have fun in a big open parking lot, I can't resist. My kids love it, and it will be part of their driving lessons, because you know they'll do it anyway, so they might as well learn how it's done so they don't smash up my cars.

3. Drag racing! Everyone who's watched a drag race knows RWD burnouts are way more interesting.

4. Dirt circle track racing, try handling a FWD car doing that, that may be why they don't use them.

IMO, RWD cars are much better for driving and for entertainment. I know these reasons don't apply to everyone and yes, I know I'm not normal, normal is boring.

 

Just yesterday my uncle was talking to me about my Mustang that is on order. He said that he was surprised they were still RWD. I told him that's the appeal. He said he thinks it keeps some people away.

Now, I'm not saying that I want FWD Mustangs, but I do agree with him that while RWD is an attraction, at the same time it is a reason why some would not buy one. His daughter, my cousin, has a 2000 V6 model, but during heavy snow she has to use one of their other cars. And I also plan to have another car around for winter driving (probably a FWD car).

So, I would not be buying a 2005 if it were FWD, but I'm pretty sure there is a market for FWD Mustangs. But, if it aint broke...........................well you know the rest. I for one, hope they stay RWD

 

For what it's worth, my impression of FWD is as follows. I think in the mid to late 1970s, auto manufacturers began heavily marketing FWD cars. It was marketed as the being of such better quality and value than RWD cars. The real truth is that FWD cars are A LOT cheaper to make. With a transverse mounted FWD car, you have no driveshaft, no rear differential, and no parts associated with those items. Car companies shoved the FWD down the throats of the consumer all the while claiming it was a better system simply because they wanted to save money. The only way in which FWD may be even a little better is in slick driving, however, I don't buy that to the extent they have been marketed. You will be told that a FWD will go up a hill better in the snow. I ask you to consider the physics of that assertion. When inclined going up a hill, gravity is causing most of the weight of the car to be applied to the rear wheels. All the weight over the front wheels is being shifted back. While I think it is probably better to pull than push up a hill, that advantage is negated by the physical shift a pressure on the tires.

As a final point, the proof that RWD is superior is found in the fact that EVERY car known for outstanding performance and handling has classically been RWD. While I know there are some that would claim WRXs and EVOs handle great (aren't they FWD?...I honestly don't know), and I don't dispute that, there is a much larger body of evidence (Porsche, Benz, Vette, BMW, Lambo, Audi, Ferrari, and so on) on the side of RWD. Anyway, I apologize for the rant. I just feel that a great deal of the public has been duped by car makers into actually believing that FWD is better. I can't count the number of people have bragged to me "My car is FWD" like it was a good thing. It is cheaper to make...nothing else. And it has been engrained into so many that it is better.....just the way the makers want it, so they can shove a cheaper, inferior product down your throat with you believing the whole time that it is better.

 

If they would make it front wheel drive, I might as well get a Civic and call the muscle car era officially dead.

Glad that didn't happen

 

Actually, GM is coming out with something like that for 2006. They're putting a 5.3L LS-3 in a FWD Monte Carlo... :bang:

Yeah, I think it's a hideous idea too.

But even moonshine-drinking, mullet-headed, NASCAR-obsessed trailer trash need cars too.

 

Let's just buy a Honda Civic then ???

Matt

 

Umm... I think the Audi RS8, which continues to obliterate everything in the American Le Mans series, proves otherwise.

The RS8 is AWD.

Also, the Subaru WRX rally cars are AWD as well.

 

There is also a trend in the auto industry right now of going back to rear drive cars. Chrysler who was the worst front drive offender in the 1980's and 1990's is going back to rear drive with cars like the 300, magnum, charger, crossfire. This was a car company that offered no rear drive cars besides the viper for 15 years.

Most people agree rear drive cars drive better. Magazine editors, car review sites, and testers love them.If you read magazines that deal with new cars you will find that when they compare several models and only one is a front drive the front driver gets negative points.

Thats was a huge issue for Cadillac up until a few years ago (every caddy was front drive except for the deville). All the German and most of the Japanese competition were rear drivers. Now you will notice Cadillac has phased out all their front drive vehicles.

Even japanese car companies are looking at rear or at least AWD designs. Acura who were die hard front drivers now have an AWD vehicle and a rear drive platform on the way.

With todays use of traction control, better tires, and cars being set up better, a rear drive platform is much more viable year round.

A mustang will never be super in the snow but I dont imagine that a 300 horsepower 300+ ft lbs of torque front driver would be fantastic either. Plus you would have to deal with the torque steer even in the dry, and the fact that when you lose traction its with the wheels that also steer your car. At least when you lose traction in a rear drive car its easier to control and a heck of a lot more fun.

 

 

"FWD Performance Car" is an oxymoron and just plain silly.

I don't think AWD would even be acceptable. The Mustang is too much of an icon to mess with it too much.

 

no unless you could convert it to RWD

RWD is lots more fun and NOBODY is impressed with a FWD burnout

 

NO WAY!!! :nono:

 

FWD: No. Just no. Make it go away.

AWD: A completely different question. With the modern AWD systems (as seen in Audi, Subaru, Porsche etc etc) the Mustang would perform even better. I'd love to see it on the GT500.