Frank Fontaine

I find it amazing how by the time we're done with 3 pages there are arguments FOR FWD. Great then, because we all happen to drive FWD Maximas. But sometimes I think it's good to be open-minded and try to be realistic, not always saying that what you have is the best.

Name ONE FWD true sports car--there isn't one in existence. That's not to say there aren't FWD sporty cars.

It's common knowledge that no one can break the 200 hp FWD barrier. You've got Volvo at 268 and Caddy at 300, but all the power is wasted. Push, pull, roll, c'mon. Fact is you're asking the wheels to steer and power the vehicle. That's why FWD doesn't work.

1--it's cheaper to manufacture the transaxle
2--the costs associated with the rear axle are nil

Do you think a BMW or BENZ rear-axle is simply a beam going across with 2 shocks? It's actually quite complicated.

Here's the pecking order:

RWD
AWD
FWD

Does it make Maxima less of a car? No. But it's getting carried away to write a dissension claiming FWD is better or just as good.

Jeff92se

iTrader: (82)

Ah who said FWD was better or as good?? And you had better add the the sho, and turbo saabs to the fwd over 200hp to that list. Probably w/ mods, add the camry and maxima too. What kills the FWD thing is the lack of a lsd differential. Not that it makes a fwd the same as a rwd though.

But then again, are you or I even capable to exploiting the inherent handling advantages of a RWD configuration??? Unless you are a very active participant in scca racing or have attended some kind of racing school, I doubt it.

So in your theory, if 300hp is just wasted in a fwd, then a rwd potential is just wasted on 99.999% of the normal drivers in here.

Case in point. I've have seen set-up CRXs murder mustangs and camaros in autocross. Why is that? Because weight, chassis set-up and the driver are just as important as the drive configuration of the said car.