Re: So what's good about FWD?

[shields@tembel.org (Michael Shields)]

Ok, so what people are saying is:

1. Yes, FWD performs better in a low-traction situation purely because
   of the nose-heavy weight distribution.

2. FWD is cheaper and lighter because of the short drivetrain.  You get a
   flat floor and easy assembly.  It places constraints on the front
   suspension design but makes designing the rest of the car simpler.

3. People like to have lots of understeer.  (You'd think they'd rather
   stay on the road...)

But why doesn't anyone build a rear-drive, *rear-engined* economy car?
It would have the advantages of a short, simple drivetrain without
working against weight transfer.  And, it would have extra weight over
the drive wheels.  It seems to me that this would be just as cheap
as a front-engine/front-drive car, and would perform better under all
conditions.  Why doesn't anyone build it that way?
-- 
Shields.