Think Australian cars and you're likely come up with three words: large, RWD, sedan. Well, Ford CEO Allan Mullaly has turned the land down under upside down by suggesting that the next Falcon might be a front-drive model. The Motor Report gasps at the announcement, but with the new Falcon FG selling slowly, it seems large rear-drive sedans are going the way of the SUV in this country. Mullaly's pronouncement that the decision would "be driven by what the customer wants and values" has Aussie hoons hoping they still have a chance to stop the cruel march of progress. In the real world, rumors that the new Falcon could be a global platform suggest that it will almost certainly be FWD. Mullaly also gently broke the news that in the long term, V8s would be less prominent in the lineup thanks to Eco-boost. Of course the quantifiable benefits of an FWD platform are numerous. Besides the greater global flexibility, an FWD model would offer more interior space and efficiency for less money. GM's Holden brand has probably saturated what few niche markets exist abroad for the Aussie formula of cheap-and-cheerful, drift-happy muscle sedans. In decisions which reflect their general strategies, GM has gone for the marginally-profitable gusto by bringing its Aussie RWD V8 sedan stateside as the G8, while Ford plays it safe by (probably) globalizing its Aussie throwbacks. From a business perspective, it's hard not to prefer Ford's approach. As an RWD nut, well… change can suck.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Well, the Australians themselves, are abandoning rear wheel drive big sedans in droves, due to the balooning costs of driving.
So Ford could simply be following the market.
Times are a changin’and the Ozzies are changing with them, just like the rest of us are.
Of course, they can always buy a Hyundai Genesis…
But RWD seems to work for the premium brands, and globally as well? BMW:s entire line-up consists of rear-wheel driven cars. Hyundai even resurrects RWD for its Genesis. So, how come it only works for the premiums?
At least one “quantifiable benefit” of FWD is a non-issue in Oz.
Ingvar, I really don’t know why it works for the premiums. Hopefully, some big Detroit Auto exec reads TTAC, goes over the five-star review for the Genesis 4.6, and has a lightbulb go on in his head.
Ingvar, I really don’t know why it works for the premiums
Image.
Even when “perverted”. My ex-boss had an Infiniti G35, and told me “the salesman told me they changed the platform to Front-wheel drive so it’d corner better (sic)”. Even though he mixed up his driving wheels, the salesman used the “sporty RWD” (or FWD, in this particularly sad display of ignorance) to sell a car to a guy who never goes above the speed limit.
He would have been happier with a Lexus ES, but then he would have had to act his age…
But RWD seems to work for the premium brands, and globally as well? BMW:s entire line-up consists of rear-wheel driven cars. Hyundai even resurrects RWD for its Genesis. So, how come it only works for the premiums?
Cost.
A front-drive car doesn’t needs as much power or physical mass to achieve the same performance and interior packaging results an equivalent rear-drive car. It can thusly be made cheaper. If you don’t care about in-extremis dynamics, this is a fine compromise.
Sit in a 3-Series (a 320 or 323i) and Civic (Si sedan) back-to-back. To achieve the same basic performance and space of the Civic, the 3 needs a bigger engine, a physically larger chassis and/or more expensive engineering. This will, as such, cost more. The only way to pass this cost onto the customer is to sucker them into paying a premium, so you tack on some high-margin add-ons and sell the car at a premium.
And there’s no way a mainstream car like the Falcon can claim the kind of premium to make this work, so Ford has three choices:
* Make the Falcon good enough and eat margin dollars. This isn’t sustainable.
* Cut corners to meet minimum margin. This is such a bad idea that I’m loath to bring it up.
* Just sell them Mondeos, which are better than a decontented Falcon, and cheaper to make than a competitive one.
Ford Oz may as well shut up shop and just be an importer (Mitsubishi Australia anyone?) if they do this.
I can’t see it happening myself. Not when the successful Ute is RWD as well. Completely forget about trying to tow anything with it that they do now.
Is it April 1st again?
A front-drive car doesn’t needs as much power or physical mass to achieve the same performance and interior packaging results an equivalent rear-drive car. It can thusly be made cheaper.
Cheaper for them to build, costlier for us to repair.
FWD has many advantages, it is more compact, leaves more usable space in the passenger compartment and rear trunk, putting the engine/trans/much of the front suspension, into the chassis as one unit is quicker. And there are more. For the majority of drivers, economy and space trump ultimate driving experience.
Sorry, but most of use will never know if our car understeers until it plows straight through the curve, and most of us don’t practice heal/toeing while we down shift to keep the turbo spooled.
Cheaper for them to build, costlier for us to repair.
There’s a lot of Toyota Corollas that would refute that. We’re not talking the Crown Vic and it’s pleistocene mechanicals: any modern car is going to cost money to repair, regardless of drive wheels. When the bulk of the problems most people see are due to pumps, seals, electronics and trim, the whole push-vs-pull is kind of irrelevant.
Even in an accident that might leave the driveline intact, a modern unibody car is going to be expensive to fix.
No RWD, no sale from me.
Is the large RWD sedan dead? No. Look at German automakers, and the Hyundai Genesis.
There will always be a market for them and apparently Ford simply wasn’t business savvy enough to hold onto it.
Ford Australia can kiss their entire business goodbye if they reduce the Falcon to big, fat, FWD car.
The other big, fat, FWD car for sale there is the Camry we buy up in droves, it doesn’t sell so hot in the Land Down Under and no wonder. They see it for what it is, a car that really isn’t very good.
FWD vehicles are much better for driving in Snow! RWD even with a good set of 4 Snow tires are terrible in the Winter time
Ford Australia can kiss their entire business goodbye if they reduce the Falcon to big, fat, FWD car.
They’d hopefully just eliminate it in favour of the Mondeo (which they already sell?), which is just as roomy, but lighter, more space-efficient and handles just as well. The Falcon has it’s fans, but the Mondeo, really, is a much better car for what most people do.
The other big, fat, FWD car for sale there is the Camry we buy up in droves, it doesn’t sell so hot in the Land Down Under and no wonder. They see it for what it is, a car that really isn’t very good
They supplemented it with the Aurion, which does sell well. Similar chassis, but more capable. I’d expect the Camry to go away when it’s run is through and the difference to be split between the Avensis and Aurion.
A “premium” sedan has generally required lots of power & acceleration to sell well in the USA market. Even if not all versions of the sedan pack a wallop, the higher-configured ones do. This might be changing with the higher price of fuel.
Psarhjinian compares a BMW 320 to a Honda Civic Si and notes that they “achieve the same basic performance.” As far as handling, the BMW should have an edge here if the tires and suspension are roughly equal. However, 320’s are usually sold as the low-end unit configuration while the Si is at the top of the Civic handling. Given that a 1996 USA-spec BMW M3 (that won Motortrend’s “Best handling car at any price” contest) is basically a 1996 BMW 320 with upgraded off-the-shelf parts, it shouldn’t be that hard to make a 320i handle at least as well–even better because you would have a lighter engine than the M3.
Acceleration (strait-line) between a BMW 320 and Civic Si merely shows that the traction advantages of RWD have no use on the drag strip if you don’t have much power. Compare the Civic Si with a 335i and see what happens. Even if you somehow added an additional 100 HP to the Si the results would be the same (except that a larger cloud of tire smoke would erupt from under the front of the Si).
I Love all the systems,
RWD- BURN-OUTS!
FWD- Terrific Control* If it is done correctly Example (MINI Cooper) … In the snow Fwd is third best in the pack, better than RWD. But my MINI Cooper only has like 4 inches of ground clearance so it goes away every winter.
AWD- “Love, its what makes a Subaru, a Subaru” that is so true!
AWD gives you a sense of security that you are glued to the pavement or dirt or ice or snow. I prefer AWD where I live (New Hampshire)
4WD- Its good but not as good as AWD because its much much heavier… its slower too, its good for pickups and SUV’S
psarhjinian:
Even in an accident that might leave the driveline intact, a modern unibody car is going to be expensive to fix.
I agree, which is why there should be choice.
This article is about the rapid homogenization of the passenger car.
We’re not talking the Crown Vic and it’s [sic] pleistocene mechanicals…
Taking potshots at the Panther platform is easy, but we all know this chassis was given few upgrades in the last 29 years, so it’s a bit of a red herring to judge BOF by this example.
…any modern car is going to cost money to repair, regardless of drive wheels.
Anyone who has had to pay someone to take apart a transaxle might disagree with you.
I may ask WHY?
Hyundai is entering this market.
The Germans/British haven’t left it.
And I like the RWD the Aussies make.
If the world is supposed to look Corolla/Camry… sadly, I don’t agree with that kind of progress :puke:
You should have seen the number of labor hours my mechanic charged to change all four Mcpherson struts in my 2000 Corolla, not to mention some minor suspension links.
To get to the four struts, it required a ton of disassembly.
Sure it was cheaper to build, and saved space, but I’m not sure if the gas savings of the vehicle is cancelled by the extra repair and maintenance expense over my obsolete Panther sedan.
Globalization just leads to fewer choices – anybody paying attention has to notice.
The other big, fat, FWD car for sale there is the Camry we buy up in droves, it doesn’t sell so hot in the Land Down Under and no wonder. They see it for what it is, a car that really isn’t very good.
Mmmm – I think it’s a bit more complicated than that.
The Camry sells here as a 4 cylinder, the Falcon/Commodore as 6 cylinder. Traditionally, in Australia 4 cylinder cars were not seen as suitable for the long distances that Australians may travel. Advertising heavily reinforced this belief. So the Camry and the Falcodore are not really selling into the same market segment.
A Camry with a 6 cylinder is sold here as an Aurion. The previous generation Aurion was ugly and not popular. The current generation is much better but is now selling into a very difficult market with high fuel prices and a declining market share for the larger sedans.
I have also had personal experience of Ford and Holden being believed to be “Strine” cars while Toyota is Japanese. (Falcon, Commordore and Camry are all made here although with various components sourced off shore.)
Though I am a Holden fan, I wish the falcon well, it provides good competition. I have never understood why the link between the Mustang and the Aussie Falcon was broken after 1971. There is no reason why the Falcon Platform couldn’t be used by the Mustang. IRS (Control Blade style), 6 Speed Manual T56 gearbox, ZF 6 Speed Auto, 5.4L Quad Cam V8 386 HP or 420 HP depending on spec, Atmo 4L Straight 6 260 HP or Turbo 4L Straight 6 360 HP or 413 HP depending on spec. I hope Ford US has the brains and capacity to build a new gen Falcon, Mustang and Crown Vic et al in 2012 off the same platform.
Some puny V6 with twin hair dryers attached to it (and one that is probably going to break), is NO replacement for a V8.
Just one of the reasons the Lincoln Taurus deserves to fail…FWD is another.
Perhaps they ought to figure out how many sales they will lose by switching to FWD. As far as I am concerned, nothing FWD ever left GM that was worth a damn. Maybe Ford made a decent compact, but I didn’t drive it.
Maybe they should work on being better at being Ford rather than trying to be someone else.
GE Levecque :
FWD vehicles are much better for driving in Snow! RWD even with a good set of 4 Snow tires are terrible in the Winter time
Only if you don’t know how to drive them. Even an old car with an open diff drives easily in the snow if you know what you’re doing. With a differential lock an RWD beats normal FWD’s easily even in heavy snow.
The driving enthusiast prefers RWD for several reasons, which have nothing to do with image: better weight distribution, better steering feel, no torque steer, ability to “steer” using the accelerator. The average driver does not care, and therefore buys a FWD car because of its packaging benefits and because it does not fishtail in the snow.
The driving enthusiast prefers RWD for several reasons, which have nothing to do with image: better weight distribution, better steering feel, no torque steer, ability to “steer” using the accelerator.
Sadly, there aren’t many of us enthusiasts around which is why the world is chock full of Camrys, Accords and Corollas.
Aren’t turbocharged engines more expensive to maintain than good ol’ fashioned V8s?
GE Levecque :
August 27th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
FWD vehicles are much better for driving in Snow! RWD even with a good set of 4 Snow tires are terrible in the Winter time
I would have to say i disagree with this. FWD vehicles ask the front two wheels to accelerate, steer and slow the car – try to to do any two of this simultaneously in a FWD package and you will quickly find the inherent flaw in this setup – they have an inherent weight bias in the front that creates an additional disadvantage. RWD is a much better setup for driving dynamics – you can actually balance the car with throttle inputs while cornering and if packaged properly create a much better weight distribution (even poorly packaged its inherently more balanced) – These things make RWD the preferred choice for enthusiasts as many have noted but this translates to snow or wet roads or any other condition (save muddin’) The limits of adhesion just come at lower speeds in snow and rain and FWD’s horrible driving dynamics don’t miraculously change becuase there is precipitation.
FWD is used by manufacturers because it is cheaper to build and there for more profitable as many others have outlined. Unfortunately many seem to have been sold and bought into the false bill of goods that FWD is somehow better in poor conditions.
Mullaly is right. Building Australia specific platforms is downright stupid. The market is far too small to support it. Australia has a population only slightly more than half that of the state of California, or just over that of Los Angelese and San Diego counties combined. Can you imagine any company building platforms specifically for the Southern California market?
“Mullaly is right. Building Australia specific platforms is downright stupid. The market is far too small to support it. Australia has a population only slightly more than half that of the state of California, or just over that of Los Angelese and San Diego counties combined. Can you imagine any company building platforms specifically for the Southern California market?”
How about Ford’s absence of allowing the engineering the falcon’s platform to LHD to serve a global market when GM saw the need for exports to support the Commodore program. GMH makes $$$$ Ford makes -$$