I was looking at a copy of Automobile magazine while waiting in the Dr's office last week. Of the top 10 selling vehicles for May '08 (old issue) 8 of them were fwd. The other 2 were the Ford F150 and Chevy Silverado trucks. Granted, none of the cars were luxury or entry level luxury, but it does show that there is a market for fwd.

 

The answer should be obvious. FWD vehicles are cheap to manufacture compare to RWD counterparts which is why all of the econoboxes are FWD so your post tends to agree with my statement above. Name a 150k FWD car? How about at 100k, or even 50k? None, why is that? Again, Lexus could build a poor quality 10k econo car and there would be a market for it. Should they?

 

Cadillac DTS
A number of Audis, not all of which are sold in the U.S.A.
A TL with lots of features.


FWD is cheaper and more fuel efficient as well. Not to mention, I think your average driver feels safer in them. I know I do. My bro's IS300 is a fun car, but a scary one too because it fishtails and has poor traction. Problems that weren't existant with my Prelude.

 

Your point being? So to your logic should BMW and Benz and Porsche come out with FWD cars? Plus, I would add that new tires or a driving school is in order if you feel a IS300 has poor traction. The car handles very well even for newbie drivers. FWD and RWD both have distinct advantages as well as disadvantages but the driver is the ultimate factor in the equation. The TL handles very well for a FWD vehicle but Acura also has the sense to offer a AWD option as well. The ES is no TL by any means in terms of handling or sportiness, not meant to be.

 

No, but I think cancelling your number one selling vehicle because its FWD is a terrible idea.

And the IS has new tires. It does not have a limited slip.

 

Umm, you went off our discussion there. Why do you believe BMW and others should not off
offer a FWD car?

Also, if you have been around long enough you would know that a LSD can be much more deadly than a 1 legged pumpkin. Instead of 1 wheel losing traction and 1 on the road, LSD can spin (depending on the LSD) both wheels with no traction. Anyhow, the thread is way off topic (my bad) so thanks for the discussion.

 

If you look at the number of ES, TL, Lucerne, Azera etc. etc. that are sold, it shows that there is a large market for FWD in this price range and below. Lexus (and others) would be silly to walk away from 75k-85k in annual sales just because they're fwd's. Obviously they're not for everyone, but they are for a lot of buyers.

 

Maybe they should, but that wasn't what is being discussed here. I was responding to your idea that Lexus should either make the ES AWD or drop. Who knows? A FWD MB, BMW, etc. might be very profitable to them. Afterall people do buy the A class in Europe. And Acura doesn't seem to have a problem selling their FWD vehicles.

 

My answers to that are above. No need to keep posting it over and over.

 

Sorry, I was looking at your answer above which was no. Now it is maybe. But would it more profitable, of course it would ! 100% correct on that. Just the same as selling a cheap Lexus would be. But the thread topic is what? If you have your own ideas of what Lexus should do, post it. I posted mine as you well know.

 

FWD should be limited to the ES and I guess the new HS hybrid coming. I do NOT like the FWD RX. FWD is for economy/efficiency/packaging. Past entry level cars, no sane company will offer FWD luxury cars (the RL is now AWD). Its an oxymoron.
Yes the A4 can be had FWD and it never beats the 3 in any comparo. It has to have the heavier AWD to remain competitive.

As we look, AWD is being offered more and more. Look today, cars that offer AWD today that didn't in the past
G35/37
IS
C-class
3 series
GS 350
M35/M45
Volvo cars
Saab
Benz has expanded their AWD lineup (the new CL is now AWD only for instance)
Acura FWD offers AWD RL and now TL
Lincoln FWD with AWD optional
CAddy has AWD cars

Audi no longer has a foothold with AWD. There have been rumors the ES/RX may lose being shared with the Camry in the next generation. We shall see.

 

Thanks for the tip...

 

HS? CL class AWD only? Time to Google. Mike knows way more about cars than I do.

 

Most small econoboxes are FWD, not necessarily because FWD is cheaper to manufacture (in some ways, it's not), but because FWD increases interior space efficiency and the amount of weight over the drive wheels for wet-snow traction, both of which are at a premium in small, light cars.



Again, expensive cars tend to be RWD or AWD, not because of cost of producing the drivetrain, but because they tend to be larger, more driver-centered, and, in many cases, more performance-oriented, all of which makes a better case for RWD.

However, though not extremely common, there ARE fairly expensive FWD cars. You'll find them if you look. For years, several top-line Cadillacs in the 50-60K range, with the Northstar engine, were FWD, and Audi/VW have done some as well. Top-line, well-equipped, FWD Volvo S80s can go for around 50K. The new FWD/AWD Lincoln MKS, fully loaded, is almost 50K.

 

Your correct and not to sound as if I am trouncing on FWD cars, they have their place in society. The TL is an example of a well handling FWD vehicle. My Fusion did ok also. Again, they have their place.