Front-wheel drive

The first successful application of front-wheel drive was the Miller 122 racecar designed in 1924 by Harry Arminius Miller of Menomonie, Wisconsin.[1]
Front-wheel drive became the norm for mid-sized cars starting with the 1982 Chevrolet Celebrity, 1983 Dodge 600, 1985 Nissan Maxima, and the 1986 Ford Taurus.[1]

Section Contents:

• The 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado was the first U.S. front-wheel drive car since the Cord 810.(More...)
  
  
• The first successful consumer application came in 1931 with the DKW F1 from Germany.(More...)
  
  

The 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado was the first U.S. front-wheel drive car since the Cord 810. It used a longitudinal engine placement for its V8, coupled with an unusual "split" transmission, which turned the engine power 180 degrees. [1] The 1959 Mini, while a pioneering transverse front-wheel drive vehicle, used a substantially different arrangement with the transmission in the sump.[1] Front-wheel drive (or FF layout ) is a form of engine / transmission layout used in motor vehicles, where the engine drives the front wheels only.[1] Front-wheel drive was further popularized by the 1948 Citro"n 2CV, where the lightweight aluminium flat twin engine was mounted ahead of the front wheels, and 1955 Citro"n DS, featuring the mid-engine layout.[1]

The vast majority of front-wheel drive vehicles today use a transversely mounted engine with "end-on" mounted transmission, driving the front wheels via driveshafts linked via constant velocity (CV) joints. This configuration was made popular by the 1967 Simca 1100, and the 1969 Fiat 128.[1] According to various sources, sometime between 1895 and 1898 Gr"f & Stift built a voiturette with a one-cylinder De Dion-Bouton engine fitted in the front of the vehicle, powering the front axle. It was thus arguably the world's first front-wheel drive automobile, but it never saw mass production, with only one copy ever made.[1] The Cadillac Eldorado, with front-wheel drive introduced in 1967, holds the record for the largest engine in a front-wheel drive production vehicle, at 8.2 L (500 in"), starting with the 1970 model, lasting until the 1976 model year.[1] Most modern front-wheel drive vehicles feature a transverse engine, rather than the conventional longitudinal engine arrangement generally found in rear-wheel drive and four-wheel drive vehicles.[1] By reducing drivetrain weight and space needs, vehicles could be made smaller and more efficient without sacrificing acceleration. Some suggest that the introduction of the modern Volkswagen Rabbit in 1975, from a traditional U.S. competitor, served as a wake-up call for the "Big Three" (which already produced front-wheel drive vehicles in their operations outside North America).[1] There were relatively few rear-wheel drive cars marketed in North America by the early 1990s; Chrysler's car line-up was entirely front-wheel drive by 1990. GM followed suit in 1996 where its B-body line was phased out, where its sports cars (Camaro, Firebird, Corvette) were the only RWDs marketed; by the early 2000s, the Chevrolet Corvette was the only RWD car offered by Chevrolet until the introduction of the Sigma platform.[1] Panhard of France, DKW of Germany and Saab of Sweden offered exclusively front-wheel drive cars. In 1954, Alfa-Romeo had experimented with its first front-wheel drive compact car named "33" (not related or referred to sports car similarly named "33"). It had the same transverse-mounted, forward-motor layout as the modern front-wheel drive automobiles. It even resembled the smaller version of its popular Guilia.[1] Had Alfa-Romeo succeed in producing 33, it would precede Mini as the first "modern" front-wheel drive compact car.[1] Alvis Cars of the United Kingdom also introduced a front-wheel drive model in 1928, but it was not a success either.[1] Front-wheel drive became the norm for mid-sized cars starting with the 1982 Chevrolet Celebrity, 1983 Dodge 600, 1985 Nissan Maxima, and the 1986 Ford Taurus.[1] The Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard drove a mass changeover of cars in the U.S. to front-wheel drive.[1] The first successful application of front-wheel drive was the Miller 122 racecar designed in 1924 by Harry Arminius Miller of Menomonie, Wisconsin.[1] In acceleration, the Dodge SRT-4 holds the world record for the quickest production Turbo front-wheel drive production vehicle. A turbocharged Citro"n SM broke the land speed record for its class at Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah in 1987, going 202 mph (325 km/h), a record for a front-wheel drive vehicle.[1] By the mid-1980s, most formerly rear-wheel drive Japanese models were front-wheel drive, and by the mid-1990s, most American brands only sold a handful of rear-wheel drive models.[1]

The advantages of front-wheel drive (FWD) seem self evident: By avoiding the need for a driveshaft connecting the engine in front with the rear wheels, front-drive cars save space.[2] Car/sex metaphors are unavoidable, so let's get right to today's: Front-wheel drive cars are like bad sex.[2] Everyone knew that front-wheel drive cars were the efficient, sophisticated wave of the future.[2]

In automotive design, a FF, or Front-engine, Front-wheel drive layout places both the engine and driven wheels at the front of the vehicle. This layout is typically chosen for its compact packaging, allowing the rest of the vehicle to be designed more flexibly.[3] I drive a car now that has front-wheel drive. That's all I have ever driven. My husband is looking at buying a car with rear wheel drive and I am concerned about how it will handle in the winter on icy roads and such.[4] One in each pair had front-wheel drive, the other rear. We ran them through our normal battery of performance tests.[5] Today, front-wheel drive wins out in most small cars because it is a better package and costs less.[6] Automotive News, 7/4/2005, Vol. 79 Issue 6155, p12-12 The article compares the benefits of front-wheel drive and rear-wheel drive in automobiles.[6]



The first successful consumer application came in 1931 with the DKW F1 from Germany. Other German car producers followed: Stoewer offered a car with front wheel drive in 1931, Adler in 1932 and Audi in 1933. [1]

We live in an area that does get quite a bit of snow. Pam, One of the reasons front wheel drive cars became popular because they handled better in the snow. Its not stopping the car, but driving the car.[4] Front wheel drive is considered next best because the "weight" of the engine is over the wheels doing the steering.[4]

While the majority of current passenger cars are still front wheel drive, rear wheel drive vehicles are becoming more common.[7] The controversy has gone on for decades: which is better - front wheel drive or rear wheel drive? We used to have predominately rear wheel drive (RWD) automobiles on the road, but by the late 1970's, front wheel drive (FWD) vehicles were beginning to dominate.[7]

Let's look at front wheel drive first, as it is most common. Reduced cost: that is often the reason manufacturers design and build the way they do.[7]

I have a front wheel drive 2006 Hyundia Sonata, V6, fwd. Can you do donuts around another vehicle twice in this type car? If so how hard and/or experienced would the driver have to be to accomplish this feat? Thank you for any information that you can give me.[5] To the Porsche 924 driver: You might want to double-check your facts. I run an old Porsche 924, the only Porsche ever to have front wheel drive. although the car was originally 'laughed out of hand' I contend that its road-handling is far superior to its more expensive stable-mates.[5] I have found with front wheel drive cars that there can be substantial lost of control when hitting bumps. On flat pavement, they are fine, but hitting bumps at highway speeds on slanted and/or curved roads, direction of the vehicle is much more difficult to maintain.[5] I am needing information on doing donuts in a front wheel drive car. Any help would be greatly appreciated as this will affect my life from now on.[5]

Section Contents:

• Weren't front-drive Hondas the hippest cars around?(More...)
  
  
• Bob Erck In principle, four wheel drive is superior because power reaches all four wheels independently and the electronics allow each wheel to "recognize" the traction of the other three.(More...)
  
  

Weren't front-drive Hondas the hippest cars around? Wasn't even Volvo switching, belatedly, to front drive? I also blamed the victim! I must just be a lousy or unsophisticated driver, I figured. [2] None of the cars was very good " you give up a lot in chassis stability when you chop off the roof, I discovered. The old, junky, rear-drive Ford and Chevy pony cars were by far the most enjoyable " they rattled and guzzled, but at least they were a blast to drive around corners.[2] Here's where I emphatically dissent. It's pretty clear to me, after driving hundreds of different vehicles over several decades, that rear drive offers a big aesthetic advantage to ordinary drivers at ordinary speeds in ordinary conditions.[2]

A bit over a year ago, I conducted an abortive test drive of five convertibles.[2] The entrants were Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, VW Cabriolet, Chrysler Sebring, and Toyota Solara. That was the order of finishing (though the test was interrupted by 9/11 before I could drive a final production version of the Toyota).[2] The supercar you can drive to the supermarket. Thank goodness they don't make 'em like that anymore.[2] Rear-wheel drive cars are like good sex. Sometime in the early 1980s, I asked my friend Paul why he drove a crass Chevy Camaro. He said he liked the "balance" of a rear-wheel drive car. I nodded but secretly sneered at him.[2]

In a front-drive car, with the front wheels slipping, you slow down and keep turning the way you'd been turning to get around the corner in the first place -- a more natural maneuver, since you're pointing the car in the direction you want to go. This is why, for safety reasons, even rear-drive cars sold to average consumers tend to have their springs and other suspension bits set up to make them understeer -- to make the front tires slip first, despite the car's innate oversteering tendency.[2] "A rear-drive car can typically approach that," says Zellner. Engineers can move the front wheels forward, so that the engine " which doesn't have to be connected to those wheels -- sits behind the front axle.[2]

Issigonis's Mini and a few successor cars had the engine laterally mounted (east-west), with the transmission in the sump below the crankshaft. This was as near as possible to putting the entire weight of the drivetrain on the front wheels.[3] The Gr"goire Sport, amongst other cars by that firm, had the engine longitudinally in front of the front wheels, with the differential in the middle. This became quite popular, as the German Ford Taunus 12M and the Lancia Flavia used it as well.[3]

Because the transversely-mounted engine does not require a bevel gear to change the direction of the final drive, coastdown losses are reduced by approximately 2-3% of flywheel power and hence overall efficiency is slightly higher than with an FR design. The earliest such arrangement was not technically FF, but rather MF and had the engine mounted longitudinally (fore-and-aft, or north-south) behind the wheels, with the transmission and differential in front.[3] The net result is more tractive force at the wheel with the shorter drive shaft and the car tends to pull to the opposite side. For this reason, the Issigonis design (in which the two driveshafts are equal in length) is still preferred by many performance drivers and accounts for much of the Mini's success in rally and short-track circuit racing.[3] The shorter drive shaft, being stiffer than the longer drive shaft, transmits the motion to the wheels immediately instead of 'winding' up due to the drive torque.[3] You can use it to adjust the position of the front end towards or away from the center of the corner, as you simultaneously adjust traction with the right foot, and keeping the rear end where you want it with the left foot. You can imagine what would happen if you tried to drive a rear wheel drive car in this fashion.[8] In all events, the advice to take your foot off the gas when encountering a skid, is the logical first reaction - in a Rear Wheel Drive Car.[8] Right. Are these guys completely stupid, or what? Well, when the book was written, in the time when virtually all cars in North America were Rear Wheel Drive, this advice made sense.[8]

The effect will be about the same as if you'd let off on the throttle on a rear wheel drive car.[8]

For good reason. Every winter, literally thousands of lives are made miserable, or ended, by a failure on the part of those in charge of training us to drive to publicize this difference.[8]

No, in fact a good BASIC first reaction is to apply SOME gas pedal with the right foot, and at the same time, apply SOME brake with the left foot. The slight braking of the rear wheels will bring on some slewing around of the rear of the car, and the braking of the front wheels will be offset by the power applied to them at the same time.[8] You're in a better position, because you can also vary the power to the front wheels with the gas pedal, and "hunt" for a throttle opening that will give the best traction, as you steer INTO the curve. If you find the traction window, which you usually will, you will be able to make the front end "claw" its way arond the corner. If you're still with me, and this makes sense to you, you're not yet out of the woods for your first encounter with "failure to negotiate."[8]

The natural First Reaction, letting off on the throttle, and thus braking the front wheels, and losing ALL of what insufficient traction there was,was the wrong thing to do.[8]



Bob Erck In principle, four wheel drive is superior because power reaches all four wheels independently and the electronics allow each wheel to "recognize" the traction of the other three. [4] Bob Hartwell The question of front and rear drive automobiles continues to be debated among people who drive cars.[4] With rear wheel drive, the pushing rear wheels slip and the back end of the car starts to swing. Technology has helped reduce this problem in RWD cars to a point where auto makers are returning to build RWD. RWD has definite advantages under normal driving conditions.[4] Rear wheel drive without added weight is considered to be the least effective.[4]

Traction has always been a problem with RWD vehicles, because of the lower rear vehicle weight over the drive wheels, but modern electronics has changed that.[7] Traction is improved by having the weight of the engine and transaxle over the drive wheels. This is a big advantage on slippery roads.[7] What is the answer? How about all wheel drive! Porsche uses AWD on a Carrera model to enhance performance and traction.[7]

Even with the decrease in passenger compartment room and increased mechanical complexity, I am still a rear wheel drive fan.[7]

I have to turn it off to get out of the snow, and then turn it back on before I skid out. Hey Guys, Here I drove rear wheel for about five years, I am a cab driver, so I should know it better then all of you guys out there who hardly drive 10K miles in their entire life.[5] I've driven both, and I'm in no doubt that the front wheel-drive is far safer, handles like a dream, and corners like a panther wearing sticky boots! Ok, perhaps with modern cars, with sophisticated electronics and fancy braking systems, there might be not so much difference; but I'll stick with front drive.[5]

1. Front-wheel drive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front-wheel_drive

2. Why rear-wheel drive is coming back. - By Mickey Kaus - Slate Magazine
http://www.slate.com/id/2081194/

3. FF layout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FF_layout

4. Rear vs Front Wheel Drive in Winter
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/eng99/eng99328.htm

5. Comparison Test: Front-Wheel Drive Vs. Rear-Wheel Drive - Popular Mechanics
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1266931.html

6. front-wheel drive (engineering) --'Britannica Online Encyclopedia
http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-682516/front-wheel-drive

7. CanadianDriver: Front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive
http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/020619.htm

8. FRONT WHEEL DRIVE CAN GET YOU KILLED
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/snwvlly/fwd.html