Seems like GM is missing out on the small FWD performance market. Do they plan on ever covering that, or will they leave it to Ford and its Focus SVT and the imports?

 

There is a supercharged version of the base Vibe in the works that will have 180hp and be avail in auto/manual transmission. I believe the SC Ion is also still in the works.

Now, where is that affordable V-8/RWD option???

 

Crossover and a car with an ugly interior? They can do better...

 

I think they are moving but slowly, the vibe which was mentioned and the cavalier which has s supercharger for the manuals and i think there is a performance version that should come out soon after the new body style. Let us also not forget that the Impala SS will be coming and we may see it on the auto show floor very soon...

GMHTP has an article of an Impala SS with an Ls1 stuffed by Jon Moss and it definitely looks like a sleeper, like the 96 model, but i'm guessing that the SS won't have it but just a supercharged V6 with the FWD. We may also get something for the Monte carlos but it will not be too much, perhaps the same supercharger as the Impy i'm guessing

 

I think a good many models are in the works for that market but GM is waiting for vehicles on the new platforms to come out. Car's like the new Grand Am, Cavalier, Sunfire replacement, Soltice?, Ion. Within 2 years they should all be out I believe.

 

Funny. I thought "FWD performance" was an oxymoron.

 

That attitude is a good way to **** away market share.

 

Centric has a point...

Performance aint FWD...

RWD or AWD is performance.

 

It's a market.

Subaru has it.
Toyota has it.
Pontiac (sorta, but not completely) has it.
Honda has it.
Ford has it.
Chrysler has it.

Overall, GM's offering of a relatively slow not-all-that-small and definitely-not-all-that-tight car and a crossover station wagon is really pathetic.

 

Call it what you like it still FWD

Pseudo-Performance has a nice ring to it.



But sure I agree you should milk the suckers who buy this FWD crap..

 

Sporty FWD cars are really not as bad as most of us make them out to be. Personally I just give them hell because they don't own Camaros (same treatment as Mustang owners get, but with less expectation that they'll ever be as fast. ). It's not a shameful market.

 

RWD is less complex under the hood due to the symmetrical layout of the motor and the transmission being further back all on its own, not cluttering space or causing complexity. RWD is better as far as weight distribution for performance. You want the weight squarely on the wheels with power? Well by default the engine's weight is attracted vertically straight down by gravity, and the car's weight overall is 50/50 over front to back, give or take, so it would appear that FWD has the advantage? maybe in the snow at turtle speeds. But when you're launching forward (i.e. performance), the angle is not straight down anymore, it's somewhere around 45 - 60 degrees back, right where the rear wheels are, taking all the weight of the engine and the car, and getting great traction, while the front wheels do the steering. A RWD's rear end is likely to want to squat down while the front end rises up, further enhancing traction and weight trajectory, pushing the weight along. a FWD pulls the weight, it doesn't push it, and doesn't do the squat/rise effect nearly as effectively.. with its engine being the heaviest concentration of the car directly on top of the drive wheels accelerating hard is more likely to lose traction because of the same effect of the weight shift back, plus it makes no performance sense to use the same wheels exclusively for acceleration and for steering. I say "exclusively" because I'm all about AWD for performance too, but never FWD.

RWD: Picture a sprinter that has just taken off the starting line. Picture the legs as the rear wheels, the arms as the front wheels, the head & torso as the engine. The body is leaning forward at an extreme angle. All the body weight is being directed down and back at the 45-or-so angle I mentioned and this setup has extremely high efficiency for propulsion. FWD: Now picture the same person having to use his arms instead of his legs to go the distance, with wheels at his feet (to eliminate/reduce friction) ! He's not pushing his weight along but pulling it. Highly inefficient and strenuous with plenty of deadweight to drag (legs).

 

That's nice and all, and I realize that FWD is actually terrible for track and drag racing, but it's just an important market that GM appears to be mostly ignoring.

 

That's nice and all, but this thread is about FWD performance, not FWD markets. FWD was not made for performance. face it.

 

Having started this thread, I figure I know what it's about.