Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 14:55:35 GMT From: MikeHunt2nopsamcity.com Subject: Re: Toyauto vs Slaab : bottom line
Not quite true. It actually cost more to build a FWD car than a comparably sized RWD. If you recall when Chrysler replaced their complete line of RWD with much smaller FWD the prices were comparable. What they saved on steel glass and plastic was replaced with extra labor cost and reductions of economies of scale. Assembly of FWD cars is slower because of the greater ratio of off line assembly required for FWD construction. Ford actually can assemble the Crown Vic at less cost than the Taurus. It is the market forces that determine retail pricing in a particular market. How many small cars and trucks do you think could be sold in country's with an average income of 1/5 that of the US if they sold for the same price. The real advantage of FWD is in packaging a vehicle to accommodate a given number of passengers in a smaller size. That was necessary in the seventies for bread and butter high volume cars but not today. As cars get bigger they tend to use RWD because of the lower build cost and the lower sales volume. Sales volume has much more to do with the MSRP than anything else. Cadillac lost its number one position to Lincoln because it does not built the right cars for the luxury or performance market, RWD. They will be returning to RWD over the next few years. Toyota was smart to enter that market with RWD with the Lexus. Chrysler will have several RWD models in the near future in it near luxury models and it projected uxury models so they can use shared MB parts. dizz wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 21:50:57 GMT, Just Bob <uctraingnopsamanet.com> > wrote: > > >On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 02:52:51 GMT, dizz <dizzNOnopsampro-ns.net> wrote: > > > >>Their FWD cars don't cost $40k like a Saab can. FWD makes sense at > >>the low end, not the high end. > > > >Exactly where during your automotive engineering training did you > >examine the 'price vs. drive wheels' differential equation ? > > LOL! Duh.... You don't need to have extensive "automotive > engineering training" to know that rear-drive is superior to front > drive, but it costs more, which is why it's only found on > more-expensive cars. Duh....
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
