Photo courtesy of L Deren
Sedans like Ford’s Panther lines and the GM B-Bodies get a lot of love around these parts. Much of that is due to their traditional styling and rugged, body-on-frame construction and rear-wheel-drive. However, these cars were mostly usurped by modern, unibody, front-wheel-drive sedans. These became popular even with older, conservative buyers fond of the old-school Panther and B. But do these modern, FWD, full-size sedans have any fans here?
There’s something not quite right about a 4.6 V8 powering the front wheels but, then again, the 1995 Lincoln Continental was about as much of a sports car as the 1995 Lincoln Town Car. Personally, I love the balance and handling ability a RWD platform can provide in a sedan with sporting intentions. But what about those of us who simply want a cushy, Brougham experience? Is RWD a necessity?
The Continental’s flaky transmission may hinder its popularity among Curbsiders but how about the 2000 Buick LeSabre? This FWD G/H-Body GM sedan ticks many of the boxes a Panther would, sans RWD, BOF construction. Reliable powertrain? Check. Traditional, unmistakably American styling? Check. Front bench seat? Check. Soft ride? You better believe that’s a check!
Can either of these cars tempt my Panther-loving compatriots? Can any other full-size, FWD sedan?
Nope.
Nope, the Linc seems like a big Taurus, the Buick in particular always reminds me of a blow up mattress in appearance. I haven’t personally found any FWD large sedan appealing since the early 80’s Eldo and Riv/Toro, and before that, the 66/67 Toro and 67 Eldo, although they were coupes, not sedans per se. Hard to believe so many model years have come and gone without something large and FWD speaking to me, although the last large Bonnies were promising, after they got stripped of cladding, but you still had to take them with a godawful rear wing. Yuk.
Mind you, those final E-body cars were longitude-FWD, not transverse-FWD, like these sedans. And according to some people here, they were also BOF, not unibody. But they handled quite well, despite their size and floatiness, and especially in inclement weather. I was first brought home from the hospital in my grandma’s brown over brown ’85 Riviera, which would have been approaching ten years of age by then, but it was the car that got me interested in cars.
I was excited to see the recent “La La Land” movie feature an 80s Riviera convertible driven by Ryan Gosling.
I did not realize that – we had a sort off an equivalent in the EU in the FWD-only A8 (and there are FWD-only versions of the A6) which like all of these Audis had longitudinal engines. Such cars were bought by people who could not quite stretch to the “proper” Quatro models. It works, but you always get the feeling something is “missing”…
That seems to be true of a lot of the nicer VW Group products, right up to the Bentley Continental GT, Bentley Flying Spur and Volkswagen Phaeton (recently discontinued), size-wise. And yes, all Audis that are the A4 or higher, except for the Q7 and R8 have this longitude-FWD setup by default.
The thing with VW / Audi is that they push the engine way ahead of the front axle, so that the transmission is actually in line with the front axle and acts as a transaxle for the front wheels, while still having a longitude output shaft for the rear wheels. Thus, FWD versions of these cars seem very nose-heavy, while the AWD versions (which have some variation of Audi’s “Quattro” AWD setup) are rear-biased and feel more balanced than anything from competitors like Mercedes-Benz, BMW or Jaguar. This layout also lends itself to VW Group’s unique W engines, like the W12 seen in the A8 an the Bentleys, which is shorter in length than a V12 and in some cases takes up less room than a smaller-displacement V8 (the 6.0-liter W12 is smaller than Audi’s 4.2 V8, for example).
With the E-bodies, though, GM actually placed the transmission beside the engine, and linked them together with a chain. This was called the Unitized Powerplant Package (UPP). Weirdly, the Riviera was RWD *until* ’79, despite being on the same platform most of the time was the Toronado and Eldorado. It also had a full frame at times when the other E-bodies had partial frames, so there’s that. And for ’77 – ’78, a brief stopgap Riviera was introduced on the smaller B-body platform.
And when he is more successful at the end, he upgrades (near the final scene) to the same period Eldorado.
He does! I pointed that out to the people I was sitting next to. The mirror skullcaps give it away as being the Cadillac version, although the Buick was never sold as a convertible in that color combination, either.
Well, actually, they worked. My dad’s last car was a 1996 DeVille. Was it a sports car? Hell no! But did it drive well? Yes. Both in town and on the highway, it cruised comfortably, with decent fuel economy and minimal upkeep. It was an old person’s car, built for “the greatest generation”, those folks who survived the depression and WWII service, only to be overtaken and overlooked by their boomer offspring. Conservative styling, a ride that makes the word “cushy” seem too harsh, and yet, solid and reliable. Those folks of that age never really took to European or Japanese makes, and I do recall talking to an elderly couple who refused to buy a Japanese car specifically as a result of losing friends in the Pearl Harbor attack. Alas, if any of those folks are still around, they are over 80, and likely not driving (although living in a retiree filled community means I still have drivers over 80 around me on the road daily!), so makes like Buick and Cadillac and Lincoln are having to adapt or die. However, one still sees these kinds of rides all around, even if they are used up secondhand vehicles, but there are folks who love them for what they are, and forgive what they are not.
Not sure if you’re folks were apart of the “greatest generation”, I can easily dispute that. But I will however, admit the DeVille was nice. I will leave it at that!
Mr. Hartfield.
You seem to be argumentative and can’t post anything that comes across as positive.
Different points of view on these posts are appreciated.
If you have nothing positive or actually appropriate to say please, keep the negative tone to yourself. Some of us are here to share life stories or learn.
I’m sorry but your last few comments are really harsh and not what most of us are looking for here.
I can see the good and bad in all cars.
+1!
Thank you Tj for your comments on this. We are here to share and enjoy, not to bring others down or lambaste those with who we disagree.
And to you, Mr. Hartfield, yes, my parents were a part of the “greatest generation”, so named by Tom Brokaw, but the name is justified. Those born in the time of the great depression pulled together to rebuild the economy, then pulled together to win WWII, and then had the rug pulled out from under them as their children’s generation evolved into cynical, greedy, and arrogant Boomers. Not all of them, mind you, but quite a few. I try to associate with Gen X rather than Boomers just for that reason.
While no Generation is all good or bad, I would have a hard time disagreeing with you. And technically, I’m a “boomer”. ??
JFrank – Greatest generation indeed. I reflect on my grandparents’ and parent’s combined generations and the sacrifices they made to flee hunger and tyranny, make something of themselves out of nothing, and gallantly fight for this country. A hat tip to you all who survived and progressed through the ’30s-’60s. Us younguns don’t have a clue what sacrifice means….
How can you honestly make such a blanket statement about millions of people born after the 30’s? Please don’t simply dismiss the life experiences of people whom you have not even met.
A shout out to the H and C bodies of 85-91. One thing Fwd was supposed to do was free up space in the interior. These did that and were light enough to bring out the charm of the 3.8 Buick V6 and let it take it’s rightful place among great engines such as the small block Chevy the LA Chrysler and the 4.6 Ford.
Agreed, H bodies don’t get nearly enough love. A GM Greatest Hit, in my book.
(It’s also funny when you see one of them in a parking lot, because despite their huge interior, they are visually dwarfed by a modern midsized sedan.)
And, for the older snow-belt customer who like their large cars, FWD was obviously a better choice.
Not really. With a few obvious exceptions (sports cars and muscle cars, mostly), RWD cars do fine in snow. The problem is usually in the driver’s seat!
John, the problem may be in the driver seat, but 50% of drivers are below average. I grew up in the snow belt and remember all the sandbags in the trunks and cars spun out into snowbanks, and how people couldn’t wait to upgrade to FWD.
I Wouldn’t turn down a 1985-90 Buick Park Avenue, (Best looking of that generations “C” body.) Past owner of an ’87. A coresponding “H” body LeSabre would do in a pinch!
We had ’89, ’98, and ’04 LeSabres. The ’98 was probably our favorite out of all of them, but they were all fairly durable and smooth vehicles. The 3800, which all 3 had, was a pretty great engine–especially considering its somewhat humble roots.
(Would love to see a 3800 article similar to some of the other engine articles here. Maybe I’ll look through my old stuff and see what I can find/remember about it.)
The two last generations of LeSabre are still all over Chicago, and they haven’t been made in at least 12 years. Some are rustbuckets, but a surprising amount are still in very nice shape. Probably a result of the age/demographic of the typical new LeSabre buyer.
For new cars, I do have to say the latest Impala is pretty good looking and is comparatively imposing in size compared to most modern sedans. I also rode in a new Continental a little while ago and it has a really nice, extremely comfortable interior (first time I’d been in a car with reclining back seats.) Only problem was that I couldn’t figure out how to get out once we arrived–the doors open with a switch, not a lever.
This is an area where Ford may have been outplayed by GM. Ford, being the last RWD full-size platform after the last Caprice/Impala/Roadmaster rolled off the line in 1996, got all those gravy fleet contracts with the Panther until it, too, was finally put to rest in 2011.
But whatever GM lost in RWD fleet sales they gained in experience. I can’t say as I much like any of the Panther’s FWD replacements, be they a 500 or Taurus. GM, OTOH, while not world-class, had some serviceable FWD big cars after the RWD bubble cars went away, the most notable being the last couple generations of Impala. The 2006-2016 car (the last ones with the 3.6L V6, in particular) turned out to be pretty decent cars that could be had at very affordable prices. They were hardly up-to-date in the Camcord sense, but they got the job done. I especially like the ones with a front bench seat, the last car to be so equipped (that I’m aware of). The 2014 Epsilon II car seems to be pretty decent, too. Although there’s no more bench seat, reviews indicate GM is making strides in building cars that no longer trail the entire field. If I were in the market for a new big car, I’d give the latest Impala a hard look.
In fact, they spit out so many of the last W-body (particularly fleet versions), I predict the Impala and its division sisters will easily be a future COTR and on roads for at least the next couple decades. For a good-sized, reliable, cheap, FWD domestic car that one doesn’t absolutely hate to drive or ride, the GM 2006-2016 W-body is hard to beat.
GM shut down the RWD sedan line to build more trucks and SUVs there. That was a good business decision in 1996, and it’s gotten better since then.
I’ve never been a fan of large sedans in general, but I’m pleased (If not ecstatically thrilled) with my 300M. The Chrysler LH’s were well styled, nicely appointed and responsive, and with the High Output 3.5 have got some guts. Durabuility is questuionable, although I do still see quite a lot of them on the road. In truth though, it isn’t the car I’d choose to drive if it hadn’t come my way at the right time and the right price.
Love for the full size FWD sedan?
Heck yea!
(BTW, after Alfa Romeo, now it’s Kia who’s presenting a RWD sports sedan. Have you seen the new Stinger?)
I often do searches on AutoTrader of Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impala, and Toyota Avalon – new & CPO just to compare prices and options. Give me a V6, heated seats, heated steering wheel (if I can get it), and a suspension that makes me want to point the hood at the horizon, set the cruise control, and see how many miles I can gobble up in a single day.
I still love big sedans and honestly the RWD ones are either stupid expensive or have dubious quality reputations (Chrysler/Dodge I’m looking at you.)
I grew up with sedans and I feel myself being pulled back in that direction.
I agree, and I do the same AutoTrader thing. Even though I’m a Crown Vic owner, I obviously realize that my next car won’t be a RWD BOF sedan. If I had to choose among newer cars right now, I’d select an Avalon… it’s like a modern LeSabre, and I like it.
Several years ago I traded in my old Contour to CarMax, and while I was there, I test drove a few used cars… a LaCrosse among them. I liked it, and could easily live with one, particularly since used examples are pretty good values.
Regrettably,I havta agree that the Avalon is more Buick than Buick today. In fact Lexus is more Buick than Buick! My next car could be an Avalon. It would be my first time owning a “furrin” brand. (although in reality it’s probably more American made than a Buick now ?!) My only foray (to date) into Japanese vehicles has been on two wheels.
I’m also a Crown Vic owner currently, but it’s had the effect of making me tired of large, isolated cars. A recent bout of crazy had me strongly considering trading it in on, of all things, a new Focus ST. Completely different end of the spectrum, but I wouldn’t mind completely different. Thankfully for my finances reason prevailed (though the $21k asking price wasn’t bad at all for an ST…)
If I were looking for the new equivalent of the CV, then yes, Avalon or Impala would be the way to go. But I don’t anticipate looking for that. With a couple of exceptions I’ve driven mid-size to full-size RWD cars my entire life. But I think whenever the next purchase happens it will be something a bit different…
I have a crush on the new Volvo S90 and V90. (I liked the old S80 and the 6-cylinder V70, too.) They’re a little too expensive for me, but I might win the lottery.
Meanwhile the the Avalon is probably the best thing in the class, although the Impala and LaCrosse aren’t bad. A little cheap in places, though. I like the ES350, too, but that darned Lexus predator front end.
The new S90 is gorgeous. On the inside perhaps even more so. But it’s not cheap…
Those Continentals are so troublesome and don’t age well at all. It’s wasn’t just the transmission, the electronics and air suspension were terribly cheap and many of the auxiliary components like brakes and suspension bits were sourced from cheap parts carried over from the Taurus. I drove quite few of them when I worked in the service department at a Ford dealership and they felt just like driving a weird, extra-long V8 Taurus, only with cheap slippery leather and more electronic goodies that were inevitably malfunctioning. If you wanted that experience it was better to just go straight for an actual Panther, which was at least more durable. I just never really understood the need for that Continental. It wasn’t different enough from the Taurus and the overall effect came across as a flaky cut-rate Town Car.
The GM H-bodies though… Lots of love for those. I still have fond memories of the silky smooth ride in my 2002 Park Avenue. GM did a much better job with just about everything – body, suspension, engine, trans, overall durability. They are also way less cumbersome and “buttoned down” than the Panthers and B-bodies with no sacrifice in ride. The PA was so much better proportioned than the LeSabre though… the rear overhang has always looked Gremlin-style chopped off to me, especially with that long and bulbous looking snout. Plus, the Park Ave. had a gen-u-ine stand up ornament on the hood! Always appreciated that view while wafting down the freeway.
Front-wheel drive is a perfectly acceptable layout for the majority of drivers who do not actively seek nor particularly want a sports car driving experience in a sedan. It’s typically more fuel efficient, yields more interior space due to a flatter floor, and gives better traction on slick surfaces.
The big factor is suspension tuning, and in the case of these types of cars, very soft suspension makes for far inferior handling than being front-wheel drive. What good is rear-wheel drive if you feel like you’re going to capsize.
The only drawbacks to large, front-wheel drive sedans tends to be their unfavorable weight distribution, combined with long wheelbases. Sometimes this can even pose basic everyday-type handling deficiencies.
But to sum it up, for those looking for the “Old School American” traditional soft and cushy ride, a front-wheel drive luxury, full-size luxury sedan will probably do a better job 99% of the time.
Front drive sedans done properly can provide a plush ride combined with excellent road manners you just cant buy them in North America
Well, what FWD car from Europe is as plush as a Buick?
The Citroen C6?
The C6 is a nice car indeed, but it does not have the isolation and quietness of a newer Buick. But it combine a quite smooth ride with nice handling.
Peugeots make the Buick look pretty ordinary.
I’m sorry, but that’s just not true. I’m from a Peugeot family, and yes, the old 504 and 505 were great comfortable and reliable cars. The 406 was comfortable and nice riding but not reliable at all (2.0 HDi), and the new 508 (HDi with nearly all options) that my dad is driving is reliable, but harsh riding and a lot of tire noise.
The Buicks has a repuation for soft riding, comfortable, quiet and reliable cars. Some were powerfull as well. Today Peugeot are nowere near that characteristic of their cars. They have become more like a German car in terms of both ride and reliability.
Absolutely My uncle had a 2000 LeSabre for 15 years and it suited him just fine. Comfortable, reliable, reasonably economical, exactly the right car for him.
Nope. The bigger and heavier the car the less FWD is at a traction/packaging advantage. I thought the Continental was interesting for the 32v V8, but with transmissions barely adequate for a Vulcan it was a recipe for disaster.
Those LeSabres were beyond ugly, the 2000 restyle is just lumpy and bulbous . Makes the Continentals low smooth styling seem downright classy by comparison.
As far as I know the only “full-size” FWD sedan these days is a China-only Audi A8 model.
Mid 2004 I got a new 2003 Pontiac SSEi as a company car. I remember being told the reason we were getting such an upscale model was that the company got a fleet deal on some unsold leftovers. Outside the car looked like they had layered plastic cladding on with a trowel. Inside the dash looked like a Rock-Ola jukebox by day and Tokyo by night when lit up. Once you got over the general teenage Speed Racer appearance, you were rewarded with a great over the road car. I was sorry when I had to turn in the Pontiac. My next fleet car reverted back to a Dodge Caravan. I drove a lot of two lane highways in the west. It took me a long time to get over my addiction to the passing ability I had with that Series II 3800. The Dodge had tighter build quality and was more practical – but it wasn’t nearly as as enjoyable to drive.
Most minivans aren’t nearly as enjoyable to drive 😉
I have to drive minivans quite a bit for work and I have to say, other than the fact that they are vans, they drive rather nicely. Especially our newer Dodges with the Pentastar, they also have some get up and go. I suppose part of that is they have normal meaty tires instead of the rubber bands most cars get. I like the looks of my 19″ rims on my 300c but it would have more of that old school float with an older sized wheel.
Props for the Pontiac G-body Bonneville! I’ve driven several of these and oddly, my favorite one was a basic rental Bonneville (SE model) that I drove to Cleveland from Grand Rapids and back in a weekend.
The 3800 was a smooth motor and the car drove smaller than it was. I had no issue with the red interior lights or the arrangement of the dash, for once, even the basic seats were pretty easy on my back.
I think the spirit of that car lives on in the new Impy, but I’ve yet to drive one to find out.
Avalon, particularly the generation that ended in 2011. I think they are the Panther, or B-body, of the future. They may not be as heavily-built as the BOF big boys, but their Camry-like reliability makes up for any lack of robustness. And in terms of driving, they provide a similar or better experience.
I respect the Avalon, but don’t love it. Alas, the only fwd full-sizers I love are forbidden fruit from France (Peugeot 605, Citroen XM, Renault 25).
No. With size comes prestige, and prestige doesn’t work as nicely with fwd.
With size comes prestige. So a large bag of turds carries more prestige than a small bag of turds?
I’m wondering with these FWD full size sedans experience significant torque steer with their larger engines? My late MY2000 Maxima with the VG engine really did when you floored it.
I quite like the styling of those Continentals, and it was a packaging marvel getting the DOHC 4.6 V8 to work in a transverse FWD layout. However, the flaky transmissions and “plus size Taurus” driving experience (from what I’ve heard) kill the appeal. Nice to look at but I don’t care to own one. Then again, maybe the ones that are still alive have defied the transmission odds?
LeSabre? LeNope. They’re very good cars, but I just can’t deal with that styling. Super-conservative ovoid theme creates a shape that is at once boring and unappealing. I rather liked the initial ’86-’91 LeSabre, but the following ones lost the plot. (Curiously the later Park Avenues generally work in my eyes–something about the reworked, longer tail treatment makes the whole design better balanced.)
The current Impala is a rather good-looking machine too. Haven’t driven one, but I’d consider it if I were looking for a sedan.
No none really does it for me. I like the Chrysler lhs New Yorker but I would notd buy one with its weak transmission
My current DD is an ’03 LeSabre.
It’s not the most exciting car in the world TO drive. But it’s utterly reliable (gotta love that 3800 Series 2 V-6). It will haul a ton of stuff, and people. It’s only got 48,000 miles on it (I bought it from a little old lady. Really). And it’s safe. And comfortable.
The only full size front-driver I’ve ever liked was my mom’s VW Passat B3 wagon. That thing was huuuuge.
Not really, because every one I can think of, that I like anyways, has serious flaws.
1992-97 Cadillac Seville: Beautiful car, questionable engine quality. (My Northstar finally busted a headgasket and is getting replaced with a newer one. There goes 7600 down the tube.)
1988-94 Lincoln Continental: Okay design, but it looks and feels like a slightly more upmarket Taurus.
Oldsmobile Aurora: Great design, finally unique, still has problems that prevent it from being great.
First Gen Chrysler LH cars: A car that was *this* close to truly being great. But, in the end, the Mopar stamp of “quality” let it down.
91-96 Buick Park Avenue: I honestly can’t think of anything wrong with this. Nice design, durable, comfortable, but by the same token, the Roadmaster is just as good.
Current Chevy Impala: I like it, but I’d much rather have an AWD version of it.
Any other front wheel drive, big sedan I can think of is just boring or forgettable. That’s not to say I wouldn’t dismiss any of these cars simply because of their layout. I just would rather have a B-Body instead.
Looks like the top photo is from Maine and cool taxicabs they have there. I like the Impala and Impala Limiteds at work, but I rather have a Minivan since it is more practical. The new Lincoln Continental looks nice despite the oversized rims.
Where’s the LH New Yorker?
NOPE.
For someone who wants a cushy, floaty road sofa, fwd is plenty adequate. But seeing as how that’s kind of an ‘old folks’ thing…who the hell would want that in the first place?
Personally I’m no fan of sedans, period. The few that I can see as appealing also have potential as sleepers or stylish freeway bombers. Chrysler 300C, the slick top Mopar M bodies with cop car goodies, or a ’60s era Chrysler…especially the Imperials come to mind. Those cars all have SOMETHING cool about them or have the potential to be. A big fwd car is just a comfy appliance. Nothing to see here.
“For someone who wants a cushy, floaty road sofa, fwd is plenty adequate. But seeing as how that’s kind of an ‘old folks’ thing….who the hell wants that in the first place?”
Um…..Me.
I know as a twenty year old, that’s surprising to say, but it’s true. When you live where I live, where twisties don’t exist, the roads never get paved, stop and go traffic is the norm, and the I-95 highway becomes a second home. Getting performance suspension is utterly useless, all it will do is break your spine in two because its transmitting every pothole and crack straight to the driver. The mushy suspension of a big road sofa is what I want, yes I know it’ll handle like a waterbed filled with porridge and Jell-O, but on the highway and around town, being comfortable is more important than looking cool.
Different strokes for different folks, but I would much rather look like an old man, than have the back problems of one.
I’m with you. I’m now in the correct demographic,but your position on this is where I have been since my 20’s. The “generational” differences (to me) are bull. My grandfather was more interested in “sporting” (read: buckboard handling..) cars than me. (He was an MG and “souped up” Ford man fan!) But his “rebellious” grandson is a Buick man! ?
I agree. In my 20’s I owned a succession of coupes, hot rods, Jeeps and trucks. A friend’s loaded Fleetwood was a revelation. So roomy and comfortable by comparison. It made me forget about going fast. Comfort for long-distance rules.
Same here, uh…me?
We all know you are a balls to the wall sports car/off road sort of guy, and that’s great, but that isn’t everyone.
Very true, and I’m not suggesting it SHOULD be for everyone. If it was, then hard core 4x4s and muscle cars would be mundane and common and therefore nothing special.
Depends on who you are, muscle cars and off road 4x4s are still mundane and nothing special. I know I get tired of their practically cliché appeal.
I disagree more with the sedan hatred, I’d take a 4 door sedan over a SUV, CUV, Minivan, small hatch, medium hatch or wagon any day. Sorry, I’m a trunk fan through and through, and with my beloved 2-door coupe extinct I need to hitch my wagon to the next closest star.
The issue I have with big FWD sedans isn’t the dynamic qualities, it’s that that layout usually dictates elements like flat dimensionless wheels placed so far back the piece of fender between the door and wheel is almost vestigial, resulting in inherently worse styling than a RWD based car in the same class(usually). Sure there’s a traction advantage, but when we’re talking about near two ton cars FWD isn’t at quite the same drastic advantage a Civic has over a Chevette in the snow, there was a grain of truth to the old “road hugging weight” mantra old auto marketing pushed.
Just look at a BMW 7 series or a Mercedes S class, or a Lexus LS, and compare them to the efforts of GM’s FWD everything era. RWD helped make those cars look and be as prestigious as they were. Nobody Buying the BMW, Benz and Lexus cared about outright handling in those models(otherwise they’d get the smaller nimbler ones), they had a legitimate air of no compromise exclusivity that FWD cars just struggle to achieve with any credibility. I don’t question that big FWD sedans can’t be good, I like the 92 Seville for example, but would they actually be worse off if the best of them, all else being equal, were rear drive instead? I think not.
Coupes aren’t extinct, not by a long shot. The coupe as a mass market fashion statement IS nearly extinct. Granted there are far less choices in 2 door form, but they’ve been distilled down to the best theve ever been. The D3 muscle cars are obvious in their mission, but if you prefer less brute force and more sophistication, theres the Lexus RC, Nissan 370Z, Infiniti G37, Cadillac ATS, Audi 5 series, BMW 4 series, Mercedes C class…I’m leaving out quite a few but you get where Im going. The choices that you DO have are more focused as performance cars which is where coupes excel in the first place. All of these in their base forms fill the need for a softer, more image-focused PLC type car.
Its as good a time as any to be a car nut. And I don’t think that the vanishing of ‘poser’ coupes like the fwd Monte Carlos, DSM Avenger/Sebring coupes, etc are any big loss.
I’d still sooner buy a Monte Carlo over a Lumina/Impala.
Interesting outlook but it definitely clashes with mine. Coupes have become polarized, like too many other things today, into a high performance at all costs niche, which inherently limits the bodystyle’s appeal and consequently the exposure to the masses due to a myriad of practicality/cost/reputation reasons that all your cited examples carry with them to one degree or another. Coupes, err, 2 doors(have to be specific about that now a days, ugh) shouldn’t have to be supercars any more than 4 door sedans need to be police cars, or SUVs need to be off roaders, or pickup trucks need to be used for work only. No for some reason function at all cost needs to be applied to them, despite the bodystyle being perfectly practical for basically anyone without kids, and I personally like 2-door styling more than what the stat sheet numbers say about it – oh such heresy in this highly scientific time! – PLCs, if your definition of that is a 2 door not engineered by shortening lap times on a racetrack most buyers never will go to, let alone heard of, paints a broad stroke, there’s more cars I like by that definition than purpose built supercars.
There are several 4-door sedans right now that had there been 2-door versions of, all else being equal, i.e. no shortening wheelbase or overall length, just longer doors and a revised roofline (think pre-1968 GM A-bodies, Pre-1971 Chrysler B bodies, Pre-1972 Torino/Fairlane) that would look absolutely fantastic over all the actual stubby coupes with no rear seat and teeny trunks offered today. The Challenger is really the closest I can think of that actually ticks most of the right boxes, and more and more I may actually psych myself into buying one despite FCAs reputation lately, but I have to say, the current Charger fits the silhouette of a proper long coupe even better despite it’s 4 doors. If I could order a 6-speed manual like I can the Challenger…
I’m a big fan of full size cars in general, and FWD is fine by me. In fact, I am mystified at how many old car fans don’t like FWD. There’s no practical reason. The average full size American car can be pulled by the front wheels as effectively as pushed by the rear ones.
The chief benefit of FWD for me is winter traction. The chief detraction is service difficulty. I do all my own repairs and generally prefer to work on a RWD platform.
My personal fleet is mostly RWD. But I have a ’97 DeVille that I love (except for the headbolts). I used to have an ’88 Bonneville SE that was about the best thing GM made in the late ’80’s. Excellent performance, efficient, roomy, great instrument panel and decent in winter. A great car.
” In fact, I am mystified at how many old car fans don’t like FWD. There’s no practical reason.”
FWD came about for reasons of economy and practicality. Not the things that get people excited about cars. Think about it. FWD is one ‘innovation’ that didn’t rise from being developed on the race track. I know how the classic Mini Cooper rose to be a rally champion by way of its fwd handling. But that’s going the other way around.
Most of the things that old car fans love about old cars are facilitated by rwd: Theyre more powerful, the layout can handle more power, the rwd design is simple, rugged, and easy to work on. And lets face it…most fwd cars are thought of as throwaway appliances. There are exceptions such as the classic Mini Cooper. I’m a fan of many turbo Mopars which are fwd based. But the reality is that as much as I love the ’84-’86 Daytonas, Shelby Chargers, Omni GLHS, etc they’ll never have the collectability or the aftermarket support as any Mustang or Camaro, or any A or B body Mopar. Year One isn’t going to start stocking restoration parts for ’95 Grand Prix’s, or any Honda. Aint gonna happen.
Year One probably won’t but I could see 90s Hondas collectible for a generation who ruined most of them a 15 years ago haha.
I agree pretty much, transaxles are pretty well stuck with the FWD chassis they were designed for so you’re limited to what engines can be swapped or how much power you can throw in. That and wrenching on anything on the front of the engine, or changing plugs on a V6 pushrod configuration just isn’t cathartic like it can be on a longitudinal layout. These are important to old car fans who get their hands dirty anyway.
Other factor is FWD started off as a fun novelty, pretty much any car that had it prior to 1975 in the US is notable and interesting in the same kind of way the electric car is today. But when it was fully adopted by all of the manufactures in just a few short years, replacing or planned to replace some RWD cars that were actually quite good and getting better, one can see the seeds of resentment being planted. I certainly hear and feel that way today with EVs and especially AVs on the horizon – so we made some of the the greatest performing cars ever and the industry push is to place us in transportation pods instead? What the hell!
Good points, and all true.
But also, the switch to FWD just happened to coincide with a bunch of other changes, including downsizing, fuel injection, ECUs*, OBD and GM being completely taken over by beancounters and churning out crap. And all of that other stuff became associated with “FWD equals bad” even if the surviving RWD cars had the same issues.
And of course baby boomers have the demographic advantage and dominate the conversation, so when they collectively decided that all cars after 1972 (or whatever) were shite, us GenXers passed down that information and it took decades before people started to respect things that weren’t BOF/V8 dinosaurs.
CC recently had a story about a 1983 Malibu wagon, and it got me thinking. That car was total wonder bread, dull as hell, and the Celebrity which replaced it was much better for the target market in most respects. But the Malibu will always have an aura for being the last RWD. But, if GM had kept up with cars like that Celebrity, and still owned the midsized market, and there would be be very little nostalgia for that Malibu. It represents the old era which has been symbolized by Rear Wheel Drive.
* Can’t remember how my times I’ve heard a variation of “They said the computer was broken and I needed to buy a new one for $800. Why does a car even need a computer!?”
FWD has been around for a long, long time, and the first successful mass produced car with FWD was the Citroen Traction Avant of the early 1930s. The first US FWD car of note was the Cord in the late 1930s. There are advantages and disadvantages to both FWD and RWD (and AWD as well), so it really boils down to the best solution for the task at hand. Front drive cars get better traction, but they are hard to power and steer with the same 2 wheels. RWD allows better steering and performance, but loses traction and uses much more usable space. FWD is a cheaper package to build, especially in unibody cars, while RWD is easier to build in a body on frame car. I would hazard a guess that most people would be hard pressed to be able to tell whether a car is FWD or RWD by simply driving it, so really, it is not that much of a difference, other than to connoisseurs or snobs. A car is not premium based on being RWD.
My most recent cast-off was a 1994 Olds 88 LSS, in purple-burgundy. It was in the fleet as the same time as my Mercury Grand Marquis. The Olds was really smooth riding, and perhaps quieter than the Merc. However, the reliability wasn’t there. It left me stranded three times during the not quite a year I owned it. My wife refused to ride in it, therefore it became useless as an extra car.
What really irked me about the thing is that the Series 1 3800 got worse mileage than the 4.6 in the Mercury. 17 MPG was normal, 22 on a freeway trip seemed rather low. Considering that the 4.6 had a replacement limited slip 3.55 differential, I was expecting to best the 20 city 23 highway.
I still consider a FWD large sedan with a Series 2 or 3 3800, but there’s nothing that speaks to me enough to do something about it. W-body Intrigue and Impala lack the rear seat room and heft. The Century is grey porridge that only occasionally looks tempting, if only for being so anonymous that it stands out. LeSabre would be an option for the 96-99 model years, but the 2000 looks too puffy to be stylish. Pontiac’s products aren’t interesting.
Much love for these! I honestly don’t understand all the FWD hate I see. Ninety-Eight percent of the time I honestly read it as just enthusiast virtue-signalling and move on.
I think I’ve related tales of my 1989 Bonneville and the 1995 LeSabre that followed it here before. Both were cars I bought with my own money and wanted to buy. Back then I had no interest in performance cars-where I grew up “performance” was how fast your redneckmobile could go in a straight line, and none of that interested me. I wanted big, smooth, comfortable, and those H-Bodies delivered in spades. The Bonneville actually handled pretty well for such a big car, and while the LeSabre didn’t handle, I didn’t care. I live in Michigan-there’s strikingly little opportunity to enjoy a car’s handling in a place that’s flat as a tabletop with roads straight as a line. And, FWD has huge merits here because of snow, and to this day my parents freak out at the idea of me even driving a rear-drive vehicle in the snow (literally, my dad lectured me on how rear-wheel drive vehicles are so unpredictable and I needed to be careful on the drive home on Christmas when we took my old F-150 to visit them!).
Some cars are just really good at what they do, even if what they do isn’t all speed and handling. This “every car has to handle like I’m going to the track” bullshit is the reason there aren’t comfortable cruiser cars on the market these days, and the people peddling it can take a long walk off a short pier as far as I’m concerned. I loved thatBonneville and that LeSabre for some of the same reasons I love the ‘78 Continental I have now. It just felt… right. I got in and I felt at home. Driving was relaxing, an experience to savor like a fine whiskey or a nice cigar.
I DD a Fiesta ST now, having caught the Euro handling bug quite by accident a couple cars after I crashed the LeSabre. Back then, though, had you given me a Focus SVT, I don’t think I would have enjoyed it or bonded with it like I did the LeSabre. The LeSabre was the sort of car I wanted, and it hit all the right notes. I cried on the final drive, away from the accident scene to my cousin’s place nearby, as though I had lost a dear friend. Because I had.
My spouse had a 2013 Taurus, on which we put 50,000 miles inside of 18 months. That car, too, was a great car that did everything we asked of it and more. It rode well, did 29 mpg on the freeway, and had a ton of power. It was quiet and reliable. It really was cut from old school cloth in some ways, and I was quite alright with it. That car ate up Midwestern miles like very few can, and I count myself amongst the current Taurus’ fans.
Moral of the story-Yes, I’m a fan of big FWD sedans.
Yep, you nailed that part about enthusiast virtue signaling. Other than dedicated sports cars, even RWD doesn’t really have much of an advantage there either. No one runs Town Cars through the Nurburgring. That said, the last generation Town Cars don’t handle badly in the roundabouts and off ramps I’ve thrown some in for kicks.
I just don’t see the point of making every damn car out there “for the track” either considering where most folks live and how most folks drive. RWD or FWD isn’t the issue there but rather the overly stiff suspensions, overly bolstered seats, and all of that. Not to mention all the “Super Sporty Sport” appearance packages or slight suspension changes that make one’s Camcord just ride that much more harsher.
Count me in as a fan of the FWD big sedan. I like ones that fall into the Brougham-esque category though, so no “sporty” things. The last w Impalas were good, honest cars. I enjoyed the one I had (with bench seat/column shift even!) for that short time. Same with the last LeSabres and Park Avenues though the PAs were a lot nicer. I like the Avalons with the wood on the steering wheels (kind of a Japanese Buick) and I rather like the New Yorker/LHS/Concorde/300m LH Chryslers. I know people say they were trouble but I regularly see them soldiering on around here, many way past 100k miles, even out to 150-200k plus. Just stay away from the 2.7L but I’d guess those are mostly the ones that crapped out.
I also got to use a 2004 Deville at work for a couple years. I really liked it, drove nice, good power, handled just fine and was on the whole reliable though some of its sensors were starting to get wonky. What I didn’t like about it was its unimpressive interior. Those Chrysler Concordes in higher trim were every bit as good or better, which is a pat on the back for Chrysler and a head shake for Cadillac. Not bad, but just not as good as it should have been considering how much money they wanted for them.
I might get a new Continental the next time around. I love my 300c and I do like to be able to say it’s on a RWD platform (just because all the big boys are-like the S Class and 7 series) but honestly I don’t notice a huge difference. I’ve driven lots of RWD vehicles, it’s usually just in snow or mud or such that I ever even think about it. The 300’s rubber band tires make more of a difference than its driveline set up, I would say.
Nope, give me compact and revvy with three pedals and a hatch.
Yep.
I thought the first gen (85-90) C&H body GMs were nice cars, but they didn’t quite have the presence that the RWD B bodies had. The slight bump in size that came with the second generation fixed that pretty well.
My two most recent cars have been ’95-’96 Olds 98s and depending on how long this one lasts, there might be another.
As a single man, I don’t need that big a car. But I’m partial to FWD in general. I respect the Taurus because it was such a step forward for an American automaker. I think the ’96 Taurus in particular is very good-looking.
I once drove a Buick Century, that’s not quite full size but it come close: I did not like it. another time I drove a Olds 88 50th anniversary edition. I did like that one as a land barge except for the crappy interior.
There, I am with Dan Cluley. (I prefer the 88 over the 98 though).
For my money I prefer a car that is comfortable on a long road trip. Big, quiet, spacious and fast. I rode motorcycles for thirty five years, when I slammed the door on a car I wanted to relax! To me cars are for going places, I really don’t care about ultimate handling or super low quarter mile ETs. Really how fast are you going to drive?
My grandfather was part of the greatest generation. He always wanted a Buick over a caddy. He didn’t get his Buick until the late 90’s. It was a used 90 Buick Regal coupe.
It was not only his first Buick but his first front wheel drive car.
He loved it. When it became to expensive to repair, he bought another Buick. It was a century. Not quite as nice and not the object of today’s question.
But he would have loved a lesabre or a park avenue.
I kind of follow his lead. The buicks of the late 80’s to the early 00’s were not overtly the best cars but…. they had the traditional qualities that some wanted.
My first car was a brougham. I miss Pop’s first Buick. So yeah. There are fans of this type of car
Even most “sporty” four doors don’t need RWD, let alone luxury four doors. They’ll either leisurely float down the highway or rocket down the Autobahn all the same as a RWD model. Corners favor entirely different cars in the first place.
One of the nicest cars I’ve ever ridden in. In my case, a diesel with nearly 600.000 miles and still strong. Is that one yours?
It’s not, but I plan on joining the Volvo clan with a first gen V70 soon.
The 2000 Le Sabre is a super way to tool down the road, if you can find one that isn’t worn out.
We had a 2016 Impala for a week last summer, and I quite enjoyed driving it. Lots of room and a smooth ride without being mushy, and plenty of power with good fuel economy from the V6. I was kind of sad to take it back. I’ve driven many different large FWD sedans as rentals, and I prefer something with a firmer ride and not too many toys (though a good stereo is a must).
My daily drive is a automatic diesel Toyota HiAce van.Hooray, It’s rear wheel drive so it must be an enthusiasts vehicle…. I can’t tell you how enticing stuff like Buick Park Avenues looks at the moment…
Nope. Wrong wheel drive sucks. It sucked before, it sucks now, it will suck in the future. While I may be forced into one by the lack of anything else available, I despise front wheel drive.
LeSabre and other 3800 platform mates were and are more loved as used cars perhaps than when new. They’ve proven to be very durable, affordable family cars. As such, used car dealers still bid up good examples knowing they will be an easy sale and little headache afterward.
On the other hand, the FWD Continentals were much more problematic because of its well-known costly transmission and suspension failures. At the used car auctions, very well-kept, lower-mileage, obviously one-owner Continentals brought very low bids and little interest, their reputation was well known. The buy-here-pay-here operators would buy them, knowing their clientele pretty much would be happy with an upmarket car, regardless of its poor reputation.
In my limited experience driving GM’s FWD C-bodies, I found them to have as much or more float than the RWD models, but less sense of isolation from the road. That independent suspension and body on frame build makes a difference. Also, as far as I’m aware it is cheaper to maintain.
Now that being said, I would not kick an ’85-’90 Olds 98, ’86-’90 Olds 88, ’85-’04 Buick Park Avenue, or 91-’96 Olds 98 out of my driveway. And I would consider a Toyota Avalon if shopping new cars–though because I like big cars so much I’d probably get a larger SUV instead.
So no hate here…truthfully if I had the money and the space I could easily see having 20 large sedans from various decades sitting around, some of which would almost certainly be FWD.
I like my 2009 Ford Taurus. I think it’s a better car than floaty old RWD cars.
Living in Europe and having to go through Vienna’s traffic on an almost daily basis, no. However, if I were working in Vienna during the week but travelling home to say Salzburg for the WE, I would not say no to a big FWD car like a Volvo V90 for example, or (if they were available here) a Buick Lacrosse or a Chevrolet Impala.
Yesterday I helped an aunt land a ’17 Avalon mid-range hybrid for $31,000. Huge inside, 35-40 mpgs, sunroof and heated seats. It drives pretty well too. She did ok in my book…
As I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to appreciate the qualities of a big sedan. I’ve owned a 1995 S420 and my current Magnum SRT8, as well as driven/rented many other numerous large sedans (300s, Chargers, Taruii, etc). Yes, even though my current daily driver bends way towards the sporty side with big honkin V8 and RWD, I also do have some love for the FWD big sedans.
On a trip to North Carolina back in 2005, we got a Caddy DTS as a rental car. It drove very well. Comfortable, fast, ate up the highway miles. The country roads that we were on were big sweepers, not tight and windy mountain roads, and it handled very well. I wasn’t pushing it, but I also wasn’t babying it either. I will say that when I got back to California I did do some price checking on them.
I actually prefer the 2006+ DTS styling. The Art & Style from Caddy was a bit more angular in the 2006 refresh, but it wasn’t so over the top as the CTS was in those years. My love for the big FWD sedan would be like the image attached…. 2006+ DTS, fully loaded, in Pearl White metallic.
No, no love at all.
FWD makes sense in compacts and sub-compacts. The space utilization advantage in FWD is maximized, and since these cars are lighter, there isn’t as much asked from a FWD powertrain as in their larger counterparts.
In mid-sizes, the appearance of V6 engines and heavier transaxles starts minimizing the value proposition in FWD except that they are easier to assemble and cheaper to produce.
In full-size cars, FWD is a decided disadvantage. Transverse V8s are hard to fit and the beefy transaxle required to handle all that power make these cars too front heavy and prone to plowing when pushed. Plus, there is only so much you can do to mitigate torque steer. And then there are problems with durability. Ever wonder why the majority of old vans on the road are Chevy Astros and GMC Safaris, despite their fewer production numbers vis-a-vis Chrysler and Ford’s offerings? That is because they are RWD and have adequately sized driveline components. Getting 200k plus out of them is not that problematic.
I will gladly take a Panther over one of the FWD Continentals any day of the week!