13 front wheel drive BMWs by 2016

[CorvallisBMW]

ugh...

Everyone pay attention. Listening? OK, good.

The reason BMW is developing smaller FWD vehicles is to lower their corporate average fuel economy (CAFE). Those mileage standards are going up in both the US and Europe and you' can't meet a 35mpg fleet average when even the most lowly US-based 128i can't crack that on the freeway, let alone a six-liter twin-turbo 760Li barge that only does 15mpg.

It's not the carpocalypse, it's just reality. And really... what's the big deal? 99% of your driving is done in a manner that makes no difference whether it's FWD or RWD. Commuting to work or school? Going to the grocery store? heading up to blunt's place at 11pm on a friday night for some lovin'? it doesn't matter what wheels are being driven. The 5% of people on this board who actually track their cars at some point during the year aren't going to buy a new FWD BMW anyways. Lets not forget BMW has made little economy cars in the past (Isetta anyone?) and they're still around as a company today.

[tjts1]

Even the Isetta was RWD. Not that it was a BMW design or anything.
:drink:

[vespam5]

Screw all this. It's about balance, handling, heritage, feedback, safety, peace of mind, pride, engineering. All reasons why I'm proud to drive and work my BMWs. If they go FWD I will never buy a new BMW again 100% guarantee you that.

And as much as I agree with your second paragraph I will still think it is a sad day when BMW goes FWD.

Isetta is rwd, so is 1600, 2002, 320, 316, 318, all small compact cars with good effeciency.

ugh...

Everyone pay attention. Listening? OK, good.

The reason BMW is developing smaller FWD vehicles is to lower their corporate average fuel economy (CAFE). Those mileage standards are going up in both the US and Europe and you' can't meet a 35mpg fleet average when even the most lowly US-based 128i can't crack that on the freeway, let alone a six-liter twin-turbo 760Li barge that only does 15mpg.

It's not the carpocalypse, it's just reality. And really... what's the big deal? 99% of your driving is done in a manner that makes no difference whether it's FWD or RWD. Commuting to work or school? Going to the grocery store? heading up to blunt's place at 11pm on a friday night for some lovin'? it doesn't matter what wheels are being driven. The 5% of people on this board who actually track their cars at some point during the year aren't going to buy a new FWD BMW anyways. Lets not forget BMW has made little economy cars in the past (Isetta anyone?) and they're still around as a company today.

[slammin.e28]

What's the difference in a FWD and RWD as far as "economy"? Does putting the engine sideways magically make it more efficient? NO! Does it somehow make the car make more power/tq for less emissions? NO!

Look under the hood of a 318. They have P-lenty of room to shorten that car up and make it a "compact". Just bring over the 123 hatches and they will be a big hit. I know plenty of people who love the looks of those cars, including me! As far as I'm concerned, bring back the 4cyl to the states and keep them RWD. Next the hofmeister kink will be gone, then the kidneys, then the roundel, etc, etc. It'll be another VW FWD shitbox.

[tjts1]

What's the difference in a FWD and RWD as far as "economy"? Does putting the engine sideways magically make it more efficient?

Weight, centrifugal mass.


Not that it stopped BMW from building some fuel efficient RWD cars.
116d: 116hp 43/58mpg US
320d: 163hp 47/65mpg US
520d: 184hp 39/54mpg US
I'm sure nobody would ever want to buy these RWD BMWs in the US. Bring on the FWDs instead.

[slammin.e28]

Any BMW diesel I would hop on board! They need to see they already have the product. They just need to throw it on a boat and ship it across the pond! As someone else said, they're trying to re-invent the wheel.

[CorvallisBMW]

What's the difference in a FWD and RWD as far as "economy"? Does putting the engine sideways magically make it more efficient? NO! Does it somehow make the car make more power/tq for less emissions? NO!

Actually yes. From a mechanical perspective the FWD transverse engine layout is more efficient. The power being output does not have to go through the universal joints in the driveshaft and does not have to make 90* bends at the differential. Because the whole package is more compact and power only flows in the transverse direction it is, technically speaking, more efficient. It's also lighter weight, easier to manufacture and easier to install.

Hence why +90% of the world's cars are FWD.

Like I said earlier: For 99% of drivers 99% of the time, FWD or RWD makes not one bit of difference. You're not driving at WOT, or at the edge of tire adhesion, or balancing the car through a corner at 10/10ths speed. The only time it really makes a difference is when driving at or near the limit, and be honest, how often do you actually do that?

[Axxe]

If you read the article I posted you would have seen that 40% of Jetta sedans were also TDIs. I bet bmw could sell more 123d hatches in the US than 5GTs, or X6Ms or any number of other 'nitch' models.

The only half descent looking 1 series.

I've said this a hundred times, if they bring this car and market it properly it will sell.

[Schnitzer318is]

What's the difference in a FWD and RWD as far as "economy"? Does putting the engine sideways magically make it more efficient? NO!

In a word... YES.

While I applaud your enthusiasm for RWD only BMW's Corvallis is right, it won't affect any of us in any way. We will continue to buy the RWD offerings.

I won't get my panties in a bunch until they do away with RWD... then the world will end.

[CleanAzzE30z]

ugh...

Everyone pay attention. Listening? OK, good.

The reason BMW is developing smaller FWD vehicles is to lower their corporate average fuel economy (CAFE). Those mileage standards are going up in both the US and Europe and you' can't meet a 35mpg fleet average when even the most lowly US-based 128i can't crack that on the freeway, let alone a six-liter twin-turbo 760Li barge that only does 15mpg.

It's not the carpocalypse, it's just reality. And really... what's the big deal? 99% of your driving is done in a manner that makes no difference whether it's FWD or RWD. Commuting to work or school? Going to the grocery store? heading up to blunt's place at 11pm on a friday night for some lovin'? it doesn't matter what wheels are being driven. The 5% of people on this board who actually track their cars at some point during the year aren't going to buy a new FWD BMW anyways. Lets not forget BMW has made little economy cars in the past (Isetta anyone?) and they're still around as a company today.

While I respect your well-written opinion, I must respectfully disagree. People are reacting like this because of their personal preference for RWD cars and a brand that has, up until pretty recently, stuck to its guns in terms of principles. The BMW of the 80's or 90's would have never made an X5/X6 M, and not just because of the money involved in developing one or the risks about being able to move them or the lack of popularity of SUVs in the 80's. Furthermore, just because most of the members here will never need to use the benefits of RWD on the track does not make their opinions/preferences any less valid. Its a move away from one of the aspects that make us love BMW in the first place.

[tjts1]

Well I'm sold. I'm going to buy a 2002 this weekend and converting it to FWD. I hear Honda civic engines are mad tight.