Me thinks Mr. Knuckles wa joking 
I wonder what car design that meets gov’t’s legal requirements (safety, EPA, etc) would yield the lowest possible price and still make a profit? What would its sales price be?
Right now dealers and auto manufacturers are in the driver’s seat (pardon the pun). Most dealers are charging OVER MSRP because of supply shortages. When car sales turn back to normal, I think you’ll see this type of practice going away. Hopefully that’s going to happen soon.
Such a vehicle would have a manual transmission. Since manuals are hardly available in the US market, it shows that low price isn’t their priority. Such a vehicle would also have hand crank windows, no A/C, rear drum brakes, and no power locks. I wonder if real wheel drive is cheaper to make, even if it’s heavier? Safety standards haven’t really changed since 1997 as far as I know. That’s when ABS, frontal airbags, and a side impact structure of some kind became mandatory. The front crash test is still 35 MPH in to a barrier.
1 Like
I’d guess FWD is not only lighter weight, but a little less expensive. No drive shaft, u joints. Still needs a differential, but no big solid axle. Just the solid axle replacement part (I don’t think this includes the axle shafts & differential parts) for my truck is over $500. W/no rear solid axle, suspension design probably a little simpler &less $$. Truck’s benefit from the sturdiness of a solid rear axle though, so truck’s remain RWD as far as I know.
I don’t know if we’ll ever return to the point where new cars routinely sold for below MSRP. After all, dealers have now seen that plenty of people will pay well above MSRP for a new car, so why should they cut prices to below it?
1 Like
Good points, makes a lot of sense. Beyond just cars, some economists are saying that’s the same reason the currently inflated prices for groceries etc will not be returning to pre-Covid.
FWD has those parts different places. The differential built in to the transmission. The U joints are CV joints which should cost more to make. The CV axles replace the axle shafts in the rear end. Rear independent suspension is considered a luxury. Cheap FWD vehicles have rear axles. RWD is simpler but it requires a drive shaft which is added weight and rear axle has to be hollow which is the only thing that adds complexity.
1 Like
FWD is cheaper to make. That was the driving force of companies going to FWD.
First, it isn’t the axle that is hollow it is the drive shaft.
Second, what is more complex about that? If fact I believe RWD is less complex, compare replacing U-joint to CV joints. If a differential goes bad you don’t have to replace the transmission with it. Front wheel drive as we know it was for faster, cheaper assembly.
+1
Additionally, it yields more interior room. I recall driving my neighbor’s old RWD Toyota Cressida, and it had less interior room (at least for the front seat passengers) than a newer FWD Corolla.
Rear axle tube is made from steel pipe I think. Has to be hollow b/c rear axle shafts from differential to wheels fit inside. I doubt there’s much in the way of incremental parts cost CV joints vs u-joints. More one-time development costs for CV probably.
Seems like FWD parts cost either nearly the same or a little less than RWD, but guessing maybe fewer $$ in ass’y costs for FWD. It seems like having more room for placing the rear suspension components, brake & fuel lines, etc would result in a FWD $$ savings too.
What we need here is a spreadsheet comparison !.. lol … hmmm … maybe someone will ask this question to “Dear Car Talk”.
No kidding, but that’s not what was stated.