Should BMW make front wheel drive cars?

[ingenieur]

I'll start by saying I'm not a rear wheel drive snob. For the best part of my driving career I have had front wheel drive machinery and only relatively recently started buying rear wheel drive cars.

I think having tried both extensively that rear wheel drive is far superior to front wheel drive.

So what are BMW playing at with their new front wheel drive models?

In the UK BMW at one point had one of the most popular cars on the road in the 3-series... which was rear wheel drive.

So if they're not doing it to try and popularise their cars, if it's not being done because front wheel drive cars are better... what other reason are they making them?

[Sporky]

They're cheaper to make, easier to package, and the vast majority of buyers won't care. Many probably wouldn't notice the difference (were it possible to make that the only difference)

[Zetec-S]

Cheaper?

Let's face it, FWD or RWD, a 118d is hardly the ultimate driving machine anyway.

[iphonedyou]

ingenieur said:

So if they're not doing it to try and popularise their cars, if it's not being done because front wheel drive cars are better... what other reason are they making them?

Because the majority of buyers don't care; given that, they'll run with the cheaper to produce drivetrain that gives more cabin space.

[budgie smuggler]

ingenieur said:

I'll start by saying I'm not a rear wheel drive snob. For the best part of my driving career I have had front wheel drive machinery and only relatively recently started buying rear wheel drive cars.

I think having tried both extensively that rear wheel drive is far superior to front wheel drive.

So what are BMW playing at with their new front wheel drive models?

In the UK BMW at one point had one of the most popular cars on the road in the 3-series... which was rear wheel drive.

So if they're not doing it to try and popularise their cars, if it's not being done because front wheel drive cars are better... what other reason are they making them?

-Cheaper to make
-More interior space in the rear due to no propshaft
-FWD is not the problem it once with for torque steer and so on
-How well a car drives is no longer a primary factor for purchasing decisions

[5lab]

They're cheap to engineer (mini floorplan), have better packaging and are more economical than their rwd equivalent. People buying cheaper family cars care much more about the price, economy and packaging than they do the ability to do a skid on a roundabout once every 4 months, so they sell better.

[ingenieur]

I'm just struggling to see why all of those reasons matter if they already had the most popular selling car on the road without going down the FWD route. It must have been cheap enough, had enough rear leg room, been adequately packaged for so many people to want to own one?

I worry that once they're heading in this direction there is little to mark a BMW out as a superior / more desirable choice in a sea of FWD euroboxes.

[Zetec-S]

ingenieur said:

I worry that once they're heading in this direction there is little to mark a BMW out as a superior / more desirable choice in a sea of FWD euroboxes.

3/10 for trolling.

Isn't is just the 1 series and 2 series? Kinda eurobox territory anyway...

[iphonedyou]

ingenieur said:

I'm just struggling to see why all of those reasons matter if they already had the most popular selling car on the road without going down the FWD route. It must have been cheap enough, had enough rear leg room, been adequately packaged for so many people to want to own one?

I worry that once they're heading in this direction there is little to mark a BMW out as a superior / more desirable choice in a sea of FWD euroboxes.

Because it's cheaper to produce. Ergo, higher margin.

[AmyRichardson]

iphonedyou said:

Because the majority of buyers don't care; given that, they'll run with the cheaper to produce drivetrain that gives more cabin space.

This was basically it. I don't know if it was apocrypha or not, but supposedly BMW's market research bods surveyed a section of 1-Series owners and the vast majority of answers to the rwd/fwd question were along the lines of "rear wheel what?"

BMW used to think that perfect 50/50 balance, rwd and smooth, fruity I6 engines were their USP - and their marketing made a big play on the same. In the 21stC it isn't, their USP is strictly that they are BMW, even if that doesn't really mean anything in terms of hardware.

Fwd provides a lot of advantages (of the sort that people do care about) and in small & relatively low-powered cars it's not a dynamic problem either.

[bumskins]

AmyRichardson said:

BMW used to think that perfect 50/50 balance, rwd and smooth, fruity I6 engines were their USP - and their marketing made a big play on the same. In the 21stC it isn't, their USP is strictly that they are BMW, even if that doesn't really mean anything in terms of hardware.

Exactly, BMW even struggle to produce good-sounding 6 pots nowadays. The S55/58 range of engines sound abysmal, the range of V8 turbocharged engines have all sounded like a wet fart since their release - there's no denying the effectiveness of these engines, but given the disparagingly fleeting opportunities to enjoy such performance nowadays and the fact it's not even enjoyable to listen to, what's the point?

[JamesRR]

It’s the same reason that by far the best selling models in their ranges are now the 4 cylinder varieties. I have a 540i because I enjoy the big straight six with it’s smoothness and power, but a 520d can connect to your iPhone and stream your music and be exactly the same in every way except the engine as my car is, which is more important to the average consumer, hence why you see lots of 520ds every day but not many 540i or M5 variants. Powertrain and driving experience just isn’t a big priority for most buyers these days.

[ingenieur]

AmyRichardson said:

BMW used to think that perfect 50/50 balance, rwd and smooth, fruity I6 engines were their USP - and their marketing made a big play on the same. In the 21stC it isn't, their USP is strictly that they are BMW, even if that doesn't really mean anything in terms of hardware.

If someone said to Saab in the early 1990s when they were preparing to release a GM car which would be restyled to look like a Saab and that doing so would mean the company would be gone in 15 years because of what they were doing they would have laughed at you.

It is in essence the same thing that BMW are doing now. Or at least what people on here are saying they are doing.

i.e. you take away all the things that make a BMW a BMW... except for the badge. That is exactly what Saab did.

I think BMW are a more resilient manufacturer and could withstand a considerably harder knock than Saab could. But it still doesn't make any sense to copy what they did. Are they following the model but they will make it work when GM couldn't?

[ingenieur]

JamesRR said:

It’s the same reason that by far the best selling models in their ranges are now the 4 cylinder varieties. I have a 540i because I enjoy the big straight six with it’s smoothness and power, but a 520d can connect to your iPhone and stream your music and be exactly the same in every way except the engine as my car is, which is more important to the average consumer, hence why you see lots of 520ds every day but not many 540i or M5 variants. Powertrain and driving experience just isn’t a big priority for most buyers these days.

Do you think the 520ds could be popular because BMW are also known for making some cracking high end models of the same shape and as such are a premium manufacturer making their cooking models the same quality and image but with an economy bias which is required for drivers covering bigger distances.

[Court_S]

The driven wheels thing isn’t a big deal for me and in my experience BMW FWD cars are pretty good having owned four MINI’s in the past.

Most people don’t give two sts about driven wheels and as already said a 20d or similar is hardly bought because of the way it drives; it’s the badge, economy, CO2, BIK, tech etc that really matter. There’s also a perception still that RWD are unusable in the wet / snow etc especially for the 40i versions. Some of the discussions about it relating to 40i cars were hilarious, but I guess for those coming from a Golf R or similar it’s probably a very different experience.

[Gigamoons]

JamesRR said:

It’s the same reason that by far the best selling models in their ranges are now the 4 cylinder varieties. I have a 540i because I enjoy the big straight six with it’s smoothness and power, but a 520d can connect to your iPhone and stream your music and be exactly the same in every way except the engine as my car is, which is more important to the average consumer, hence why you see lots of 520ds every day but not many 540i or M5 variants. Powertrain and driving experience just isn’t a big priority for most buyers these days.

True. And AWD EVs are making driven wheels even less relevant.

[otolith]

I had a 128ti as a courtesy car last week. It was unremarkable. I didn't realise it was meant to be a hot hatch - maybe I should have driven it harder, but it was a front wheel drive automatic with numb steering which made unremarkable four cylinder noises.

[AmyRichardson]

ingenieur said:

Do you think the 520ds could be popular because BMW are also known for making some cracking high end models of the same shape and as such are a premium manufacturer making their cooking models the same quality and image but with an economy bias which is required for drivers covering bigger distances.

Absolutely. Their reputation is built on a very real foundation of first-rate executive/performance cars, plus they continue to produce halo models which broadly reflect their old USPs, so their reputation will be slow to dilute, if it does at all.

It's not like Saab, as referred to above, BMW's identity was/is very tangible and based in sound fundamentals which tied up with their projected identity. Conversely Saab was always a bit "err, fighter planes, err something-something architects, turbos - oh , and definitely not German" - all of which might have worked if it wasn't shackled with over-built Fiat (& later GM) platforms.

[SteBrown91]

ingenieur said:

If someone said to Saab in the early 1990s when they were preparing to release a GM car which would be restyled to look like a Saab and that doing so would mean the company would be gone in 15 years because of what they were doing they would have laughed at you.

It is in essence the same thing that BMW are doing now. Or at least what people on here are saying they are doing.

i.e. you take away all the things that make a BMW a BMW... except for the badge. That is exactly what Saab did.

I think BMW are a more resilient manufacturer and could withstand a considerably harder knock than Saab could. But it still doesn't make any sense to copy what they did. Are they following the model but they will make it work when GM couldn't?

But BMW are still making BMWs - just not all RWD.

SAAB were spending an aweful lot of money re-engineering the GM platforms handed to them to save them money to make a car that was hardly any better. That is why they went bust.

[Magnum 475]

Sporky said:

They're cheaper to make (plus more stuff)

This is the main advantage of FWD. It saves costs for the manufacturer.

I had a 1 series loan car while my 3 series was in for investigation (again). It's very obviously FWD although without some of the worst vices of FWD.

The average driver will neither know nor care. The enthusiast or person who prefers RWD won't like it, but there's nothing in that sector with RWD now, so we don't have much choice.