Right after BMW's license/covenant over MG/Rover expires, I can see this happening. I believe the terms that were set prevented MGR from producing a 3/5-series beater.

And the Streetwise might end up being a 4WD, too.

 

RWD is more expensive to produce than FWD.

But I agree they could do mass produced FWD drive car with RWD sports versions.

 

Right after BMW's license/covenant over MG/Rover expires, I can see this happening. I believe the terms that were set prevented MGR from producing a 3/5-series beater.

And the Streetwise might end up being a 4WD, too.

How and why are they producing the RWD ZT if this clause really exists though?

 

I'm sure it has been written somewhere that this is exactly what they are doing - engineering the RD60 platform for FWD and RWD. Perhaps Rover versions to be FWD and MG ones to be RWD?

 

The RD60 has shorter overhang, and a little bit less wheelbase as the 75 chassis. With the short fron overhang, it would be hard to make it RWD unless you have a short engine or a rotary engine that you can fit it longatudinally (sp?) under the endine bay.
however, if MGR wants a rotary engine design, I know where to get a cheap deal.... No lies!

 

I would love to see MG's higher power versions of the RD60 as RWD. But Rover should also set its stall out as producing the best FWD cars. Why do the press give FWD cars such a hard time? Is the MINI Cooper RWD? No!!!!! Why??? Because if the original Mini had been RWD it could never have won all those Rallys. FWD corners better than RWD. RWD is better on high performing cars I suspect because FWD would struggle to cope with something like a V8 but on lower powered cars FWD wins everytime. Wish Rover would point this out in their adverts!

 

I may have the deal wrong - it might just be a caveat on 4WD to be honest.

 

cityrover - this is the best idea I've read on the forums for a long, long time.

 

I already suggested it when they launched the ZT260!!!! But FWD is cheaper!

 

I would love to see MG's higher power versions of the RD60 as RWD. But Rover should also set its stall out as producing the best FWD cars. Why do the press give FWD cars such a hard time? Is the MINI Cooper RWD? No!!!!! Why??? Because if the original Mini had been RWD it could never have won all those Rallys. FWD corners better than RWD. RWD is better on high performing cars I suspect because FWD would struggle to cope with something like a V8 but on lower powered cars FWD wins everytime. Wish Rover would point this out in their adverts!

As far as I'm aware, FWD does NOT corner better than RWD, as the wheels are supplying the forward motive force at the same time as they are attempting a directional change. Pretty much the only reason for using RWD is that it gives you a better cornering ability.

Suspect the Mini won all those rallies because it was smaller and lighter than its competitors.

 

In the BTCC FF's have showed they are faster then the rear wheels driver BMW around the corners, the BMW only being faster of the line, after that losing out.

FF-

heavy use of front wheels, possible 'torque steer'.

FR-

extra weight and resistance of transmission, about 7% more power lost before reaching wheels compared to FF.

4WD-

extra weight and resistance of transmission, about 14% more power lost before reaching wheels compared to FF.



The best way to go is MR, but as thats completely useless in a sedan i think we will be having FF's for some time. hope iam wrong i would like to see some more MGR FR's.

 

Phil I disagree. With RWD you can not power into a corner you can only power out. A skilled driver can maintain power levels for more of the time in FWD as you can pull a car into and out of a corner. Hower, it does not FEEL as good a RWD because the front wheels are also having to manage directional change. Finally because the engine sits over the front wheels FWD cars do not loose as much energy as they don't transfer power to the rear wheel engines. This is why the MG TF is such a great car, it does not suffer from power loss being transfered to the RWD. Also handeling is improved as its Mid engined!

BMW have pulled the wool over everyone's eyes on this!!! I would love to race two equally powered 75's/ ZT's one with FWD the other with RWD, just to prove a point!

 

Hower, it does not FEEL as good a RWD because the front wheels are also having to manage directional change.

This is the whole point though. FWD is not half as much fun as RWD, regardless of which is actually faster given the same power output. Plus you can't really put that much torque through the front wheels, so FWD is fine as far as it goes for lower powered cars, but if you want real excitement, it's still got to be RWD!

 

The interesting thing here is that, IIRC, the 75 was originally intended to be RWD (a so-called "Baby Bentley"), and this was overturned by BMW who insisted on FWD to ensure that it did not compete with the 3 or 5 series.

I think the basic rule for MGs and Rovers should be that the larger cars should be RWD, and the smaller ones, where interior space and packaging are paramount, should be FWD.

 

KA I agree, but those BMW adverts that argue RWD is the best really annoys me, especially when in a future one series, I suspect that FWD would be MORE DESIRABLE. In a smaller car RWD is rubbish!!!!!!!! And below a certain power output level its not even as fast to drive a FWD. I guess all I want to see is a bit of honesty. Don't suppose I will ever get it though.

 

True, it does seem rather silly to be doing a RWD Golf rival which will ultimately be less practical and heavier - but maybe just the idea of RWD in a hatch that size is their USP.

 

Because generally speaking FWD is safer for the average driver - it generally gives more predicatble handling.

It is also more space efficent.

 

I just think that, when the RD60 finally goes into production, the Golf, Focus and Asatra et al will already be topping sales charts.

The introduction of just another car like them, however good, will not resonate through the industry nearly half as much as a class and price competitor with something a little different.

It hasnt harmed B*W, and their 3 series does outsell the Mondeo in europe.

Heaven know's RWD used to be the absolute norm until Austin started the FWD trend in smaller cars, and for the time and even today that's was a good thing, but RWD cars have advanced so much since the appalling handling of cars of old, today they are seen as a step above the mainstream and they sell on that basis. I'm certainly not sugesting the car is only RWD, but the option should be there, and possibly a AWD, and I don't think this should be kept for MG variants, the MG brand has had enough resurgance pumped into it, it's time to turn back to Rover just for a wee while anyway, Let's face it, the more volume the mainstream Rover cars sell, the more money to pump back into special MG projects, none of which on their own, are enough to keep the entire company afloat as it is today.

 

The other reason to keep focused on the ROver brand for a while, it simple.

Too many models, too diluted and too many sales reduces the kudos of the MG marque, just like the x-type has turned jaguar into makers of a dressed up Mondeo, and SAAB into Vectra producers.

I am sure none of us want this for MG.

 

Actually I think what the management team has done with the MG brand is quite remarkable. Something akin to what VW did with the SEAT brand, but perhaps not on quite such a scale. MG models must be selling faster now than at any other time in the marque's history - and that's not even with brand new models, rather with re-worked Rovers that have been around for some time. I for one am looking forward to seeing what they can do with the next generation of models.

 

Because generally speaking FWD is safer for the average driver - it generally gives more predicatble handling.

I assume this was a slip of the pen, Richard.

Yod did mean RWD is safer for the average driver, surely?

 

KA I agree, but those BMW adverts that argue RWD is the best really annoys me, especially when in a future one series, I suspect that FWD would be MORE DESIRABLE. In a smaller car RWD is rubbish!!!!!!!! And below a certain power output level its not even as fast to drive a FWD. I guess all I want to see is a bit of honesty. Don't suppose I will ever get it though.

Couldn't agree more!! I've driven a FWD VW Corrado that felt better to drive than a RWD C36 Mercedes. Most of the punters that buy into B*W's advertising would never believe that a FWD 200bhp VW would be a better drive than a RWD 280bhp Mercedes. I'd say that for low power cars, say up to 200bhp for example, there is no benefit to be gained in having RWD. A good chassis, like the Corrado, ZS, or Integra-R, can handle that sort of power through the front wheels without uncontrolable understeer.
A small car with little over 100bhp will only gain weight being RWD, but B*W persist with this idea that RWD is what makes a car.

 

...B*W persist with this idea that RWD is what makes a car.

And rightly so.

 

I assume this was a slip of the pen, Richard.

Yod did mean RWD is safer for the average driver, surely?

No - I did mean FWD. Generally, FWD is more forgiving. It has a natural tendency towards understeer rather than oversteer (especially in the wet) and with the exception of the Peugeot 205, most FWD will just tuck in the nose if you panic and back off the throttle too quickly.

As for RWD,whilst it is naturally more balanced under most conditions, the instinctive "I'm in trouble, snap the throttle shut" reaction of MOST drivers can lead to serious oversteer, especially on a wet or slippery road.

FWD with the extra weight over the nose is also better in snow/ice as it helps get the traction down (RWD and rear engine does the same - ask a Skoda Estelle driver!).

Please note that I am not saying that FWD is a better set up for a sporting car - just that it is safer for the average driver (who probably learnt on a Micra or Corsa). For the record - I generally prefer RWD - my dad is a driving instructor, he taught me to drive on a RWD Talbot Sunbeam and then how to drive fast on a Cortina V6 and I own an MGC (RWD 3.0L straight 6)!

 

Wet roundabout + MGC + heavy froot = excitement!

However, 185/65x15 tyres make a HUGE difference compared to the standard 165s! Add heavy duty anti-roll bar, gas telescopics up front (it has telescopics up front anyway) and a gas telescopic rear conversion and you have civilised handling.