Ran accross this thought some might be interested.
Phelan: Rear-Drive Cars Not Dead
Detroit Free Press
By Mark Phelan
April 15, 2007
Let's kill a couple of myths over our morning coffee.
1. New fuel economy and emissions rules will ruin Detroit 's automakers by forcing them to build boring, mediocre cars.
2. Rear-wheel-drive cars burn more fuel, so tougher mileage and emissions standards rule them out.
These canards come to mind as folks pronounce General Motors' new family of rear-wheel-drive cars dead-before-arrival, victims of new carbon-dioxide limits that have yet to be written.
The speculation began when GM product boss Bob Lutz said the company had "pushed the pause button" on development of its new rear-wheel-drive models until it knows how U.S. regulators respond to the U.S. Supreme Court's reasonable ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency can regulate carbon dioxide emissions, which are widely thought to contribute to global warming.
The new family of rear-wheel-drive cars, which includes the exciting Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac G8, plays a large role in GM's plans to restore excitement and prestige to brands like Chevrolet, Pontiac and Buick.
It was a short jump from Lutz's "pause" to reports that GM had scrapped the program.
Not necessarily.
The development of GM's new cars is far enough along that it makes sense to pause until the company understands the CO 2 emissions standards likely to come, but several technologies and fuel sources may still put them on American highways.
Diesel, biofuel, E85 and hybrid gasoline-electric power plants already exist. Plug-in hybrid power – like the Chevrolet Volt concept car that wowed the North American International Auto Show in Detroit in January – might also work. That technology isn't ready today, but it might be around the end of this decade.
It all depends on how the regulations are written. If legislators emphasize reducing greenhouse gas emissions and petroleum consumption, any of those technologies could become major players.
And any of them would work in the new rear-drive cars, the layout best suited to the style and performance GM was developing to resuscitate its brands.
But wait, you say. I keep reading that rear-drive cars use more fuel. If I want to save the Earth, isn't front-wheel-drive mandatory?
Not so much.
The diesel engines that account for more than 50 percent of European car sales prove it. A rear-drive six-cylinder diesel Mercedes-Benz E320 will use less fuel in a year than a front-drive V6 Honda Accord or Toyota Camry, according to the EPA's Web site.
An experimental diesel in the rear-drive Mercedes C-class gets nearly 43 m.p.g. in European tests.
Detroit 's automakers made big, inefficient rear-drive cars before fuel economy mattered. They switched to front-drive for a quick fix, but there are other alternatives today, and they are looking at all of them.