Tungsten Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Even if you take a more than minimum built FWD car it will still never be as good as an RWD car because of physics. Maybe FWD has an advantage of interior room, fuel efficiency, cost of manufacture, and smaller size but it will never handle as good or accelerate as nice or be able to use as much power as a RWD car can. Precise1, I know all about luxury FWD cars and RWD luxury cars still top them when it comes to road manners. Nothing will beat FWD for space efficiency though. Anyway, to the OP, if you want to exchange your Pathfinder for something smaller I'm not here to stop you from doing that but you will never know what you had until you lose it. Pathfinders may be more expensive to own and drive than the stereotypical FWD vehicle but they are so worth it in my opinion. There is nothing like a large luxury RWD vehicle for a comfortable and fun driving experience even if it is powered by a rice burning V6 (which is very efficient). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingo Posted September 19, 2012 Author Share Posted September 19, 2012 Just about everything. FWD rice burners are for limp wristed people that don't know anything about cars. Take for one, the weight distribution. RWD platforms have a proper weight distribution because of how the engine and transmission is placed. FWD will understeer because all the drive train and powerplant is directly at the front rotated sideways. They will also torque steer because most of the time the drive shafts are uneven. The other thing you will notice is inferior part quality. Since FWD cars are just basic means of transportation, all the parts are value engineered. The majority of parts on a Pathfinder are overbuilt so they last a long time. FYI: Pathfinders have almost an even 50/50 weight distribution, which makes them ideal for handling on hilly roads. I'd take offense, but I notice you are from N.J. Why can't the weight-foward distribution with FWD be considered an advantage in many conditions just as RWD can be considered a disadvantage in some conditions? Of course they drive and handle differently. You have to adapt your driving technique. Also, seems to me the late 70's early 80's datsuns/nissans are pretty damn durable and reliable and most parts are cheap to replace. Still alot of them driving around stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tungsten Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 It's true that FWD cars are more forgiving under low traction at slow speeds because the front wheels drive and turn but that's pretty much where the advantage ends. If you want to get more out of a FWD platform, you really want the rear wheels powered too, which is going to be AWD. The nose heaviness of FWD will still make you tend to understeer and the uneven CV shafts of most FWD platform vehicles will make you torque steer on acceleration. The AWD alleviates those side effects a little bit but it still does not change the weight distribution. The nose heaviness is never a good thing but if you only drive 40-70 mph on the highway, you will never notice. A well designed RWD platform or even a straight up Nissan GT-R type AWD platform should have an exact 50-50 weight distribution by placing most of the weight into the middle of the vehicle or counterbalancing the weight on the front somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreus009 Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Hmm...FWD vs RWD in poor traction conditions...give me FWD anyday. The weight is where the drive wheels and therefore better chance of having traction and less likely to have your back end coming around to your front end. BTW...a pathfinder....(at least up to 2000) are a far cry from a large luxury vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreus009 Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 It's true that FWD cars are more forgiving under low traction at slow speeds because the front wheels drive and turn but that's pretty much where the advantage ends. If you want to get more out of a FWD platform, you really want the rear wheels powered too, which is going to be AWD. The nose heaviness of FWD will still make you tend to understeer and the uneven CV shafts of most FWD platform vehicles will make you torque steer on acceleration. The AWD alleviates those side effects a little bit but it still does not change the weight distribution. The nose heaviness is never a good thing but if you only drive 40-70 mph on the highway, you will never notice. A well designed RWD platform or even a straight up Nissan GT-R type AWD platform should have an exact 50-50 weight distribution by placing most of the weight into the middle of the vehicle or counterbalancing the weight on the front somehow. Oh you mean like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismothunder Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Pathfinder = Large? I want too know what your on C, cause I'd sure love some. Hell my 86 c-vic went great in snow, far better then most fwds and the vic was larger then a pathfinder. I even drove it on glare ice a few times and besides a little spinning at a full stop (I mean very little) it would handle fine. I watched people in 4 wheel drive go in the ditch when the whale just kept on a rumbling. But the vic did have another advantage over fwd cars, it was big, grey, dented, ugly and loud. Hell kids ran from it. And it got 21 mpg (winter was 16-17) It maybe close too 50-50 on the 21 but the rears do get light when in snow, even in 4wd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tungsten Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I don't know where my reply just went but anyway... Pathfinders are large cars or compact trucks. That's how I see it. Pathfinders also came with plenty of luxury features at the time. They were far from being cheap and basic. : Crown Vics are great cars as long as it is a CVPI model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismothunder Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 The CVPI are crap... well at least the panter chassie is, the 79-91 is were its at for a road lumbering whale that will survive being driven through cinder block walls. They even came in a 2 door version. Maruader's are cool though. But dreadfully slow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tungsten Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) You mean this? I agree, these are the best crown vics ever made. The reason why CVPI is the way to go is they have all the heavy duty goodies on them like bigger engines, better brakes, taller gearing, auxiliary coolers, etc. The coupes do look pretty hot though. Another car I like is a Volvo 240DL. Good platform and well balanced. Plus it goes like a tank. The 86-93 seems to be the best one. Edited September 22, 2012 by Tungsten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Ok, lets get back on track here with the OP and 4wd VS FWD + Fuel economy subject. I'll go back and prune what isn't pertenent... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tungsten Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 The 240DL is RWD and doesn't get any worse fuel economy than a FWD plus you get better handling and all around toughness with simplicity. Just throwing it out there. I'm actually seriously considering one myself for daily use if gas gets too expensive in the future. I think they also came in diesels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 (edited) Ha!I had an 1984 240 DL, peacock blue, that was a bad ass, comfortable, but obscenely slow ride. Loved that car. <br /><br />No setup is perfect, I would take my wife's wrx with blizzaks skiing any day over the pathy. But it will pass anything in the road but a gas station. <br /> If u were looking for a cheap vehicle, that got respectable gas mileage, capability, and easy to work on- Suby GL-wagon. Even had a transfer case. Here in Wa they still comand a premium though! Edited September 22, 2012 by AndyC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Boy, don't hit the edit button unless you want your punctuation messed up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahardb0dy Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 (edited) A guy at work has one of those Crown Vic's, I've been working there going on 14 years and he has had it since I started, I feel sorry for him with the gas prices (351) but it still gets him to work and back. Edited September 22, 2012 by ahardb0dy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 I think he's pointing it out and leaving it as an example? What browser or what ever are you using? B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahardb0dy Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 excuse me, I'm in a pissy mood today, I'll try to be good with any replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 No worries Bud, I hope you/things get better. These posts will self distruct soon... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahardb0dy Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 feel better now, been looking at cars for sale, mostly 70 chevelles, can't afford any of them but like to look. Right now my wife is going thru her old pics to pull out pics of her old cars, she had 2- 67 camaro's, a 67-68 Mustang fastback (not sure of year), and many others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogdor636 Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 I think he's pointing it out and leaving it as an example? What browser or what ever are you using? B He might be on Tapatalk. That's what mine does if I try to edit my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Yeah I'm on crapatalk... Hadn't used the edit function before. Went back to add one letter and suddenly, punctuation exploded! I guess that's what I get for proof reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogdor636 Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Yea something is fubared with tapatalk for editing. First post is good, edit is a giant wreck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgtplatt Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) 1989 geo metro 3cyl 2 door.. 50mpg. Nuff said. Edited October 6, 2012 by Sgtplatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingo Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 I made my decision. I just purchased a 1985 Nissan Sentra 2 door hatchback SE (B11) for $600. 1.6L engine 5 speed tranny. The Pathfinder is officially for sale, I will post it in the classifieds forum. On craigslist too! http://spokane.craigslist.org/cto/3404783948.html Thanks for the input all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 You are welcome. Sad that you decided against the Pathy, but it was obviously a well reasoned decision and at least you stuck with Nissan. Good luck, I hope the Sentra works out for you. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now