Is FWD as a platform dying before our eyes?

with the proliferation of crossovers and EVs either on the market or coming to market is FWD disappearing in front of our eyes? Domestic manufacturers have seemingly stopped development on the platform, with Chevy using Asian partners to bring their rebadged offerings to market. Toyota, Honda, Mazda, VW, Hyundai and Nissan seem to be carrying the flag, and there have long been hints that Mazda's next flagship is going to be RWD. VW has decreased it's FWD offerings and the subcompact market is all but disappearing stateside (Mazda 2, Fit, Yaris) 

I've lamented the slow disappearance of the manual transmission FWD hatchback disappearing, but honestly, it appears that FWD as a whole is withering on the vine. Am I overreacting or by 2030 will less than 15% of new vehicles sold be fwd?

If FWD is dying, then as far as I'm concerned, good.  FWD toys are fine, but personally, I absolutely cannot stand FWD as a daily, especially in the winter.  The inability to accelerate hard while turning from a stop just kills it for me when there's any kind of traffic around. 

When the alternative to FWD is AWD why is it such a bad thing? I could take the whole underpinnings of a MQB Tiguan and stuff it into a Mk2 Golf and make that pos way better in every way. Don't see the downside. Unless there are 1WD offerings I'm unaware of (though most FWD are just that)

Eh, FWD was never a preferred design from a physics standpoint. It was all about manufacturing ease,  cost, and speed at which units could be assembled. RWD is better in almost every objective parameter. Notable FWD vehicles like early golfs/rabbits and 90s civics/integras are notable despite being FWD, not because of. 

Grab that next gen Civic Type R when it comes out. Likely to be the pinnacle of FWD engineering 

FWD is a crime against God and nature.  If cars were intended to be FWD weight transfer would work the opposite of how it does.

Seriously, FWD is where you end up if packaging and cost take priority in the in the compromises that are made when a platform is designed.  FWD also produces relatively benign handling characteristics and improves initial traction in low grip situations.  

Most crossover AWD systems are FWD most of the time. I don't think FWD "platforms" are in danger, but purely FWD vehicles may be in danger. Some EVs are FWD.

Most modern vehicles are like using a camping back pack to carry your credit card to the store. At some point uncommon sense may prevail.

I'm not a fan of FWD, but there's no contest between a FWD car vs. a RWD/AWD truck/crossover.

I was reading the other day GMs market share is down to 12%, Ford's under 10%. The domestic manufacturers alone are no longer a good barometer of the market.

Im just here for all the RWD guys pointing out the flaws of FWD

It's interesting that in the same way OEMs went to FWD because of packaging requirements, they're making EVs RWD for the same reason due to putting the motor-generator at the hubs.

If I'm not mistaken fwd originally came by virtue of the original MINI.  For its time it was groundbreaking in offering a small footprint and yet large passenger accommodations.  By virtue of fuel economy goals, and the fact that awd adds both weight and drivetrain drag which impacts those goals, I don't see it going away until all cars go electric.

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

with the proliferation of crossovers and EVs either on the market or coming to market is FWD disappearing in front of our eyes? Domestic manufacturers have seemingly stopped development on the platform, with Chevy using Asian partners to bring their rebadged offerings to market.

Most GMs were rebadged/retooled Opels.  I think the only "truly American" front drive chassis were the fullsizes, and the W bodies.

RaabTheSaab said:

Eh, FWD was never a preferred design from a physics standpoint. It was all about manufacturing ease,  cost, and speed at which units could be assembled. RWD is better in almost every objective parameter. Notable FWD vehicles like early golfs/rabbits and 90s civics/integras are notable despite being FWD, not because of. 

Don't forget packaging and NVH.  It's easier to package when you don't need to have a driveshaft and a rear axle, or a complicated and heavy IRS.  The only easily-packaged IRSs were trailing arm suspensions, like cheap cars like ACVWs and BMW 2002s and Datsun 510s had.

There is also a lot of drivetrain loss with hypoid gears.  Transverse drivetrain means the torque never needs to be sent through a right angle.  Sure we have transverse AWD, but note that these usually are not sending very much torque through right angles on a regular basis.  And even on non "rear torque on demand" systems, it's still not horrible because only half of the torque on average is being sent back, and this reduces losses as a whole.

Plus, there was a blurb when the original quattro was released, that due to the nonlinearity of power lost to the tires, over a certain amount of power, AWD actually has less drivetrain losses than 2WD, even when factoring in all the extra gear losses, seal losses, windage losses, etc.

I don't see it going anywhere. Almost all awd platforms offer a fwd base model which is the volume model and I don't see that going anywhere. It's cheaper, easier, and the vast majority of the buying population doesn't care about dynamica