fuzzymoomoo Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 Could CD6's modular approach be flexible enough to have the RWD longitudinal layout, while FWD models have their own module with the transverse layout? Thats what I was thinking 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 (edited) FWIW, when I was a teenager, my next door neighbor had to do some engine work on his mother's V8 FWD Olds (it would've been an '80s model). It had a 305 or 350, and I'm pretty sure it was longitudinally mounted. It has been about 30 years, but I recall the powertrain as being a surprisingly compact package. Edited February 13, 2018 by SoonerLS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 You gain the assembly line benefits of FWD (powertrain all in one package), but keep the potential of RWD and AWD. You can also get better weight distribution, as more of the powertrain weight can be behind the front axle, although you still have the bulk of the weight of the engine over the front wheels for traction. So you think the front suspension, engine and transmission could be installed as one unit like FWD vehicles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 So you think the front suspension, engine and transmission could be installed as one unit like FWD vehicles? Thats how they do it for the Mustang 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 So you think the front suspension, engine and transmission could be installed as one unit like FWD vehicles? I guess it depends on how they do it, but I don't see why not. Just stick it on a subframe and bolt it to the chassis. I'm pretty sure that's how the aforementioned Olds was built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 Thats how they do it for the Mustang So where does FWD get all that advertised manufacturing efficiency if they do it the same way for RWD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 (edited) If you already have a longitudinal engine and transmission what is the benefit of doing FWD only rather than RWD only? Seems you need a differential and axles and a driveshaft either way. With FWD you also need a transfer case to reverse the power to the front. Seems like you lose all the normal benefits of FWD. What am I missing? Somewhere in there has to be consideration for packaging of the PIH (or even smaller hybrid) battery pack. Maybe the pack will be smaller in the future with higher energy density batteries, but nonetheless, they have to go somewhere (and please, Ford, do not append them into the chassis like the Fusion and C-Max). Edited February 13, 2018 by Harley Lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 I’m not talking about CD6 - I’m talking about Audi A6 being longitudinal FWD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 (edited) So where does FWD get all that advertised manufacturing efficiency if they do it the same way for RWD? No clue. When I was at FRAP the front and rear subframes were assembled on their own line (engine and suspension line) and lifted into the cars the same way whether it was a Mustang, Fusion or Continental. The only difference I can think of that would be cheaper would be not needing someone to connect the driveshaft and that seems very minuscule in the grand scheme. Edited February 13, 2018 by fuzzymoomoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 rwd.....has part of me longing for a straight six revamp....... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 I’m not talking about CD6 - I’m talking about Audi A6 being longitudinal FWD. No torque steer? Plus it seems like its just history with VW/Audi products to be this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StangBang Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 (edited) FWIW, when I was a teenager, my next door neighbor had to do some engine work on his mother's V8 FWD Olds (it would've been an '80s model). It had a 305 or 350, and I'm pretty sure it was longitudinally mounted. It has been about 30 years, but I recall the powertrain as being a surprisingly compact package.That would be an Olds Toronado 1979-85. They started with an Olds 35O V8 for 1979 then bumped down to an Olds 307 V8 from 80-85. There was also the dreadful Olds 350 Diesel engine from 80-85. Then an unpopular Buick 4.1 V6 from 80-85 with hardly any takers. 305 was a Chevy engine and Olds never used them nor the Chevy 350 in the Toronado. Edited February 14, 2018 by StangBang 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 (edited) I think they also realized they needed a better platform or Lincoln if they really want to compete globally with the other luxury mfrs. But here is another question that I’ve been pondering ever since Audi debuted their longitudinal FWD vehicles. If you already have a longitudinal engine and transmission what is the benefit of doing FWD only rather than RWD only? Seems you need a differential and axles and a driveshaft either way. With FWD you also need a transfer case to reverse the power to the front. Seems like you lose all the normal benefits of FWD. What am I missing? With Audi, it's simply historical I think. They have been building FWD longitude since the 1970s and there is no compelling reason to change. The previous FWD longitude Audis from B1 platform on to B7 were truely FWD with optional AWD. The current MLB architecture on B8 and B9 platforms were the first designed to be drive wheel agnostic. FWD makes sense if you are not trying to gain maximum handling advantage... it drives just fine for 99% of normal daily driving and have traction advantage in snow. And philosophically as a company, Audi believes AWD to be superior to RWD so when they build performance oriented versions, they opt for maximum traction with AWD. There is no reason for them to build RWD only version of A4 (or A5, A6, A7, A8, Q5, Q7). What's kind of a surprise to me is that Porsche hasn't offer RWD only Macan or Cayenne. Could CD6's modular approach be flexible enough to have the RWD longitudinal layout, while FWD models have their own module with the transverse layout? If you turn the engine around, you need new transmissions mounts (probably new transmission too) and new suspension calibration, new front subframes and probably need to redesign the firewall and safety cage because crash impact will be different. So why would you want to incur all that unnecessary costs? Just leave the engine pointed longitude. The whole point of a modular architecture is you leave those things the same and not redesign them for every new vehicle. That being said, Ford does do the mix longitude and transverse engine thing with Transit... so maybe I'm overthinking things. There were a few example of cars with both longitude and transverse engines. Renault 21 from the 1980s comes to mind... it had different wheelbase as a result. In modern times, that would never work because you end up with basically two different cars and duplicate costs of meeting crash tests requirements. Edited February 14, 2018 by bzcat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 That would be an Olds Toronado 1979-85. They started with an Olds 35O V8 for 1979 then bumped down to an Olds 307 V8 from 80-85. There was also the dreadful Olds 350 Diesel engine from 80-85. Then an unpopular Buick 4.1 V6 from 80-85 with hardly any takers. 305 was a Chevy engine and Olds never used them nor the Chevy 350 in the Toronado. Thanks for the clarification. I thought it might've been a Toronado, but, really, I don't care that much. I'm a car guy, so the longitudinal V8 and FWD combo was interesting, but IDGAF about GM products and their mishmash of engines. They might as well all be small block Chebbies as far as I'm concerned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Ford is investing too much into this new 8F transmission for them to abandon the longitudinal FWD drivetrain now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StangBang Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Thanks for the clarification. I thought it might've been a Toronado, but, really, I don't care that much. I'm a car guy, so the longitudinal V8 and FWD combo was interesting, but IDGAF about GM products and their mishmash of engines. They might as well all be small block Chebbies as far as I'm concerned. Well you're not much of a car guy if you don't know the Toronado was the only front wheel drive Oldsmobile with a longitudal V8, after all it's been around since 1966 and it was a significant piece of automotive history. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Ford is investing too much into this new 8F transmission for them to abandon the longitudinal FWD drivetrain now You meant abandon the transverse drivetrain. They’re not - they still have C3 with lots of transverse products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pffan1990 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 FWIW, when I was a teenager, my next door neighbor had to do some engine work on his mother's V8 FWD Olds (it would've been an '80s model). It had a 305 or 350, and I'm pretty sure it was longitudinally mounted. It has been about 30 years, but I recall the powertrain as being a surprisingly compact package. It's the Oldsmobile Toronado like StangBang said. I may be Ford guy but always fascinated with how GM did the layout of the Toronado like you saw. rwd.....has part of me longing for a straight six revamp....... Yes, bring back the 300 inch straight-six! But in modern tech with DOHC, dual injection, and CGI block. lol Ford is investing too much into this new 8F transmission for them to abandon the longitudinal FWD drivetrain now Not really. They still have the front drive-based vehicles to put the transmission in. The 2019 Transit Connect update will get it along with the new Focus, updated Edge/Nautilus, etc. I just thought of something. If the CD6 is indeed designed to have rear drive module with longitudinal layout and front drive module with transverse layout, wouldn't you think Ford would be better off calling the architecture the CD6R and CD6F as to avoid confusion? That's how they name their transmission like with the 10-speed auto for rear drive-based vehicles and the new 8-speed auto for front drive-based vehicles. Be easier to do this so auto journalists would be able to accurately describe the vehicles they are reviewing as well as making it easier for prospective customers to research on new Fords for their next purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Well you're not much of a car guy if you don't know the Toronado was the only front wheel drive Oldsmobile with a longitudal V8, after all it's been around since 1966 and it was a significant piece of automotive history. Yes, I'm aware of the Toronado, but maybe you missed the part where I said IDGAF about GM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twin Turbo Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Hi all Newbie here with my first post! "The next Mustang" is one of my favourite subjects (well, anything Mustang related automatically attracts my attention!) and I saw the "Linkedin" post on Mustang6G, so had to come here to investigate more! The idea of a flexible platform excites me, well it does if its done well, and potentially bodes well for the next-gen Mustang. Certainly the "killing" of S650, as was reported a few months back, had me slightly worried, but only in as much as it meant the search was on for more information as to when we'd see the next-gen Mustang, and what would underpin it. My assumption was that S650, by very nature of it being closely named to S550, would be a heavy refresh of that architecture. So, seeing this thread here makes me sigh with relief, especially if the timescales for the new car haven't moved that much. So, thanks to everyone that's input to this thread, it makes great reading. One thing I don't think's been challenged though IS the timescale. As far as I could tell, S650 was mooted for the '21MY....and it appears a CD6-based Mustang would be here for the same model year. My assumption is "swapping platforms" this early in its gestation hasn't impacted those delivery timescales too much? If the '21MY is the goal, I also assume we'd expect to see early prototypes hit the roads around this time next year? A new thread appeared on Mustang6G a week or so ago with someone claiming the next-gen Mustang had been pushed back to 2025/2026. This was little more than "my friend who works at Flat Rock was told in a meeting that....." and I've not seen this posted anywhere else. I'm hoping there's no truth to this, as the '26MY seems a LONG way away and, as good as S550 is, it'll be pretty old by then and, likely, outpaced by the opposition. Anyway, enough rambling from me....it's good to be here and I look forward to more insights from you gentlemen 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelyD Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Lincoln is in the mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 The original timeline for the mustang redo was ‘22. It got moved up a couple of years and that’s when we figure they decided to move it to CD6 instead of a bespoke platform. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 FWIW, when I was a teenager, my next door neighbor had to do some engine work on his mother's V8 FWD Olds (it would've been an '80s model). It had a 305 or 350, and I'm pretty sure it was longitudinally mounted. It has been about 30 years, but I recall the powertrain as being a surprisingly compact package. You forgot about the Eldorodo ! It had a much bigger V8 (over 400 cid) mounted the same way. GM also made a very interesting Class A motorhome using the same drivetrain. There are still a few on the road 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 rwd.....has part of me longing for a straight six revamp....... Those guys down under did a lot with the Ford inline 6, including OHC ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Ford is investing too much into this new 8F transmission for them to abandon the longitudinal FWD drivetrain now You meant abandon the transverse drivetrain. They’re not - they still have C3 with lots of transverse products. If Fusion goes to CD6, what is left on the C3 platform ? Focus and Escape This could signal a big change coming ! Move Fusion and Edge to a stretched C3 platform and move Explorer and Taurus (and the Lincoln equivalents) up to CD6. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.