What does FWD have to do with being slow or not? The TT (like all other Audi platforms) is FWD as well with AWD as an option, like the Brera. Granted, 0-60 in 6.5 sec and 150 mph is not all that impressive in these times where Camrys have 275hp, and everything is needlessly fast, but it is hardly slow. Sure, I'll be happy if the next generation Brera/Spider are lighter/faster, but Alfas have traditionally been more about overall balance and driving enjoyment than the outright pursuit of ultimate track numbers. I'll take a 'slow' Brera V6 anyday over the excellent but clinical TT. The Top Gear trio agree as well.

↓↑report

I don't have an issue with having an entry level Brera, but what Alfa needed to do yesterday to silence all criticism of the Brera is add another 50-60 hp. The Brera V6 is actually lighter than the BMW 330xi coupe (AWD), and the Infinity G37 coupe (RWD). Its performance is similar to the BMW, but it's quite outperformed by the G37 with its 330 hp. Alfa has always been curiously shy with horsepower, and it needs to pony up (pun intended) to be a more serious contender.

↓↑report

the problem is the platform. If it's a lightweight, stable and solid platform then, besides having no RWD, all cars based on it will be a good drive: 149, new Brera, new Spider, new 159 which will have a stretched version of that.

But if the platform is no better than the current ones, then Alfa won't be selling well, AT ALL. Which will mean even LESS money into developing good cars.

↓↑report

Every car in this segment has FWD as a base drivetrain because it makes more sense for 90% of the buyers in terms of packaging manufacturing efficiency. Simply put it works, and the latest FWD technology has yielded some truly great handling cars with none of the associated stereotypical vices. The BMW 1 series is the only car in this segment in Europe with RWD, and has been only mildly successful because it's heavier and less roomy than its competitors, and aside from better steering feel holds no handling advantage. The track numbers bear that out. Throw in slick surfaces into the equation, and it loses the plot completely, traction control or not. RWD is good for a high powered and/or highly focused sports car, but it's superfluous in most passenger car applications, especially in smaller vehicles.

↓↑report

Wrong.

I have a small, low power, RWD car. Steering feel isn't even the most significant advantage. The car only weighs 2400lbs. Mazda Miata. The RX8 is similar in a size closer to this concept, with more than two seats, and it handles sublimely, as well.

Handling is more neutral, less understeering, less torque steering, better weight distribution, and better emergency maneuverability.

Good RWD handling beats anything FWD and otherwise similarly equipped, Hands down, no contest. The only way FWD wins is packaging for manufacturing. It is easier to load a drivetrain on a single subframe into a chassis, and the rear suspension can be less involved and cheaper. That is it.

Traction is finite, and putting power through steering wheels, especially with ackerman angle, and tires riding on edge when turning causes all kinds of problems.

Just because some FWD cars can be pushed on the track doesn't make it superior or even equivalent. Almost NO race classes favor FWD if there are also RWD cars in the weight, size, and power class.

I have had FWD, RWD, 4x4, and AWD cars. I know the difference, and I will not buy another FWD car as anything other than a beater, or absolutely anti-sporting vehicle role.

If you don't know the difference, then you haven't experienced it enough, or haven't driven a good enough example of RWD.

I don't care how big or small, FWD still behaves like FWD, and like it is dragging the rear end of the car around, while over-taxing the front suspension and steering geometry, and traction, by steering and powering the same front wheels.

And the "weight=traction, and favors FWD in the slick" rule is negated by any RWD car that is anywhere close to 50/50 weight distribution, moreso with an LSD, and completely obliterated by a mid-engined car, or real AWD.

I would put my 300hp AWD Legacy GT, or my stock 1999 Miata with a torsen diff, and good tires on both, against any FWD car for power delivery and handling.

And my legacy, with a rear drivetrain has just as much interior room as any FWD car with similar bodywork dimensions.

FWD is easy, and cheap. That makes it fiscally good for people who don't care to really drive, or want a challenge to make a particular FWD to perform.

But when it comes right down to it, AWD, and RWD are technically superior, and more capable of performance.

And why build a sleek 5-door hatchback sedan if you are worried about ultimate practicality, and not performance? Plenty of companies already make appliances that are practical, and don't perform. They are called Camrys and Accords, Impalas, Tauruses, and Fusions.

↓↑report