data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4e0e3/4e0e397816903e72684dbf0a446d084a724c6286" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7002f/7002fb49e62832c5b7715cb9233fce73839d0969" alt=""
In 1955, the same year in which the Škoda 440/445 made its first appearance, Škoda started making plans for a new car for the 1960s. The initial plans for the car were to make the car as light and fuel-efficient as possible: it was to weigh no more than 700kg, and the overall fuel consumption was not to exceed 6-7 litres per 100 kilometres (33-38mpg).
The next step was to produce the car as a four-door saloon, which would be built using monocoque construction. Like most leading car manufacturers dating back before the Second World War, Škoda always built their cars using the traditional and well-proven front-engine and rear-wheel drive layout. However, Škoda decided to look at two alternative options. Their first option was to go for the more modern front-engine and front-wheel drive layout, and their second option was to use the rear-engine and rear-wheel drive layout if the first option was unsuccessful.
As you may have guessed, the front-engined-with-front-wheel-drive option was unsuccessful, and therefore Škoda picked the rear-engined-with-rear-wheel-drive one. Even by the early 1960s, the idea of rear-engined small family saloons was still considered to be reasonably popular. In France, there were the Renault Dauphine, Renault 8 and Simca 1000, while in Germany there were the Volkswagen Beetle andNSU Prinz, in Italy there were the Fiats 500 and 600, and in Britain there was the Hillman Imp, all of which favoured the rear-engined concept. Many people considered the rear-engined, all independent suspension concept, to be the best compromise for passenger comfort and usually acceptable handling / road behaviour and cost. This arrangement has become obsolete because of the reduction in the cost since the 1960s of producing the superior front wheel drive layout. Front wheel drive cars need more complex, (and much more expensive), constant velocity joints in driveshafts than rear engine rear wheel drive cars.
No comments:
Post a Comment