Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lightweight and RWD is almost extinct. The current/late model cars that fit that are all mentioned already I think.
Unless you want a Lotus. The Elise is the lightest. Maybe not daily driver worthy? Maybe maintenance nightmare? I don't know. Engine from Toyota so that at least should be pretty solid.
I don't see the Honda S2000 noted either, if you're looking used. Over 1000 pounds heavier than the Elise. But under 3000 lbs.
Also none of the cars with the RWD spec will have gas mileage as a real primary consideration.
OK. A BRZ would be a great car for winter driving in Denver.
Depends. Denver doesn't get that much snow, plows regularly. Do you live at the end of a poorly maintained dirt road? No, it would be horrible. No ground clearance. Do you live and work in Denver proper? Great is up to debate. No light, rwd car is going to be as great as a pickup, preferably with 4WD, or a real SUV. Would it be any worse than any normal car? No. I bet there's plenty of people in Denver who manage to daily drive their CamCords through the winter with no problem.
^ While I will agree that an AWD car with snow tires is better than FWD or RWD, ground clearance really would be the only other major factor to consider.
All I've been saying is that with snow tires, RWD is just as capable as a comparable FWD car. I'd argue it's better because you have the option of steering with the throttle instead of just plowing forward (understeer). But that is the opinion of a driving enthusiast. People who view cars as appliances may disagree haha.
I'm doing my best to get rid of the stigma that a RWD car can't handle anything other than perfect weather!
Small car with big engine? Used C6 corvettes are a steal. 3200lbs, 30mpg, unlimited fun.
This is a fantastic option that I didn't think about. If you can live with a 2-seater, there is almost no car with a better bang for your buck ratio than a Corvette. Relatively lightweight with a big engine makes it effortless to cruise on the highway. It's got great handling. And it has the ability to put a huge grin on your face by stepping on the fun pedal!
All I've been saying is that with snow tires, RWD is just as capable as a comparable FWD car. I'd argue it's better because you have the option of steering with the throttle instead of just plowing forward (understeer). But that is the opinion of a driving enthusiast. People who view cars as appliances may disagree haha.
I'm doing my best to get rid of the stigma that a RWD car can't handle anything other than perfect weather!
I'm sorry but you simply are wrong. I've driven decades with both types through Alaska winters and FWD will beat RWD snow tires or not. I spent my formative years living on a mountain road and RWD cars couldn't get up that road, where FWD cars could. OK, well my VW type 3 could make it up that road but it had other issues in the snow....you enjoy kicking out the back end? Me too but it's more fun if it doesn't do it while going in a straight line. The last RWD car I drove in the winter was a Magnum on a test drive and it didn't have the grip of my Sonata.
However, the OP might want to think about the 2005-2009 Mustang with a V6. It wasn't the best winter car but it wasn't as terrible as my 72 Mustang. If the OP lives where one can use studded tires and is willing to get a dedicated set of tires for summer and winter, I think that could be suitable car. And in the long run, no matter how gosh awful the snow is in a given area, most of the time it snows, then goes away. Think about how many days it actually snows, I'll bet it 2 or 3 weeks worth of on snow on the road days. My daughter had one, we took it for a test drive on a snowy day, and I was almost impressed with it.
So there's my answer to the OP. 2005 Mustang, V6, stick, dedicated snow tires and a sack or 2 of gravel in the trunk over the rear axle.
^^ Keep in mind there are two different conversations going on here: someone presumably from Ohio asking about efficient RWD daily drivers, and another person from Denver asking about a BRZ in snow.
Anyway, the idea that RWD is just as good as FWD in snow neglects the fact that the vast majority of cars out there have a lot more weight over the front wheels which provides substantial traction advantage for the drive wheels on FWD. Obviously the equation changes if the car is mid-engined or rear-engined.
Yes and I appreciate the response. I didn't want to create a new thread just to ask that.
Now I have heard from multiple folks here in Denver that the BRZ is terrible in the snow, even with winter tires. Something about it being too twitchy and light in the rear. Some of the people have put sand bags in the trunk!
I don't know but I have heard it too much to buy one (even though I really want one ).
Huh. So people in Denver love Subarus so much that they would buy a lightweight RWD car made by them and think it would be fine in the winter if they just slapped snow tires on it? Wild.
I barely even know what snow is and I realize that car like a BRZ would be my last choice if I lived up north and planned to drive it in winter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Elise is the lightest. Maybe not daily driver worthy? Maybe maintenance nightmare? I don't know. Engine from Toyota so that at least should be pretty solid.
But under 3000 lbs.
).
