I have kind of a love for old GM cars. 60's and 50's, when they were still an innovative company. In small cars, the transmission extending rearward with RWD takes up some extra space. I wonder if a company will ever try a torque tube in a compact RWD car again like the Pontiac Tempest.

 

One of the coolest RWD cars I drove was an extremely rare Lancia Flaminia.. It was powered by a V6 had inboard mounted drum front brakes, a rear mounted trans axle and disk brakes on the rear... It sold new in 1964 for $14,000.. It was crazy some of the innovations that were being made in the 50s and 60s.. I had my first ride in a boosted car in a 62 Olds Cutlass Jetfire and my second in a 63 Avanti.. As fast as the Jetfire was I don't think it would be able to beat my Fit as it is now but the Avanti getting sideways at 85 MPH with 4 people in it may be able to... Tires really sucked back then so maybe not.. GM was doing some cool stuff like the rear trans axle, and an overhead cam 6 in 1969 or 70 but they had dropped the transaxle by then.. I am thinking GM had used torque tubes in the late 40s and early 50s on trucks.. That would be the way to go with today's unit construction cars. I believe that Rambler reintroduced that method of construction in the late 50s or early 60s but Chrysler had it in the 1930s on the Aero cars.. The made a big impression on Dr Ferdinand Porsche and was implemented in the VW Beetle design... I think it is strange that there seems to be little interest in rear engine cars except in Porsche's. He liked the idea of having the drive wheels as close to the engine as possible.. Kind of kills the hatchback though.