Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1…135136138140141…544

Comments

  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Why is it marketing bunk? Because Ford developed it? Or just because you don't understand it?

    From an engineering standpoint it's quite simple. First, remember that this is an electro-mechanical system, not a mechanical only system. If it was mechanical only then you would be correct. The Fusion has ETC so the computer knows the throttle position. It also knows the steering angle. If you accelerate while turning the computer says "hey - there might be a loss of traction" so it tells the center diff to shift torque to the rear wheels - BEFORE IT ACTUALLY STARTS TO SLIP.

    It has nothing to do with whether the front wheels would actually slip or not - it doesn't matter. It shifts the torque to prevent a POSSIBLE slip.

    If BMW's AWD system doesn't work that way then maybe they need to license the technology from Ford.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    robert - I guess we're kinda on the same page on this, but the only system I know of that proactively does anything is the 'Collison Avoidance' systems on some of the Lexus (MB?) models and even that is tightening seatbelts, disabling throttle and applying the brakes in REACTION to what it (the computer) sees as an impending collison. Dangerous stuff IMO.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    But the point is it shifts the torque BEFORE the front wheels lose traction, so it's not ONLY reacting to front wheel slippage - it's also preventing it under some circumstances.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Does Fusion have something similar that engages all wheels by expecting slippage as opposed to functioning only when detecting one?

    It does both - shifts torque when slippage is detected AND shifts torque when slippage is expected.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    but you don't concede the fact that this (and many other systems) are really reacting to what some computer programmer somewhere is really guessing to be a problem - in this case your precious steering angle combined with a throttle setting. Think about it - this is Pandora's box - a computer program making driving decisions for us. This does, BTW, go well past silly AWD systems BTW and can be more invasive than simply routing some power to the rear wheels. Of course Ford is well behind the curve on things like SC systems. Since so many folks want these kind of things I wonder how many sales Ford loses simply because it won't add an extra circuit to the brake systems (and a yaw sensor) on the Fusion and therefore doesn't even offer Stability Control - for any price. That's OK I guess, Ford will do it when the government forces them to.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    That's an entirely different argument - whether the computer should be making these decisions for us. The original assertion was that it only sent torque to the rear if slippage was detected and that's not true.

    I'm sure Ford is losing a few sales over lack of SC in the Fusion. But that doesn't mean they're behind the curve from a technology standpoint. SC was available in 1999 on the Lincoln LS (as was manumatic shifting) so the technology is there. They were also the first to put roll stability control on a SUV IIRC.

    You could argue the same thing about the Camcord's lack of AWD. Ford decided to spend the money on AWD while Toyota and Honda spent it on 4 channel ABS and SC. And just because YOU prefer SC over AWD doesn't mean everyone does.

    Next year the Fusion will have both AWD and SC. Where does that leave the Camcords?
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Why is it marketing bunk? Because Ford developed it? Or just because you don't understand it?

    Because this would make them the first manufacturer on the face of the planet to predict slip "before" it occurs and that ain't so. You cannot predict "slip" any more than you can predict the stock market.

    It has nothing to do with whether the front wheels would actually slip or not - it doesn't matter. It shifts the torque to prevent a POSSIBLE slip.

    They can say whatever they want different systems work differently. But I'll repeat....Slip can not be predicted and therefore proactive shift of torque to prevent slip is an impossibility.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Where can I read about that? I haven't found anything on the topic.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Acura's CMBS system is another. But we would be digressing from the topic.

    One example of engaging all wheels proactively (as in... no need to detect slippage before doing so) in an AWD system is Honda's VTM-4. But, it doesn't know if a slippage will occur. It will simply engage all wheels when the vehicle is being accelerated. There might be other systems like it, but so far I haven't found anything that suggests Ford's AWD in Fusion/Milan works like that (or engages without detecting any loss of traction). I will now leave that for akirby to provide us with the details.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    but you don't concede the fact that this (and many other systems) are really reacting to what some computer programmer somewhere is really guessing to be a problem

    In that case evey AWD/4WD system should be called a "reactive" system. Even a full time system like those in Subarus are reacting to something electronic or mechanical in the driveline. Akirby's point is that 4WD can be engaged in the Fusion without slippage of the front wheels. Our Explorer has the same system, but for RWD, and I do feel the rear wheels slip in snow, ice, and sometimes rain before the front wheels kick in too. What I don't feel is when it might be kicking in going around a bend or something like that. But the part you really need it for IMO, which would be getting better traction in slippery conditions, is totally reactive and you can feel the wheels slip a little at first.

    Does that make a little more sense or am I just adding to the confusion? :blush:

    Of course Ford is well behind the curve on things like SC systems.

    Whoa now captain. They may be behind in offering in on their fleet of cars but all of the SUVs/CUVs, and optional on some cars now, have it standard. And what Ford uses is not the same animal as what other mfrs offer.

    Look up Volvo's SC with RSC system and you'll see the difference right away. Most mfrs are now copying it but I have yet to hear of one that's better than what Volvo and therefore Ford use.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    One example of engaging all wheels proactively (as in... no need to detect slippage before doing so) in an AWD system is Honda's VTM-4. But, it doesn't know if a slippage will occur. It will simply engage all wheels when the vehicle is being accelerated.

    That seems really silly to have it work that way. Why not just send a little power to the other two wheels all the time rather than programming it to start from 0% and work up from there each time the accelerator is depressed? Is it a cost savings thing so they don't have to add another clutch or something? :confuse:
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Where can I read about that? I haven't found anything on the topic.

    I posted the link in post 7051. Here it is again:

    Ford Media Article
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    now that most cars in this segment are very reliable, it's refreshing that I'm not married to a brand anymore and am willing to consider other options.

    Where do you get that incorrect idea, impression, and opinion?
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Because this would make them the first manufacturer on the face of the planet to predict slip "before" it occurs and that ain't so. You cannot predict "slip" any more than you can predict the stock market.

    Slip can not be predicted and therefore proactive shift of torque to prevent slip is an impossibility.

    You are absolutely totally missing the point. Slip is most likely to occur when accelerating briskly or when cornering. Doesn't mean that it will occur - just that it's possible or even likely depending the road conditions. Ford's AWD software senses one or both of those conditions and sends torque to the rear to AVOID a potential slip situation.

    Why is that so hard to comprehend? All you need is a steering angle sensor, throttle sensor, electrically controlled center diff and some softwtare. It's not rocket science.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Ford's AWD software senses one or both of those conditions and sends torque to the rear to AVOID a potential slip situation.

    Ok, I understand what you are saying. The Ford system detects acceleration shifts accordingly. That is different than saying it is able to predict slippage.

    As a comparision, Subaru's system has been doing that for years. I posted a description in this thread earlier.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Here's a list of mid-sized cars that are above average in predicted reliability according to CR:

    Accord (based on history--current model is a new design)
    Camry I4
    Fusion
    Milan
    Passat V6
    Prius
    Sonata

    Those cover a very large percentage of cars sold in this segment. Several others are at least average:

    Malibu (pre-2008 model)
    Mazda6
    Galant
    G6

    Altima, Aura, Optima, and Avenger/Sebring are too new for CR to have enough data to rate them for reliability. Altima has historically been reliable.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    That article doesn't speak anything about being pro-active. It does about the system being FWD-only under normal driving conditions. What do you think is "non-normal"? (since the link you provided doesn't talk about it) Thats the missing link.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    SH-AWD does that with all wheels engaged at all times, and it is an evolution of VTM-4. But like I said earlier, permanent AWD systems come with a cost. Sending power to additional wheels on occasions when it makes no discernable difference does nothing but adds to drive train loss (which equals reduced fuel economy). So, while VTM-4 is capable of sending up to 70% of the torque to rear wheels, it won’t keep any part of it during steady state cruising conditions. 2WD is easier on fuel economy than 4WD with all wheels engaged.

    VTM-4 does allow a lock mode to engage all wheels permanently, and will keep it that way for as long as you choose to drive under 18 mph. :P
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    That article doesn't speak anything about being pro-active. It does about the system being FWD-only under normal driving conditions. What do you think is "non-normal"? (since the link you provided doesn't talk about it) Thats the missing link.

    Umm....how about the entire last paragraph? Try this:

    Simple mechanical systems use a clutch to send torque to the secondary drive axle when the primary axle starts to slip. Today’s electronic systems — like those found on all Ford Motor Company cars as well as Ford Explorer and Expedition, the Lincoln Navigator and the V-8 Mercury Mountaineer — use a computer controller that monitors such things as steering angle, accelerator pedal position and engine speed to provide the precise amount of torque, front to rear, as needed.

    “What’s really impressive about these systems is that they don’t just react to slip,” says Rodrigues. “They usually prevent that slip from occurring in the first place. By predicting slip and preventing it, the driver doesn’t feel the vehicle slipping and responding. The operation is seamless.”

    He says on-demand systems create a smooth, confident driving feel in all weather conditions with much better traction. The systems also help balance and improve driving dynamics by sending torque to the secondary axle when it’s most appropriate for handling.

    “On a normal front-drive vehicle, the front wheels have a limited amount of traction available to them,” says Rodrigues. “That traction has to be used for moving the car forward and for steering. If you use all of the torque to drive forward, you don’t have anything left to steer with, and vise versa. An AWD system off-loads some of that drive torque to the rear wheels. The harder you accelerate, the more of that torque that’s going to be redirected to the rear wheels, restoring the ability of the front wheels to steer the vehicle while providing an even higher level of acceleration.”
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Again, it doesn't tell you anything about the condition(s) that the system sees as having a potential to cause slippage. That is the missing piece.

    The paragraph/link from Ford PR is emphasizing on seamlessness/transparency of the system, not on how it works or when it works.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    . How in sam hill for example, can an AWD tell if it's raining and the limits of grip are lower? The obvious answer is they can't.

    Because in a low traction situation, all the wheels may be going different speeds (as picked up by ABS sensors) so the AWD system knows full well the traction level.
    The car can also know if the lights are on, wipers are on (especially BMWs with rain sensors) and if hte defroster/AC is on.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Because in a low traction situation, all the wheels may be going different speeds (as picked up by ABS sensors) so the AWD system knows full well the traction level

    You get a cigar. Thank you for proving my point. Systems don't predict slip they measure it. The only reason the wheels are going different speeds is because they are already slipping. :shades
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Next year the Fusion will have both AWD and SC. Where does that leave the Camcords?

    I have experienced more benefit from AWD rather then SC. Is SC control nice, and effective? Yes. But, in my neck on the woods (North East) AWD will help me more, being we have curvey roads and snow.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Fords' AWD system is built by Haldex, which as we all know is a part time AWD system. It is capable of sending 50% power to the rear wheels when nesessary. It is FWD biased, 100/0 on dry pavement, straight lines.

    Haldex differs from SH-AWD, Quattro, and Symmetrical AWD because it is part time. Is it as sophisticated at the others? No. Is it effective? Yes. Haldex is the best responding part time AWD system in the industry. The benefits are longer tire life and better gas mileage.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Again, it doesn't tell you anything about the condition(s) that the system sees as having a potential to cause slippage. That is the missing piece.

    Good grief. It's right there in black and white:

    use a computer controller that monitors such things as steering angle, accelerator pedal position and engine speed to provide the precise amount of torque, front to rear, as needed.

    They're not going to publish the exact algorithm - that's obviously proprietary. Suffice it to say if you're cruising at 30 mph and go WOT - it will engage the rear wheels to avoid slippage. If you accelerate while turning with enough throttle and/or steering angle it will engage the rear wheels to help handling and avoid slipping in case the roads are slick. If you're doing 15 mph in a parking lot at full steering lock with 10% throttle it's not going to engage.

    Is it that hard to imagine the situations where you might have wheel slip on a slick road? That's all the software is doing using the steering angle, throttle and speed indicators.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Fords' AWD system is built by Haldex

    That was true for the Five Hundred originally, but not anymore and never for the Fusion. Ford's AWD system is NOT built by Haldex. It is built in-house and is based on the Haldex system but it works differently.

    The Ford technology, Kurrle says, is simpler than the Haldex system because it is “more electro mechanical (and) the Haldex is more of a pressure, hydraulic-based” system.

    The fact that it's electro-mechanical is what allows it to be proactive and reactive instead of only being reactive to slip.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Might want to search the original thread. I posted a link to a video that showed various ESC,DSC systems in action. Not all systems have the same capability. I would take Symmetrical AWD over PT anyday. Symmetrical AWD can send 100% power to the rear axle on launch.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    It must be in white. With the webpage background being also white, I can’t see it. :)

    You haven’t addressed the issue, but keep repeating excerpts from the link (which shows nothing to the effect I’m looking for). If it is pro-active in any way, what condition is it looking for? I haven’t found anything on the subject, and apparently, that article is all you’re relying on for knowledge as well. Automakers don’t have to publish an algorithm to explain something that exists. It is as simple as tell when to expect the engagement.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I stand corrected, however, after reading the Ford tecnology press release, it is very very similar to Haldex. It's also similar to Mazda's as well.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    “What’s really impressive about these systems is that they don’t just react to slip,” says Rodrigues. “They usually prevent that slip from occurring in the first place. By predicting slip and preventing it, the driver doesn’t feel the vehicle slipping and responding. The operation is seamless.”

    The problem with this statement, is in the wording. What Rodrigues should have said is. By anticipating the POSSIBILITY of slip, it can prevent it. Just saying the system PREDICTS slip, gives the impression that it can detect an "Ice patch" on the road ahead of you, and engage the rear wheels. The system does not have ESP. Unless the "Psychic Friends Network" designed it.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Just saying the system PREDICTS slip, gives the impression that it can detect an "Ice patch" on the road ahead of you
    and this 'press release' type of wording aggravates an already dangerous situation, folks like akirby, perhaps, that bite into this whole thing and then drive their AWD or SC equipped vehicles like madmen until, of course, he ends up in a snowbank. And you are right the computer that controls this AWD system must also know who really killed Kennedy - bet if we searched thru Ford press releases we could find the answer along with an unfulfilled promise to bring the culprit to justice. ;)
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    A reporter seeks to talk with owners of the 2007 or 2008 Ford Fusion or Mercury Milan who are also parents of young children. If you are interested in commenting on your experience, please reply to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, November 15, 2007 and include your city and state of residence as well as the age of your child/ren.

    Thanks for your consideration,
    Jeannine


    Jeannine Fallon
    Corporate Communications
    Edmunds Inc.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    now that most cars in this segment are very reliable, it's refreshing that I'm not married to a brand anymore and am willing to consider other options.

    Where do you get that incorrect idea, impression, and opinion?

    Consumer Reports and JD Powers data seem to confirm this. In Consumer Reports, the difference between below average and above average is usually less than 5 percentage points over a five year period. And JD Powers' Long Term Reliability data shows that the most reliable cars in this segment have around 2.5 problems over a 5 year period vs below average cars in this segment having around 3.7 problems. Not a big difference.

    And why do you have to be so rude when you want to express yourself? I know you like Honda and their reputation for reliability despite your having to replace your transmission in your Accord. I've had two Accords so far and they have been good cars. Personally, I like Honda a lot.

    But with two independent organizations coming to similar conclusions about the excellent reliability of the vast majority of cars in this segment allowed me to choose a car with traits that I prefer. For me it was having extra hauling capacity in a hatchback and superior braking performance in case emergencies crept up. I also wanted something comfortable that had a good amount of power and handling that could control this power. I wanted good safety ratings too. The Mazda6 had all these things and was several thousand dollars less than the Accord or Legacy GT that made my short list. And since I thought it looked much nicer and had more direct steering, it was an easy choice. When I first started looking, Mazda was nowhere on my cars under consideration list. But keeping an open mind about what cars I'd consider led me to my perfect choice and after nearly 2 years of ownership I couldn't be happier with my decision.

    Here's another pic of my car:

    image
  • exshomanexshoman Member Posts: 109
    Hey guys, let's put a sock in it. Just agree to disagree. I'm getting tired of reading page after page of you 3 going at each other.
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    As someone who enjoys Backy's posts, I don't know how anyone could read sarcasm into that--not that I don't enjoy sarcasm. .
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    In case this has any bearing on the subject, the 04 Explorer I had appeared to be a "reactive" type system. It would drive the rear wheels 100% of the time unless it detected some slip, at which point it would automatically engage four wheel drive.

    That said, the system worked very well. I often tested it in slippery conditions such as on gravel or loose dirt, and on wet roads. From a dead standstill, going immediately to full WOT, the rear tires would chirp only very slightly before the front tires kicked in. I would say the system was able to detect slip, transfer power, and actually obtain additional traction all in well under one second.

    I can see where this would be advantageous on a sedan as well.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    A few replies and then I'll let it drop.

    It senses the steering angle, the throttle position and the engine speed. Based on various combinations of those inputs it knows if you're going straight or turning, accelerating or decelerating, etc. When it sees some combination of these conditions that could possibly cause slip (accelerating quickly, accelerating while turning, turning at high speed, etc.) it kicks some torque to the rear wheels JUST IN CASE. In addition to preventing POSSIBLE slip it also helps with handling.

    I don't understand why that concept is so hard for you to understand. It's common sense.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Just saying the system PREDICTS slip, gives the impression that it can detect an "Ice patch" on the road ahead of you, and engage the rear wheels.

    That's because nobody in their right mind would think that a car could do such a thing in the first place and would not interpret that from the press release wording.

    It works as advertised - let's move on.
  • bug4bug4 Member Posts: 370
    Nice look'n car!! Mazda sure does a great job with their wheels. . . those are cool! :shades:
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Let me recap. The discussion on AWD started with a point around its impact on fuel economy. It included my opinion on varying degree of impact based on how the AWD system works, and that permanent AWD systems (all wheels powered at all times) affect more than AWD system with a little pro-activeness built (all wheels engage under certain conditions that don’t wait for slippage to occur). This in turn has greater effect than completely reactive system (all wheels engage only when slip is detected).

    Our argument is around whether Fusion’s AWD system has a bit of pro-activeness that it will engage all wheels under non-slip conditions which is something you’re suggesting. My understanding based on articles (including the one you provided) is that it is a completely reactive system.

    You did claim something that would put an AWD system in the middle category:

    “Slip is most likely to occur when accelerating briskly or when cornering. Doesn't mean that it will occur - just that it's possible or even likely depending the road conditions. Ford's AWD software senses one or both of those conditions and sends torque to the rear to AVOID a potential slip situation.”

    The question remains, does the system being discussed do that? Does it always engage all wheels when turning, regardless of traction? Would it engage if the wheel speed sensors didn’t notice any change while considering steering angle? Those will make it more like Acura’s SH-AWD system which (while permanent) will redistribute torque by default and doesn’t wait for slippage. I haven’t seen any such claim from Ford.

    Besides, virtually all AWD system use some form of yaw, speed and throttle sensors to make it work.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I don't understand why you can't comprehend what the Ford article is saying.

    It sends torque to the rear BEFORE any slip is actually detected in an attempt to both prevent slip from occurring AND to improve handling. So yes, if you're accelerating around a corner it will shift torque to the rear - period. It does sound very much like Honda's SH-AWD but I don't think it's quite as sophisticated.

    I've posted the relevant quotes from the press release that say EXACTLY that. If you don't understand them or choose to think they're lying then fine. End of discussion.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    "I don't understand why you can't comprehend what the Ford article is saying."

    Because it's a bunch of marketing mumbo jumbo designed to obfuscate the fact the it's a rudimentary AWD system by today's standards.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    it's a rudimentary AWD system by today's standards.

    I don't know if it is or is not, but it would seem to be clearly less rudimentary than the AWD systems offered on the Accord, Altima or Camry along with several other midsize sedans.

    It seems pretty clear that the system can engage, under certain circumstances, without slip first being detected. Akirby has clearly documented that this is claimed by Ford. Those who don't believe it, I think ought to find some documentation to back-up their unsupported opinions.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    It seems pretty clear that the system can engage, under certain circumstances, without slip first being detected. Akirby has clearly documented that this is claimed by Ford.

    And those of us who have a Ford vehicle with the new sytem, my '06 Explorer has it, have backed up that it does work in the way akirby describes.

    You can feel the main drive wheels slip ever so slightly in slippery conditions before the other two get power. There's no doubt about that. However, in the case of the Explorer where you can feel the 4WD working via a slight vibration through the steering wheel when applying some throttle input, the 4WD does kick in sometimes when you never felt any slip and weren't expecting it. It also stays on for a little while until it senses that all is right with the world again and it's OK to shut down. This can happen at any time no matter what the road conditions are like. There are also no lights or indicators telling you what's going on with the system so I'm guessing in the Fusion, where you most likely don't feel the vibration the Explorer gives off, the switch is 100% transparent.

    Many times I've hit the go pedal hard to take off and the 4WD has kicked on. I know that because I could feel it. The one big thing missing from that equation though is that the rear wheels never slipped at all like they might on wet, snow covered, or gravel covered roadways. You hit the gas too hard on any of those roads the rear wheels will slip just a bit before the front wheels kick on. So somehow the onboard computer saw something it didn't like about the way I was driving and felt it would help out a little. Whether I wanted it to or not. ;)
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    If some of you want to twist, churn, and spin the data coming from CR and JD Powers, that is fine, and it's your right to do so. However, taking a direct look and interpreting the information in a straight forward manner, the yield and results are this:

    There are a few above average midsize sedans in terms of long term reliability.

    There are quite a few AVERAGE midsize sedans in terms of longterm reliability.

    There are a few below average midsize sedans in regards to long term reliability.

    Some of you might be OK with mediocre and below vehicles.

    I'm not; I always want something that is AT LEAST above average, as a minimum.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    That may well be, I did not bother to check, but if the difference, in absolute terms, between above average, average and below average is very small, then this may be a reason for not giving much weight to that factor.

    It was stated above that Consumer Reports and JD Powers data seem to confirm this. In Consumer Reports, the difference between below average and above average is usually less than 5 percentage points over a five year period. And JD Powers' Long Term Reliability data shows that the most reliable cars in this segment have around 2.5 problems over a 5 year period vs below average cars in this segment having around 3.7 problems. Not a big difference.

    Another thing I looked at is expected repair costs, based on edmunds data and my own information on the cost of extended warranties. Again there was not a big difference, the difference for most models was less than $100 per year. An operating cost difference of $5-10 per month is not something that would be a significant factor to me.
  • mz3smz3s Member Posts: 17
    i agree with you totally.

    It becomes a problem when others are bashed, made fun of, and looked down upon as if they weren't educated enough to pick the car you (not you personally, but you get it, right) chose.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    So yes, if you're accelerating around a corner it will shift torque to the rear - period.

    Now only if a Ford PR would put the words like you did. And given that it can only help market the AWD system better, I don't see a reason not to! How about this...

    "If the front wheels begin to turn faster than the rear wheels, as would be the case if they were spinning on snow or ice, the two hydraulic pumps would turn at a different rate and hydraulic pressure proportional to the difference in their speeds of rotation would be generated."

    Thats a marketing spin to suggest that the AWD system kicks in before the wheel spin happens. And this is from Honda's Real Time AWD system used in CR-V and Element.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    Except no one twisted any information. The list Backy posted does show MOST midsize being above average, that seemed fairly apparent by doing the math and observations in the real-world.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I always want something that is AT LEAST above average, as a minimum.

    Then you have many options to choose from. :) The new Accord is a question mark for now, but CR has given it the benefit of the doubt due to its solid history. And there's the Camry (I4 at least), Fusion, Milan, Sonata, Passat (V6), and others "above average". So quite a range of choices for different driving styles and budgets.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles