Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Actually, the Aussie low range in Subies is for the 2.0l engine. It's geared only about 20% lower, and our 2.5l has 20% more torque to begin with.
I'd settle for a 6 speed manual with a lower 1st and a taller overdrive gear! :-)
-juice
The WRX's STi's 6 speed sounds great!
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
If so, they'd have to engineer a low range for the US market, and I bet the Forester would get one too.
-juice
I unfortunately didn't get the camcorder out in time to record the Acura 3.2TL Type-S (with stability control on) having a very hard time understeering and spinning its drive wheels throughout the entire section.
What systems does BMW use? Haldex? Torsen? VC?
-juice
BMW uses something similar to MB cars, an integrated planatery gearset with a fixed torque ratio (38/62). This setup is durable in that it doesn't use any clutches (which can wear out over time), not very complex, effective, and yet light. Because of the rear wheel bias, you'll find that there is actually very little difference between the handling and performance of the 2WD and the AWD models, except for the fact that the AWD model has 100% more traction. All 3 differentials are open with traction control and stability control managing the flow of power to the appropriate wheels as needed. The rearward bias tends to cause the 330xi's rear wheels to spin momentarily on the slick surface prior to the traction control kicking in. With the Audi's Quattro setup, all four wheels spun simultaneously.
Drew: You're probably right - they didn't know how to use what they had. They mentioned that coming down the hill, whatever kicked in was flashing lights and making a lot of sounds - 3 women in a Benz - I'm thinking I'll probably never get any more of a technical response from them ) Oh, and while I DO have 4WD, I don't have LSD I didn't realize the mileage info about the Full Time 4WD. I know I can't take corners or spin on a dime when I have 4WL engaged )
Juice: I'm the only one crazy enough to live at the bottom of my hill Most people around here have big ol' trucks - that's probably what I'm going to end up with. I have 4WD on my PF now and I usually use it to get out of the driveway and then up the hill when I leave. It really takes just a second! I can remember in college having to get out and lock the hubs on a boyfriend's old Bronco - just moving the lever seems easy! The other cars you've suggested are OK, but I need something larger. When you live in the sticks, not everyone will deliver, so you're on your own to get it. Ground clearance is an issue because most of the roads are gravel with pretty large dips. In fact, my Dad can't (won't??!!) bring his Corvette down it because even my son's Maxima scrapes at the bottom of the hill. Didn't Subaru have a "Brat" small truck many years ago?
Yes, I live in an adventure, but I LOVE it!! BTW, I'll probably end up with a 4WD F150 SuperCrew - at least that's where I'm pointed now. Plus, all the redneck boys around here will think I'm cool - for an old lady )
Regarding that F150 pickup truck, you will probably find all that you need in Town Hall's pickup truck message board. However, they are a bit more, uh, rambunctious than in SUVs, so be prepared ;-) Consumer Reports has tested the F-150, so you may want to take a look at their review as well. Keep in mind though, that with a really light rear end, pickup trucks tend to lose traction easily, with the tail of the vehicle possibly coming around quickly.
The IIHS has crash tested the F150 in its 40 mph front offset crash test. You can see the results here:
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0110.htm
All IIHS tested full-size pickup trucks:
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0108.htm
Just can tell you more about the upcoming Subaru BRAT. Who knows, it may be exactly what you are looking for, if you can hang on to your (relatively new) Pathfinder for a bit longer.
Good luck,
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I was laughing at peaches' post too.
Guess what? The BRAT is coming back. Did you see the ST-X concept? It'll basically be a crew cab with a small bed, based on the Legacy.
I'm partial to small cars, because handling is my #1 priority and fuel efficiency isn't far behind. Then again, gas is pricey where I live, still about 1.70 for regular.
If you lived close to DC, I'd bring my Forester by. It's small, but get an $800 5'x8' utility trailer and you can haul 3 yards of mulch, no problem. The AWD works great, L models start under $20k, and I get 25mpg to boot.
-juice
I stuck to pavement so I don't think the rear axle ever even engaged, but you can expect understeer, as usual.
Anyone put it to the test in snow or other loose surfaces?
-juice
From personal experience, once you drive a vehicle where there is torque going to all 4 wheels all the time, you'll never go back. Even the everyday safety handling is superior.
-juice
I vaguely remember reading a good piece about the confusion between 4WD and AWD. I'm in the market for an SUV (Yukon or Sequoia) and I'd like to read this article again before going for a test drive.
Thanks.
AWD is full-time, and usually incorporates a center differential so both axles can receive power all the time. Most of the time it lacks a low range.
There are exceptions to both. Many newer 4WD systems operate full-time, or at least engage automatically.
Meanwhile, some AWD systems, like the ones Subaru markets in Australia, indeed have a low range.
I'll let someone more familiar with the specific 4WD systems on the Seqouia and Yukon address those.
-juice
auto-4wd, 4wd hi, 4wd lo, 2wd
auto: will engage the front drive after the rear is slipping
4wd hi: only engageable on non-dry surfaces, 50/50 split of torque
4wd lo: only engageable on non-dry surfaces, 50/50 split of torque + lower gearing
2wd: Rear wheel drive only
Seqouia:
IIRC, this puts some power to the front axle when in "full-time mode" which is engageable on dry surfaces. Also has low range as well.
My personal preference for on-road is the full-time systems that put some power to the front axle at all times, this makes it a more pro-active rather than re-active system.
-mike
I heard that mixing tires of different sizes is not good on an AWD setup. In this case, the diameter of both tires are the same. The section width and sidewall length are different.
Anybody knows why? Is it ok to mix tires of equal diameter but different section width and sidewall length in an all wheel drive vehicle?
Versatrak is primarily FWD anyway, with the rear wheels kicking in only when necessary. So the AWD is engaged only on slippery surfaces, not all the time, and you'll likely not have any problems.
Still, you will probably increase understeer, because your rear tires will have better traction and the fronts will have effectively less traction. Also, if you're after the colorful burned rubber effect, you won't get it from the rears.
-juice
-mike
PS: That is actual circumference, not the theoretical one set by the "specs" of the tire.
I did a Plus One and found that in theory the new tires should have been only a tiny amount bigger in radius, about 1/4". The actual tires turned out to be bigger than expected, by about 3/4"!
Part of this was because the new tire is a 60 series, while the old was 70, with much more flex. The rest is manufacturing variance, I guess.
It was fine because I swapped all 4. Actually, I recommend you do the same. It may look odd to have different wheels front/rear.
Here is my photo album for that Plus One swap.
-juice
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I have a 2001 Denali XL. On about 4 or 5 occasions in the 7 months I have had the vehicle, I have noticed a quirk that has me concerned.
When stopped for a light, when I accelerated, I noticed a hesitation and then what felt like an engagement of the drive train and I was on my way. This doesn't happen often, but i am wondering if anyone else has had the same problem and what was wrong, if anything?
At first i thought the system sensed a slippage and transfered more power to the front wheels. I called my dealer and of course, he had not heard of the problem
Thanks
Larry: is the tranny slipping? It's new so I'd have it looked at by the dealer.
-juice
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Thanks
Yukon/Sub has autotrac (0/100 until slippage) Reactive
-mike
I hope this helps!
-mike
-juice
Good luck,
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
"Wouldn't that be something similar to a stability control system? I.e. taking power away from a wheel ( a stability system would do so by applying brakes).
Yes, somewhat similar except for the fact that it doesn't do this in that context because it has no idea when the vehicle is about to slide. As mentioned, it has no yaw sensors. Additionally, unlike a stability control system which can apply the brakes whether or not the driver is touching the brake or throttle pedal, an active differential-based stability assistance system (which is what the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution has) needs engine torque to work; basically this means that your foot has to be pressing down on the throttle pedal for it to be active. In an emergency manuever, most drivers don't step harder on the throttle pedal.
As I understand it, as you get faster, the VTM-4 system sends less and less torque to the rear wheels until it is a 100% FWD'er.
"If Honda had used VSA on MDX (it did offer VSA with RT4WD on CRV in Japan), it would have yaw sensors. But that would be more about stability control than transfer of power to the other set of wheels. During cornering, the wheel speeds aren't the same anyway, and that would be enough to trigger a transfer of power, however small or large, electronically (instead of mechanically, as with a central differential)."
Since a stability control also incorporates 4 wheel traction control, the traction control feature can be programmed to distribute power side-to-side by applying resistance to selective wheels. It doesn't matter if the wheel speeds of the inside and outside wheels aren't the same. That is what the front and rear differentials are for basically.
"'I'd like to see where you got the information that lifting off the gas pedal would not 'initiate' rear wheel engagement even upon detecting slippage (loss of traction, not stability). As far as I understand (from what I have read thus far), the on-demand refers to proactive engagement (during acceleration/cornering) and reactive engagement (upon detection of slippage). With the LOCK mode, it doesn't need the driver's foot on the pedal anyway (upto 18 mph, after which it becomes a reactive system)."
This information can be located in the Acura MDX discussion topic, where it was discussed some time ago. All torque-on-demand systems require torque to work. In order for a useable amount of torque to be sent through the drivetrain, the driver's foot has to be on the throttle pedal. Without this, the system can't redistribute torque since insufficient amounts of it are being produced by the engine at almost idle speed. With the VTM-4 lock activated, the torque split ratio is indeed allocated so that more of it is to the rear wheels. However again, if your foot is not on the throttle pedal, even though the split may be 50/50, the vehicle will not move.
"BTW, do you remember my post about a trip to Padre islands, and driving the Taurus on sand? I didn't need a lot of 'momentum' to get going, just enough, and it definitely wasn't more than 10-15 mph (on a crowded beach). But I did use the steering to grab as much traction as possible, without having to slow down, and avoiding excessive use of the gas pedal. So I wonder why 18 mph would be 'too slow' to get out of snow/sand banks (the purpose of having LOCK on the MDX)."
I do remember, but it all depends on the type of sand, etc. All I can tell you is what the owner wrote. In this situation, 18 mph was too slow and whenever it reverted back to FWD mode, the MDX owner got stuck, He couldn't spin all four wheels continuously either (to gain momentum) since the system would start reverting back to 2WD mode.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Lots of great info on AWD systems -- you surely have been doing your homework!
On the M-Class, how is torque distributed between the front and rear axles? Is there a VC? Just curious.
Ken
Hope this helps!
Got it. The use of planetary gears with a traction and stability system overlay sounds very much like the design Subaru put into the VDC.
Now, does this set up behave similarly to a Torsen set up with TCS?
Ken
-juice
I live in New England and will use the vehicle for moderate dirt road use during hiking seasons (not winter hiking) but mostly for daily commuting including heavy traffic and slick wet roads.
Can you help?
I now think I understand the difference between the drive systems. The pathfinder has available full-time 4WD (which includes the low gear option) and an Auto-4WD mode, as well as a full-time 2WD mode. The Auto4WD mode seems like the MDX full-time AWD. The MDX never has full-time 4WD. The MDX is reactive instead of proactive (which is the Pathfinder in fulltime 4WD). Ok.
So, how do I measure the relevance of these differences? As I stated in my earlier post, I'll be using the SUV primarily for commuting everyday on pavement, but we make frequent visits to the backroads of New Hampshire and most of our summer is spent visiting remote (but not technically off-road) hiking sites. We'd like the ability to access sites located farther off the beaten path, so want an SUV that can handle mud, deep ruts and heavy gravel. We are not likely to be driving on beaches. We will definitely be driving in heavy snow and ice. We'd also like a car that will last over 100,000 miles--we keep our cars as long as possible. Finally, I've just heard a rumour (totally unsubstantiated) that Nissan may be in financial trouble.
Can anyone offer opinions on how to weigh these factors?
Thanks in advance!
From your description of what you want to do, I'd stick with the PF over the MDX. The MDX isn't meant for off-road stuff IMHO.
-mike
-mike
-mike
One followup question: It seems that for the use I describe, I will also want LSD. Do you agree? Some of the posts seem to imply that in some situations LSD is a disadvantage, but I don't think my use falls in those categories.
If the PF AWD system is 100% RWD til slippage, then it's basically similar to the MDX system, in reverse. A better system would be one such as the ML series or the Trooper that puts some power to both axles at all times. The TLC also has a system that applies some power at all times to both axles.
-mike