Since the predominant circumstance, even here in the Puget sound area, is a dry or wet roadbed, snow/winter tires offer LESS traction the clear majority of the time.
So I'll just stick with my safer plan of using summer tires and throwing on snowchains as/when needed.
I continue to run my summer (quiet, comfortable) tires in the wintertime because in the clear majority of wintertime circumstances they have MORE traction than ANY winter tire.
Rather than compromising traction for the exceptions I handle the exceptions as just that.
If I still lived in Montana and had to endure week after week of snow and ice covered roadbeds I wouldn't hestitate to change over to a winter tread.
Based on your limited utilization rate, I would suggest that a FWD RX would have served you just as well. That way you would only need one set of chains for the three times this next decade you may actually require more traction that the stock set-up provides.
All this wasted verbage for a guy who does not even need AWD in the first place.
I might as well get back to work. Time is wasted here....
Wwest, you have made such a big deal about chains that I assumed you used them frequently. You now tell us that you have used them twice in the last 12 years! The last time you needed them was seven years ago. You really betray yourself as one who fixates on things that don't matter.
I now have a different suggestion for your next vehicle. The X5 would be stupid because you wouldn't use the capabilities. Further, you don't even use the capabilities of the RX you have. Perhaps a Volvo wagon is in order.
And advise all the local EMTs that they can toss 70% of the equipment they have on board since they only use most of it about once about every ten years.
Gee, come to think of it I don't think I've used my horn any more than that, why does Lexus keep equiping vehicles with such a useless device?
Many people here in the beautiful pacific northwest automatically, as soon as the law allows, install studded tires. 95% of the time all that does is destroy our roadbeds. But ask them to give them up except for the x% they actually need wintertime traction devices?
Dude, you're self destructing here. "Not me, I'm not going out into that "weather". " If that is the case, why are we even discussing any of your issues?
For more years than I can remember I have ALWAYS purchased a new fire extinguisher to carry in each new car I purchase. Now that you have brought it to mind it occurs to me that in all of that time, incurring the cost of maybe 20 or 30 fire extinguishers, I have only made use of one of those and that wasn't even to my own benefit.
I was traveling north on SR167 early one morning and a car setting in the median just off the right shoulder was on fire, smoke rolling from under the hood and the passenger cabin so full of smoke one couldn't see inside.
With a young inexperienced WSP officer trying to keep me away "she's libel to blow any minute" (fire in front, gas tank in rear) I used the butt end of my trusty fire extinguisher to break a window and get the lady driver out of the car. She had decided she needed a nap and pulled over during the cold night and left the engine running.
Another WSP came on the scene just as I was exhausting the extinguisher under the front of the car attempting to put the fire out. It didn't work.
How did the accident happen that you saw? Did somebody run a red light near a blind curve?
Seriously, you are really confused if you equate buying a fire extinguisher or having a horn with the purchase of an AWD vehicle. The horn and extinguisher are for emergencies that can't be predicted. AWD is so you can travel in spite of what is predicted. You have said yourself that you choose not to travel when the weather is bad enough to require AWD. I realize that emergencies can happen, but buying and AWD for such an emergency is the equivalent to driving a fire engine on a daily basis. You would be well served with a FWD station wagon, a weather radio and fire extinguisher.
From what you've said, the fire extinguisher you had didn't do you any good. It would have done you just as well to break off the antenna on the car to break the driver's window out. Or your keys, or a flashlight, or any number of other things. It seems to me that other than having things for no logical purpose is a norm for you, wwest. You don't think that laws should be followed if you don't feel like following them, and it seems as though you like to find an issue with everything that involves you. YOU, the all knowing, all insightful, totally omnicient one decided to purchase the RX FOR A SECOND TIME! If it was so inadequate, why? Go out and buy a Discovery if you want more ability with the AWD. I, for one, am just tired of hearing about all of these contrived situations that you get yourself into to get your vehicle stuck. It certainly apears that you are the only one that many of us have heard of that has done so. Maybe that's the answer, and it has more to do with the ability of the driver than the limitations of the ability of the vehicle.
Ask him what happened in the News and Views subject about fogging windows. He was complaining of fogged windows and blaming Lexus for it until it was discovered that he had his HVAC system set for recirculate.
Hey Pal, I suggest you park you butt for those 3 occasions in the next dozen years and you can reduce your contentious behavior on this board, and maybe even sleep a bit tonight. Comparing a fire extinguisher with AWD capability is another irrelevant comparison that only serves to highlight your ineptitude. Your mind hops from one random topic to another. Initially folks were sincerely trying to help you, but at this point, people are only responding to you out of frustration.
What I have said, discovered, was that although the LS400 "fresh" mode indicator was on, lit, the LS400 climate control could still be "automatically" in recirculate mode, as much as 90%.
Other than absolutely knowing, remembering, that YOU have previously manually activated the "fresh" mode there is otherwise no indication available. All the system indications are exactly the same.
With regard to my need, use, of AWD. As many of you have pointed out, and I fully agree, in most, probably even the clear majority of circumstances, the vehicle is truly AWD.
But in the more rare occassions when traction is lost, or only compromised, the RX300 doesn't measure up. Basically I had no real problem with that. The two occassions I have related under which I needed to use chains involved a Jeep in 4WD mode (center diff'l locked).
And that's how I expected to make up for the fact that the RX300 wasn't truly AWD, snowchains. Until I discovered that they couldn't be used safely.
of a fictional(??) story involving a 20,000 hour jet pilot, an F18, and an open house on a USAF base.
"granny" had the opportunity to climb up and actually sit in the pilot's seat of the F18, but was cautioned not to touch anything painted bright red.
Her curosity thus peaked, of course she had to ask what the bright red handle at the front of the right armrest was for.
The discussion lead to how much is this "special" seat was worth and how much was it's developement cost. Oh, probably upward of tens of millions of dollars said the pilot.
"And you've never used it even once says granny."
"My, what a hell of a waste of my taxpayer dollars."
Wow, I was planning to get back to wwest's chain reply to defend my comment that they only provide a bit more traction, but things have gotten a bit testy here. I seem to have stumbled into a situation where a lot of history with him is coming to a head. I suggest that some of you tone down what seem to be a series of vendettas. I'm neither a moderator nor a host, but wwest is entitled to his opinions whether you agree with them or not and whether you feel they are unsupported or not. OK, most of them are not. :-)
My comment on chains being only a slight improvement in traction is likely based on more practical experience than anyone you've discussed this with. I won't go into my background as that would seem rather trite. but suffice to say my experience with snow, chains and various traction aids is sufficient.
It is worth noting that as recently as 10 years ago, the majority of snow tires were still based on rudimentary technology. The advent of radial tires 40 years ago improved grip enough that winter tire sales fell below the point they were worth R&D dollars. Then all season radials appeared and snow tires pretty much remained in stasis.
This changed about 5 years ago when the development of winter specific rubber compounds enabled a quiet winter tire that also wore well. Money went into this newly profitable niche and today it's a fast growing tire segment. Today's winter specific tires are the result of a great deal of computer aided design and benefit from the first real changes in tire compounds since WWII. In short, these are not your father's snow tires.
Chains helped the old snow tires a great deal under certain conditions because they really weren't that great to start with. Absent among these conditions are roads with a thin covering of snow as the chains simply chew through the covering and metal on asphalt provides very poor grip after that happens. Also absent would be deep unconsolidated snow because the chains displace enough snow at first wheelspin that the vehicle is dropped on the frame almost immediately - a serious stuck. But still, chains did help these older snow tires.
Today, a good set of winter specific snow tires has no trouble on ice whatsoever - a traditional chain use mainstay. These are not the hard rubber cleated tires of old. They are silica based rubber that remains pliable at temperatures well below 0. The compounds are also tough enough to have incredibly fine siping, which older rubber compounds could not handle without falling apart or wearing like warm butter. The new tread patterns are designed to avoid the high PSI spots of large, traditional snow lugs, which often melted the snow at the contact patch and resulted in LESS traction than an all season tire.
There are a lot of other areas where old snow tires and/or chains are lackluster, but you get the idea.
So, tire chains will provide incremental traction benefits under certain conditions - yes. But time and technology have passed them by with today's modern winter tires. With the traction choices afforded by this new generation of winter traction, the limited improvement of chains has become truly marginal. Look no further than last year's World Rally series to see that they never chain up on the snowy venues - sticking with studs that are now being replaced with the new compound NON studded tires more and more each year. One day, chains will be anachronisms except on heavy earth/snow moving equipment or any other type of vehicle for which new generation boots are not available. Before you know it, you'll see this new technology available on HD tires for the snowplows - you read it here first.
Of course, semi trucks will likely always carry chains as their tires must last hundreds of thousands of miles. Chaining up at the pass will remain the only economically viable way for them to improve traction for the 30 miles of winter passes in a typical 1500 mile run.
I'm not just talking a good story here, either. I've personally put my money where my mouth is. For 8 years, I've had studded tires on every car I've owned, and Idaho allows me to run them. That's 4 full sets of new studs over that time. This year, I yanked the studs out of my winter tires and purchased 2 sets of Michelin's Arctic Alpin studless winter tires. That was based on my own research, corroborated by a couple of lengthy discussions with an aquaintance who worked at the Steamboat Springs Winter Driving School for many years.
So, chain use is a strategy - yes. But I'll run rings around you under any condition you can name with my studless winter tires. It's only a matter of time before the Highway Patrol revamps their antiquated winter condition requirements in recognition of the new king of winter traction. You heard this here first, also!!
Sorry, I didn't realize that all this time we were discussing wintertime tire traction with STUDS versus snowchains.
I'm not very familier with studded tires, I continually campaign against their use since the clear majority of the time here in the Puget Sound area all they do is chew up our roadbeds and bridge decks.
But it is my impression that most tires that can accept studs are really serious, damn SERIOUS, winter TREAD (MUDDERS??) tires.
So, yes, MUDDER (or anything close) treads will often get you up and going in deep snow and studs will certainly help on ice.
But I still stand by my statement regarding the lack of sufficient traction when the roadbed is dry or only wet, my summer tires (where technology also has not stood still!) will give me better performance, and especially so when compared to studded tires.
I certainly wish you well with you coming wintertime experiment (in ID?) without studs, but may I suggest you throw in a set of chains just in case.
Question, does the 4 Runner sport w/ X-REAS adversely affect suspension articulation? If I am very interested in off-roading, should I stay away from this feature?
The way the system works is that when a wheel compresses, seperate from the other wheels, the shock absorber increases resistance to that compression up to and including the point that it will actually lock that absorber while the opposite wheel (diagonal) will do just the opposite. So for example, if the front right wheel compresses, the shock absorber will increase resistance to that compression while at the same time, the rear left wheel will get less resistance so that the vehicle will more likely stay level. If, for another example, you're stepping on the brakes heavily, instead of the vehicle diving forward under the braking forces, the front shocks will resist compression and the rears will soften to allow compression more easily, so you have less brake dive. The same thing happens in reverse when you accelerate briskly. From what I understand, this will not adversely effect off-road performance as it is designed more for the situations described above. It will still allow the full articulation of the suspension. What it should do is something like the following example.
You're doing some rock crawling or going over some logs... The front right wheel comes off of a rock and articulates to the full extension of the suspension. The X_REAS suspension should react by trying to extend the rear left wheel to compensate and so will try to keep the front wheel in contact with the ground, maximizing traction and stability.
That is my understanding of how the system works, but if I am wrong, please feel free to comment.
Go back and read dougs post again. Slowly this time. He is not talking about studs, and he never once mentiones mud tires.
Your form of obstinacy is self destructive. I think you need to consider that there may actually be people out there that know a bit more than you do about the concept of winter traction. Not to mention everything else.
Doug: that may be one of the finest posts I have ever read in Edmunds. Excellent job.
I would agree with the last comment. Good explanation.
To add to that, there are several other factors that go into winter traction on winter-specific tires now. The comment from Doug explained quite a bit about some of that technology. Older snow tires were not much different from mud tires when you look at them. The snow and ice-specific tires available now are specifically designed for these surfaces and to give exceptional traction on dry surfaces as well. The one minor drawback about them is that with the softer rubber compounds they use on them for the most part, they wear more quickly than all-season tires if you use them all-year. However, even this drawback is becoming less and less of an issue.
Some other factors going into these tires for technology:
The added surface area from the design of the tread pattern. If you look at the blocks within the tread pattern itself for most of these tires (and I'm saying snow and ice, not studded tires), you will see that the individual blocks of tread are acually broken into smaller sections. These smaller treads are usually "Z" shaped to add traction both front and rear (for acceleration and braking) but for lateral traction as well(for turning)
The rubber compounds themselves are made to be both soft as well as somewhat "porus". And I said porus in italics because it isn't acutally like a sieve, but there are small "bubbles" or "threads" that are built into the rubber compound itself to have more traction than just normal vulcanized rubber.
The tread patterns are designed so that under directional forces, the tread blocks stay flat in comparison to the ground to maximize traction.
There are many other examples of the technology going into these tires, but limited space here and I'll be honest, I don't have all of the experience with these products. But I just wanted to re-iderate Doug's post.
Here is a bunch of winter tire reviews. I strongly recomend you read through these. I think you will be suprised at how many winter tires handle dry and wet well.
Your summer tires have a handicap in winter, even when the roadbed is dry. Their rubber compound is suited to warmer temperatures, and their grip is linearly related to temperature. So if you have a set of summer tires, they will have different friction cooeficients with different temperatures. Sometimes it is better to use winter tires on cold dry pavement than it is to use summer tires on cold dry pavement.
wwest said: Sorry, I didn't realize that all this time we were discussing wintertime tire traction with STUDS versus snowchains.
Doug responds: Uh..., we weren't...guess that's the extent of your response to my "chains only provide incremental improvements" explanation? It applies to studs as well, so pulling studs into the discussion changes things not a whit.
wwest said: I'm not very familier with studded tires, I continually campaign against their use since the clear majority of the time here in the Puget Sound area all they do is chew up our roadbeds and bridge decks.
Doug responds: Since you're not familiar with studs, I'm surprised by your statement above that you thought we were debating studs. Do you normally debate on topics you're not familiar with? For many, studs are the only way to safely negotiate hills and such with their family aboard. That there are areas they must travel the rest of the day that don't require this safety feature is noted, but hardly a reason to take the option away from them. One day they'll switch to the new studless technology, however.
wwest said: But it is my impression that most tires that can accept studs are really serious, damn SERIOUS, winter TREAD (MUDDERS??) tires.
Doug responds: There is an important difference between winter treads and mud tires. You show your ignorance by suggesting that they are still one and the same. Decades ago, they were very similar. Reread my post above to discover that the large lugged snow tire of yore (similar to the mud tire of yore and today) is ancient technology.
wwest said: So, yes, MUDDER (or anything close) treads will often get you up and going in deep snow and studs will certainly help on ice.
Doug responds: I've been in snow over my head with my vehicles many a time - always in the company of many other like minded folks. Mud tires are not the best for deep snow as they're designed to displace mud. When they displace snow due to wheelspin, you find yourself sitting on your frame and very stuck. I'll take an AT (all terrain) tire over a mud tire in deep snow anyday - they float better. And yes, studs will help on ice but the newest generation of winter tires will run rings around them on ice.
wwest said: But I still stand by my statement regarding the lack of sufficient traction when the roadbed is dry or only wet, my summer tires (where technology also has not stood still!) will give me better performance, and especially so when compared to studded tires.
Doug responds: I think it's worth pointing out the absurdity of your statement. Every winter, thousands of people on summer tires experience sudden and catastrophic loss of control upon encountering ice or slippery packed snow conditions. But I have yet to hear of someone on studded tires suddenly losing control upon encountering an unexpected dry patch of road.
Give as all a break here - we put traction winter tires on for the extreme conditions encountered in winter and I think even those of us with double digit IQ can figure that out. To imply you're the only one here capable of comprehending that a winter tire may not perform as well in summer conditions and that it's a novel debate position to hold is a bit much, don't you think?
Listen, I'm not here to bash you wwest. You have a great deal of knowledge on things but like any of us there are things you are not as familiar with. I likely speak for a lot of others when I say that your input is valued. But if you wish to pontificate on a topic you would be well advised to consider that there are some highly informed folks here on the list who would appreciate you researching your posts a bit better. The purpose of this board is to make factual and helpful knowledge available in a community fashion. You violate that spirit when you put forth incorrect information. Then you violate basic human courtesy when you engage in debate over that information without making any attempt to improve the quality of it.
Speaking for myself, I have spent my entire career with automobiles and everything related to them. I enjoy these boards and exchanging the information I have for fellowship and enjoyable discourse. But one of the least enjoyable aspects of my perspective is constantly having to correct wrong information that others may erroneously take as gospel from this board. I don't mind doing it on occasion, but it is distinctly unrewarding to have to spend most of my online time correcting when I could be sharing new information. It's akin to spinning wheels when we could be moving along into new territory.
Importantly, it also drives knowledgeable people off the boards.
I strongly urge you to use this board for information to make your motoring experience more pleasant, more economical, or more safe. But please consider your knowledge level within the context of a board populated by people who do this for a living. I do not intend this to sound harsh, but it needed to be said and there is really no way to candy coat it any better.
I am getting conflicting reports from dealers on this subject ... can this HL go on the beach - live on Long island, NY and drive on the sand - sometimes soft .. usually take the tire pressure down to 15 psi and gmc jimmy goes fine - do you think the HL can cut it? We like the HL, but want to get more info before purchasing ..any help would be great - thanks in advance.
It really depends on the sand you're talking about and your experience driving on it. Two major factors when you're driving on sand are how soft it is and how you drive on it. If you're slamming on the brake (burying the tires) or flooring the throttle from a standing start (digging the tires into the sand), you're going to have a more difficult time in ANY vehicle. Letting out some air to get a bigger footprint will help alot. For most situations, I would guess that the HL should be fine. Using the "snow" button may also help. You may also look into the possibility of getting tires that will give you a wider contact patch in general. The tires on the HL are made for on-road use primarily and as such are much narrower than those found on most truck-based SUV's. And with them being narrower to begin with, they may have a greater likelyhood to sink into the sand if it's soft.
thx toyotaken ... that does help ..I have driven on the beaches there extensively - grew up there - the trick is to stay in the tracks and air down - city slickers with huge v8 suvs get stuck every summer there without taking the tire pressure down ... the sand is not consistent - it can be firm in places and get very soft quickly - I've been on the beach with a friends subaru outback ..it was ok, but ground clearance was a bit of an issue ...the know on the HL is that it doesn't have a 4 WD low gear ..I guess the snow button drops it down a bit ... still a toss up btwn this HL and the new 4-runner - if i knew for sure that the HL could handle this sand, i would buy it today ... thx again ...again, anyone with info regarding this would help ..thx
Actually, the snow button does not change the gearing at all. In fact, most snow buttons I'm familiar with cause the vehicle to start in 2nd, which would be going the wrong direction with a taller gear instead of your search for a lower gear.
Why don't you tell the dealer about your concern and ask him to take you to the area in a Highlander so you can drive it in that sand for a better feel of its capabilities. If they know this is your only concern I'm sure it could be arranged.
Tidester - you guys get some real winter down there, eh? We're currently having the wimpiest snow season on record up here. Of course it would happen the year I pop for 8 Michelin Arctic Alpins....
doug is correct, the snow button starts the transmission in 2nd gear so that it is less likely to spin the tires. The 4Runner would be more effective in a few different ways. First, the tires are MUCH wider in their tread width. Secondly, the ground clearance is much greater. Third, the 4wd is a more "actual" 4wd in that it will always give traction to both the front and rear drive shafts. The 4wd on the Highlander will send power to both, but if one end starts to spin, the V/C will progressively transfer power to the other, but it may not do so quickly enough for you not to have dug your tires into the sand. The availability of Low4WD should not be too big of an issue actually. I have found that other than the gearing being lower, thereby limiting how quickly you can spin the tires, using 4wd hi is fine most times in the sand. Most of what causes problems I've found anyway is getting started correctly and stopping correctly. Other than that, making sure you're not turning too quickly and digging the outside front tire too deeply in soft sand. Keeping momentum and not making any HUGE inputs into steering or speed changes seems to have a much greater benefit than the availability of low 4.
Summer tires use rubber compounds that are optimized for summer. This means they are not optimized for winter. The rubber compounds in summer tires harden in cold conditions, leaving you with significantly less grip than in warm conditions. Winter tires use a silica based compound that stays pliable in cold conditions.
This means that in some cases, winter tires have more grip than summer tires on dry roads, depending on temperature.
It is safer to stick with winter tires in the winter, because 1)Summer tires harden in the cold and have less grip, 2)they will handle black ice a million times better than summer tires and 3)less hassle with chains, because you will need them far less often.
You mentioned your reasons for carrying chains is similar to the reasons why the air force uses ejection seats, and why you carry a fire extinguisher. I liken using winter tires to this exact example. You never know when you need their capabilities.
Black ice does not give you the chance to get out and instal snow chains.
It hit 59 here yesterday - can you press that snow button a little harder so Bogus Basin can open?
Since I recall many of you discussing FWD/RWD/AWD/4WD coming down ski roads, I'm inviting feedback to the link posted in steve_ "Winter/Adverse Weather Driving Discussion" Nov 21, 2002 11:43pm, esp. the fourth paragraph. I think the authors are perhaps overly RWD biased...thanks for joining in over there!
Looking to replace my ' 87 4Runner (stolen and stripped this year--boo-hoo!) with either 1999 or 2000 Landcruiser. Without a doubt, it's a great rig either year. One of the points to consider in the purchase is the difference in 4WD systems. My question is: is the 4WD ActiveTrak/VSC system on the 2000 model a significant enough improvement over the older system to tip the decision towards the 2000 model? Would appreciate advice on this. Thanks!
First off, do you off-road?? If you do off-road, then try and get a '00 TLC with locker rear differential.
If you're more into safety and all-weather handling with good off-roading ability, then go for the ATRAC/VSC-equipped model. From personal experience, ATRAC works quite well in off-roading. However, the most benefit is on-road handling in foul weather.
Consumer Reports initially did not like the handling on '99 TLC...i think the tail wiggled too much in their handling course. However, with the '01 models (VSC/ATRAC), the handling was much improved.
In my opinion, get the TLC with VSC & ATRAC. It is good for everything (on-road and off-road).
It is no secret that I am a big fan of the newer Active-Trac system. From the people I have spoken to who have used this off road, I think you're at least as well off with this system if not better. There is no argument that you are better off on-road with the stability control. For my money, it is worth it. It isn't my money involved though is it?
This forum is great! In short time, definitely some good into and advise. Bias towards ActiveTrak invites the questions: how good is its reliability, and does it cost more to maintain? So far, with what's been said, leaning towards 2000.
Comments
So I'll just stick with my safer plan of using summer tires and throwing on snowchains as/when needed.
Rather than compromising traction for the exceptions I handle the exceptions as just that.
If I still lived in Montana and had to endure week after week of snow and ice covered roadbeds I wouldn't hestitate to change over to a winter tread.
All this wasted verbage for a guy who does not even need AWD in the first place.
I might as well get back to work. Time is wasted here....
HiC
I now have a different suggestion for your next vehicle. The X5 would be stupid because you wouldn't use the capabilities. Further, you don't even use the capabilities of the RX you have. Perhaps a Volvo wagon is in order.
Gee, come to think of it I don't think I've used my horn any more than that, why does Lexus keep equiping vehicles with such a useless device?
Many people here in the beautiful pacific northwest automatically, as soon as the law allows, install studded tires. 95% of the time all that does is destroy our roadbeds. But ask them to give them up except for the x% they actually need wintertime traction devices?
Not me, I'm not going out into that "weather".
I was traveling north on SR167 early one morning and a car setting in the median just off the right shoulder was on fire, smoke rolling from under the hood and the passenger cabin so full of smoke one couldn't see inside.
With a young inexperienced WSP officer trying to keep me away "she's libel to blow any minute" (fire in front, gas tank in rear) I used the butt end of my trusty fire extinguisher to break a window and get the lady driver out of the car. She had decided she needed a nap and pulled over during the cold night and left the engine running.
Another WSP came on the scene just as I was exhausting the extinguisher under the front of the car attempting to put the fire out. It didn't work.
True story. The driver was revived on the scene.
Seriously, you are really confused if you equate buying a fire extinguisher or having a horn with the purchase of an AWD vehicle. The horn and extinguisher are for emergencies that can't be predicted. AWD is so you can travel in spite of what is predicted. You have said yourself that you choose not to travel when the weather is bad enough to require AWD. I realize that emergencies can happen, but buying and AWD for such an emergency is the equivalent to driving a fire engine on a daily basis. You would be well served with a FWD station wagon, a weather radio and fire extinguisher.
Steve, Host
What I have said, discovered, was that although the LS400 "fresh" mode indicator was on, lit, the LS400 climate control could still be "automatically" in recirculate mode, as much as 90%.
Other than absolutely knowing, remembering, that YOU have previously manually activated the "fresh" mode there is otherwise no indication available. All the system indications are exactly the same.
With regard to my need, use, of AWD. As many of you have pointed out, and I fully agree, in most, probably even the clear majority of circumstances, the vehicle is truly AWD.
But in the more rare occassions when traction is lost, or only compromised, the RX300 doesn't measure up. Basically I had no real problem with that. The two occassions I have related under which I needed to use chains involved a Jeep in 4WD mode (center diff'l locked).
And that's how I expected to make up for the fact that the RX300 wasn't truly AWD, snowchains. Until I discovered that they couldn't be used safely.
"granny" had the opportunity to climb up and actually sit in the pilot's seat of the F18, but was cautioned not to touch anything painted bright red.
Her curosity thus peaked, of course she had to ask what the bright red handle at the front of the right armrest was for.
The discussion lead to how much is this "special" seat was worth and how much was it's developement cost. Oh, probably upward of tens of millions of dollars said the pilot.
"And you've never used it even once says granny."
"My, what a hell of a waste of my taxpayer dollars."
My comment on chains being only a slight improvement in traction is likely based on more practical experience than anyone you've discussed this with. I won't go into my background as that would seem rather trite. but suffice to say my experience with snow, chains and various traction aids is sufficient.
It is worth noting that as recently as 10 years ago, the majority of snow tires were still based on rudimentary technology. The advent of radial tires 40 years ago improved grip enough that winter tire sales fell below the point they were worth R&D dollars. Then all season radials appeared and snow tires pretty much remained in stasis.
This changed about 5 years ago when the development of winter specific rubber compounds enabled a quiet winter tire that also wore well. Money went into this newly profitable niche and today it's a fast growing tire segment. Today's winter specific tires are the result of a great deal of computer aided design and benefit from the first real changes in tire compounds since WWII. In short, these are not your father's snow tires.
Chains helped the old snow tires a great deal under certain conditions because they really weren't that great to start with. Absent among these conditions are roads with a thin covering of snow as the chains simply chew through the covering and metal on asphalt provides very poor grip after that happens. Also absent would be deep unconsolidated snow because the chains displace enough snow at first wheelspin that the vehicle is dropped on the frame almost immediately - a serious stuck. But still, chains did help these older snow tires.
Today, a good set of winter specific snow tires has no trouble on ice whatsoever - a traditional chain use mainstay. These are not the hard rubber cleated tires of old. They are silica based rubber that remains pliable at temperatures well below 0. The compounds are also tough enough to have incredibly fine siping, which older rubber compounds could not handle without falling apart or wearing like warm butter. The new tread patterns are designed to avoid the high PSI spots of large, traditional snow lugs, which often melted the snow at the contact patch and resulted in LESS traction than an all season tire.
There are a lot of other areas where old snow tires and/or chains are lackluster, but you get the idea.
So, tire chains will provide incremental traction benefits under certain conditions - yes. But time and technology have passed them by with today's modern winter tires. With the traction choices afforded by this new generation of winter traction, the limited improvement of chains has become truly marginal. Look no further than last year's World Rally series to see that they never chain up on the snowy venues - sticking with studs that are now being replaced with the new compound NON studded tires more and more each year. One day, chains will be anachronisms except on heavy earth/snow moving equipment or any other type of vehicle for which new generation boots are not available. Before you know it, you'll see this new technology available on HD tires for the snowplows - you read it here first.
Of course, semi trucks will likely always carry chains as their tires must last hundreds of thousands of miles. Chaining up at the pass will remain the only economically viable way for them to improve traction for the 30 miles of winter passes in a typical 1500 mile run.
I'm not just talking a good story here, either. I've personally put my money where my mouth is. For 8 years, I've had studded tires on every car I've owned, and Idaho allows me to run them. That's 4 full sets of new studs over that time. This year, I yanked the studs out of my winter tires and purchased 2 sets of Michelin's Arctic Alpin studless winter tires. That was based on my own research, corroborated by a couple of lengthy discussions with an aquaintance who worked at the Steamboat Springs Winter Driving School for many years.
So, chain use is a strategy - yes. But I'll run rings around you under any condition you can name with my studless winter tires. It's only a matter of time before the Highway Patrol revamps their antiquated winter condition requirements in recognition of the new king of winter traction. You heard this here first, also!!
IdahoDoug
I'm not very familier with studded tires, I continually campaign against their use since the clear majority of the time here in the Puget Sound area all they do is chew up our roadbeds and bridge decks.
But it is my impression that most tires that can accept studs are really serious, damn SERIOUS, winter TREAD (MUDDERS??) tires.
So, yes, MUDDER (or anything close) treads will often get you up and going in deep snow and studs will certainly help on ice.
But I still stand by my statement regarding the lack of sufficient traction when the roadbed is dry or only wet, my summer tires (where technology also has not stood still!) will give me better performance, and especially so when compared to studded tires.
I certainly wish you well with you coming wintertime experiment (in ID?) without studs, but may I suggest you throw in a set of chains just in case.
You're doing some rock crawling or going over some logs... The front right wheel comes off of a rock and articulates to the full extension of the suspension. The X_REAS suspension should react by trying to extend the rear left wheel to compensate and so will try to keep the front wheel in contact with the ground, maximizing traction and stability.
That is my understanding of how the system works, but if I am wrong, please feel free to comment.
Your form of obstinacy is self destructive. I think you need to consider that there may actually be people out there that know a bit more than you do about the concept of winter traction. Not to mention everything else.
Doug: that may be one of the finest posts I have ever read in Edmunds. Excellent job.
HiC
To add to that, there are several other factors that go into winter traction on winter-specific tires now. The comment from Doug explained quite a bit about some of that technology. Older snow tires were not much different from mud tires when you look at them. The snow and ice-specific tires available now are specifically designed for these surfaces and to give exceptional traction on dry surfaces as well. The one minor drawback about them is that with the softer rubber compounds they use on them for the most part, they wear more quickly than all-season tires if you use them all-year. However, even this drawback is becoming less and less of an issue.
Some other factors going into these tires for technology:
The added surface area from the design of the tread pattern. If you look at the blocks within the tread pattern itself for most of these tires (and I'm saying snow and ice, not studded tires), you will see that the individual blocks of tread are acually broken into smaller sections. These smaller treads are usually "Z" shaped to add traction both front and rear (for acceleration and braking) but for lateral traction as well(for turning)
The rubber compounds themselves are made to be both soft as well as somewhat "porus". And I said porus in italics because it isn't acutally like a sieve, but there are small "bubbles" or "threads" that are built into the rubber compound itself to have more traction than just normal vulcanized rubber.
The tread patterns are designed so that under directional forces, the tread blocks stay flat in comparison to the ground to maximize traction.
There are many other examples of the technology going into these tires, but limited space here and I'll be honest, I don't have all of the experience with these products. But I just wanted to re-iderate Doug's post.
http://www.frontiernet.net/~werner/SnowTires/tirecomments.html
Your summer tires have a handicap in winter, even when the roadbed is dry. Their rubber compound is suited to warmer temperatures, and their grip is linearly related to temperature. So if you have a set of summer tires, they will have different friction cooeficients with different temperatures. Sometimes it is better to use winter tires on cold dry pavement than it is to use summer tires on cold dry pavement.
Sorry, I didn't realize that all this time we were discussing wintertime tire traction with STUDS versus snowchains.
Doug responds:
Uh..., we weren't...guess that's the extent of your response to my "chains only provide incremental improvements" explanation? It applies to studs as well, so pulling studs into the discussion changes things not a whit.
wwest said:
I'm not very familier with studded tires, I continually campaign against their use since the clear majority of the time here in the Puget Sound area all they do is chew up our roadbeds and bridge decks.
Doug responds:
Since you're not familiar with studs, I'm surprised by your statement above that you thought we were debating studs. Do you normally debate on topics you're not familiar with? For many, studs are the only way to safely negotiate hills and such with their family aboard. That there are areas they must travel the rest of the day that don't require this safety feature is noted, but hardly a reason to take the option away from them. One day they'll switch to the new studless technology, however.
wwest said:
But it is my impression that most tires that can accept studs are really serious, damn SERIOUS, winter TREAD (MUDDERS??) tires.
Doug responds:
There is an important difference between winter treads and mud tires. You show your ignorance by suggesting that they are still one and the same. Decades ago, they were very similar. Reread my post above to discover that the large lugged snow tire of yore (similar to the mud tire of yore and today) is ancient technology.
wwest said:
So, yes, MUDDER (or anything close) treads will often get you up and going in deep snow and studs will certainly help on ice.
Doug responds:
I've been in snow over my head with my vehicles many a time - always in the company of many other like minded folks. Mud tires are not the best for deep snow as they're designed to displace mud. When they displace snow due to wheelspin, you find yourself sitting on your frame and very stuck. I'll take an AT (all terrain) tire over a mud tire in deep snow anyday - they float better. And yes, studs will help on ice but the newest generation of winter tires will run rings around them on ice.
wwest said:
But I still stand by my statement regarding the lack of sufficient traction when the roadbed is dry or only wet, my summer tires (where technology also has not stood still!) will give me better performance, and especially so when compared to studded tires.
Doug responds:
I think it's worth pointing out the absurdity of your statement. Every winter, thousands of people on summer tires experience sudden and catastrophic loss of control upon encountering ice or slippery packed snow conditions. But I have yet to hear of someone on studded tires suddenly losing control upon encountering an unexpected dry patch of road.
Give as all a break here - we put traction winter tires on for the extreme conditions encountered in winter and I think even those of us with double digit IQ can figure that out. To imply you're the only one here capable of comprehending that a winter tire may not perform as well in summer conditions and that it's a novel debate position to hold is a bit much, don't you think?
Listen, I'm not here to bash you wwest. You have a great deal of knowledge on things but like any of us there are things you are not as familiar with. I likely speak for a lot of others when I say that your input is valued. But if you wish to pontificate on a topic you would be well advised to consider that there are some highly informed folks here on the list who would appreciate you researching your posts a bit better. The purpose of this board is to make factual and helpful knowledge available in a community fashion. You violate that spirit when you put forth incorrect information. Then you violate basic human courtesy when you engage in debate over that information without making any attempt to improve the quality of it.
Speaking for myself, I have spent my entire career with automobiles and everything related to them. I enjoy these boards and exchanging the information I have for fellowship and enjoyable discourse. But one of the least enjoyable aspects of my perspective is constantly having to correct wrong information that others may erroneously take as gospel from this board. I don't mind doing it on occasion, but it is distinctly unrewarding to have to spend most of my online time correcting when I could be sharing new information. It's akin to spinning wheels when we could be moving along into new territory.
Importantly, it also drives knowledgeable people off the boards.
I strongly urge you to use this board for information to make your motoring experience more pleasant, more economical, or more safe. But please consider your knowledge level within the context of a board populated by people who do this for a living. I do not intend this to sound harsh, but it needed to be said and there is really no way to candy coat it any better.
Regards,
IdahoDoug
I am getting conflicting reports from dealers on this subject ... can this HL go on the beach - live on Long island, NY and drive on the sand - sometimes soft .. usually take the tire pressure down to 15 psi and gmc jimmy goes fine - do you think the HL can cut it? We like the HL, but want to get more info before purchasing ..any help would be great - thanks in advance.
Hope this helps.
tidester, host
IdahoDoug
tidester, host
Why don't you tell the dealer about your concern and ask him to take you to the area in a Highlander so you can drive it in that sand for a better feel of its capabilities. If they know this is your only concern I'm sure it could be arranged.
Tidester - you guys get some real winter down there, eh? We're currently having the wimpiest snow season on record up here. Of course it would happen the year I pop for 8 Michelin Arctic Alpins....
IdahoDoug
The availability of Low4WD should not be too big of an issue actually. I have found that other than the gearing being lower, thereby limiting how quickly you can spin the tires, using 4wd hi is fine most times in the sand. Most of what causes problems I've found anyway is getting started correctly and stopping correctly. Other than that, making sure you're not turning too quickly and digging the outside front tire too deeply in soft sand. Keeping momentum and not making any HUGE inputs into steering or speed changes seems to have a much greater benefit than the availability of low 4.
I said that summer tires would always provide better traction on dry or wet roadbeds than ANY "winter" tire.
You are clearly correct, that was/is an absurd statement, so I will correct it using your guidance.
"Summer tires will always have better traction on dry or wet roadbeds than any "winter" tire" UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO DRIVE INTO AN AREA OF ICE OR SNOW.
And I do thank you for pointing out that I had not completed the context of my statement.
Summer tires use rubber compounds that are optimized for summer. This means they are not optimized for winter. The rubber compounds in summer tires harden in cold conditions, leaving you with significantly less grip than in warm conditions. Winter tires use a silica based compound that stays pliable in cold conditions.
This means that in some cases, winter tires have more grip than summer tires on dry roads, depending on temperature.
It is safer to stick with winter tires in the winter, because 1)Summer tires harden in the cold and have less grip, 2)they will handle black ice a million times better than summer tires and 3)less hassle with chains, because you will need them far less often.
You mentioned your reasons for carrying chains is similar to the reasons why the air force uses ejection seats, and why you carry a fire extinguisher. I liken using winter tires to this exact example. You never know when you need their capabilities.
Black ice does not give you the chance to get out and instal snow chains.
I think that's a Law of Nature! I've become convinced that washing my car causes rain! :-)
tidester, host
Since I recall many of you discussing FWD/RWD/AWD/4WD coming down ski roads, I'm inviting feedback to the link posted in steve_ "Winter/Adverse Weather Driving Discussion" Nov 21, 2002 11:43pm, esp. the fourth paragraph. I think the authors are perhaps overly RWD biased...thanks for joining in over there!
Steve, Host
Steve, Host
If you're more into safety and all-weather handling with good off-roading ability, then go for the ATRAC/VSC-equipped model. From personal experience, ATRAC works quite well in off-roading. However, the most benefit is on-road handling in foul weather.
Consumer Reports initially did not like the handling on '99 TLC...i think the tail wiggled too much in their handling course. However, with the '01 models (VSC/ATRAC), the handling was much improved.
In my opinion, get the TLC with VSC & ATRAC. It is good for everything (on-road and off-road).