Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
I bet there are very few cars (or trucks) available with AWD or 4WD and stickshift.
The USA VW TDI geeks are always begging for AWD & stickshift VW TDI for USA, but it never happens..
I think dodge fullsize 4WD pickups are available with stickshift, including their diesel pickup truck!
Sara - enjoy that new darth-vader-looking acura stickshift! Speaking of Benz unreliability, I had Y2K Benz E series wagon bought new. it drove 100k miles rather comfortably but for the first 20k especially, it was the least reliable new vehicle I've ever owned - by far - out of more than 25 cars - including 6 Z28s. (4 of the Z28s with stickshift, 2 with slushbox).
Simple logic (simpleton logic) should tell you that can NEVER be the case.
Asking only the front 2 tire's contact patch to support both drive traction and lateral control traction simply does not add up, does not compute
There are more implementations of "AWD" in the market today than one would at first believe. It doesn't stop with F/awd or R/awd, there is also the of matter of the type of coupling between the primary drive, driven, wheels and the secondary drive wheels.
Some, mostly F/awd, are simple "one-wheel" drive vehicles with the only "enforcement" of AWD functionality being POST loss of traction, wheelspin/slip detection, on the primary, front, drive wheels.
But trying to keep the subject at hand in mind....most modern day driver licensees have not enough real world experience that they can be trusted with a FWD vehicle equipped with a manual transmission, FAR too dicey for the untrained/inexperienced on a slippery roadbed.
As for safety, it's a mixed bag. FWD is good unless you're out of revs and/or torque(mile tall gearing that takes forever to rev, like in a Camry). Then you can't accelerate you way out of trouble. Also, FWD going *down* a slippery hill is a disaster waiting to happen unless the driver knows exactly what to do. Doubly so with manual as you have compression braking, all of your braking power, steering, and most of your traction on the same set of wheels.
FWD is not a panacea, sorry to say.
RWD isn't either, of course.(though you don't hear about many BMWs and Mercedes doing poorly in snow over in Europe) But at least with RWD you can have proper fun with the car the rest of the year.
And, no, I can't stand the TSX. Partly because of the decision Honda makes to force automatic on you if you want the real engine, and partly, because they could have followed Toyota's lead easily and made it RWD like the IS250. As underwhelming as it is, it's a good car with manual. A bit heavy, but far better than the TSX to actually drive.
Like I've said several times I prefer RWD for all driving conditions, that said, I also have to admit that it is easier to drive a FWD car through winter conditions than a RWD car (although the RWD car is more fun).
Since I use my brakes to stop not engine compression I have never had any kind of issue in any conditions going down hill with fwd and a stick.
And please - the weight transfer to the rear wheels while going up hill is negligible compared to the weight of the engine over the drive wheels. FWD will get up a steep slippery hill better than RWD.
And for starting up on a steep slippery hill - there is a lever between the seats called the emergency brake.
It happens a lot. :sick:
I think there are too many real life examples that shoot holes in that (/his) hypothesis.
Another is if the hypothesis is true, this should post negatively on the NHTSA's safety issues, nary a word, let alone categories. Indeed one can query the system to see if they have even tested this and in what manner. The macro position is that the accident and fatalities are at the absolute lowest since they have been recording these things. nhtsa.gov
It happens a lot.
LOL - people must learn restraint...
and modulating the clutch is tricky, too.
As for snow, I'd prefer the FWD car to be an automatic going uphill and a stickshift on the way down.
Of course, on actual ice, nothing will save you---not even octo-drive. Well maybe tank treads. I haven't driven a tank, but I did drive armored personnel carriers, and with automatic and all wheel drive, they were pretty good going up, or down, and knocking down small trees. You can't do that real well with FWD. :P
I had a Porsche 356 while living in Colorado, and going downhill on snow and ice was freakin' scary, let me tell you. Once the rear end kicked out, it was all over...there was no going back...oh, wait, "going back" was exactly what happened, as in backwards. Fortunately, those cars rarely started on snowy days, so I am alive today thanks to choke-less dual carburetors.
I learned to drive stickshift in New York City, where "kill or be killed" motivated me to never dawdle in traffic. As a kid, I went 44 mph down every street. :P Now of course you can't do that, as NYC has become a crowded theme park.
I used to love downshifting into 2nd gear in the Queens Midtown Tunnel just so I could hear the engine's roar off the walls. We also did a lot of drag racing on Woodhaven Blvd. near Rockaway Beach, where the city kids would meet the Queens thugs for "best 2 out of 3". Now I think it's mostly drive-by shootings. :P
FWD cars (in general) understeer.
RWD cars (in general), tend to oversteer.
For the average (or below average) driver, in most conditions, habing the car understeer is generally thought of to be a better situation (plowing into a turn, for instance) that oversteer (having the backend come around).
Attributable in no small part, beginning at about the turn of the century, to FWD and F/awd TRAC systems that INSTANTLY dethrottles the engine upon detection of wheelspin/slip on the primary, FRONT, drive wheels.
VSC, same time period, to prevent/abate the inadvertent(***) tendancy for FWD PLOWING/understearing didn't hurt the statistics either.
Overall safety improvement, given the current dominance of FWD, compariable to ABS back when it became common.
*** Unlike RWD or R/awd the FWD/F/awd driver is generally not the causative factor, DIRECT causative factor, for encountering plowing/understearing.
In that case the next time I need to move a piano upstairs you get to lift/carry the back.
With a 356, or 911, or older VW bug, having the rear end "kick out", the driver would be at fault, TOTALLY so, in any conditions. Rear engine rear drive, possibly the SAFEST overall vehicle configuration there is.
Most of us rear engine rear drive stick shift owners, quickly learn to make use, defly so, of rear engine compression "drag" to keep the behind "behind" in the conditions you describe.
I see, and given that understeer is generally a result of too much speed for the conditions/curve, how is that not the driver's fault?
Like it or don't, regardless of which end of a car loses traction in a turn/curve, it is virtually always the driver's fault.
Clearly you have no concept of how dangerous such a technique is while driving in slippery conditions. Introduce enough drag and that rear-engined RWD car will snap around faster than pretty much any driver can correct for.
Oh, you mean like this list of cars I beat this past weekend in my 3100-lb FWD stock vehicle at the autoX?
2007 Volkswagen GTI 39.931
2008 Subaru WRX STI 40.078
2011 Subaru Rex 40.491
1995 Mazda Miata 40.536
Crossfire 41.000
Nissan GTR 41.126
1989 Porsche 911 41.222
2005 Ford Mustang GT 41.408
2011 Subaru WRX 41.451
2007 Ford Shelby GT 41.482
370Z 41.521
1991 Toyota MR2 42.185
2008 Pontiac G8 GT 42.453
1991 Toyota MR2 44.023
STI 44.826
2008 Subaru Impreza 2.5i 45.040
1992 Chevrolet Camaro 45.057
2003 Ford Mustang 45.492
1989 Toyota MR2 45.971
1988 Pontiac Trans Am/GTA 46.009
1989 Mazda RX7 46.620
RX8 48.554
1999 Ford Mustang 50.862
2008 Subaru Impreza 2.5i 51.892
By the way, in the spirit of the thread, we typically have over 100 participants in each autoX. I'd say only half of those are consistently there every event. And out of all participants, manual trans cars are easily 95% of them. I think that's a pretty strong case for manual trans cars sticking around.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I think there are too many real life examples that shoot holes in that (/his) hypothesis.
And all of them involve very light little cars. As I stated, the real issue is that once you approach 4000lbs, the fact that you have an extra 600-800lbs in the front results in massive over-steer, and very heavy steering (unless of course they over-amp it to the point where they remove all feel/make it drive-by-wire steering)
Everyone always talks about how FWD is great for climbing hills, but last I checked, what goes up must also come down. I suppose everyone just forgets about that? Putting the majority of the braking power, the steering, the acceleration, and the weight on one set of wheels is a bad idea. If you do anything wrong, you're over. Just check for videos of people sliding down hills in the winter. There's too many to possibly watch. Now, I suppose computers can help some, but it's really not a proper way to design a car. It shouldn't need a dozen computers and safety systems to keep it on the road.
Now, I suppose there are a couple of rare 50/50 weight distribution FWD cars, but most are so heavy up front that the rear end is pretty much just along for the ride. And if they were 50/50 and FWD, the advantage going up hills would disappear.
Look above your post. Thanks.
I'd also like to add that I am far from the fastest FWD car there.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it until someone can show me a largish FWD-er that's really fun on a twisty road.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
There are some exotics and supercars that are the exception, but obviously it costs ALOT of money and ALOT of power to make a heavy car fun.
I plan on taking my 540i to the autoX at some point this year. Will it be fun? probably. Will it be AS FUN as my GTI? Probably not. I can guarantee it won't be as fast.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
.....
Naturally, anything on a track isn't true on normal roads.
Take off the blinders and make up your mind, will ya? Certainly, autoX is a "sort of spirited manner." If you want to hold on to your personal bias that has no basis in the real world, that is certainly your privelege, but don't expect others who know better and have more experience to follow you down that path.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Seriously? Granted I've never driven a TSX in any form but it must not handle anywhere near as well as it looks like it should. I mean geez, I don't even remotely have to flog our bone-stock four-thousand pound FWD minivans to exceed the posted limit in the mountains; does the TSX handle that poorly? :P
Of course, even without ever having driven a TSX, we all know it is more than capable of running rings around any two-ton minivan ever to turn a wheel. :shades:
In any case, blanket statements made about FWD seem kind of silly to me.
1) I have no problem believing a 1996 Integra could dust a 1995 300ZX in the curvies.
2) IIRC, the 1995 300ZX had more than a passing resemblance to a bloated pig (especially compared to my business partner's old Datsun 260Z).
I used to own a 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan, as did Shipo (referenced above). While that could be described as anything other than "sporty," I could still toss the old girl around when I wanted to just by knowing how it would respond to my input.
It will go faster, but it feels a lot like trying to do the same thing in, say, a Buick. The front is knumb, oversteer is unavoidable, and the suspension loves to hop out from under you when the weight swings the other way after a hard corner.
The TSX is actually the current Accord in Japan and sold with a markup for the U.S. market as an Acura. It's simply not the same as, say, a BMW 1 series. And heaven help you if you compare a FWD sedan like that to a car like the RX-8. (which technically is also a sedan). The weight distribution is the main problem. And they simply didn't need to make it FWD as it makes it feel like a typical 25K sedan instead of a cheap alternative to a luxury sports sedan. (which unfortunately, is how Honda is marketing it...)
There *is* actually large FWD car that is totally fun to drive...the Alfa Romeo 164LS.
There *is* actually large FWD car that is totally fun to drive...the Alfa Romeo 164LS.
Not withstanding that it is no longer made I have my doubts based on a great deal of mileage behind the wheel of it's cousin the Saab 9000 Turbo. Remember I specifically said "fun to drive on a twisty road."
I'll be a lot more excited about Alfa's return to America if they bring in some reasonably priced RWD cars.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
And you say I have no concept...
Your description is, however, perfectly adequate for a FWD vehicle.
And that's with PSM off.
Sorry, but no.
They're just simply are not enough autoX events, nor drivers with interest in same, to overcome the "numbers" on the other side. Manuals, pure manuals, will be sticking around but only as a "boutique" class.
Also, how many practice runs would YOU need in the RWD of your choice in order to come out just as close to the top as you did with your FWD...?