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

Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans

191012141517

Comments

  • mnrep2mnrep2 Member Posts: 200
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=3280&page_number- - =10

    This link is borrowed from another poster, but provides somw interesting fodder to the discussion of AWD Vs. RWD, No? :)

    Basically, the AWD variant was quicker than the RWD based car in both the dry and wet.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I respect your opinion...it feels the opposite to me. BTW, the 528i I drove for a day during service was about 90% of the 330xi as well, IMO. Loads of room and the I drive wasn't that bad to me.

    Regards,
    OW
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    This really is not an AWD vs RWD discussion. It's about AWD sports sedans. Given that fact, that specific debate is moot...

    Here's one discussion that is more appropriate: FWD, AWD, RWD and the Luxury Performance Sedans.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    It's the same case with the 335xi. I wonder how the difference in AWD systems compare between the G and the 3 relating to all around performance and capability.

    I did not like the G sedan previously but the new body style is much more appealing.

    Regards,
    OW
  • mnrep2mnrep2 Member Posts: 200
    Back in 2005 the G35x offered the best implentation of AWD in this class (imho). The body style and interior were not my first choice, but I am planning on keeping the car because it is a blast to drive, handles incredibly well in snow, and still gives a predominantly RWD feel in every day driving. :) The interior is fine by me and the body style has grown on me as well...
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    There is a new candidate out there for Ultimate AWD Sedan.

    The FQ-360 goes from a stop to 60 miles an hour in 3.9 seconds — faster than a Porsche GT3. And it’s not a one-dimensional drag racer. In a racetrack performance evaluation at the Bedford Autodrome by the British car magazine Evo (no relation), an FQ-340, which is a rung down the power ladder from the FQ-360, set a lap time just 0.35 second slower than the Ferrari F430. Not bad for a four-cylinder sedan.

    HOW MUCH? Not for sale in the United States; base price in Britain is £34,641, about $70,000. (A less powerful American-spec version, the 2006 Evo MR, was $36,924.)

    WHAT MAKES IT RUN? Two-liter turbocharged in-line 4 (366 horsepower, 363 pound-feet of torque); six-speed manual transmission.

    IS IT FAST? Yes, even compared with a Ferrari F430 or Lamborghini Gallardo.

    I don't know about the rest but if you can't have fun in this thing, your over the top!

    Regards,
    OW
  • redsoxgirlredsoxgirl Member Posts: 67
    HOW MUCH?

    WHAT MAKES IT RUN?

    IS IT FAST?

    Nice review, but you forgot a question:

    WHO WOULD BUY IT?

    These boy racer cars can have all of the performace in the the world, but if they look like they were designed with a 16 year old pubescent boy as the target market, what's the point? What even semi-professional adult wants to have to wear a bag over their head driving a car that looks like the Evo? Or the WRX?

    And most pubescent 16 year old boys (or girls) don't have $70k, or even $35k burning a hole in their pocket. So, really, who does buy these things? Britney Spears? K-Fed?
  • tiff_ctiff_c Member Posts: 531
    These boy racer cars can have all of the performance in the the world, but if they look like they were designed with a 16 year old pubescent boy as the target market, what's the point? What even semi-professional adult wants to have to wear a bag over their head driving a car that looks like the EVO? Or the WRX?

    Well since I am in my second childhood, Me for example. :D
    I don't care for a big wing unless it actually does something but the wing on the EVO X is pretty reasonable. The STi is a wagon and has a small overhang. I've seen bigger on Minivans!
    I enjoy my car, I'm not intimidated by the PC opinions of others who are not paying for my car.
    If YOU are paying for my car. Only then do you have any say in what I drive.
    But if you wear a bag over your head while driving you could easily get nominated for a Darwin Award! :P
    Subaru screwed up with the new Rex, i know as I currently own an old one and no way would I buy the fugly new one. The new STi looks possible if I want to throw an extra $10K at it. My wife isn't very keen on me doing that.
    My real gripe about some cars is that you really can't use the speed anymore, too many cops all day and night, speed trap cameras everywhere. So for me getting a performance car is pretty useless. I'd rather buy a shifter kart and race that at the track. Much cheaper, and very quick.
    But the new EVO looks sharp and yet not Boi racerish and the new STi is a friggin Station wagon! :surprise: :shades:
    So unless you mean the old EVO/STi models which are only available as leftover I don't see your point.
    But at $35K+ I think that's reaching into BMW territory.
    The STi and the EVO with their AWD systems will spank a new BMW xi.
    The Nurburgring times are significantly faster on the new car EVO and STi compared to the xi and the new cars look sharp not Boi racer.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Just like the GT3, these cars are really for the track. Who would buy a GT3?

    Anyone with the cash and the need for speed...it's the same for this new Lancer, which is right up there in nose-bleed territory. After 300 HP, it's all about hormones!

    I find no value in identifying stereotypes with the cars they drive...it's not productive at all. I could go on all day about my personal views on the looks of cars and then judge the purchasers. Why bother? It really doesn't matter.

    I didn't buy my BMW for the bling factor. You are NOT what you drive.

    Actually, I prefer the "sleeper" look while I go about my business from point to point. No wings or $5,000 wheeels for me.

    If a skilled driver decides to attend a track event with this new Evo, I am sure the "looks" of the car or what some people might "call" them won't matter at the end of the day.

    Regards,
    OW
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    WHO WOULD BUY IT?

    Funny, I had the same reaction to the Nissan GT-R that somebody posted pictures of in one of the other forums. I've been critical of Cadillac looking like they stole designers from Mattel Toys, but Nissan doesn't do much better with an exterior style that looks like several members of the committee were blind.

    As for attempting to defend the WRX and EVO as not looking "Boi" racer, I think that speaks for itself.

    Congrats on the Red Sox making it to the Big Show. ;)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    After 300 HP, it's all about hormones!

    Oh, no, you too are a boi racer from the Fast and Furious Friday night fraternity??

    Seriously, I try to avoid judging people by the car they drive - although my neigbors mother in law has tested me on that by managing to get a new Mercedes every three years and having the bumpers, fenders, doors and other body parts dinged up before the temporary tags expire. Guess it's not the type of car she drives, but rather how she drives that has me judging her. And steering clear.

    That said, the "in-your-face" styling of some cars is something that simply doesn't appeal to me aesthetically. Maybe all those exagerated wings, hood scoops, air dams, etc. on the WRX/EVO look good to some, but they just look silly to me, hormones aside.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Like it or not, your all-season shod "xi" model will actually be less safe in snow, rain, sleet and ice (or any combination thereof) than a RWD "i" model with a good set of winter tires mounted.

    That argument is weak.

    I can beat up a pro wrestler if he's blind folded and has both arms tied behind his back. So?

    Put the same tires on both. Of course the AWD will lose if it's handicapped like that.

    Plus, I've owned snow tires, the problem is they're never on when you need them, and they're on a lot of times when you don't.

    Last winter I had the snow tires on for roughly 90 days. I think there was snow on the ground about 6 days. The other 84 days, I made a major compromise in dry grip.

    In fact, overall I'd conclude over that 90 day period the vehicle was less safe overall.

    Our last true blizzard came in March, by then the snow tires would have been off.

    Unless you have a pit crew to mount/dismount your snow tires DAILY depending upon the weather, you're making a compromise, plain and simple.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "That argument is weak."

    Sorry, not buying. Many folks operate under the assumption that if they have AWD they don't need winter tires. My bet is that the number of folks who put winter rubber on their AWD cars is a tiny, tiny fraction of the AWD population out there.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    You HAVE to put snows on the RWD car in snow...most assuredly if you tick the SP box. The AWD is good with AS. Been there, done that.

    Regards,
    OW
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "You HAVE to put snows on the RWD car in snow...most assuredly if you tick the SP box. The AWD is good with AS. Been there, done that."

    Now that BMW is offering a summer rubber option on the "xi" models, the same rule applies. Only an idiot would drive a summer tire shod "xi" in the winter time. That said, I've seen plenty of Audi Quattros with nice wide summer rubber (I assume) off in the ditch around here, usually with a ski rack on the top and New York plates on the bumper. :P

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Agreed...summer tires do not work in the snow on any wheel drive! :)

    Regards,
    OW
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    the number of folks who put winter rubber on their AWD cars is a tiny, tiny fraction of the AWD population out there

    Same for FWD and RWD.

    I'd take that bet. I think you're wrong simply because people that buy AWD tend to live in the snow belt, so they're actually more likely to want snow tires.

    Back to my real-world example, AWD or not, doesn't matter, when there isn't snow on the ground the snow tires sacrifice grip, and even in winter around here that is most of the time.

    AWD may cost more and use more gas, but it makes no such compromise (less dry grip when in use, like snows). You always have more traction.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    I'm afraid we're going to have to part company on this one as I absolutely think you've been sold by the AWD hype in the market these days. Catch'ya later on a different topic. ;-)

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I separate the two issues.

    One is AWD. It helps traction pretty much always. If you think that makes owners overconfident, that's a driver issue, not an issue with AWD.

    Tires are a different topic entirely. I tried snows. They were great on snow, incredible really. Squirmy as heck on dry pavement, though. Given my climate doesn't have clear season changes, and snowfall is sporadic, the snow tire "solution" just isn't practical here in DC.

    YMMV.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Last winter I had the snow tires on for roughly 90 days. I think there was snow on the ground about 6 days. The other 84 days, I made a major compromise in dry grip.

    Good grief, so you are advocating paying $2k more, having a less fuel efficient, 200+ lb heavier AWD system for 359 days so that you have somewhat better snow traction with all season tires on 6 days?

    In my hometown with 100+ inches a year, people drove for a half century with RWD as the only choice and life didn't come to an end. I agree with you, it makes little sense for you to put snow tires on your car. But, if I were faced with the prospect of a whopping 6 days of snow a year, the LAST thing I would do would be get an AWD 3-series. California gets more than that many days of fire a year.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    AWD is not just for snow...you also get:

    * less understeer
    * more neutral handling
    * better traction in the rain
    * better ability to put lots of power down
    * better weight distribution
    * more even tire wear
    * RWD feel (for rear-biased systems)

    Price varies, $2k is on the high end for the increase in list price. I bet it's more like $1000-1500.

    200+ lbs is also on the high side. Last time Subaru sold AWD and FWD variants the difference was under 150 lbs. Plus the added weight is sprung weight plus it's over the rear axle.

    I just prefer the way they feel. I don't need AWD on every car in my fleet, in fact I have one of each, FWD, RWD, AWD. If it's raining and I want the most sure-footed one the choice is a total no-brainer.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Oh geez...

    * less understeer

    Than what? A FWD based Audi maybe but certainly not a RWD BMW. If anything the "xi" models exhibit significantly MORE understeer than an otherwise identical "i" model.

    * more neutral handling

    Nope, not buying (see above).

    * better traction in the rain

    Agreed.

    * better ability to put lots of power down

    Agreed to a point.

    * better weight distribution

    How do you figure? Consider the following manual transmission BMW sedans (the automatics are even worse):

    --------------- Weight Distribution Fr/Rr
    -- Vehicle -------- RWD -------- AWD
    328i / 328xi -- 50.5/49.5 -- 52.6/47.4
    335i / 335xi -- 51.5/48.5 -- 53.8/46.2

    * more even tire wear

    Debatable, I've never seen any evidence to support that.

    * RWD feel (for rear-biased systems)

    Debatable as well. I suppose that "feel" is there for folks who are used to FWD, but I'm quite sure that even the best AWD systems don't feel as RWD like as a true RWD car.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You seem to be limiting this conversation to BMWs, why?

    Yes, I meant compared to FWD. That's how most cars are sold. When AWD is an option, most of the time FWD is the other option.

    BMW is the exception here, not the rule. OK, Mercedes & Infiniti too.

    In the FWD camp we have, let's see, everyone else. :P

    With FWD, once you pass 200hp or so, you're overwhelming the front tires. At some point you're either in an AWD or you're in torque steer city.

    What makes my RWD Miata fun is that you can easily exceed the limits of adhesion. That's great when you intend to, not so great when you don't intend to.

    To me, personally, that's OK because it's a roadster/toy.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    We're talking about "Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans" here, and to my mind at least, that puts most of the FWD based AWD cars out of the picture and the remaining ones in the minority. Said another way, building a car that is FWD based and has over 200HP is a flawed design premise and as such, I'd have a difficult time considering any FWD based car the "ultimate" anything (Audi being the possible lone exception).

    "BMW is the exception here, not the rule. OK, Mercedes & Infiniti too."

    How about the AWD variants of the Chrysler 300 (and Magnum and Charger siblings) and the AWD variants of the Lexus IS & GS?

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Yes, I meant compared to FWD. That's how most cars are sold. When AWD is an option, most of the time FWD is the other option. BMW is the exception here, not the rule. OK, Mercedes & Infiniti too. In the FWD camp we have, let's see, everyone else.

    Who, besides Audi, offers AWD as an option over FWD? And, as Shipo pointed out, NO FWD based car is in contention for the utltimate sports car, including Audi.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    We're talking about "Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans" here

    Yes, and that puts RWD cars out of the picture, too. ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    An RS4 owner may beg to differ.

    The following cars are FWD based but offer AWD:

    A3
    A4
    A5
    A6
    Five Hundred/Montego/Taurus
    MazdaSpeed6
    Mitsu EVO
    Saabs (coming soon)
    Aerio/SX4
    Toyota Matrix
    VW R32
    VW Passat
    Volvo S40/V50
    Volvo S60/V70

    I bet that list is longer than you thought! :P

    And that is without going to the SUV/crossover class, where AWD is most common.

    I'll add that cars like the Caliber SRT-4 and MazdaSpeed3 would benefit tremendously if AWD were offered.

    Contenders for ultimate sports car? EVO would certainly qualify, especially if cost is an object. Let's see if Saab offers an AWD Viggen, I'd love to see that. If Mazda put AWD on the Speed3 it would at least be the ultimate at that price level.

    You can't just dismiss the Lancer Evolution and the RS4.
  • parlynnparlynn Member Posts: 2
    Am trying to decide on which to buy. Will use in snow periodicaly. Can anyone who owns one tell me what mileage they are getting, and how well do these cars perform in snow with all weather tires. Also how good is the reliability since I plan on owning well beyond the 4 years.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The AWD systems are very capable.

    I went to the X3 Drive that BMW hosted, and they had a neat demo where they drove the cars up ramps, the kind that tests the AWD system by letting only a single wheel have traction.

    An X5 made it up, no surprise, but they also drove a 330xi up as well, it made it. That means the AWD system can send enough power to all 4 individual wheels to get it up the ramp. Impressive.

    For you, my concern would be ground clearance. You know the traction is there, but you can still high center and get stuck in packed snow or ice. For that reason, the X3 may be better in snowy environments, though to be honest I'm not sure exactly how much ground clearance each model has.

    I won the goofy little orange cone for "Best Performance" that BMW hands out after a stint behind the wheel of an X3. I felt they rode a bit harshly but supposedly that's been improved.

    Good luck shopping.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I bet that list is longer than you thought!

    Longer, perhaps. But that list includes only one car that I would consider even a contender for "ultimate AWD sports sedan", namely the RS4. And in that league, I would personally still strongly prefer the lighter weight, more nimble feel of a RWD M3.

    Going back to your previous point:

    AWD is not just for snow...you also get:

    * less understeer
    * more neutral handling
    * better traction in the rain
    * better ability to put lots of power down
    * better weight distribution
    * more even tire wear
    * RWD feel (for rear-biased systems)


    I side with Shipo on each of his counterpoints to those claims. However, let me concede that personal preferences can vary (that's why they are called "personal") and if you really feel that AWD gives you all of the above, that's your opinion and perogative. I just hope that you have reached those conclusions by first hand test drives, not just from reading reviews or road tests. There seems to be a lot of advocacy of AWD out there that thinks everything about AWD is better than RWD. In the case of my test drives of a 911 C4S vs. the C2S, the only checkmark I would give to the side of the "4" is better rain traction. And there were a bunch of other categories not listed that favored the "2". I would have never reached that conclusion with my nose buried in Road and Track. It took my rear in the drivers seat.

    Enjoy your weekend.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Actually, when i decided on the 330xi, it was a test drive with the 330i non-sp that made me pull the trigger. I added the AWD for the traction advantage.

    I was not disappointed in the steering feel and the capability of the awd version.

    AWD is not better than rwd just different. I am sure the SP would improve the handling of the 3 over the AWD. My butt-o-meter felt the slight advantage of the xi over the non-sp rwd version.

    After 26K miles, the car is more than I expected in every category. As far as ultimate, I agree the RS4 is king where luxury is part of the mix.

    BTW, there is a vid pitting the E46 M3 vs. RS4 and the difference with professional drivers. They came to the same conclusions Shipo and yourself have ardently represented...the M3 was so much more fun to drive. Vive le difference!

    Enjoy your weekend as well...I love when it rains!

    Regards,
    OW
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I just hope that you have reached those conclusions by first hand test drives, not just from reading reviews or road tests

    Most definitely.

    Specifically, I consider it almost a hobby to attend driving events whenever possible, and a couple where I was lucky enough to sample AWD vs. non-AWD version of the same car side-by-side included the Volvo Fire & Ice event and the Mercedes-Benz event, where I got to sample 4Matic.

    In the Volvo's case, the difference is so significant that I'd go as far as to say I wouldn't even consider a FWD Volvo, at any price. The Haldex is fast-acting and just transforms a boring car into a fun car. The car in question was an S60. And yes, this was a conclusion I made after back-to-back drives.

    The automakers stage a slippery take-off with tarps and soap, but beyond that rigged traction demonstration, the AWD models are just more fun in the turns, too.

    At the Benz event, the benefits aren't as pronounced. For the most part you really only notice the AWD at take-off, but I didn't feel that 4Matic lessened the driving experience over the dry parts of the course, either.

    Remember something - I own a Miata. I fully understand the fun that RWD can bring, as well as the risks/challenges. My 93 will spin in split second if you lift in the middle of a turn, and you can't really catch it. It's bad in the rain, so I don't even drive it in the snow.

    I'm not saying I'd want AWD in a Miata, in such a light car 150 lbs or so would add a significant percentage of weight.

    But in an ultimate sedan that weighs a whole lot more to begin with, the % penalty is much smaller, often not noticeable, as in the case with the back-to-back Benz test drives.

    -

    PS The Saab model I was thinking of is the 2008 Saab Turbo X - AWD and 276hp. That's probably enough to make the front axle want to tear itself away from the rest of the car, like many prior Saabs with loads of torque.
  • unlimitedjoeunlimitedjoe Member Posts: 79
    better traction (100%)
    better to put down power (100%)
    even tire wear (yes, tire rack had an article in car & driver claiming, awd rubber out last fwd & rwd tires.)
    rwd feel (yes, this is the bmw bias factor for its awd cars.)
    more nuetral handling (100% for everday, and who knows what the roads or weather will throw at you driving.)
    less understeer (shipo correct.)
    better weight distribution (shipo again correct.)

    also i would rather have, a Z06 vette over an M3, since your bringig in higher priced rwd cars, in a sight talking about ultimate AWD sedans :shades:

    safe & fun driving gentleman!
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    better to put down power (100%)

    In theory, that might be correct, but considering all factors, AWD is a performance disadvantage in the cars I've shopped.

    Sorry for the "sedan" digression as well, but since I am most familiar with the 911S, the AWD "4" version weighs about 150 lbs more than the RWD "2". In addition, the AWD system, in spite of being one of the best in any car, has an additional 3-5% drivetrain power loss, as measured on a dyno. Add those two factors together, and the total is the equivalent of 6-8%+ reduction in power/torque at the pavement to vehicle weight. It is therefore not surprising that in actual road tests, the 911 C2S noticably outaccelerates the C4S and the C4S essentially matches the 30 hp less powerful C2.

    Driving all 4 wheels would presumably reduce wheel slippage, but under hard acceleration, the dynamic weight shift puts 80%+ of the 911's weight over the rear wheels and probably 65% of the 3 series over the rears. Whether or not the rear wheel wheel slippage would have been severe enough in RWD to warrant the extra weight and drive train loss to re-route some of that power to the front wheels needs to be considered on a case by case basis. Certainly, that is absolutely NOT the case with the 911S. With respect to the 3 series, my bet would be on a 335i sport package over the 335ix.

    However, even in the case of the 911S, where the "2" is about 0.3+ seconds faster to 60 in actual road tests, the numbers don't tell the whole story. There is an immediate thrust with the "2" and the "4" has a little bit of dullness at takeoff. After 30 mph, the are both cooking along very well. but that feeling off the line was not as quick or direct with the "4". Probably wouldn't have bothered me if I hadn't owned a "2". After I questioned it, my dealer, a former factory engineer, acknowledged that it is there with virtually all AWD systems. Simply more moving parts in the drivetrain to get spooled up and and more weight/inertia in the car to get moving.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Excellent post. However, the drive train loss numbers are debatable. The most important difference, as you note, is the added weight. If you want more traction, to me there is no debate. If you want steering feel, again, no debate.

    Which is best? Ahh, now we can let loose!

    Here is a blog that is interesting as to the future of AWD.

    The F-16 is inherently unstable and cannot fly without computerized nannies to keep it aloft. As AWD systems in cars get more complex and can do more things more quickly, one wonders if there will come a time when we'll be absolutely unable to drive without gizmos to make sure rubber stays on road. Torque vectoring is the next step in AWD, its contribution being that it can get power to any wheel nearly instantly without having to use the brakes or cut power.

    Most current AWD control wheelspin by braking a spinning wheel or cutting the power from the engine. Torque vectoring is achieved by using redesigned differentials that can distribute power to the wheel or wheels that have traction. That means that wheels don't need to be stopped, and even better, you won't suffer from a sudden loss of power as you're negotiating an unexpected loss in traction. The systems in use now or being developed work on FWD, RWD, and AWD cars, and can get power to any wheel or combination of wheels. Ricardo's system can do so in a tenth of a second.

    We drove Acuras with SH-AWD (Super Handling All Wheel Drive) earlier this year on an ice track in Montreal, and the difference is remarkable. Where other SUV's stopped in the middle of an icy corner either due to braking or power loss, the Acuras maintained their lines almost at speed. Mitsubishi has used the technology for almost a decade now on its Lancer Evolutions, and Audi and BMW will be joining the party later this year with new systems from Ricardo and ZF.


    Let the party begin because the more increase in power to these new high performance engines, the new way to get the "rubber to the road" will be with all 4 (6 or 8) contact patches working intelligently in micro seconds.

    Regards,
    OW
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Which is best? Ahh, now we can let loose!

    Let me reign it in a notch by proclaiming, "there is NO absolute best". It depends upon the application and individual priorities/preferences.

    I would love to have Acura's more advanced SH-AWD on our older AWD MDX. Which is still better than our former Isuzu Trooper 4WD that could not be driven in 4WD mode on dry pavement.

    But I am absolutely not a candidate for Acura's 4,000 lb RL. It may be capable of running circles around a 535i on a hockey rink, but frankly, I don't care. It's an overweight, non "super handling", anemic car on dry pavement. Even my FWD TL 6-speed feels like a sports car by comparison when I get it back after having the RL as a service loaner.

    I do think that AWD systems will continue to advance and for those that want to go to that ice track in Montreal, there will be even more and better choices in the future. But I think the whole decision of RWD vs. AWD will remain at least partially subjective in how much one wants to trade off AWD versitility vs. RWD sportiness. On an SUV the decision is easy. On a sports car, the decision is also easy, in the other direction, IMO. When I think of "sports" sedans, maybe I overweight the sport side too much compared to you. Or maybe we have different sensors in our respective buttmeters that cause us to evaluate the tradeoffs differently. Whatever the case, I don't think there will ever be a single, universal answer to "which is best?".
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Agree on the RL...what were they thinking? :sick:

    Whatever the case, I don't think there will ever be a single, universal answer to "which is best?".

    Agreed again. At the end of the day, it's what satisfies the individual that is his best. If you consider the history of the automobile, it's a blink in a fly's eye since the beginning of time. Imagine what's ahead!

    I'd like an F-16 in my garage in the not so distant future with No-Wheel-Drive! (sans the armament, of course!... No Sky Rage for me!) :surprise:

    Regards,
    OW
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    The RL handles the way it does is not because it's AWD, but rather because Acura marketers decided that's how they wanted the vehicle tuned, soft and comfy.

    I have no doubt that if Acura wanted to develop an AWD RL "AMG, etc.-fighter," they could without any problem.

    So blame the the marketing decision-makers here, and not because it's AWD.

    Bob
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Agree, the RL looks like an Accord. I can understand the soft and comfy design but don't advertise it as a Super Handling answer to the luxury class sedan...that just alienates customers.

    IOW, the Ultimate it is not. So far, the RS4 is still looking good...until the M45X debuts.

    Regards,
    OW
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree 100%, and I'll add that I bet people would be complaining even more if it were FWD like the previous one.

    Look at the used car market. You can get one of those FWD RLs for next to nothing. No more than the cheaper TL, actually. So the current RL may be a failure in the market place, but its predecessor was an even bigger failure.

    911: my only experience was a ride-along with a friend's C4. It was sweet - he really put the power down, and it accelerated out of curves like nobody's business.

    The C2 probably is a tad quicker, but I doubt you can get on the power as early exiting a turn.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    If you consider the history of the automobile, it's a blink in a fly's eye since the beginning of time.

    Be forewarned, this post has absolutely nothing to do about AWD sports sedans, or cars at all. But since you referred to the history of the automobile being a "blink in a fly's eye since the beginning of time", I have a "history of time" analogy. We have all seen time lines, I presume. And even if a few of us have never played golf, hopefully you get the idea.

    - Imagine a time line that ran from the 1st tee to the bottom of the cup at the 18th hole of Augusta National. The length of the course is roughly 7,200 yards. Planet Earth is roughly 4.3 billion years old. So you are starting at the first hole, heres what you will see as you play (at roughly 576,000 years per yard):

    - Not much for the first 9 holes. The very first signs of life are after the "turn" between the 9th and 10th holes.

    - Keep plodding along on the back nine and life very slowly evolves from single celled microbes to fish, reptiles, birds and small mamamels.

    - Finally, by the time you get to the 18th hole, a 400 yard par 4, there on the tee box is the first dinosaur.

    - You smack a beautiful 290 yard drive down the middle of the fairway. All along the way your ball is passing the evolution of the dinosaurs as they happily rule the earth, without the benefit of the automobile (had to get that in).

    - Where your ball has stopped, 110 yards away from the 18th hole, coincides with that nasty asteroid splashing into the Gulf of Mexico off the the Yucatan. No more dinosaurs from here on in.

    - You hit a decent second shot but come up about 35 feet short. Your ball is now where the very first evidence of humanoid type creatures are found, 7 million years ago.

    - Your first put is right on line, but ends up a foot short. The earliest [non-permissible content removed]-sapien DNA is under your ball, 200,000 years ago.

    - Then you pull a "habitat" (otherwise known as a yip) and leave your next put on the lip of the cup. Another 1/8" and it would have been in the hole. That 1/8" represents the 2,007 years since the birth of Christ.

    - You really don't want to know how tiny of a fraction of an inch the "history of the automobile" represents, do you?
    And just think, in that tiniest fraction of an inch, we have, as an industrial society, potentially created the problem known as global warming, that could potentially affect the rest of the history of the Planet Earth. Lousy way to screw up a nice round of golf, huh?

    I'm sure others have interesting ways to put their own lives and human history in perspective, but I came up with this analogy all by myself. And it makes me feel even more guilty when I hit my drive on the 18th hole out of bounds. ;)
  • unlimitedjoeunlimitedjoe Member Posts: 79
    okay you know porche,congrats! but it's not the same with all car companies, this i know. the 335i does have a problems with putting down power, off the line or off a corner,and what some professional drivers would say a little unsettled in the rear.
    in my own situation i found that an, rs4, evo, lancer or a 335xi (all are ultimate awd sedans,had to put that in.) do not have a problem, to put power down. ;)

    on your theory on evolution, or in your words, your life on human history, i suggest:

    1)buy a big bertha,so maybe you could have a chance of hitting the ball 320 yards, and rolling anoyher 50 yards on those carpet like fairways.

    2)sell porche.

    3)buy electric car.

    4)maybe save mankind & mother earth!
  • unlimitedjoeunlimitedjoe Member Posts: 79
    habitat,

    can you get 2 with clubs, in 911?
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    And it makes me feel even more guilty when I hit my drive on the 18th hole out of bounds.

    Great analogy...it's all relative anyway. I do not feel guilty about "global warming". We just need to get through this next 1/1,000th of an inch to clean up the mess on your last put!

    That's what's great about life. Enjoy your Porsche and Augusta National! Every time!

    Regards,
    OW
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Enjoy your Porsche and Augusta National!

    I think I'd trade the keys of my Porsche just for the chance to play Augusta National. I probably should revise my analogy to a course that mere humans can actually get on, like Pebble Beach. ;)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    can you get 2 with clubs, in 911?

    Yes, plus enough luggage in the front trunk to make it through a 4 day golf weekend without having to recycle (or share) any clothes. The clubs go across the (folded down) rear seats. It's easier to drop them in and pluck them out in a convertible, but there is even slightly more rear seat room in the coupe.

    However, on the subject of AWD, the Carrera "4" has a reduced front trunk space due to area taken up by the drive train for the front wheels. So you may need to recyle/share clothes with that one.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Member Posts: 9,372
    Time again for our weekly gathering of enthusiasts! Maybe we should make tonight a costume chat! :P

    The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Some interesting AWD/RWD stuff in the article:

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=123158
  • unlimitedjoeunlimitedjoe Member Posts: 79
    i have a scary story,

    audi will be introducing in europe only, the new RS6, WITCH will have a twin turbo V10 570hp, ultimate SCARY awd sport sedan.

    lets hope dracula wont import one to america! i'ma scared.

    hey habitat if that don't scare you, go on u tube and watch, boogatti and other scary awd friends, MASSACRE rwd kids!

    p.s.

    ok to watch with nine iron in hand for protection. ;)
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    This is what I've been trying to point out with the 330xi!

    According to tradition, the Audi should lack steering feel thanks to its all-wheel-drive system. It should understeer heavily as it gets led around by its heavy nose. And it should exhibit a flinty ride. Yet the Audi has the more communicative steering here. Its cornering attitude is surprisingly neutral. And its compromise between a comfortable ride and good handling ranks with the best that BMW has accomplished over the years.

    The all-wheel-drive 2007 Audi RS4 just plain hauls [non-permissible content removed]. It doesn't rotate around an apex like a rear-driver. It's less the rapier than it is the broadsword. But it's devastatingly effective as a street machine, so it wins.

    While not in the same performance class, the 3'er awd system does NOT detract substantially from steering feel, IMHO. :confuse:

    Regards,
    OW
Sign In or Register to comment.