I am looking for something to get maybe in second half of 2003 or so.
I am leaning toward the Liberty or Sorento at this point. I really really like the Forester, but want something a little more rugged/trucklike for utility/offroad purposes. Otherwise, I think the Subaru is nice. I had a Subaru back around 1990 or so, and if I remember right, repair costs were through the roof. I think it was a Loyale (?) wagon. Almost a thousand bucks to fix the exhaust!!!!
Nah, you could get a full performance SS cat-back for about $400 or so. There are several wholesalers that sell over the internet or by e-mail. Parts for my Subie are actually cheaper than for our Mazdas.
There should be a turbo by about June, we expect about 200hp from a light-pressure turbo, sort of like VW's 1.8T and Volvo's 2.4T.
You could get that, add iSR 2" lifting springs and a pair of skid plates from Primitive racing, but...
For your needs I think the others may be a better choice, though. The Koreans have even moved up the reliability ratings, both CR and JD Powers. I'd take a close look at the Sorento.
Well, just wanted to tell you all I LOVE my new 5-speed 4cyl VUE with ABS and Traction Control. I drove in some pretty bad snow and ice and I moved along straight and true with the traction control and ABS keeping things in check. Don't miss AWD one bit... in fact, my last AWD vehicle would spin all 4 wheels on ice while my Traction control got me through. Love this vehicle (and I didn't need to use the front and rear side air curtains!) YAY!
Daisy our bulldog would normally get in the back of the Subaru 87 GL and promptly chew anything in reach. We got the 03 X Forester and every trip, she sits up and watches out the rear window. No chewing yet. Haven't gone on long trips with her yet but for short trips she appears mesmerized looking out the rear view window. As a side light the 03 X handled all the bizarre weather we had here the past few weeks in NE PA with no problems.
This suv was for my wife.Forester = great car hate the look (looks like baby nissan x )Hyundai Santa Fe = i like it but it felt underpowered, great price though.Jeep Liberty = walked in and walked out (dealer would not even talk about a tmv price) Saturn VUE = sorry i did not even look at. (wife said no to look) Ford Escape = ford could sell more cars if they fired all the salesman (why do they need to feel good about the deal, the managers give the best prices and in this case $500. less than a tribute. Mazda tribute = you owe it to yourself to visit the mazda dealer. A-1 a fair price and no lube required. this is what i bought 03 es tribute, sunroof,leather,6-cd,cold package,spoiler,side bars,alloy wheels,alarm. $24,000 + tax,tag,title no other fees. Not a bad price and the dealer was a pleasure to work with
congrats on the Tribute! Nice vehicle. I TOTALLY agree on the Chrysler and Ford dealers... particularly the Ford guys. WORST sales people I've ever come by. I'm SURE they lose sales because of this. Chrysler/Jeep is a little better but not by much... they're very cocky when it comes to the Liberty. That's why I went with the Saturn.... EXCELLENT dealer experience... calm, no pressure, everyone pays the same price... takes the pressure away and the service is the best in the business.
The turbo Forester was my first choice vehicle, but I didn't buy one because I couldn't get the local dealers to budge on their pricing and my second choice vehicle ended up being more than $2,000 cheaper.
I'm definitely not in the "boy racer" class - I'm the wrong sex, and I'm over 50. I did want the extra power because I drive from sea level to about 6,000 feet every day. I was tired of having a 5 speed manual that couldn't manage the drive in 5th gear - I had to downshift to 4th to maintain 65-70 mph - and I wanted an auto with enough ooomph to maintain 70 on the steepest parts of the freeway. The Forester turbo was about the best choice without going to a 6 cylinder (which is what I did).
I'm still not unhappy about my choice (even if I die every day when I fill up with gas), though I might have bought an AWD Escape hybrid if I had waited. I still think the Forester XT is a practical car.
It really depends on the dealer. I have ran into cocky Honda dealers, right along with cocky Jeep dealers, Ford dealers ect.... My Ford buying experience was a breeze. Went the internet route. In and out of the dealership in about 3 hours!
I can speak for the 2002 CRV. I have a spriger spanieal who looks like and is almost as tall as a setter. My roomate has a Great Dane and Lab mix, mostly great dane.
I can put them in the cargo area behind the seats wth no problem. But they both can't lay down unless I slide the back seats forward 8 inches.
When you slide the seats forwards, (if I remeber correctly) the volume goes from 32 to about 40 cubic feet which rivals the large SUV's. I know you only care about usable space so I can tell you the seats slid forward will give you an additional 8 inches in one direction along the floor.
If you slide the seats forward 8 inches it would not be comfortable for adults. But, you could slide the seats forward a few inches and you would still have the leg room of the Forester.
The dog will be tall enough to look over the rear seat and out the windows. The back of the CRV should also be ample in size for the dog to bed down if it so chooses.
Try to find a local no-haggle dealer. Fitzmall.com in the DC area has several makes, including Subaru, Toyota, Hyundai, Isuzu, and Jeep. They get paid based on customer satisfaction, not commision, so all they care about is that you get a vehicle you love.
Besides, how many times have you haggled for hours, only to have the dealer surprise you with a hidden fee at the end? You know what's next - they offer to split the difference as a "favor". Some favor.
No thanks, I'll go no-haggle, no surprise fees. Too bad they do not have Ford or Honda franchises, though others no-haggle dealers might.
Another idea is a pricing service, but it'll be hit-or-miss with the surprise fees.
Basically it's like Saturn, only they sell near invoice, so prices are better than MSRP. I think if you offer MSRP up front even the worst dealers will treat you nice!
do make a huge difference. Out here the Toyota and Honda dealers all seem to be terrible. I've had both good and bad experiences with Jeep dealers - it does depend on the dealership (if you don't like the one you are at, go to the next one). Same with Ford and GM. I've only been to Subie, Saturn and Hyundai dealers once - the Subie and Saturn dealers were great, the Hyundai seemed OK, but we didn't talk money at all, since I quickly decided that the Santa Fe wouldn't meet our needs.
I won't buy another Toyota because of the dealers, no matter what they come out with (of course, it doesn't help that I can't stand the one I have). I just wish there were more no-haggle dealerships here (Saturn is it around here). That's where I would go, if I could.
I have a CR-V and a Chocolate Lab that is 22" at the shoulders and 65 lbs. One dog is no problem, two friendly dogs no problem with the back seats in the best configuration for adults. The height is not a problem for a large muscular dog to jump into. Cons: If you ever have to lift your beast in for some reason, the height seems alot higher; and the CR-V is probably not as heavy-duty as you seem to want - but then not many in this class are.
I took a measuring tape with me when we looked at the CRV and the Forester. I did a quick measurement of the cargo area of both vehicles. Since my husband and the salesman were both waiting, these numbers are only approximate. Here's what I got (in inches):
I tried to measure the smallest distance in each direction - from the top of the back seat to the innermost part of the rear window slant, or between the wheels for the width measurement. I wanted to know how big a box I could fit in the car. Also, the CRV's rear seat was all the way back, I think, when I did the seat up measurement. Naturally, that doesn't matter for the seat down measurement.
I've always thought the CR-V prioritized passengers over cargo. Rear leg room is great, but consider that the Forester has 10" more depth with the seats in place, so really you have to move the seat well forward to fit anything back there.
I can fit my kid's stroller and still change a diaper behind it, all while being protected from the rain, in my Forester. And the kids don't need much leg room anyway.
With the new CR-V, at least you can slide the seat all the way forward. That would leave enough cargo room for my needs.
Height is great but only if the things you carry can be stacked. So not for most groceries. Maybe Honda should sell a shelf for such a tall cargo area, like the PT Cruiser and some vans offer.
One criticism of the Subie, though, is the width. I was hoping they'd use the rear suspension from the Outback, which allows a LOT more width between the wheel wells. Forester kept the struts instead, and they protrude more than I'd like.
For that reason, our Legacy has far more useful space (i.e. floor area). It's shorter, so the Forester is better for tall boxes, but the Legacy is much better for most other stuff.
Help me out!! A 2003 Ford Escape. XLT Package. V-6, Auto, upgraded 6 C/D player, ABS brakes. I cannot think of any thing extra. 2 WHEEL DRIVE! The price - $22,000 on the road - taxes, tags, title and freight all included. I live in Md, which has a 5% sales tax. A $22,000 check from the credit Union is all I need. My C.U. is offering the same 5.9% for 60 months. The $500 rebate is part of the $22,000. What do you think? Will I be disappointed with 2 wheel drive? Thanks everybody!
I am trying to guess under which circumstances you need the clearance, but not AWD/4WD. Can't think of any. You can buy a great station wagon for that price. Much better handling, faster, more comfort, quieter, more space, less fuel.
On one hand, we don't get much snow in MD. FWD is lighter, cheaper, and more fuel efficient compared to the same vehicle with AWD.
On the other, we probably will this year, and an AWD model will be easier to resell and probably depreciate less. Plus it'll be better in rain, or if you ever hit the orchards in the fall.
But yeah, a Ford Focus wagon is just as roomy and probably $6 grand less. A Taurus wagon will seat 7 and cost about the same, with more cargo space.
From the tone of your post, I'd guess that you really do want AWD, but price is an issue. So consider also the Legacy L Special Edition, which has AWD, ABS, 2 moonroofs, CD, outside temp gauge, 16" alloys, 4 disc brakes, cruise, keyless, and power everything.
Since you're in MD, check out fitzmall.com. $20,161 includes freight, with tax that would still be about a grand cheaper, plus you get AWD. This is a no-haggle dealer, so if you're interested e-mail me (it's in my profile) and I'll put you in touch with a salesman who treated me right.
That's because the Forester has the spare tire inside. You do have an insulated cooler underneath the cargo floor that'll fit a 12 pack and plenty of ice. :-)
Our 76 Dodge Monaco wagon had enough room for 6 adults, plus coolers and beach chairs, with picnic lunch, kids, and dog in the "way back".
The SUV's of today are what are supposedly taking the place of yesteryear's wagons, but not doing much of a good job at it. They don't hold or tow as much, don't hold as many people or are near as well riding.
The floor space with seats down was enough to hold a sheet of 4x8 plywood/sheetrock/paneling. We used to load it right up to the back headrests, or until the front wheels almost came off the ground. You wouldn't believe how many bricks one could hold/haul!
You don't *need* AWD at the orchard. But then you can't do this...
I gave a "hay ride" to the whole group, it was a hoot. We were able to get to the most remote apple trees, and got the best apples. You definitely need the clearance, and probably AWD if you don't want to get stuck far from any help.
AWD gives you an extra margin that lets you do the things you want to do. You could walk, I guess, but it was blistering hot that day and we had 3 kids with us, enjoying the A/C during the ride.
So driving on an orchard or farm, up a gravel road or trail, snow or rain, lots of opportunities to use the AWD come up.
I've always wondered why someone would want a FWD SUV. There are lots of them around here, but other than looks, they seem to be impractical to me. There are much better, more efficient and cheaper people-movers out there. Now, if you are like me and have a reason for AWD/4WD, then an SUV makes sense. (We've got snow and more is expected this evening. Should be a great weekend for snowshoeing and cross country skiing).
One lives in Florida, and basically loves Isuzus (it's his 3rd) and wanted something roomier than his old I-Mark and Stylus. So the Rodeo was the affordable option for him. He loves it.
The other lives in DC, and regrets not getting 4WD.
But those are Truck Juice, and the RWD models can tow like 4000-5000lbs so there is a use for them, whereas the FWD Cute-utes don't have any increased towing capacity than their wagon/mini-van counterparts (I think that was the original posters point)
I can. VW is going after Mercedes, so I can see them using RWD. Is the Phaeton AWD?
The problem with FWD is packaging. You gotta cram the engine, tranny, and differential in one tiny little engine compartment. That usually forces a very high-mounted engine block, almost always transverse, above the tranny and diff. The half shafts are usually not of equal length (hence torque steer), and access is tough because there isn't any room left over for your hands to reach anything.
So you end up with a high center of gravity, torque steer, front tires that wear twice as fast as the rears, and dull understeer.
It's safe and leaves you with more passenger space, so it's fine for mom's family car, but on mine I'll take RWD.
Mount the engine longitudinally, nice and low. The tranny behind it, not below. The diff in the rear, nice and easy to access and service everything.
A RWD Acura RSX would probably handle as well or better (with a fixed roof) than a Honda S2000. People would flock to it.
Just read in Automobile about how Acura really needs a RWD car that fits the niche between RSX and TLs. They said they'd take the G35 or IS300/400 over whatever comes in the middle of those 2 models cause they prefer RWD.
most people would say one of the real "advantages" of FWD, is packaging. In fact, that was one of the main reasons everyone switched to FWD. There's no driveshaft or rear differential to worry about. You can get as much interior space into a "smaller & lighter" FWD, than RWD.
I've never heard anyone say anything negative about how an Integra or RSX handles. In fact, they are almost always praised in that aspect. Even the new '03 V6 Accord is praised in terms of handling—and with no torque steer.
Frankly, you couldn't give me a RWD vehicle. Well... you could "give" me one, but I would never buy one again.
"No RWD cars I can think of under $20 actually, unless you deal down a base Miata."
Mustang (not GT though), the MB C230 bases at about $25,000, so it might be hard to talk them down below $20,000. You couldn't pay me to own a C230 though.
Protoge is nice. I drove a P5 and liked it. Not enough torque there to even talk about torque steer. I bet the Mazdaspeed model has it, though. And that turbo did not win 10Best, by the way.
Haven't tried the 6 but I probably will. We owned a 626 and that thing was nose heavy and understeered rather severely, so hopefully they cured that. Actually that's what I base my complaints about FWD on.
I'd give anything to have something like an 86 SVO with 15 years worth of improvements into it.
I remember looking maybe 10-15 years ago for a 4 cylinder, rwd, turbo car, and came up with a pretty short list. Turbos are mostly gone, and so is RWD. The only cars you find those on are pretty pricey.
I would love to see a RWD RSX or RWD Accord class Honda type of car for less than $25,000.
Now, as far as SUV's,...
You can still get a RWD Wrangler for less than $20,000 I think.
Let's face it, on-throttle oversteer is more fun (and more effective) than on-throttle understeer. You can tighten your line by getting ON the gas rather than backing off. Woo-hoo!!!
When I lived down south any of them would have been fine. Whatever little snow we got was easily handled by RWD with decent snow tires. When I moved to Phila I had a RWD with studded snow tires that were great. The state thought they tore up the roads so they outlawed them for all but emergency vehicles. I then drove a FWD in 10 inches of snow for some one else and it made a believer out of me. If you live up north there is a world of difference between RWD and FWD. Enough to affect the purchase of a car to account for winter driving. The recent weather here again made me a believer about AWD in bad weather. If some one gave me a RWD or FWD I'd make do. If I have to purchase a car i'll go for AWD, FWD and RWD in that order. My old man said buy flexibility not limitations.
Comments
I am looking for something to get maybe in second half of 2003 or so.
I am leaning toward the Liberty or Sorento at this point. I really really like the Forester, but want something a little more rugged/trucklike for utility/offroad purposes. Otherwise, I think the Subaru is nice. I had a Subaru back around 1990 or so, and if I remember right, repair costs were through the roof. I think it was a Loyale (?) wagon. Almost a thousand bucks to fix the exhaust!!!!
There should be a turbo by about June, we expect about 200hp from a light-pressure turbo, sort of like VW's 1.8T and Volvo's 2.4T.
You could get that, add iSR 2" lifting springs and a pair of skid plates from Primitive racing, but...
For your needs I think the others may be a better choice, though. The Koreans have even moved up the reliability ratings, both CR and JD Powers. I'd take a close look at the Sorento.
-juice
-juice
We got the 03 X Forester and every trip, she sits up and watches out the rear window. No chewing yet. Haven't gone on long trips with her yet but for short trips she appears mesmerized looking out the rear view window.
As a side light the 03 X handled all the bizarre weather we had here the past few weeks in NE PA with no problems.
$24,000 + tax,tag,title no other fees. Not a bad price and the dealer was a pleasure to work with
zoom zoom zoom
I'm definitely not in the "boy racer" class - I'm the wrong sex, and I'm over 50. I did want the extra power because I drive from sea level to about 6,000 feet every day. I was tired of having a 5 speed manual that couldn't manage the drive in 5th gear - I had to downshift to 4th to maintain 65-70 mph - and I wanted an auto with enough ooomph to maintain 70 on the steepest parts of the freeway. The Forester turbo was about the best choice without going to a 6 cylinder (which is what I did).
I'm still not unhappy about my choice (even if I die every day when I fill up with gas), though I might have bought an AWD Escape hybrid if I had waited. I still think the Forester XT is a practical car.
I can speak for the 2002 CRV. I have a spriger spanieal who looks like and is almost as tall as a setter. My roomate has a Great Dane and Lab mix, mostly great dane.
I can put them in the cargo area behind the seats wth no problem. But they both can't lay down unless I slide the back seats forward 8 inches.
When you slide the seats forwards, (if I remeber correctly) the volume goes from 32 to about 40 cubic feet which rivals the large SUV's. I know you only care about usable space so I can tell you the seats slid forward will give you an additional 8 inches in one direction along the floor.
I want to be able to take people AND the dog along, not either/or.
If you slide the seats forward 8 inches it would not be comfortable for adults. But, you could slide the seats forward a few inches and you would still have the leg room of the Forester.
What kind of dog would you put in the cargo area?
Besides, how many times have you haggled for hours, only to have the dealer surprise you with a hidden fee at the end? You know what's next - they offer to split the difference as a "favor". Some favor.
No thanks, I'll go no-haggle, no surprise fees. Too bad they do not have Ford or Honda franchises, though others no-haggle dealers might.
Another idea is a pricing service, but it'll be hit-or-miss with the surprise fees.
Basically it's like Saturn, only they sell near invoice, so prices are better than MSRP. I think if you offer MSRP up front even the worst dealers will treat you nice!
-juice
I won't buy another Toyota because of the dealers, no matter what they come out with (of course, it doesn't help that I can't stand the one I have). I just wish there were more no-haggle dealerships here (Saturn is it around here). That's where I would go, if I could.
CRV Height: 41 Width: 41 Depth, seat up: 28 Depth, seat down: 52
Forester: Height: 30.5 Width: 37 Depth, seat up: 38 Depth, seat down: 68
I tried to measure the smallest distance in each direction - from the top of the back seat to the innermost part of the rear window slant, or between the wheels for the width measurement. I wanted to know how big a box I could fit in the car. Also, the CRV's rear seat was all the way back, I think, when I did the seat up measurement. Naturally, that doesn't matter for the seat down measurement.
HTH,
Tamara
I've always thought the CR-V prioritized passengers over cargo. Rear leg room is great, but consider that the Forester has 10" more depth with the seats in place, so really you have to move the seat well forward to fit anything back there.
I can fit my kid's stroller and still change a diaper behind it, all while being protected from the rain, in my Forester. And the kids don't need much leg room anyway.
With the new CR-V, at least you can slide the seat all the way forward. That would leave enough cargo room for my needs.
Height is great but only if the things you carry can be stacked. So not for most groceries. Maybe Honda should sell a shelf for such a tall cargo area, like the PT Cruiser and some vans offer.
One criticism of the Subie, though, is the width. I was hoping they'd use the rear suspension from the Outback, which allows a LOT more width between the wheel wells. Forester kept the struts instead, and they protrude more than I'd like.
For that reason, our Legacy has far more useful space (i.e. floor area). It's shorter, so the Forester is better for tall boxes, but the Legacy is much better for most other stuff.
-juice
I am trying to guess under which circumstances you need the clearance, but not AWD/4WD. Can't think of any.
You can buy a great station wagon for that price. Much better handling, faster, more comfort, quieter, more space, less fuel.
On that note, Merry Christmas to all.
- D
On the other, we probably will this year, and an AWD model will be easier to resell and probably depreciate less. Plus it'll be better in rain, or if you ever hit the orchards in the fall.
But yeah, a Ford Focus wagon is just as roomy and probably $6 grand less. A Taurus wagon will seat 7 and cost about the same, with more cargo space.
From the tone of your post, I'd guess that you really do want AWD, but price is an issue. So consider also the Legacy L Special Edition, which has AWD, ABS, 2 moonroofs, CD, outside temp gauge, 16" alloys, 4 disc brakes, cruise, keyless, and power everything.
Since you're in MD, check out fitzmall.com. $20,161 includes freight, with tax that would still be about a grand cheaper, plus you get AWD. This is a no-haggle dealer, so if you're interested e-mail me (it's in my profile) and I'll put you in touch with a salesman who treated me right.
-juice
-Frank P.
-juice
I agree that the Legacy AWD wagon is a better idea than the Escape.
The SUV's of today are what are supposedly taking the place of yesteryear's wagons, but not doing much of a good job at it. They don't hold or tow as much, don't hold as many people or are near as well riding.
The floor space with seats down was enough to hold a sheet of 4x8 plywood/sheetrock/paneling. We used to load it right up to the back headrests, or until the front wheels almost came off the ground. You wouldn't believe how many bricks one could hold/haul!
I gave a "hay ride" to the whole group, it was a hoot. We were able to get to the most remote apple trees, and got the best apples. You definitely need the clearance, and probably AWD if you don't want to get stuck far from any help.
AWD gives you an extra margin that lets you do the things you want to do. You could walk, I guess, but it was blistering hot that day and we had 3 kids with us, enjoying the A/C during the ride.
So driving on an orchard or farm, up a gravel road or trail, snow or rain, lots of opportunities to use the AWD come up.
-juice
-mike
One lives in Florida, and basically loves Isuzus (it's his 3rd) and wanted something roomier than his old I-Mark and Stylus. So the Rodeo was the affordable option for him. He loves it.
The other lives in DC, and regrets not getting 4WD.
-juice
-mike
He didn't really get it for image or utility, he got it because he loves the Isuzu brand and it a loyal customer.
I'd take RWD over FWD any day.
-juice
Trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find a decent RWD car which I can afford.
-juice
I can't imagine a RWD VW or Acura RSX, nor would I want one.
Bob
The problem with FWD is packaging. You gotta cram the engine, tranny, and differential in one tiny little engine compartment. That usually forces a very high-mounted engine block, almost always transverse, above the tranny and diff. The half shafts are usually not of equal length (hence torque steer), and access is tough because there isn't any room left over for your hands to reach anything.
So you end up with a high center of gravity, torque steer, front tires that wear twice as fast as the rears, and dull understeer.
It's safe and leaves you with more passenger space, so it's fine for mom's family car, but on mine I'll take RWD.
Mount the engine longitudinally, nice and low. The tranny behind it, not below. The diff in the rear, nice and easy to access and service everything.
A RWD Acura RSX would probably handle as well or better (with a fixed roof) than a Honda S2000. People would flock to it.
-juice
Personally my next car may be a CTS V8 or IS400.
-mike
It can take on the Altima and Mazda6, but not the G35 or BMW 3 series.
-juice
most people would say one of the real "advantages" of FWD, is packaging. In fact, that was one of the main reasons everyone switched to FWD. There's no driveshaft or rear differential to worry about. You can get as much interior space into a "smaller & lighter" FWD, than RWD.
I've never heard anyone say anything negative about how an Integra or RSX handles. In fact, they are almost always praised in that aspect. Even the new '03 V6 Accord is praised in terms of handling—and with no torque steer.
Frankly, you couldn't give me a RWD vehicle. Well... you could "give" me one, but I would never buy one again.
Bob
Mustang (not GT though), the MB C230 bases at about $25,000, so it might be hard to talk them down below $20,000. You couldn't pay me to own a C230 though.
From the passenger perspective, packaging is great with FWD. No tunnel down the center. It's what allows a flat floor on Civics.
Look at all the great handlers you're excluding: Miata, 3 series, Z, etc.
-juice
Haven't tried the 6 but I probably will. We owned a 626 and that thing was nose heavy and understeered rather severely, so hopefully they cured that. Actually that's what I base my complaints about FWD on.
-juice
I'd give anything to have something like an 86 SVO with 15 years worth of improvements into it.
I remember looking maybe 10-15 years ago for a 4 cylinder, rwd, turbo car, and came up with a pretty short list. Turbos are mostly gone, and so is RWD. The only cars you find those on are pretty pricey.
I would love to see a RWD RSX or RWD Accord class Honda type of car for less than $25,000.
Now, as far as SUV's,...
You can still get a RWD Wrangler for less than $20,000 I think.
-james
What I will admit to, is that FWD and RWD feel different. As to which is more fun, it depends on who you talk to, and what pushes their "fun" button.
Bob
I don't doubt that a Mini is a hoot, just imagine what it would be like if it were RWD! LOL
-juice
When I moved to Phila I had a RWD with studded snow tires that were great. The state thought they tore up the roads so they outlawed them for all but emergency vehicles.
I then drove a FWD in 10 inches of snow for some one else and it made a believer out of me. If you live up north there is a world of difference between RWD and FWD. Enough to affect the purchase of a car to account for winter driving.
The recent weather here again made me a believer about AWD in bad weather.
If some one gave me a RWD or FWD I'd make do.
If I have to purchase a car i'll go for AWD, FWD and RWD in that order. My old man said buy flexibility not limitations.
In cold climates, choose AWD. In warm climates, it doesn't matter, so go ahead and get RWD if you can.
-juice