I have my opinions as someone who's lived all his life in the steep, icy mountains of Colorado. And so have my parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, going back to times before automobiles even existed. And none of us see much value in AWD, as none of currently own, nor owned before, a 4WD or AWD vehicle. Even the snow plow I drive for the County is a single axel RWD commercial truck, and we only have one AWD truck in the whole fleet. If snow plows aren't AWD, I don't know what actually needs AWD other than off-roaders or people who refuse to plow their driveways. It's not that AWD can't help. But it's not a necessity. And generally, it's an expense. I am looking for an AWD vehicle, as mentioned in another post. However, it's for a friend who says they won't drive anything else. But, at the same time, they want a cheap vehicle. And frankly, I'm having a difficult time finding such a vehicle. Although, I digress, as AWD vehicles are cheaper than they ever have been. I think the thing is this, AWD can maintain greater acceleration, period. It's not about steering. Sure, it can accelerate more while cornering. That, to me, doesn't mean it corners better. It just means it accelerates better. Sometimes you do get a bit of difference in cornering though, due to different weight bias. More weight in the front contributes to more understeer. Having motors and such in the rear can even out the weight a bit more, causes less understeer. Nothing that adding a couple of sand bags in the trunk wouldn't also do. But then again, more weight in the rear of a FWD vehicle means less traction. I don't know of any vehicle that has a fun mode. To me, cars are boring, expensive tools that get us from point A to point B. Quick acceleration or whipping out the tail around corners just seem immature to me. But that's just me.
Issac, you appear to address whether you and your family find AWD desirable generally more than the specific attributes of the Toyota hybrid AWD set up. I don't dispute any of your subjective conclusions, but note the difference in how it allows a car to turn. On that you do seem to agree. Emphasis added. Being able to turn the car at a higher speed and while applying power is a difference in how the car turns. Emphasis added. This difference in how cars will behave in a turn and under power isn't an indictment of the judgement of you, your parents or any preceding generation. It's just a difference in how the cars handle that is undisputed. You might not be the only person with automotive ahedonia; I believe it is common. You might find any specific vehicle feature overpriced, moot or of marginal benefit for you, and you can certainly conclude that people who drive in ways you don't are immature, but none of that is a comment on how the car applies power in a turn. I would never try to talk you into buying something you wouldn't want.
So we agree it accelerates better. But we don't agree that it corners better. However, if we put both together, then we both agree that it can accelerate better while cornering. That is the difference between you and me. None of what I said changes how the car applies power in a turn. It just is not the same as maximum cornering. Yes, I totally agree that an AWD will accelerate better, in a corner or not, than a FWD can. I never said it didn't. And these kinds of arguments only make it worse. Emphasis added. No it's not. The car cannot turn a shaper corner; therefore it is not a difference in how the car turns. It's a difference in how the car can accelerate and turn at the same time.
On the contrary, I think context is very important here. I said that AWD doesn't help brake or turn. You said, it does help turn, but you put in your own context "under acceleration." So why under acceleration? In what situation do you need to turn and accelerate? You mentioned having fun. And that is a valid opinion. What about if a moose jumps out in front of your car? What if you just want to get from point A to point B, like to and from work or the store or school? What if you take a corner too fast for the conditions? Then how does AWD help? How does cornering and accelerating at the same time in slippery conditions help you under these common circumstances?
Where you describe the difference in how a car will turn, you appear to admit the difference. Emphasis added. Your premise is directly contrary to your stated understanding that the AWD car can accelerate in a turn better. Because that's a common state for a car, the other options being deceleration or a constant speed. Turning in either direction from a stop, such as from a stop light. This can be illustrated through a thought exercise. Two Priuses are travelling through a long sweeping curve on ice. One has FWD and the other AWD. They each travel at the same speed. The AWD is using 24 ft pounds of torque total,16 pounds through the front and 8 pounds through the rear. For this illustration, any additional torque through the front wheels greater than 16 ft pounds will break the front wheels free and induce understeer. The FWD Prius will use 24 ft pounds to keep the same speed through the same sweeping curve only if it channels 24 ft pounds through the front wheels and induces understeer. In this illustration, the FWD car turns less well because it presents the choice to travel more slowly or take an arc tighter than the curve. That the driver of a FWD car might drove more slowly when he senses the front wheels washing out is a difference of the driver input, not the car. That the driver of one or the other car considers the car only a joyless financial burden will not itself change how the car turns in that sweeping curve. You don't appear to dispute any of that difference. Instead your contention appears than an AWD and FWD car will turn the same so long as they aren't under power. That's a valuable observation to anyone who mistakenly believes that an AWD and FWD car will not behave the same when none of the wheels are being driven.
You sure to like to try to provoke anger with those you dialog with, don't you. No, I do not and will not admit any difference. Anyone asking how AWD could help them on ice and snow isn't going to get some sort of turning benefit, because anyone who's emergency turning on snow and ice IS NOT ACCELERATING! Now, if you like frolicking along your roads while you slalom from side to side in graceful burst of acceleration while you turn, then good for you. BUT I WILL NOT RECOMEND AWD AS A CORNERING HELPER BECAUSE FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES, IT SIMPLY ISN'T! I don't care how good they accelerate and turn at the same time. THE WHOLE REASON FOR THIS ARGUMENT IS THAT I SAID YOU CANNOT TRADE SNOW TIRES FOR AWD WHEN IT COMES TO CORNERING AND BRAKING. And I will stand behind that statement and will not agree that AWD makes cars turn better. I will only agree to AWD helping cars accelerate and less likely to get stuck, end of story, end of discussion, end of argument. You want to turn corners, you want to avoid an accident, you want to turn even from a stop, GET WINTER RATED TIRES. Don't replace winter tires with AWD under this premise that AWD turns better, because it simply doesn't. I REPEAT, AWD DOES NOT HELP CARS TURN BETTER. Buy AWD if you want better acceleration. Well, that and perhaps not having to shovel your driveway or get out and shovel snow from under you car as often.
No. There isn't a reason to be angry about anything I've written here. I've discussed the drive system differences, and have taken no issue with what you find valuable, your experience, or your reservoir of ancestral experience with two wheel drive or your preferences. I've made it through a lot of great lakes winters with two wheel drive cars almost always on all season tires. Experience and foresight will avoid problems that aren't sufficiently addressed by equipment and technology alone. That shouldn't keep us from clearly evaluating what the tech does without burdening the evaluation with our extraneous preferences. Yet, I do appreciate that you don't dispute the illustration in post #65. You'll see that the illustration is about the car's characteristics, not driver behavior. How a person reacts in a perceived emergency isn't an attribute of the car.
Because I didn't want to continue the argument, but I would dispute it. Let me put it this way: You can either test if a vehicle: Accelerates better in a straight line. Accelerates better in a corner. Corners better. Brakes better while cornering. OR Brakes better in a straight line. These are 5 different scenarios. AWD helps with 1 and 2, but not 3, 4 or 5. Better tires help with all 5. It seems we both agree on these points. What we do not agree on is whether to include #2 as part of the answer to "which corners better." To me, how a car accelerates while cornering is not an appropriate answer to the question "which corners better," but to you it is an appropriate part of the answer. With your illustration in post #65, who would ask, "if I enter a corner slow enough to accelerate through the corner, which car accelerates better?" To me, that question and your illustration are about acceleration. Yes, AWDs accelerate better in poor traction conditions, including around corners. To me, that's not the same as cornering. Why can't the FWD Prius in your illustration go through the corner with only 16 ft-lbs of torque on the front wheels? It might make it out of the corner a bit later, but it still makes it out of the corner. Isn't that the same result as far as cornering goes?
A driver coming up on a sweeping curve. A car steering under power in snow and ice isn't an unlikely or rare circumstance. Since in the illustration the FWD car is unable to hold the same line through the sweeping curve, a curve that requires each car to turn, they don't "turn the same whether the car is AWD or FWD". Because then it isn't a like for like comparison of cars traveling the same speed. Introducing extraneous variables obscures the role played by the pertinent variable. No. It can't be the same because the speeds and times are different. If I told you that I can run just like Usain Bolt because I can walk 500 meters and get there eventually, we'd both get the joke that I cannot, in fact, run just like Usain Bolt. If I were to provide an illustration that bald summer tires can turn a car just as well as the best new winter tires in ice and snow, and told you I could demonstrate the lack of difference by having the car creep very slowly through a sweeping curve, would you consider that a valid comparison of bald summer tires and the best new winter tires? Or would I have turned it into a comparison of how people rationally react to real differences in the equipment?
