Advantages of 4WD on ordinary saloons?
Discussion
RobM77 said:
Another myth, popular in the UK, is that 4WD is the answer in the snow, even with the same standard tyres on the car. It will improve acceleration a bit, yes, but most people hit things because they can't corner or stop well enough, not because they can't accelerate, so safety isn't really improved, just your chances of getting stuck. Winter tyres really are amazing.
Paradoxically 4WD can be more dangerous to the less PH person. It allows you to accelerate "relatively normally", thus giving you a false impression of grip, cornering and stopping are only the same as a 2WD car. WestyCarl said:
RobM77 said:
Another myth, popular in the UK, is that 4WD is the answer in the snow, even with the same standard tyres on the car. It will improve acceleration a bit, yes, but most people hit things because they can't corner or stop well enough, not because they can't accelerate, so safety isn't really improved, just your chances of getting stuck. Winter tyres really are amazing.
Paradoxically 4WD can be more dangerous to the less PH person. It allows you to accelerate "relatively normally", thus giving you a false impression of grip, cornering and stopping are only the same as a 2WD car. 
A false sense of security. I'll hold my hands up and admit that I fell into this trap with my Celica CS a few times - you could drive off up a snowy road just fine, but then go anywhere near the brake or turn the steering wheel and it was like you were on ice.Leon R said:
I see how having to swap wheels and store them isn't ideal.
All-seasons?Hol said:
Would either of the terms: semi-permanent or non-permanent AWD be acceptable to you?
But clearly not Permanent AWD.
Except they are. They simply move the torque around automatically. There is always drive connected to all four wheels.But clearly not Permanent AWD.
Do any of the clever-diff AWDs have 100/0 normal torque split? Aren't they about 80/20 or 90/10 at a minimum? Either way, they're permanent in that nothing needs to be done to change from "2wd" to "4wd" - they are not part-time 4wd.
RobM77 said:
A false sense of security. I'll hold my hands up and admit that I fell into this trap with my Celica CS a few times - you could drive off up a snowy road just fine, but then go anywhere near the brake or turn the steering wheel and it was like you were on ice.
RobM77 said:
WestyCarl said:
RobM77 said:
Another myth, popular in the UK, is that 4WD is the answer in the snow, even with the same standard tyres on the car. It will improve acceleration a bit, yes, but most people hit things because they can't corner or stop well enough, not because they can't accelerate, so safety isn't really improved, just your chances of getting stuck. Winter tyres really are amazing.
Paradoxically 4WD can be more dangerous to the less PH person. It allows you to accelerate "relatively normally", thus giving you a false impression of grip, cornering and stopping are only the same as a 2WD car. A false sense of security. I'll hold my hands up and admit that I fell into this trap with my Celica CS a few times - you could drive off up a snowy road just fine, but then go anywhere near the brake or turn the steering wheel and it was like you were on ice.J4CKO said:
The more power you have in a RWD car, the less of if you can use in the wet, and with most BMW's, they are, on normal tyres, helpless if there is any snow.
I went from a TT with 4WD to an M135i, the TT could do full bore starts on snow, you could come off a roundabout in the wet and just aim and plant your foor, where the BMW goes a bit like Bambi on a frozen pond in comparison.
For a car you use all year round and do significant miles in, 4wd is the way to go, especially if you live anywhere snowier than average, hilly or a bit rural.
Failing that, get the right (Winter) tyres on any car and you are a lot better off, ultimate is winter tyres on something with 4WD, unstoppable, until of course you come across stranded BMW's across the road.
Yep. I went from a TT with 4WD to an M135i, the TT could do full bore starts on snow, you could come off a roundabout in the wet and just aim and plant your foor, where the BMW goes a bit like Bambi on a frozen pond in comparison.
For a car you use all year round and do significant miles in, 4wd is the way to go, especially if you live anywhere snowier than average, hilly or a bit rural.
Failing that, get the right (Winter) tyres on any car and you are a lot better off, ultimate is winter tyres on something with 4WD, unstoppable, until of course you come across stranded BMW's across the road.
Last car: V10 Audi S8. 265/35 Goodyear Eagle F1 Asyms all round. 444BHP. Full time proper 4WD (Torson diff) with 60/40 split. I would regularly boot that car on a straight road very close to where we live, from low gear, and it would hold a straight line and go. In all conditions. In fact I struggle to think I saw the TC light come on. Snow, ice, and maybe exiting very wet roundabouts once in a while.
Current car: V12 Vantage S. 295/30 Michelin PS4s on the rear. 565BHP. On that same straight road, in the rain at the weekend, roughly 1/4-/13 throttle in second applied - ahem - vigorously - had the rear wheels squirming and the TC lit up in a heartbeat.
Now obviously 444 though 4 wheels is going to be a lot more manageable than 565 through 2, but it was a bit of an eye opener as to relative stability in the wet. Though, according to something I saw last week, the V12VS is quite a bit closer to a GT3 in lap times in the wet than in the dry. Go figure.
ETA: the Vantage is a *much* nicer and better car notwithstanding its unruliness, and that's despite the S8 being pretty bloody top drawer itself.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 8th October 17:37
Nanook said:
I've been in 2 different snowy ditches when I lived in the countryside.
Once was in a Audi A4 Quattro Sport, the other time was in a Blob Subaru Impreza WRXPPP.
Both times a Shogun with appropriate tyres was used to retrieve the stricken car.
Tyres are everything in poor conditions.
TooMany2cvs said:
Except they are. They simply move the torque around automatically. There is always drive connected to all four wheels.
Do any of the clever-diff AWDs have 100/0 normal torque split? Aren't they about 80/20 or 90/10 at a minimum? Either way, they're permanent in that nothing needs to be done to change from "2wd" to "4wd" - they are not part-time 4wd.
The literature regarding my Insignia says:Do any of the clever-diff AWDs have 100/0 normal torque split? Aren't they about 80/20 or 90/10 at a minimum? Either way, they're permanent in that nothing needs to be done to change from "2wd" to "4wd" - they are not part-time 4wd.
Normal driving: 95% front, 5% rear.
During hard acceleration, up to 60% of power/torque is shifted to the rear wheels.
Sport mode: 40% front, 60% rear.
eLSD allows up to 50% of the power/torque going to the rear to be moved to either rear wheel (up to 30% of total).
WestyCarl said:
Paradoxically 4WD can be more dangerous to the less PH person. It allows you to accelerate "relatively normally", thus giving you a false impression of grip, cornering and stopping are only the same as a 2WD car.
Not exactly. You can still corner and brake better with 4wd. That is what gives 4wd rally cars such an advantage. GravelBen explained it earlier in the thread very well. 
blade7 said:
Handicapped with weight and ultimately banned. And someone claims modulating the throttle would negate it's advantage...
I never claimed that by the way. I said winters and smooth throttle modulation was better for me than a point and squirt on/off throttle solution but each to their own, I have no axe to grind, just different experiences and preferences.
The touring car Audi story is very different and is clearly not helping perception. As I am sure you know motorsport series run a minimum weight rule.
Which is were the Audi scored : they were the same weight as the 2wd cars and their cog was consequently lower. When a race car wins a race based on tenths and the 4wd adds zero penalty despite the added hardware, the balance had to be redressed and the loophole was closed. No 4wd road car would ever weigh the same as the equivalent 2wd model.
It's a bit like if I said that 4wd was useless on rally cars because the front drive Xsara group A beat the WRC cars on tarmac before the category was dropped. It would be twaddle.
All rather academic in the context of ordinary saloons anyway.
Edited by nickfrog on Monday 8th October 19:01
nickfrog said:
It's a bit like if I said that 4wd was useless on rally cars because the front drive Xsara group A beat the WRC cars on tarmac before the category was dropped. It would be twaddle.
Yip, being allowed to run over quarter of a ton lighter with the same power definitely helped. Even then they could only challenge the WRC cars on dry tarmac, in the wet it was a very different story.Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 9th October 06:28
GravelBen said:
Yip, being allowed to run over quarter of a ton lighter with the same power definitely helped. Even then they could only challenge the WRC cars on dry tarmac, in the wet it was a very different story.Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 9th October 06:28
nickfrog said:
GravelBen said:
Yip, being allowed to run over quarter of a ton lighter with the same power definitely helped. Even then they could only challenge the WRC cars on dry tarmac, in the wet it was a very different story.Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 9th October 06:28
300bhp/ton said:
Not exactly. You can still corner and brake better with 4wd. That is what gives 4wd rally cars such an advantage. GravelBen explained it earlier in the thread very well.
You can apply power out of a corner better. The braking point is pretty much moot with modern ABS.300bhp/ton said:
nickfrog said:
GravelBen said:
Yip, being allowed to run over quarter of a ton lighter with the same power definitely helped. Even then they could only challenge the WRC cars on dry tarmac, in the wet it was a very different story.Often more specialised for tarmac too as 300 says, compared to the WRC car design being a compromise for a whole spectrum of events from smooth tarmac to snow to rough gravel and mud. At the opposite end of that spectrum a Dakar truck might beat a WRC car too! (if its rough enough)
otolith said:
You can apply power out of a corner better. The braking point is pretty much moot with modern ABS.
Nope, see GravelBens reply earlier in the thread. Think it was even quoted a few posts up. Braking isn't exclusive to using the brake pedal. There are other ways of slowing a vehicle.He explained that it improved stability depending on the diff set up, not reduce braking distance, which will always be a function of friction generated, essentially by the front tyres, hence my preference for sorting the contact patch way before the transmission, particularly for modest road use.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff