fdl

There is an article on msn.ca today which "dispells common winter driving myths". And this is what they had to say about fwd in the snow...


"The traction advantages of front-wheel-drive apply primarily in the initial stages of acceleration from stop. Once moving, front-wheel-drive can be at a traction disadvantage. Especially on very slippery surfaces. First, because a good chunk of weight (or load) is then transferred towards the rear of the vehicle. But also because any tire has a finite amount of grip. And since the forward-mounted pair on a front-wheel drive vehicle must both steer it and drive it, sometimes at once, each portion of grip used for one function (acceleration or steering) thus becomes unavailable for the other. "

Dan Martin

That's why I like my GTimer for winter driving. It has a CAMM circle that will help you better understand when you are reaching the limits of traction. The only time FWD will get you into trouble is if you are trying to accelerate around a corner, but most of us do this even though we shouldn't so it can be a problem.

Lung Fu Mo Shi

FUD.

bbbuzzy

Those MSN writers must live in south FL. Please! Just do the experiment yourself. FWD is much better. Most RWD cars have much heavier front ends so there is no weight over the drive wheels. This sucks for traction. Also, cars today have much wider tires, which distributes the weight of the vehicle over a larger surface area. This also reduces traction and leads to poor snow driving capabilities. The best 2WD car I ever drove in the snow was a Renault LeCar. Go figure, a tiny box with all the engine weight over the front wheels with skinny little tires. That car could go through snow better than most SUV's. Seriously! If you want good traction from your TSX in snow, get snow tires all around on all 4 wheels. You could probably get alloy rims and tires for $700-800 and they'd be good for many, many years.

AcuraFan

That article is seriously funny.

biker

Nothing beats an intelligent experienced driver!

phile

I don't care what the article says, alls I know is that last winter, when my Civic was stuck in traffic because 3-4 inches of snow had already accumulated and everyone and his mother was sent home early, I passed many RWD cars just spinning their rear wheels with false hope as they remained in one spot (OK not really, they were sliding a few inches to the left and right) while I crawled along.

Lung Fu Mo Shi

Driving in snow is 60% driver, 40% tire traction.

The BMWs should have known NOT to stop. RWD sucks in snow if the car isn't moving. If you keep moving, you'll be fine.

Personally I prefer FWD (better with 4WD) due to the ability to "thrust vector" getting unstuck or at low speeds.

fdl

In all fairness, this is an area where the article concedes that fwd will be at an advantage ... that is traction to get you moving forward.

bob shiftright

Or the editor said "Give me 1250 words on winter driving by 2:00 sharp!!!"

FWD "owned" the Monte Carly Rally in the 1960s, when a series of snowstorms hit the rally for several years. Saab, then Mini-Cooper, then Audi all won overall ahead of larger, more powerful RWD cars before AWD rally cars came into fashion. FWD with a set of snow tires should run circles around most every car on 4-season tires.

dom

Exactly, I've never gotten stuck in the snow with any of my FWD cars and I can't tell you how many times I've passed other cars that were RWD drive, especially going uphill. One time at Rutherfor and 27 (fdl knows where that is) I passed 2 Bimmers and about 4 other cars that were all stuck on the ice and snow going uphill. My FWD Civic had 0 problems.

DEVO

I will make the arguement that with a good set of snow tires you can make a RWD car perform almost as good as a FWD car with snows.

As for AWD, I have a friend who use to own a Audi Quatro and that car sucked with it's regular tires (performance thread but not summer tires) in the snow. Switching to a narrower blizzack set made that car handle like it was on rails.

So yes... you want to go with a narrow tire for winter driving. Unless your car tires are already narrow to begin with... such as is the case in my civic. Here is something interesting about the Blizzacks... the max psi is labeled at 30psi.

bob shiftright

I'll agree because in Sweden where it snows a lot, Volvo always outsold Saab about 5-1 and Volvo was exclusively RWD until 1992 when the 850 was introduced.

But an RWD Volvo was a relatively balanced and relatively heavy car (compared to a Honda Civic). I'm not sure how well a very light RWD car like a Chevette would behave in the snow, even on snow tires. Better than a Chevette that's NOT on snow tires, I'm sure! But as well as a Civic?

gogozy

the RWD sports/performance car do bad in snow because of their wide tire(high contact surface, less adherson in snow) and the inital wheel speed, the wheel spin too fast at start up and lost grip. their front is too heavy to puch.

But if there is only 2 snow tires available for a FWD car, they shall put at rear wheel. Dangerous with only snow tires at front for FWD.

larchmont

Anybody wanna try trumping this?

DEVO

I agree that it has a lot to do with the balance of the car. The OLD VW were great in the snow.... but the engine was in the back.

majormojo

I have to agree with the article for the most part. The main advantage of FWD is during acceleration and straight line driving. However, during braking, all that weight over the front wheels combined with the forward weight shift means the back wheels can't offer as much braking as they should. Same reason many full size pickups have/had rear-only anti-lock brakes. Throw cornering into the mix and you're really asking for more than the front tires alone can deliver.

No FWD car that I'm aware of comes close to a 50/50 F/R weight balance, so FWD will always be at a disadvantage when it comes to braking and cornering on slippery surfaces when you really need to get the max braking effort from each wheel.

The "problem" with FWD vehicles in slippery conditions is that virtually nobody gets in accidents in winter because they can't accelerate fast enough. They get in accidents because they can't stop fast enough. Getting stuck is a bit different. You can always throw some kind of weight in the back of a RWD car if it isn't naturally well balanced. I had a Chevette years ago and used to throw some concrete sidewalk blocks in the back during the winter.

That said, the traction during acceleration and the smooth non-threatening feeling of gradual understeer at the limit definitely does provide a feeling of confidence when driving a FWD on snow or ice. That kind of slide is often easier to recover from than a tail-out oversteering slide. I'm generalizing I know, but many people driving now have never driven a RWD car and the feeling of the tail breaking loose on them would be very frightening and possibly lead to panic.

DEVO

I use to drive a CRX during college, and I had the rear end step out like it was a RWD car. Freaked me out. It was snowing and I was going around a corner (taking a right, normal snow speed) and I must of had real good line (traction on the front tires) but my rears must have hit some black ice. Next thing I know I'm facing the wrong way (no amount of opposite lock was going to get me out of it). I couldn't recreate the problem no matter how hard I tried (without ebraking).

gogozy

my only total out of control oversteering is on a RWD 240SX, dial steering wheel to left or right 30-45, step on gas hard, and, it spin 1 circle, and still having same direction!! but the first time was scary. the oversteering on Honda FWD are usually easier to control, give a little gas to tighten the line if front still have traction. i hate traction control because it hide the signal of "limit close in" and all of sudden it become unrecoverable... to duplicate the unrecoverable oversteering on FWD.... i guss i can..... okay, on a down hill slope, best if slippery, icy, set steering off centre then pull the handbrake. the rear will start to rotate!!! , but it is dangerous..... don't do it....

bob shiftright

That's why they recommend on a FWD car you put the tires with the best tread on the rear which is counter-intuitive. It's much safer to have wheelspin than to have the rear end break away. Also in performance driving school, they use baldies on the rear on the skidpad to teach skid control.

FWD's performance in road rallys in the snow is a matter of historical record.



Mini-Cooper at the 1963 Monte Carlo Rally

ClutchPerformer

This doesn't even make any sense. There's no rear weight transfer (or any weight transfer at all) in steady-state driving. And implying that using traction for moving subtracts traction available for turning is ridiculous. MSN needs to hire some technical editors. Edit: and they need to hire someone to weed out all those sentence fragments. Sheesh!

AcuraFan

This article is garbabe. The idea of a FWD car being at a disadvantage turning on ice is stupid. There's a reason everyone around here trades up to FWD or AWD in the winter (and those who don't get into accidents). I like the idea of having total control over my steering tires...if my tires are slipping on a turn I can intermitantly apply gas and break to take back control in almost all conditions...RWD? All you can do is let off the gas and hope your front tires catch.

In any car, to have control over it you need to have control over the front wheels. Here, let's break it down a little:
FWD car: lose control of back tires -> It means nothing.
RWD car: lose control of back tires -> You have nothing
FWD car: lose control of front tires -> You can't steer until you regain traction, which you have the control to do with gas and bake
RWD car: lose control of front tires -> You can't steer and can only hope your front tires catch at some point.

My

gilboman

:shakehd:

AcuraFan

Heh heh, and what's that supposed to mean?

It's called "physics"...get used to it.

drchaos

I bet that when you see RWD cars spinning in snow *these days* it isn't because of RWD versus FWD.

I think the distinction is market segmentation. RWD cars are comparatively rare, expensive, and usually sold to performance-oriented drivers.

The result of all this is that they come with wide tires for good dry traction which turn into hockey pucks in the ice.

And that's why you see BMW's spinning.

I think it's 80% tires.

AcuraFan

Tires have a great deal to do with it...but there's no substitute for the physics of pulling vs pushing or the path control of your drive tires being your steering tires.

Oh, and I don't see a lot of RWD cars spin in the snow these days because they have traction control (ie adding technology to make it closer to FWD's inherent safety).

gilboman

when you have FWD and you lose traction in the rear it doesnt mean nothing, your backend will come loose and if you are lucky only do spins in your ownlane with no cars..... otherwise we will see how good the TSX is at absorbing impact from multiple cars from all angles... you have FWD you lose the front, you plow into a barrier or end up in a ditch if you are lucky.... FWD vs RWD, both have their advantages and disadvantages, its not as one sided as your argument.... but RWD, if the driver knows what they are doing, they have more options if they lose traction at either front or rear. I do not claim to be able to execute this like professionals though.

gilboman

traction control doesnt do jack if you are stuck in snow FWD or RWD, turn it off and let the rubber burn.. FWD has the advantage in snow during initial acceleration b/c more weight is on the front wheels, but once it gets going the weight shifts to the rear.

but given the choice i would take FWD over RWD in a snowstorm if both cars had equal tires... b/c you can adjust your driving once you get going to not upset the car, but you have to get going in the first place which is where FWD has advantage for sure... but that advantage doesnt translate to ALL AROUND advantage for FWD, the initial traction advantage is just much easier noticed and experienced.

AcuraFan

I've spent more than ten yours driving Minnesota winters in FWD and RWD. I have never lost control of my car when (on the rare occasion) I lost traction on my back tires of a FWD car...never. The only way I can see it possible is if you panic and slam on your brakes. But the point is, when you're back tires lose grip, you can pull ourself out of it with the front drive...something that's not possible with RWD, the only thing you can do is let off the gas and/or brake and hope you regain control.
But that's the rear tires. The front tires are a different story. With RWD you only have about 75% ability to manipulate the front tires (steering and braking). With FWD you have 100% ability to manipulate the front tires (steering, braking and acceleration). I don't know about you but I like the 100% ability when it comes to adverse conditions. It means you have that much more control over regaining traction on the tires that mean the most (steering or "path control").

Junkster

Driving in Colorado for the majority of my lifetime and having owned a RWD (Audi), FWD (Integra, Eclipse), and 4WD (Pathfinder), I thought I would throw in my two cents in here somewhere (fun thread, BTW).

Owning a RWD, I found that I had to be a little more carefull in how aggressively I drove it. You drive a RWD with a little umph, you know what I mean, those bad habits of letting your car loose at each and every turn and acceleration. But the beauty of it was that you could regain control of the car if you started losing the rear end, but you have to respond quickly. Let loose the gas, pin the car towards the slide, and slowly reapply gas for traction, and you have a decent chance at regaining control. I find RWD a little more forgiving on reckless driving habits. It's easy to lose control of a RWD car, but that 'lose' can be a great gain in driving experience if you know how to use it.

FWD are safer on the snow in general, since they don't take too much brain to drive on it. You just take it easy, and even if you start spinning the front wheels, you just layoff and reapply power slowly. Where the FWD has problems is when you are in a loss of control. With power and steering coming from the same front tires, it's a bit tricky to regain control.

Try pushing and pulling a sled on ice with a nephew (or niece, your own rugrats, what-have-you) and try making it come loose. When you pull, and turn, sometimes you just have to let it slide a bit before you really begin to pull it back in line. When your pushing, and you loose it, you can point your wanted direction of motion and begin to slowly apply power towards the goal. It's a bit easier pushin.

Then again, I only got a B- in non-calculus based physics in college, so take this with a grain o' salt.

Junkster, who only took physics for his BS in biology.

larchmont

I knew there was a reason I need FWD......

1SICKLEX

LMAO.

It's about snow tires....No, the main advantage is cheap to build and fuel economy.

AcuraFan

And that's why sleds have strings in the front right? Hmm...I guess they just want to give kids more of a challenge.

I actually think your "sled" logic is faulty when it comes to cars. What your saying is push the sled from the rear but at an angle so that you can make it turn...that's something you can't do in a car. Instead, push the sled from straight back and see how easy it is to control the turn. Now pull the sled and see how easy it is to turn by turning your body (as a tire would turn).

AcuraFan

Maybe for the manufacturer...not for the driver. The main advantage for the consumer (atleast around here) is traction and path control in adverse conditions...not straightline acceleration or cheaper construction.

1SICKLEX

Agreed

Junkster

Like I said, my B- in physics doesn't help my case. :P

But in my old Audi, I could always power my way through a corner, no matter how bad the slide in the corner was. In the Integra, I could pseudo-scandy flick, but it had limits in 'pulling' me out of the slide (that was the final fate of my beloved Integra). I think drifting is where I get most of theory on the usefulness of RWD during a 'controlled' slide. The front wheels can point for destination and the rears can push you there. I remember an article that said that FWD is like an overworked single mom. She's got mutliple things to do and she can do them all well, but not all great. RWD is like a two parent system, with each taking the share of the workload. I don't know, I always found that analogy humourous.

But like I said, it was just my two cents, nothing more. I basing most of my stuff on my own driving experience.

Junkster, who thinks Larch needs more than just FWD

sponge

I also think the article is total crap. My very first car was a 77 Audi 100. Back then, everything had RWD. The big selling point and innovation at that time was front wheel drive and the improved control and handling on bad roads. I've also owned a couple of 4WD SUVs and wouldn't even consider an SUV without 4WD. In snow (and sometimes even rain) they handled like pigs in 2WD - the rear wheels. Slip it into 4WD, engaging the front wheels, and voila, no problem ( I know, not a perfect comparison - but enough to convince me that I don't want to be in a RWD car in the snow).

DEVO

Everybody here has valid points but I see a common theme that we blame the car (FWD vs RWD vs AWD) or the tires but we fail to point out that the number one reason one car handles better than another is the person behind the wheel. Most people just plain suck driving in the snow. I have seen cars that can't climb a simple hill only to see somebody else get in the car and go up it.

jcg878

True, but if most people 'just plain suck driving in the snow' isn't it all the better to have them in cars that help rather than hinder them in the snow??