According to Consumer Reports, the SH-AWD is not very useful for handling. From the April 2008 issue: "The all-wheel-drive system is designed to reduce understeer, but handling is neither more agile nor more secure than that of the competition." I wonder if, for comparison purposes, some of us would have driven an Audi AWD car (let's say) in addition to the RL. I have not but would be curious to hear from those who have...

 

Then Consumer Reports does not know how to drive!
In my opinion, it is defintely more secure and I have never been able to accelerate in the middle of a curve the way the RL can.

 

I for one think Consumer Reports is (1) oftentimes incorrect, and (2) biased. See the numerous lawsuits over the years due to false tests. There are many cars which they give high marks that I wouldn't touch. Look at it this way - why take car buying advice from someone who reviews toasters and televisions?

I previously owned a 1998 Audi A4 and 2000 S4 prior to my 2005 RL (actually a 2004 TL was in between but off the point).

Having a lot of experience with Audis (and rare Volkswagens that used the mechanical quattro system labeled as "syncro" or "4motion"), I will always rave about how amazing it was. It saved me a number of times, and really inspired confidence. Mind you, it compensated for a front-heavy, front-wheel drive platform, but it still did its magic with little fanfare and/or electronic wizardry.

On the other hand, the SH-AWD system in my RL appears to be primarily computer-based. When I accidentally had the traction control off (I pushed the button to turn it back on but there is a glitch that sometimes requires TWO presses to re-enable it), I did a powerslide into a 180-degree turn right into a cement wall. This *never* would have happened with my Audi, nor would some of the hydroplaning I've experienced in the RL.

I can't speak from personal experience, but many forum members have raved about the RL's performance in snow (especially with snow tires). That's really what quattro was designed to do, and I still remember time as a passenger in an early-90s Audi 80 or 90 that basically blazed right through 4-6 inches of snow - *ON* the New York State Thruway - without any skidding or slipping.

From a performance perspective, it took Audi until the A5 (and now 2009 A4) to get the performance quotient "just right." While the "ur-Quattro" (original Quattro - capital Q - coupe) blew the Pike's Peak competition away, the consumer cars really didn't benefit from its pedigree in quattro v1, v2, v3, v4, or v5. Version 6 is really the first one to take aim at rear-wheel drive cars.

So where does this leave Super Handling All Wheel Drive? You tell me...

 

Not trying to get into a debate of RL vs Audis as I have no experience with Quattro drives.
That said, can any drive system can impact hydroplaning? Isn't that more a speed and tire issue.
"So where does this leave Super Handling All Wheel Drive? You tell me..." - Are you saying that your Audi's cornered better than your RL?

 

I've owned Audi's for 8 years before buying the RL. I had an A4 for four years followed by an S4. I did love the handling etc., but the S4 could not match the RL in cornering from my experience. I take a 270° offramp every morning, and 45mph in my S4 was about as fast as I felt comfortable taking it. In My RL, I've taken that same ramp at 55mph and felt like there was room for more.

I love both RL and the S4, but I would give the nod for cornering to the RL.

 

robar - that's what I would expect
wife's car is BMW 3 series. Car is much lighter than RL and cornering is very good, but I can corner just as fast in RL and feel much more in control. The more you accelerate that more it turns adn never feel like its going to cut loose. In the BMW, its the opposite, I don't know at which point it is going to lose it.

 

I had a 1997 A4-quattro for 10 years and it handled well but nothing like the SH-AWD.

 

fast cornering is invigerating...it's great driving a sharp turn at 55mph...it's great until you catch a bump ...it makes you feel helpless when you break free. Although when it happened to me, i stayed on the road, but it still scared me.

 

I guess I would give Consumer Reports more credit than you do but that's not really the issue. In day-to-day summer driving and much to my surprise, I see no difference between the TL I used to own and the RL. That's why I was curious to get the impression of those who have driven other AWD cars. I gather that you are not impressed by the RL AWD but larrynimmo, gavine, getakey and robarsan find it better than their experience with other AWD cars. Maybe I just don't push the RL enough to notice a difference with the TL I used to drive?

 

With my 03 TL, i could got through the turns with a constant oversteer through the turn due to slipping wheels. you run the balance point and its very predictable.

with the 07RL the car is glued to the road and the squat is much less pronounced. As I said, the TL has a very predictable slip, the RL holds solid until in breaks, then it breaks away hard.

 

How do the new Torque Vectoring AWD systems from Audi and BMW compare with the SH-AWD?

 

Do the Audi and BMW systems have an acceleration gear in their systems? That might be the difference. Torque vectoring is one thing but accelerating the rear-outside wheel is another....

 

SAAB has also introduced XDrive.

Amazing how Honda was dismissed with SHAWD as not needed. Now everyone is mimicing the technology.

For those who mention SHAWD is not noticed in everyday driving....it was supposed to be transparent. Yet in normal driving, I still noticesubtle adjustments on the SHAWD MID. The LEGEND / RL is about finesse and driving ease. So the SHAWD system was not pronounced but instead more a passive security feature.

Now that there is some interest, we see SHAWD retuning to be more agressive. And of course it will be more pronounced on MDX and RDX. Those vehicles have different driving dynamics whic require more input from SHAWD to remain stable. The LEGEND / RL is already quite a stable platform as a low, wide track sedan. It needs SHAWD less in typical driving to remain stable. Still, if you check the MID, you see subtle adjustments in the torque. You don't notice it, and by design, in normal driving, you are not supposed to.

Remove SHAWD from the RL and I expect it will feel much like a heavier TL with more pronounced FWD attributes due to the weight and power. The neutral feel the RL exibits means SHAWD is working.

 

TampaRL, it appears that the folks at Motor Trend agree with you; here's an extract from their winter driving test:

"Enough techno talk, how'd the SH-AWD do? Quite well. Actually, every all-wheel-drive system tested did a good job on the traction-limited surfaces during slow and steady driving. However, when traction was pushed (such as in hard acceleration or during spirited cornering), the SH-AWD system was more predictable and recovered more quickly than the competitive AWD systems. With that said, the course was so slippery and treacherous that any major mishap would've been game over in any of the vehicles. When pushed, the SH-AWD did cover each of the traction-limited courses (a 2.1-kilometer icy road course, a 2.5-kilometer snow-packed road course, and a snow/ice 200-foot-diameter skidpad) in the shortest time with the fewest sweaty palms. Moreover, the SH-AWD system did its work with less intrusiveness, whereas many of the other systems delivered odd noises, suspension shuttering, and some kickback in the wheel. Again, all the competitive systems worked well, but proved more active whereas the SH-AWD was more seamless."
http://www.motortrend.com/features/c...onclusion.html

Obviously, the benefit and advantage of the SHAWD for winter driving are worthwhile. TampaRL, you're saying that the car's neutral feel is proof that SHAWD is working but Consumer Reports (nor I) noticed much difference with a non AWD car in summer driving. Not disagreeing with your non-intrusiveness point, should we not feel the improvement over a non-AWD car? Is AWD worth it for those who don't drive in the snow?