It looks verry interesting :

http://kia-buzz.com/?p=5700

 

wrong forum. There are other Acura's with the AWD system, so this should be in the car talk forum where it can get maximum exposure and response.

 

I cant believe I wasted almost 4 mins and 12 seconds of my life on that video filled with preschoolers CGI. Ummm even if it were to be better than the SHAWD its still an ugly ass KIA.

 

Murky , it wasn't the car the I wanted to point out , but their system looks like is able to do torque distribution between all four corners .
Another thing is that the system is made by Magna which is , if I'm not wrong ,a canadian company (even that system is not build in Canada) .

 

From the CG in the video, you cant tell what the hell is happening. Even during turns it didnt look like any power was being distributed differently than what it showed on a straight line.Maybe it was there lack of skills with a computer that turned me off to the video, but if you watch the way car is driving around, it looks like it loses traction a few times.....

 

Honda/Acura has had a system like this even before SH-AWD. The VTM-4 system and it's functional concept is just like this one and is the foundation of SH-AWD. SH is really VTM-4 combined with ATTS from a functional or concept point of view. VTM-4 controls the same type of active front and rear transfers that Dynamax does and even has the manual lock mode which allows a more even, but still rear biased, torque distribution for those tougher situations.

VTM-4 is different from SH and Dynamax because it is technically 4WD in which the rear wheels are not engaged all of the time. AWD has all four wheels powered all of the time regardless of the amount of torque distribution applied to them. It would appear that this is the case for the Dynamax system as well but they have it marketed as AWD. Publictions say all the power can be driven on the front wheels but Magna says it's almost all of the power so who knows? Either way it's nearly the same thing functionally, no big deal.

The VTM-4 power transfer concept is the same as SH, allowing 70% rear bias proactively and variably. It's part of what gives both SH and VTM-4 their hill climbing and handling advatage over most other AWD and 4WD systems. The Dynamax functions largely the same except they do not publish their percentages of transfer ability (that I know of) so we don't know how effecient it is in comparison, in that regard.

Where SH goes even further than Dynamax and VTM-4 is by adding ATTS or the rear active differential to the system allowing active and variable transfers of torque between the rear wheels as well and the SH electronic systems are believed to be more advanced in detecing when lock out is necessary, eliminating the need for a manually applied lock out mode that both the Dynamax and VTM-4 use. Also SH's braking systems are further incorporated into the AWD system vs just plain traction or stability and there is no mention of any hill grade technology or that it is integrated into the Dynamax system which exists in both SH and VTM.

With SH the brakes are even applied as part of an active handling function or pre-stabilty control, mostly on wither one of the front wheels to compliment the vectored rear wheel, during hard cornering and with virtually zero detection from the driver other then a split second flash of the VSA icon. This part could very well be a function of the KIA system also but they don't publish it.

To combat emergency oversteer/understeer situations the Magna system cuts power to the front axle likely by ABS and throttle control while SH-AWD will redirect power among the front wheels and each of the rear wheels to maintain stability first and only when necessary, reduce engine torque and use ABS to apply brakes to each wheel as needed to help further stabilize the vehicle.

 

Thanks , very good technical explanation.

 

Agreed. It's a KIA.

I love the commercials: "For $14,000 YOU could be driving away in a brand new KIA. Equipped with luxury amenities, such as FM Stereo, Power Windows, Power Sunroof, a mind-blowing 90hp 1.4L engine....... and much much more. "

Pfft. Mind blowing alright.

Those commercials are probably the reason I get the odd KIA riding my ass thinking he's driving a hot rod.

 

the 2011 Optima looks quite a bit better than a 4G TL

 

Still a KIA.

 

Seems interesting, but I'll take my "Symmetrical AWD" that is in my Legacy. I don't know about hill climbing power, but Subaru has more than demonstrated that their system works better than systems that split and apportion torque in a variable fashion. At least their demos have proven this.

And having never driven SH-AWD, I can't comment on it. I have driven Audi Quattro and some other assorted "versions" of some type of AWD and they are not the same.

My car, because it is a spec B, has a Torsen LSD in the rear, and a 45/55 torque split only for a more sporty feel. Other Legacy's are 50/50.

 

And? You're also paying quite a bit less.

 

Audi is really the first to come out with the awd system that changes power from wheel to wheel.

 

Actually. Honestly I'd rather get a TSX for that price (4cyl, 5AT, Nav). Have you ever sat in a KIA before? I feel like I'm sitting in an Asian Saturn.

 

Optima SX + Nav/Premium Sound = $27k... TSX Tech = $32k.. probably with rebates you can push that down to $30k.

 

Honestly, that there is even an 'Acura vs Kia' discussion likely brings a to Kia and a from Honda. Let's hold out for a head to head type AWD test and then we'll see how far Kia has come.

As far as the appearance of the new Optima vs the current TL, that (along with price and fuel economy) will probably be the only area where it trumps the 4G TL.

 

We've gone from the TL to the TSX. How convenient.

 

Just out of curiosity - what car is that in your Avatar? Is it a concept

Party Pooper

 

In all honestly, I feel like Kia is exactly where Honda was back in the 80s. A guy at work has the Forte Koup, that's a hot little car. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw some pretty interesting stuff come out of Kia in the next 10 years.

 

Indeed, it's the concept version of the current generation MDX.

 

I HATED korean cars (too overstyled or cheap looking) until this one. The interior is suprisingly decent as well.

You can get a stiched dashboard which you wont find on any Acura except the ZDX.

 

All the different systems have their advantages and disadvantages. The Quattro and Subaru variants, among others, that tend to focus on a fixed proportion, only vary torque when traction is lost at either both of the front or both of the rear wheels. The center is an effective differential, like an LSD but between the front set and rear set.

Some Quattro and Subaru systems use another LSD in the rear as well and others even in the front too. That's a fantastic concept as it can control slippage in multiple directions but the thing is that is only really useful for conditions that enable that type of traction loss in the first place, mainly off-roading and rallying.

There is almost zero contribution to dry handling since you won't loose the front or rear or one wheel on either entirely when going hard around a race course. Their rear and front bias, if any, is fixed and the only time it varies torque is when it has already lost control to a degree and they cannot maintain that variation of torque for any given amount of time, they revert back to their fixed distribution when traction is regained.

Active proportioned AWD or 4WD systems definately give up lots of off-road and rallying capabilities but that's not necessarily a bad thing because most drivers only commute in the streets and experience seasonal amounts of bad weather. Also many have lock modes for the few times you might actually need continuous and more evenly split power to all four wheels anyway, others have superior detection for those types of situations and are automatically controlled.

These systems sacrifice that extreme poor weather and bad surface traction all of the time for improved handling response and hill grade ascending. They also tend to be more power and fuel effecient, lighter with less parts being a somewhat simpler design, and tend to be more cost effective.

Yes but there is a difference in how systems change power. Audi Quattro's oringination was focused around a Torsen LSD, which they did not invent, simply applied as the center differential to an AWD system. LSD's were already in common use at front and rear axles. Today they only use the center diff and electronic ABS systems as the front and rear diffs. The LSD is what changes the power and is a technology that already existed, it's nothing crazy and while it's results were amazing for Rally sport and it's reputation carried over to the real world driving scene, it's far from a benchmark by today's standards.

"Active" differentials were pioneered by Honda and Mitsubishi. They are what everbody today is moving towards, it's simply superior in combining the aspects of handling and all weather and all surface traction, especially when combined with today's elctronics. Even the variable AWD system is becoming the new standard over the fixed Symmetrical or Asymetrical systems. The next generation of Quattro, and most other current popular systems, are all going variable with the optional addition of active differentials in the rear.

Honda has had an active and variable AWD system since VTM-4 and has had an active differential since 1996 and has had both systems integrated together since the 05 RL with it's SH-AWD.

 

With the momentum each brand has at this moment, Kia owners could be saying "but its an Acura" mocking Acuras by the end of the decade.