HDNBenjamin

Acura is still leading with their Sport Hybrid SH-AWD system.

vhtran

It goes the same with every other brands, one bad apple doesn't make it whole. We have 3 S4, 1 BMW 330x, 1 BMW 528x, 2 A6 and none of them have had any issue with their AWD systems and all of them well over 170K mileage. One of the B5 S4 hit 240K miles. Before you jump on "German Irons", we do have Acuras and Hondas in our driveway.

For performance in bad weather condition, a set of snow tires and common sense would be best. But, with all of my experiences, Audi's Quattro system is bad ass when pair with snow tires.

Here's a boring video of my morning commute a year ago in my 07 A6 + snow tires + 170K miles on that engine. Mind you that the hill is pretty steep! A few occasions you can hear I went WOT and the car just go straight.

fsttyms1

1.) When was this test. Like i said they changed the dif somewhere along the line (looks like for the 2013 version).
2.) I find it hard to believe that they were just burning rubber in a stock sho/or police version. Also note that there are FWD only versions that are police issue


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ge_first_test/

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/201...eptor-car-news

George Knighton

It was a couple of years ago, long enough ago that both the front wheel drive Chevrolet was in the mix, and so was the (at the time new) Dodge Charger.

It was an AWD car. They were bragging about it. Stock or not, I do not know, but it had too much HP for the suspension.

It was not a tight course. It was a 2.5 mile road course.

The Charger rear suspension was impressive, relative to the cars in the mix.

This was before the new Chevrolet PPV.

Timmy18

Mr Hyde

Not saying the systems don't perform well, and my RS is the best handling car I've ever owned. Just saying that even though they are known for their AWD systems, until recently, they hadn't done much advancing the tech.

vhtran

I am not sure what you meant by "until recently" and I am not sure the exact year that Audi revamped their AWD system with torque vectoring. Can Audi or BMW or the others produce a system like SH-AWD from Acura? I am sure they can, but it's up to their engineering department.

Also, what did you mean by advancing their tech? Like I mentioned about the Audi's new torque vectoring. What made you think that the Super Handling is way more advance than Audi's system? The dancing gauge of the torque is just to wow the audience. Again, as I mentioned on the post above, just because you had a bad experience with your RS4 doesn't mean that Audi system is a dinosaur.

Mr Hyde

Once again, I have had no bad experiences with my Audi, and said no such thing. I am not sure how much more clear I can make that. The RS4 debuted a new system that was rear biased by default, but had no torque vectoring of any kind. As a Halo vehicle sold at a premium price for a brand devoted to AWD tech, most probably assume it had a much more advanced system than it did. Again, it drives, and handles better than anything I have ever owned, and is the reason I still have it, and will still continue to own it for quite some time.

I was just pointing out that just because Acura didn't make the list is not an indication that the SH-AWD system is not advanced, but that brand recognition plays a part in this kind of thing, and Acura did a piss poor job of capitalizing on their jump into the marketplace with the tech which is why it is overlooked when looking for AWD comparisons.

Torque vectoring only first appeared with Audi in the B8 S4, The RS5 was the first to allow 70%+ torque to any single wheel, and that tech is now spreading throughout the lineup. These are all great systems, and obviously as time evolved they got better, but many would be surprised that they did not come out earlier from a brand devoted to AWD tech. There is much more to these systems than just driving straight in the snow, and asking me why I think torque vectoring is superior to the old systems would be like asking me why I think a LSD is superior to an open diff.

SH-AWD is just "dancing torque gauges to wow the audience" That's just ridiculous. It is not a fake display or parlor tricks. There is real tech behind it that won awards from popular mechanics, and others for its innovation when it first appeared on the RL 9 yrs ago, and similar tech has been, and is being developed, and sold by every AWD maker out there.

vhtran

Please accept my apology for misunderstood you. I replied to your post only because I thought you were the one that complained about the RS4 that has faulty AWD. I also want to apology for not making it clear about the "dancing" part. I just wanted to throw (added) in with the "advance tech" that you mentioned. I, however do agreed that Acura's AWD system works very well and reliable and never deny that.

And here's my opinion that Audi didn't advance their AWD technology because there was no competition at the time until now that Acura adjusted and beefed up the SH-AWD.

George Knighton

Can you comment on why you might believe Audi decided to make the torque vectoring Sport Differential less available, and available across fewer models?

Honda seems to believe it's a good idea to have torque vectoring across a wide variety of models, whereas Audi seems to have decided it's not as desirable as they previously believed.

Mr Hyde

I don't work for either manufacturer, but am confused by your post. Acura only has AWD option on 2 sedans (TLX, RLX), and 2 SUVs (MDX, RDX). According to rumors, down the road, they may offer it as an option on all model lines to overcome their lack of RWD options similar to what Audi did.

Audi's newest system that started with the RS5 has already trickled over to the 2012, and up A6, A7, and A8's as options. As time moves on, I would imagine the A4, and below will have the same.

George Knighton

I must have missed something if you're saying that they are options with the Sport Differential.

Is that what you're saying, that the models you mentioned when equipped with Quattro are also equipped with the Sport Differential?

I'm not a real fan of Audi, and if you know that ahead of time it might appear to you that you're walking into a trap.

But you're not. :-) I really just don't know.

George Knighton

Now that I've thought about it, this was before I had the 4G TL 6-6 SH-AWD, so that probably makes it the summer of 2009, August or September.

I remember leading a Chevrolet FWD with my Accord 6-6 HFP Coupe over what I regarded as the FWD line at this track, which bounced you rather heavily over some gaters in the Carousel.

My point at the time was that the Chevrolet could do it but the Ford would bounce sideways and have to go through slower to avoid the bouncing.

Mr Hyde

I believe they are options on the A6, and above.

The S4 has a sport diff option as well, but it is the older system which I wont get into details on here.

George Knighton

I just tried to configure an A6 Prestige and an A7 Prestige and could not find any specific option or package that mentioned the Sport Differential.

Do you by any chance know how we'd configure a car to get the torque vectoring differential?

I wondered if it were included in the Sport Suspension option, but inasmuch as it is only 695.00, and looking at what is mentioned as included, I do not see how the Sport Differential could be a part of such a cheap package.

Mr Hyde

I think you are right, and you can't. I know that in A6 reviews when the 2012 came out, it was reviewed, and almost universally loved, but I guess it was pulled as an option for the US market prior to going on sale here. Not sure why they would do that, but I guess they didn't feel the need for it, and just offer their standard quattro system on the non S/RS cars.

Looks like it is optional on the S4, and A8, but standard on the S/RS models starting at the S6 level.

wmba

The SH-AWD system is adequate, no more than that in its basic system. It has no center differential, just a electronic clutch, so it's behind the eight ball there. It's like the Torsen in that regard.

So it overdrives the rear wheels by 1.7% compared to the fronts by simple gearing. Then the actual Super-Handling element is a clutch based system, one on each rear axle, that engages a different set of gear ratios to overspeed the outside rear wheel in tight turns. That's the only clever part. ZF copied it for BMW's optional system on the X5, and Audi copied it too for an option.

Subaru has four different systems, which because they know it would be beyond the ken of Mr and Mrs Average Citizen to explain the systems, they just call symmetrical AWD. The most basic one, MPT, is the one y've been refining since 1987, and is most similar to the basic SH-AWD. It is used only with auto transmissions, whether the old 4 speed or new CVT. MPT stands for Multi-Plate clutch Transfer, same as CAcura

wmba

The SH-AWD system is adequate, no more than that in its basic system. It has no center differential, just a electronic clutch, so it's behind the eight ball there. It's like the Torsen in that regard.

So it overdrives the rear wheels by 1.7% compared to the fronts by simple gearing. Then the actual Super-Handling element is a clutch based system, one on each rear axle, that engages a different set of gear ratios to overspeed the outside rear wheel in tight turns. That's the only clever part. ZF copied it for BMW's optional system on the X5, and Audi copied it too for an option.

Subaru has four different systems, which because they know it would be beyond the ken of Mr and Mrs Average Citizen to understand the systems, they just call symmetrical AWD. The most basic one, MPT, is the one they've been refining since 1987, and is most similar to the basic SH-AWD. It is used only with auto transmissions, whether the old 4 speed or new CVT. MPT stands for Multi-Plate clutch Transfer, same as CAcura

George Knighton

Could you take a moment to describe for us how the Subaru MPT system vectors torque to point the car.

I wasn't aware that it did that.

g37guy01

There is racing AWD and then there is weather AWD. 6 storms that crippled the East Coast: Extreme freezes | MNN - Mother Nature Network and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2010_North_American_blizzard

The reason I have a Forester as a winter car is to get to work when there is over two feet of snow on the ground; where BMWs, Acuras, Infinitis, and Audi sedans won't be able to get out of the driveways.


Low tech sometimes is better than high tech. I could care less if an MDX wants to try and show how superior SHAWD is in two feet of snow and try to show off.

d1sturb3d119

iTrader: (1)

Its great that a system works for you but don't spread bullshit about a low tech system being high tech. Get educated on how things work first.

And there is no such thing as "racing AWD" and "weather AWD". Stop making shit up. AWD has different forms of implementation some more aggressive than others. By that account the TL's AWD should be considered "racing" because it sends 70% of the power to the rear wheels. Get a clue.l

The forester has as much ground clearance as the MDX has and the MDX will wipe the floor with the forester. Just because you don't "think" so doesn't change facts. All the cars you've mentioned have variants that have higher ground clearance. Think before speaking. Plenty of us cars that drive in the winter. I drive a FWD car with an LSD on it and I do just fine in whatever weather as long as I have the necessary ground clearance.

Just because you can't grasp how the system works doesn't mean that an open diff 4wd system is better.

g37guy01

Huh, what?

What is SHAWD? It's a system designed to increase the handling. Will that help the TLX in deep snow? Of course not. Who's making shit up?

My point is, which you obviously missed, if you view AWD as a bad weather aid vs a performance aid, low tech works just as well, if not better than a high tech system on a low ground clearance sedan.

As far as the MDX mopping the floor with the Forester on dry roads, yes it will but it also costs twice as much. On deep snow covered roads, they will be equal, based on the tires.

d1sturb3d119

iTrader: (1)

People here are asking for the best AWD. Your misunderstanding of what SHAWD does is the problem. You are also comparing a crossover to a full size sedan. You're comparing apples to oranges.

When you are stuck, in deep snow unless you are completely high centered, ANY vehicle can get out. If on road, your goal is to try and get the tires to compact the snow to drive over it. If off road or on thick snow your goal is to distribute the weight of the vehicle on as big a contact patch as possible so you drive ON the snow. These two variants of figuring out what to do can be positively affected when your vehicle detects slip and sends power to the wheel that does not slip or in other words VECTOR TORQUE.

Now if your subi detects slip it applies the brake to vector torque meaning your brakes are now being applied to push torque from left to right which takes time during which your wheels spin.

On the other hand the SHAWD system distributes drive buy sensing slip and immediately directing power without a loss in time to prevent excessive slip. Meaning I spin my tires less. THIS is what generates traction. Static friction.

So again if you want carefree tech that will solve everything SHAWD works. That's not to say symmetrical AWD doesn't but people claiming that a mechanical implementation of AWD is better than electronic torque vectoring are plain wrong. Is there a big difference in daily life? Nope as long as you know how to extract performance from both.

On the MDX it is designed to give you the most traction. Traction is what gets you out of snow. If you're driving off road or though 6ft of snow, ground clearance becomes paramount.

Between the two the Forester would be easier to drive given its lack of weight so it would do better in deep snow than the MDX. MDX wouldn't feel as controllable as the Forester given how heavy it is. But it does a lot more with its AWD so it would feel planted.

How often do you have a couple feet of snow in built up areas? My primary comment was directed toward AWD and its implementation. Subaru has marketed their AWD very well and plenty of people believe that only Subi's and Quattro's are capable in bad weather. Many fail to understand traction is the most important factor in bad weather.

The 2 things dictating how good a vehicle's traction is, would be:
1. Tires and
2. Drivetrain layout. (meaning how many contact patches actually contribute to traction.)

The Subi's do not have a system that works on magic. It is an older archaic implementation of AWD. Many people will never ever realize how to use any of this tech to the best of their advantage.

Good drivers grasp how this works and change their driving style to suit how the vehicle operates. You can drive a 2wd vehicle with an open diff just as well as a 4wd or an AWD vehicle as long as you know how to make the technology work for you.

Mr Hyde

Great info; Thank you.

This is exactly what I was getting at in my initial posts.

Majofo

I've gotten the MDX sideways on more than one occasion. The tires you have on are more important than what wheel is spinning.

d1sturb3d119

iTrader: (1)

Yup, tires are number one for any car. After that a good AWD system makes driving easy and getting out of a really bad situation easy.

Best mod to any vehicle are the tires. All else is secondary.

jwong77

Agreed, Acura marketing fails often.

BEAR-AvHistory

Do these systems SHAWD & Stubi AWD have High & Low range transfer cases?

fsttyms1

^ No

d1sturb3d119

iTrader: (1)

Unnecessary since they're not hardcore off road vehicles and aren't going to be crawling any way. Only dedicated off road vehicles typically have them. Chevrolet Tahoe, Land Rover Range Rover, Jeep Compass, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Wrangler, Nissan Pathfinder, Toyota 4Runner and Toyota FJ Cruiser to name a few.

BEAR-AvHistory

Thanks for the info was just curious. Both my Ranger & Expedition have them as did my old 4X4 Explorer. The Ranger was bought for hunting among other things.

Only comment I would make on not needing dual range on a DD is agree in most all cases except for deep snow.

MMRRGG

No one is making shit up. How about you look up video's on youtube that show what happens with Acura SHAWD on 20% and even 30% ramps with ice placed periodically. You'll see Audi, BMW and others try to stand up to Acura. NONE of them stand a chance. For once they stopped talking and put all cars to the test. The winner: Acura SH-AWD.

To answer your question about a tlx in the snow. If its deep, its done. just like any other car. However if you are looking for a vehicle that can put power to wheels with traction.. nothing will touch an acura. I will admit the only torque vectoring that will have a chance is Audi. And I actually dropped HP from an 2013 Audi S6 with 420 HP and 406 torque to my Acura. Do to one reason... Torque vectoring system. Prize by far...Acura.

MMRRGG

Suburu is getting there. but not even close to Acura. Systematic wont touch SH-AWD. I've driven both.

Tony Pac

Very old thread

Now we have SH=AWD 2.0 and it should be better.

mrgold35

The sport hybrid sh-awd can do pretty much any combo of on and off power vectoring, regen braking, and front/back or left/right torque split as needed depending on the driving conditions up to 75 mph. I've seen only one rear tire engaged to provide forward traction, fwd gas engine only traction, or up to all 4 motors providing max hp/tq at the same time. The major advantage of sh-sh-awd is it can still provide sh-awd with your foot off the gas or on the brakes and zero power from the gas engine. I don't think any of the mechanical awd systems on the above list work with zero engine power?

MMRRGG

Probably. You're right that is an old thread but unfortunately no company has opened a new window. Although Acura is talking about "break" vectoring like others have done. They still handle better than anything in the snow. Want looking to call you out but when you mentioned they are only performance on dry roads, i had to step in. I will also agree..1st point to be made us good tires. Point being: put the same tires on all vehicles, nothing even now will touch Sh-awd. I have a great friend that owns a german garage. He will sadly admit that Acura still knows best. TC

MMRRGG

.

I stand corrected. With what I've driven, that was their only downfall being that you had to stay on the gas. It's fun.. but can be dangerous. Hindsight: driving an Acura to it's fullest. (Took my 305 hp to 373hp) if not aware, can be dangerous. (Didn't go over 373 because then problems will rise with the T. Vectoring. I still stand by..I really don't think anything can touch it. The irony is that Acura is cheaper than most competition.

Speed_Racer

I'm still not 100% comfortable pushing the gas pedal in a curve for SH-AWD to do it's thing. It's so counter intuitive. Even in the dry. It feels like it's about to give and lose traction. Although haven't come close to what feels like exceeding it yet.

mrgold35

I think Acura missed an excellent opportunity with the 2.4L TLX by not adding the hybrid tech to that. It is a $3500 upgrade on the MDX compared to the fwd version ($1500 upgrade over the sh-awd MDX). The hybrid tech could have added 50-60 hp/tq to the 2.4L AND get +33 mpgs combined AND have the most sophisticated "bang for the buck" awd system on the market. The 2.4L TLX hybrid would have around 260-270 hp and 230-250 tq depending on how the hp/tq power curve lines up with 2.4L engine+3 electric motors. I love having the power and handling abilities close to the 3.5L sh-awd; but, the combined mpgs of the 2.4L engine with my MDX sport hybrid.

edmua6

You should give it a shot once at least. It's fun!