mylove4cars

This is because most of the public, drives like an 8 year old with a shopping cart in the supermarket (I believe someone mentioned that before) And here in the S.W of the US where I live most people are uneducated drivers, even the word snow makes them hide and stack-up water and groceries like preparing for Armageddon.

Not only for snow, the Tl SH-AWD is a safer and more enjoyable ride than most vehicles in it's class, even beyond.

docboy

LOL, my wife and in-laws are like this. The brief mention or POSSIBILITY of snow, and they freak out and hunker down as if there is going to be nuclear war.

Not saying that SH-AWD makes one invincible during a snow storm by any means, but a sound driver+SH-AWD+nice all seasons makes the TL (or any Acura with SH-AWD) a great winter vehicle. I've taken my TL up hills and snow resorts, and it has plenty of surefooted grip.

internalaudit

Anyone know, where the SH-AWD ranks on this list? I'm surprise they considered (well, it's wikipedia where information can be freely updated) the 2015 WRX with the brake based vectoring as true active torque vectoring.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...rx-sti-feature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque_vectoring

• Audi's quattro with Sport Differential
• BMW's xDrive with Dynamic Performance Control
• Honda's SH-AWD
• Kia's Dynamax™ AWD
• Land Rover's All New Range Rover Sport HSE and Autobiography Dynamics models [9]
• Mercedes-Benz's SLS AMG Electric Drive combined with active front-back torque vectoring
• Mitsubishi's Active Yaw Control
• Nissan Juke
• Saab's XWD
• Ford on several models
• Porsche on several models, when torque vectoring added as an option
• Subaru's AWD on 2015 WRX
• Holden Special Vehicles Gen-F GTS[10]

KeithL

If Acura wants to really show off PAWS and it is not a gimmick have reviewers test 2 cars, one with PAWS enabled the other disabled. Until they do that I suspect the gains are minimal at best for most drivers, my M37S had 4 wheel steering and I could not tell a difference. Granted PAWS is a bit more sophisticated, but still....

mylove4cars

I have elaborated about this matter before, I have driven the P-AWS and in my experience the gains were indeed minimal.

I'm not saying its a gimmick, an extended test on a track with 2 vehicles one with P-AWS and one without tested in different weather circumstances will tell the story for the biggest part.

BEAR-AvHistory

Minimal could be the difference between someone getting hurt or getting by. Its a good thing especially compared to nothing.

mylove4cars

What I mean and in my experience with P-AWS is: In case you get that close to the limit, it will be the drivers quality of controlling the vehicle that will save the day. (Not P-AWS)

Kevin, I don't know if you tried both, in case not you should give it a shot.

Rocket_man

And unlike SH-AWD I bet that P-AWS doesn't add that much to the cost of the car. 2 linear actuators, a computer (whose NRE was bought down by the RLX) and a simple wire harness. I look forward to test driving it.

BEAR-AvHistory

I have decent seat time in a SHAWD but have never driven a P-AWS system. My BMW dealer also is an Acura store so will give one a try when I am in for service.

mylove4cars

Kevin, I’m interested to hear your opinion.

Btw. I’m close to purchase a BMW – Are you recommending something that I should know or be specifically aware off.

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=909515&page=2

BEAR-AvHistory

Think its luck of the draw. I have had 4 with no problems others have had issues. Think the newer ones are much more reliable than the older ones were, but ran a 2004 for 120K miles with no unscheduled maintained & $1100 out of pocket in 9 years excluding tires.

Had more unscheduled maintenance issues with my 2006TL then the combined BMW set. Others have had no issues with the TL, same deal luck of the draw but most cars are better than they used to be.

George Knighton

I dissent from the view that P-AWS is not a significant change to what a car is capable of doing.

P-AWS limits understeer, which is what destroys a front drive car's lap times.

If you're in a front drive car with electronics that can be completely disabled, and you can do some fancy left foot braking and take advantage of radical lift throttle oversteer techniques (here's that tire patch thing again), then you can be a lot faster.

But P-AWS, believe me, is a much better overall solution.

And SH-AWD is even better, of course. :-)

mylove4cars

"P-AWS limits understeer, which is what destroys a front drive car's lap times."

By how much, if I may ask (Can you back this up with a track time?). I have driven both, with and without P-AWS in different weather, I have driven both cars normal and spirited.The feel with P-AWS might have been a little less pronounced FWD; hence the behavior was very similar.

Both vehicles performed understeer at practically same speed levels and needed to be corrected the same way (no magic with P-AWS).

I would strongly suggest for anyone disagreeing about this matter; to try as I above described, before making bold statements.

Colin

^^. It may be that in the hands of a extremely capable driver, two front-wheel-drive cars, one with P-AWS and one without, will reach the limits of adhesion at a similar pace. In other words, driven at 10/10s they will behave the same. However, for another driver, it may be easier to reach 8/10s in a car in equipped with P-AWS than without.

mylove4cars

Do you mean because the feel of confidence is enhanced by P-AWS?

holografique

^ this guy just can't live with the fact that for some people (like me) P-AWS does make a difference, and quite a noticeable difference.

After driving a 2006 3G TL for 6 years, I can tell you from the minute I entered my RLX, I felt a significant difference in driving a vehicle with P-AWS versus a vehicle without P-AWS. And like I stated once before (although being pinned as making mis-leading statements and comments), it reminded me of how SH-AWD felt. Clearly not as pronounced, but for me, an every-day driver, it felt similar.

I'm not a track racer, never have been, never will be. I'm just a normal guy who likes cars that feel good, look good, and are enjoyable to drive. That's it.

internalaudit

Enhanced stability makes sense based on your experience and this acura video:
http://www.hondanews.com/channels/ac...-demonstration

George Knighton

Okay, now you've given yourself away and I'm going to have to join the list of people who do not believe that you are contributing legitimately.

What you said is not correct, assuming you really are driving at 10/10 and you really are on the typical 2.5 mile American road course.

George Knighton

I'm surprised how long the "ignore" list is here. :-/

mylove4cars

I'm not debating that the RLX felt better for you; I'm debating statements made about P-AWS without driving both vehicles under the same circumstances, making an evaluation of differences without being able to back them up with facts.

I did drive them both, and I can back-up what I state.

Btw. This has nothing to do with racing; this has to do with safety, being overly confident is a bad approach in daily traffic driving. A system that gives you that feeling but is non-existent should not be advertised as such, which I'm pretty sure Acura did not and will not do, only assumption's made on the internet by individuals giving a misconception. Which I believe is bad advice.

Colin

Yes and No. More confidence will allow a 'ordinary' driver to explore the outer envelope better. But I was thinking that until you reach the ultimate limit of adhesion, there is an advantage gained by changing the rear slip angles relative to the front. And since most drivers 'quit' pushing in a corner long before the car gives up, they'll find they're going faster with with the system than without.

mylove4cars

Let me ask you this, have you tried or performed similar tests; in case not what are you base yourself on to say I'm not correct?

mylove4cars

Colin,
Don't you think this is a misinterpretation of reality?

Colin

No. It's a drivers aid, not unlike antilock brakes, or traction control. Not everybody is a professional driver on a racetrack. Making performance available to a wider range of drivers is a benefit.

mylove4cars

Colin,
I agree with making performance available to a wider range of drivers is a benefit; I'm for it 1000% , only in case of the real meaning of the word, I'm sorry I cannot find this in P-AWS, that's why I drove both, with and without to compare. If some drivers going to think this will perform like SH-AWD on a canyon road (good luck) I hope the ravine is not to deep. The way P-AWS is projected here will make a lot people believe that's close to SH-AWD.

What I'm saying about P-AWS is that the difference in behavior is minimal when you get to understeer; its going be up to you the driver to correct that understeer, the P-AWS is not going to do this for you. This is not like ABS; before the existence of ABS we repeatedly pumped the brake to keep us out of trouble, ABS came around as an aid that is correct. P-AWS is not, and for sure is not a substitute for SH-AWD. P-AWS might give the RLX a little more of a nimble drive.

"(P-AWS is tuned to “mimic” oversteer as much as possible in corners leading to a peculiar combination of slight torque steer, (very) mild oversteer and a hint of wheel hop all at the same time.)" from http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...lx-with-video/ other example (mimics oversteer) I tried to correct mimic oversteer; well I can't, it does not exist. Maybe some of the wizards can help out here. The illusion of oversteer with a FWD vehicle that understeers.

Colin

Whoa, slow down buddy. Unless you are bringing your argument with somebody else to me, please step back. I have never said that P-AWS is a substitute for all-wheel-drive. If it was, why would they go through the trouble and expense of making an all-wheel-drive car?

It offers benefits over a purely front-wheel-drive vehicle by helping to make the back end a part of the action. It can toe in the rear wheels under braking to enhance stability, and works with the Agile Handling Assist to reduce understeer and make the most of what the chassis has to offer. Period.

George Knighton

In the first place, you have made an impossible assertion.

You said that you had driven the same vehicle on the track with and without P-AWS.

Honda has never built a vehicle that is identical to a P-AWS car.

So.... Objection to the premise as non-factual, m'lud.

I have had many front wheel drive cars on the track, and I have had an RLX Advance on the track.

I used to drive an Accord 6-6 Coupe that I used while instructing at road courses. I helped the state police test and decide what kind of cars they wanted to buy in their purchase in 2012, and I was personally responsible for showing them how it was possible to drive the old style front drive Impala in a way that made it as good as the Crown Victoria, which bounced two feet sideways over a gater as it tried to keep up.

That was of course just a stop gap solution until the models they wanted came out, but my point is that I'm intimately acquainted with how front drive cars perform on road courses. I drive NASA Group 4 and 5 whenever I want, and I am a certified instructor on many courses on the east coast.

The RLX Advance is not any kind of track car. However, the point is that it is better than front drive. It reduces understeer and you are thereby able to apply more throttle than you'd normally be able to apply because the car is pointed where it's supposed to be pointed, and relatively flat instead of being in a close hauled heel, allowing a greater chance of both front wheels having relevant traction.

No, of course I have not driven an RLX Advance without P-AWS because no such creature exists, nor has any model ever been produced by Honda in an identical platform with and without P-AWS in a conventional front drive platform.

I have driven an RLX Advance on a road course, and I know exactly what it does and how it performs.

I try to be as polite as humanly possible, but in this case I am prepared to say that you need to think more about what you are saying and withdraw some of the things you have said if you want to be regarded as someone to whom we should be listening.

P-AWS is not a substitute for SH-AWD.

It is just a way to mitigate the understeering tendency of a front wheel drive vehicle, and it does this by rotating the car and keeping the car flat. This allows you to put more power down, but it will not be as fast even in theory as SH-AWD, especially in the two current iterations, the RLX Hybrid and TLX SH-AWD.

George Knighton

You say so many things that makes people doubt that you have driven an RLX in an aggressive or on-track situation.

It doesn't mimic [sic] anything. It does it.

I don't see where anybody with any credibility has ever said that SH-AWD is something that P-AWS equals. To some extent, it's a moot point because nobody has really asserted that.

However, for you to attempt to assert that P-AWS does as little as you seem to be saying is to deny reality and to deny the personal experiences of many Honda and Acura test drivers, including some in the American HPD programme, and to deny the personal experiences of many people who've driven their cars on track.

George Knighton

It also makes more performance available more of the time to drivers who do have experience.

The greatest handicap for me is that it takes a very small, incremental but noticeable 1/8 second to react.

The consequence is that if you've entered a high speed turn (it's usually the final turn before a straight), you'll have already made a correction for the car's angle in the turn and P-AWS will make you counter that as the car goes from understeer-neutral-slight oversteer.

You get the hang of it, but the first couple of times it catches you a little off guard. It's not a car you should drive 10/10 immediately because it is not your typical RL or Accord...it's very different. It might even take you a couple of sprint sessions to get used to it to get the most out of it.

mylove4cars

Colin,
In the first place, I'm not attacking anyone. look at my first line to you. I did not say that you mentioned or said that P-AWS is a substitute for all-wheel-drive.

"(Colin, I agree with making performance available to a wider range of drivers is a benefit; I'm for it 1000%" )

I'm exchanging information; hence for one reason or another and in most cases people do not like to here the truth.

If people don't like to hear my own experience, fine, like somebody so eloquently made a comment about the ignore list; so be it.

I will never make a statement, just to satisfy a group of people here on this board or elsewhere. I will tell my experience the way I felt it, nothing more nothing less.

fsttyms1

Problem is, is giving the "ordinary" driver the confidence without the experience only leads to greater chance of a larger mishap.

I can see how this could be a great thing for emergency maneuvers, especially higher speed braking stability, but i prefer a much cheaper and easier way to help get the car to rotate, better suspension setup

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

We have been doing this for ages. The electronic driver aids and many of the AWD systems that have been added to cars over the years are doing precisely what you describe above. All of the driver aids that make performance more accessible cannot overcome the laws of physics, which makes outcomes increasingly spectacular when shit goes awry. This isn't unique to just the P-AWS system.

ggesq

iTrader: (1)

May I ask what two cars you tested?

What were the weather conditions?

What track?

What tires were on each vehicle?

fsttyms1

mylove4cars

I did not catch that, because of the unreal statement you made; you are saying that I stated I drove 2 RLX cars one with P-AWS and another RLX car without. (come-on) Look at all my posts, I'm talking about FWD Vs P-AWS and not comparable with SH-AWD. What is your objective, I wonder?

Btw. I drove P-AWS on a track and many FWD vehicles on tracks, If you point to (read my sentence in the right context) - I mentioned to Keitl the following)

"I'm not saying its a gimmick, an extended test on a track with 2 vehicles one with P-AWS and one without tested in different weather circumstances will tell the story for the biggest part."

mylove4cars

1. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...lx-with-video/ other example (mimics oversteer) (Not so?)

2. Look at page 1 George, in case no one implied the capabilities of P-AWS overly close to SH-AWD, its not my purpose to start a flame war. Hence I commented on it.

mylove4cars

Yep, they should spent there monies on a driving (racing) class with George

George, before you get offended, I'm kidding

George Knighton

I apologize, but I think that part of my problem is that I'm misinterpreting what you're saying. Sometimes the syntax is a little odd.

Somehow I got from what you were typing here and elsewhere that you were trying to say that you had driven a platform that was SH-AWD, FWD, and P-AWS and you'd had the opportunity to compare them.

From your subsequent typing I see that my interpretation must be incorrect, and I am sorry about that.

What I'd like to know is to what platform you are comparing the RLX in order to say that P-AWS doesn't improve anything.

And as for the author who said that P-AWS is a mimic [sic] of oversteer, I can only say that he's not the first person who's gone to print not knowing what he was talking about.

I wonder if some of your typing wasn't a minor over reaction to your belief that some people were equating it too closely to SH-AWD, or acting as if it were a solution to bad driving.

I also wonder, after looking at several posts of yours and thinking about the writing style, and what's likely to be your first language, if perhaps we haven't met before.

George Knighton

I wish that we could get more enthusiasts on the track. They'd be better, safer and...slower, probably.

I'm a much, much safer (and sometimes slower) driver on public roads than I used to be, and it's largely because of driving on the track for 20 years.

I've seen one too many upside down BMW with the roof crushed down to the seat backs, that's for sure.

I wish it didn't cost so much that young people couldn't do it very much, because that's when people need to do it.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

I couldn't agree with you more, George. I spent a fair amount of time doing time on the track in a variety of different cars and am a much better and more aware driver for it. I had the good fortune to have someone who indulged me for serving on his pit crew, but even without it, I took advantage of any opportunity for lower cost track time or autocross.

Still, we would do well to provide better and more rigorous driver training to new drivers to improve the overall level of skill of drivers on the road.