4WD trends
12-07-2005, 08:06 PM
#51
Contributors
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Big D, Texas
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jmatthe' post='208558' date='Dec 7 2005, 09:35 PM
Oh and if AWD had handling advantages outweighing weight, race cars would have it!
These are all opinions.
Oh by the way, I have one of each...
These are all opinions.
Oh by the way, I have one of each...
Racing is so specialized, just like cars, I think AWD has its place, as well as RWD. Very interesting thread and I have enjoyed reading it. Thanks, everyone.
Regards, Mike. (Who has never owned a 4WD or AWD vehicle)
12-08-2005, 03:11 AM
#53
Senior Members
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NC, USA
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: weight. True - market forces of higher gas prices would be the right way to do this. I totally agree. But - in the US, people go absolutely crazy if gas prices are higher and want the government to cut taxes. It would be possible to put a 5000 pound limit on cars/trucks that are not used in a commercial setting. It would effect 5% of the population and would be a start for sanity. MB might have to scale back a little on their large sedans.
Now you could argue that just let the market be pure. But the reality is that govt has been subsidizing the true cost of cars for years. Have gas taxes just cover the cost of road maintenance and construction and you would have a start.
Sensibility is subjective but Angelino Jolie is hot (beauty). There are certain norms that at least a majority can agree with. Driving a 6000 pound vehicle for safety is getting ridiculous in terms of what it does to the environment moving that thing around. If it ran on H2 - then go for it. But it is a danger on the road in what it will do to a 20 year old in a Honda Civic...
Now you could argue that just let the market be pure. But the reality is that govt has been subsidizing the true cost of cars for years. Have gas taxes just cover the cost of road maintenance and construction and you would have a start.
Sensibility is subjective but Angelino Jolie is hot (beauty). There are certain norms that at least a majority can agree with. Driving a 6000 pound vehicle for safety is getting ridiculous in terms of what it does to the environment moving that thing around. If it ran on H2 - then go for it. But it is a danger on the road in what it will do to a 20 year old in a Honda Civic...
12-08-2005, 05:06 AM
#54
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
Originally Posted by 300TTto545' post='208644' date='Dec 8 2005, 07:11 AM
Re: weight. True - market forces of higher gas prices would be the right way to do this. I totally agree. But - in the US, people go absolutely crazy if gas prices are higher and want the government to cut taxes. It would be possible to put a 5000 pound limit on cars/trucks that are not used in a commercial setting. It would effect 5% of the population and would be a start for sanity. MB might have to scale back a little on their large sedans.
It seems to me that if the decision to limit auto weight is made, then it ought to affect more than, say, 5%, but, of course, there is no way to magically determine the percent that should be affected. But, as you say, it would be a start. I would vote for doing so if given the opportunity. But, I hope they won't apply the electoral system--majority rule?. I won't vote for against 4,000 lbs though unless the goverment will buy our X5 at a reasonable price.
Now you could argue that just let the market be pure. But the reality is that govt has been subsidizing the true cost of cars for years. Have gas taxes just cover the cost of road maintenance and construction and you would have a start.
I agree that govenment should not subsidize the cost of cars/the auto industry by not recovering enough from gasoline taxes to cover the costs of related infrastructure. Not doing so would, of course, also result in significantly higher "gas prices" and probably would not be allowed to reduce taxes otherwise.
Sensibility is subjective but Angelino Jolie is hot (beauty). There are certain norms that at least a majority can agree with. Driving a 6000 pound vehicle for safety is getting ridiculous in terms of what it does to the environment moving that thing around. If it ran on H2 - then go for it. But it is a danger on the road in what it will do to a 20 year old in a Honda Civic...
What you say is very reasonable, but your comments bring so many imponderables to mind that I'll just barely get started--and mainly in the spirit of fun since I have no answers. I'll just mention first that AJ is attractive, but she is not quite my type. Now, if you had said Naomi Watts or Charliez Theron (not in Monster though), then we would be able to pass a law. And, what about those that like more Rubenesque women? We can't ban such women even if those liking them are in the minority and the women don't fit into some normative group. And, OK, here's another one. What about what any car will do to a motorcycle or bicycle rider? Maybe motorcycles, Civics, and bicycles should be banned instead of all cars or just really big cars. In this regard, I do think that one has to take personal responsibility for being subject to the risks of what he or she choose to drive/ride.
It seems to me that if the decision to limit auto weight is made, then it ought to affect more than, say, 5%, but, of course, there is no way to magically determine the percent that should be affected. But, as you say, it would be a start. I would vote for doing so if given the opportunity. But, I hope they won't apply the electoral system--majority rule?.
I won't vote for against 4,000 lbs though unless the goverment will buy our X5 at a reasonable price. Now you could argue that just let the market be pure. But the reality is that govt has been subsidizing the true cost of cars for years. Have gas taxes just cover the cost of road maintenance and construction and you would have a start.
I agree that govenment should not subsidize the cost of cars/the auto industry by not recovering enough from gasoline taxes to cover the costs of related infrastructure. Not doing so would, of course, also result in significantly higher "gas prices" and probably would not be allowed to reduce taxes otherwise.
Sensibility is subjective but Angelino Jolie is hot (beauty). There are certain norms that at least a majority can agree with. Driving a 6000 pound vehicle for safety is getting ridiculous in terms of what it does to the environment moving that thing around. If it ran on H2 - then go for it. But it is a danger on the road in what it will do to a 20 year old in a Honda Civic...
What you say is very reasonable, but your comments bring so many imponderables to mind that I'll just barely get started--and mainly in the spirit of fun since I have no answers. I'll just mention first that AJ is attractive, but she is not quite my type. Now, if you had said Naomi Watts or Charliez Theron (not in Monster though), then we would be able to pass a law.
And, what about those that like more Rubenesque women? We can't ban such women even if those liking them are in the minority and the women don't fit into some normative group. And, OK, here's another one. What about what any car will do to a motorcycle or bicycle rider? Maybe motorcycles, Civics, and bicycles should be banned instead of all cars or just really big cars. In this regard, I do think that one has to take personal responsibility for being subject to the risks of what he or she choose to drive/ride.
12-08-2005, 10:38 AM
#55
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it is fun to see that my thread gave a lot of input. My humble 
opinion remains. Anything that would improve your (my) driving, e.g. DSC, ABS, Active suspension etc. etc. are all features that add safety. But then again, there will always be different drivers out there.
Some replies to this thread are about hard core drivers. Basically saying the good driving skills comes before any subsystem in the car. And I would assume that all those core drivers can brake better than ABS and ABS with panic brake assistants etc.??
From my view it is all about development and evolution of the car industry and its technology. 4WD is just one feature and I bet that no one on this forum would succeed to feel the difference in a blind test (drive) of a E60 RWD vs AWD. So that famous BMW handling is preserved.
Personally, I've had several cars ranging from FWD, RWD and AWD and sure to say they all have their pros and cons of course. But my final rankings upon choosing a car would be:
From a safety & usability perspective
1) AWD
2) FWD
3) RWD
From a economical point of view
1) FWD
2) RWD
3) AWD
From a race track perspective
1) RWD
2) AWD
3) FWD
and finally from a image & emotional perspective
1) AWD
2) RWD
3) FWD
Have fun...
Ciao!
/Knubblo
opinion remains. Anything that would improve your (my) driving, e.g. DSC, ABS, Active suspension etc. etc. are all features that add safety. But then again, there will always be different drivers out there. Some replies to this thread are about hard core drivers. Basically saying the good driving skills comes before any subsystem in the car. And I would assume that all those core drivers can brake better than ABS and ABS with panic brake assistants etc.??
From my view it is all about development and evolution of the car industry and its technology. 4WD is just one feature and I bet that no one on this forum would succeed to feel the difference in a blind test (drive) of a E60 RWD vs AWD. So that famous BMW handling is preserved.
Personally, I've had several cars ranging from FWD, RWD and AWD and sure to say they all have their pros and cons of course. But my final rankings upon choosing a car would be:
From a safety & usability perspective
1) AWD
2) FWD
3) RWD
From a economical point of view
1) FWD
2) RWD
3) AWD
From a race track perspective
1) RWD
2) AWD
3) FWD
and finally from a image & emotional perspective
1) AWD
2) RWD
3) FWD
Have fun...
Ciao!
/Knubblo
12-08-2005, 11:45 AM
#56
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
Originally Posted by Knubblo' post='208798' date='Dec 8 2005, 02:38 PM
Well, it is fun to see that my thread gave a lot of input. My humble opinion remains. Anything that would improve your (my) driving, e.g. DSC, ABS, Active suspension etc. etc. are all features that add safety. But then again, there will always be different drivers out there.
Some replies to this thread are about hard core drivers. Basically saying the good driving skills comes before any subsystem in the car. And I would assume that all those core drivers can brake better than ABS and ABS with panic brake assistants etc.??
From my view it is all about development and evolution of the car industry and its technology. 4WD is just one feature and I bet that no one on this forum would succeed to feel the difference in a blind test (drive) of a E60 RWD vs AWD. So that famous BMW handling is preserved.
Personally, I've had several cars ranging from FWD, RWD and AWD and sure to say they all have their pros and cons of course. But my final rankings upon choosing a car would be:
From a safety & usability perspective
1) AWD
2) FWD
3) RWD
From a economical point of view
1) FWD
2) RWD
3) AWD
From a race track perspective
1) RWD
2) AWD
3) FWD
and finally from a image & emotional perspective
1) AWD
2) RWD
3) FWD
Have fun...
Ciao!
/Knubblo
opinion remains. Anything that would improve your (my) driving, e.g. DSC, ABS, Active suspension etc. etc. are all features that add safety. But then again, there will always be different drivers out there. Some replies to this thread are about hard core drivers. Basically saying the good driving skills comes before any subsystem in the car. And I would assume that all those core drivers can brake better than ABS and ABS with panic brake assistants etc.??
From my view it is all about development and evolution of the car industry and its technology. 4WD is just one feature and I bet that no one on this forum would succeed to feel the difference in a blind test (drive) of a E60 RWD vs AWD. So that famous BMW handling is preserved.
Personally, I've had several cars ranging from FWD, RWD and AWD and sure to say they all have their pros and cons of course. But my final rankings upon choosing a car would be:
From a safety & usability perspective
1) AWD
2) FWD
3) RWD
From a economical point of view
1) FWD
2) RWD
3) AWD
From a race track perspective
1) RWD
2) AWD
3) FWD
and finally from a image & emotional perspective
1) AWD
2) RWD
3) FWD
Have fun...
Ciao!
/Knubblo
I learned from it and was forced to think about some things I really had not thought about too much before. I can't fault you rankings. Given my driving skills, interests, etc., I'd put RWD first on a "street" perspective" (maybe your "safety and useability perspective") and on your "image & emotional perspective"--even in a somewhat snowy/icy climate provided that I did not actually need AWD to get from A to B.
12-08-2005, 11:47 AM
#57
Members
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think all of this talk about some negative affect on handling (in dry conditions) of AWD is off the mark slightly. There is a small difference measurable by stopwatch in lap or slalom times between an AWD 5 and a RWD 5 with the same engine due to greater weight and different suspension tuning. But I don't think that difference matters in the real world.
I do not think that AWD as implemented by BMW in the 5 really impacts driving FEEL in a major way. The 5 is a large and heavy car, and even with RWD AND the sport package (which I drove prior to deciding on the xi), the fact of the matter is that no 5 is going to handle like a sports car, unless you get the M5. So while it is true that you add weight with AWD on the 5 that may show up on a timed lap or slalom, I do not think there is really a penalty in terms of handling that one would feel in normal driving.
For us, the 530xi is the car we take for everyday driving, errands, etc. It is a fun to drive car and it handles very well for normal uses and in comparison to other cars in its segment, but it is not the car to take to the race track, autocross or on really "spirited" drives on twisty roads. That is what we use our M3 for. I do not think that the thing keeping 530xis from being track monsters is AWD. With no disrespect to owners of other 5s, the only 5 that is suited to track use is the M5.
I do not think that AWD as implemented by BMW in the 5 really impacts driving FEEL in a major way. The 5 is a large and heavy car, and even with RWD AND the sport package (which I drove prior to deciding on the xi), the fact of the matter is that no 5 is going to handle like a sports car, unless you get the M5. So while it is true that you add weight with AWD on the 5 that may show up on a timed lap or slalom, I do not think there is really a penalty in terms of handling that one would feel in normal driving.
For us, the 530xi is the car we take for everyday driving, errands, etc. It is a fun to drive car and it handles very well for normal uses and in comparison to other cars in its segment, but it is not the car to take to the race track, autocross or on really "spirited" drives on twisty roads. That is what we use our M3 for. I do not think that the thing keeping 530xis from being track monsters is AWD. With no disrespect to owners of other 5s, the only 5 that is suited to track use is the M5.
12-08-2005, 01:33 PM
#58
Senior Members
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NC, USA
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tend to agree that AWD does not detract much from handling. I loved being able to floor an S4 while making a 90 degree turn from a stop without DSC chiming in. I think a well balanced AWD is a great thing ... but I am unwilling to lose the acceleration and gas mileage secondary to weight. The S4 got 14 mpg in the city with a much smaller car. That is terrible and enough to earn a GGT. I am here to say that even at this price point a GGT motivated me to get the higher gas mileage 545 - same acceleration, similar handling, better ride, more refined, better Nav, better seats and much better residuals....
12-08-2005, 07:24 PM
#59
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
Originally Posted by Knubblo' post='207517' date='Dec 5 2005, 03:34 PM
Today the global car industry estimate approx 12-13% of the car sales to be cars with 4WD. 15 years ago this number was less than 2%. A couple of years ago BMW did not even offer 4WD for their 5-series but times have changed along with new market demands and competition. Before the new cost/efficient solutions 4WD was considered an unnecessary option mostly because of price. With cost going down fast 4WD makes more and more sense for everybody.
The major reasons for an increased share of 4WD vs 2WD are:
1) Improved technology and durability
2) Less cost per unit
3) A increased consumer demand
4) A big improvement in driving safety
5) etc.
15 years from now it is probably true to estimate the 4WD share to be 80% leaving only small city cars run on 2WD.
So today it is becoming more and more relevant to ask yourself why you should NOT chose 4WD for your new car. A few suggestions might apply but they are being less important as time goes by.
1) Increased fuel consumption
2) Increased service and maintenance cost
3) Design issues (ride height etc.)
4) Lack of that slip'n'slidin' 2WD handling that some of the consumers wants
This discussion is by the way pretty similar to the discussion that arised some 30 years ago when the first ABS systems were introduced. Today ABS is not an option to choose. You assume it to be installed by default.
Do I have a 4WD, yes of course
Comments?
/Knubblo
The major reasons for an increased share of 4WD vs 2WD are:
1) Improved technology and durability
2) Less cost per unit
3) A increased consumer demand
4) A big improvement in driving safety
5) etc.
15 years from now it is probably true to estimate the 4WD share to be 80% leaving only small city cars run on 2WD.
So today it is becoming more and more relevant to ask yourself why you should NOT chose 4WD for your new car. A few suggestions might apply but they are being less important as time goes by.
1) Increased fuel consumption
2) Increased service and maintenance cost
3) Design issues (ride height etc.)
4) Lack of that slip'n'slidin' 2WD handling that some of the consumers wants
This discussion is by the way pretty similar to the discussion that arised some 30 years ago when the first ABS systems were introduced. Today ABS is not an option to choose. You assume it to be installed by default.
Do I have a 4WD, yes of course
Comments?
/Knubblo
12-09-2005, 03:27 PM
#60
Members
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great thread everyone. This is clearly a religious topic along the lines of "BMWs should only ever have inline-6 engines" (no, I'm not trying to start that debate!).
Had an interesting day today - I was on the way to the BMW dealer to pick up my new 530xi. I was trading in my wife's 1999 Lexus GS 300 which is RWD. I was excited to have our new daily driver.
Well, it snowed today A LOT north of Boston. I wasn't going to let that get in between me and my new car (yeah, my wife's...I know). So off we go forgetting how bad the Lexus is in the snow. I normally have Blizzaks on it but not for the trade-in. 2 hours later, I arrive back at my house having travelled 2 miles on the highway before turning back. WHAT A MESS!
Apparently, it was a freaky storm that dumped about 4-6 inches in just 2 hours. It was basically blizzard conditions. Lots of spin outs and some idiots even stopped in the middle of the highway (the MIDDLE!) to clear the snow from their windshield. Unbelievable stuff.
Three cheers for AWD and/or snow tires!
Had an interesting day today - I was on the way to the BMW dealer to pick up my new 530xi. I was trading in my wife's 1999 Lexus GS 300 which is RWD. I was excited to have our new daily driver.
Well, it snowed today A LOT north of Boston. I wasn't going to let that get in between me and my new car (yeah, my wife's...I know). So off we go forgetting how bad the Lexus is in the snow. I normally have Blizzaks on it but not for the trade-in. 2 hours later, I arrive back at my house having travelled 2 miles on the highway before turning back. WHAT A MESS!
Apparently, it was a freaky storm that dumped about 4-6 inches in just 2 hours. It was basically blizzard conditions. Lots of spin outs and some idiots even stopped in the middle of the highway (the MIDDLE!) to clear the snow from their windshield. Unbelievable stuff.
Three cheers for AWD and/or snow tires!