quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:

What do you think makes them better? I had a PV544, which I dearly loved, but I don't remember it being better in snow than a friend's popcorn SAAB, but that was quite a while back.

quote:

I can remember commuting in my one hour in NH winters with a BMW 328is. I'd pass Mass and Ct SUVs that were all over the road every storm. It's all about the tires and driver skill in my view.

I think it's a little more complicated. These days, an SUV is a fashion statement, as well as a display of spending power.

That said, a lot of hubris enters the package, which, by definition, gets in the way of humility, which is a necessary condition for winter driving. Or, I could be kind and just say that a 4WD can lead to overconfidence in the vehicle's and and one's own abilities.

Back to ground level, the recent 4WD SUV owners are very impressed with their new-found traction and the ability to "go anywhere". There is something to that, but a 4WD doesn't steer or stop any better than the 2WD they drove last year. As a result, they slide wide on corners and don't stop nearly as fast as they think they should.

I no longer ski, but I used to see a lot of this. Skiiers are a trendy lot, anyway, and when snowboarders are added to the mix, the driving up there gets really interesting. I skied during the middle of the week to avoid the weekend crowds, both on the slopes as well as on the roads. The midweek skiers were better on the slopes and on the road.

Oh, Oh...........this is drifting into social commentary.

A couple of winters ago, the WSJ had a very interesting article on this very subject.

quote:

Posted 05-09-2010 01:15 PM Hide Post

quote:
Originally posted by noble97monarch:



What do you think makes them better?

I think the only advantage to front wheel drive is better initial traction with the drive-line weight of the wheels over the tires. This is then counteracted by a car that is essentially off balance as it is very tail light/ nose heavy. The overall result is a poor handling car at higher speeds and one that gives little good feedback to the driver who is aware. That is why 95% of race and/or true performance cars are either rear wheel or 4 wheel drive.

The next factor is the over-confidence of the driver as they didn't feel a traction loss at start up. This leads to a lack of awareness as to the true conditions.

Another factor is the loss of steering when torque traction loss occurs. This is why no drifting cars are front wheel drive. A good driver can essentially drive a rear wheel drive car sideways with total confidence, whereas a front wheel drive car loses most steering predictability when the traction wheels slip.

Finally, a front wheel drive car generally has lousy suspension in both the front and rear due to compromises in the need to feed suspension to the steer wheels and the economy desired by the manufacturers to simplify the rear. VW and Audi are exceptions to this factor in my opinion.

The bottom line is auto manufacturers saw a wonderful way to market a technology that allowed them to build cars cheaper when front wheel drive became acceptable. Without the need to have a true framework required by a rear drive, the cars could be lighter and have far less material in the manufacturing or them.

A perfect two wheel drive snow car is a 50/50 weighted rear wheel drive car that has a low center of gravity but with ample ground clearance. With independent suspension, the BMWs and Mercedes are very hard to beat in this department. Ah yes, a set of Blizzacks is also a must to make up for the loss of acceleration traction.

That's my opinion. Grew up in Maine, lived most of my life in NH, in the car business until my mid thirties. Passed hundreds of front wheel drives and 4 wheel drives in the ditches throughout the years. Never been off my self!

Jim. Congrats on the "new" Volvo. We had a 79 242GT that we sold in 86 for a 83 244DL. (Needed the 4 door because of the kids.) That one must of had 300k on it when we sold it off for a 88 760 turbo diesel wagon in the early 90s. (kids got bigger!)
Haven't had a Volvo for more than 10 years, but lots of great memories of family camping trips pulling our pop-up camper with those cars.
Take a look at yours and see if it was actually assembled at the Volvo plant in Halifax Nova Scotia. That was where our 83 DL came from.
Don

quote:

Originally posted by Jim and Tere:
Well, we finally got a car, a 1981 Volvo 240 DL
No, it is not American made. It's a Volvo(Sweden)
No, it's not a hatchback, it's a station wagon
Yes, it gets 25+ on the highway, in fact it gets that around town
Yes, it's safe, legendary Volvo safety
Yes, it's dependable. The old Volvo 'Bricks', are simple, straight forward and Tere and I can do most of the maintenance
Yes/No, it doesn't have a 6-way power seat, but it has manual lumbar, manual tilt for seat bottom and back, and forward and back. The back does fine in it.
Yes, it was under $4000, in fact it was under $2000
I've owned a lot of Volvos over the years and we discovered that my back does quite well in their seats. We are very familiar with the marque and this one is a 2 owner California car with a manual transmission with overdrive. It's almost out of a time machine. About $1000 and it will be close to showroom. No, not a little old lady going to church, but a Swedish girl whose dad grew up in the shadows of the Volvo plant in Sweden. It will arrive in Tennessee while we're in Milford.
J