My own comparison of FWD vs. RWD in inclement weather...
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Here in Syracuse, NY, it's 4wd or stay home. I'll see both rwd, fwd, & 4wd vehicles spun off the road.
However, with the right tires and some weight, a rwd vehicle can be very managable in the winter.
Case in point, my '89 S-10. I have very good all season tires on it. I only use the 4wd to get up my driveway (steep) and once to get up the hill where my mother lives. It goes great in 2wd.
However, with the right tires and some weight, a rwd vehicle can be very managable in the winter.
Case in point, my '89 S-10. I have very good all season tires on it. I only use the 4wd to get up my driveway (steep) and once to get up the hill where my mother lives. It goes great in 2wd.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
So far, some observations...
1) Didn't know that I wasn't supposed to downshift a manual coming to a light
However, interestingly enough, I DID use the Tap Shift in the GP to come to a light, and it didn't slide, and it did what I wanted to do, which is slow down the car without using the brakes. I've done this in normal AT cars I've owned on many different occassions, and I've never had an issue...
2) Mustang Killer, I think your post is spot-on. My point has always been that you CAN do RWD in the snow with decent tires, but many don't WANT to. Indeed, studded snows can help a ton, but what if you put studded snows on a FWD car? As you said, the car would be bulletproof...
3) George, I agree slow, smooth and care will get you around, but keep in mind the average driver. They don't WANT to worry about sliding, and with FWD, sliding is something they don't have to worry about nearly as much. I'm talking about the average "enthusiast." They want at least a modicum of capability from the car...why did SUVs boom? Capability...
4) Buttercup, define "much more control" for me, please. I think the original post sort of proves to some extent that there isn't "much more control" in RWD in bad weather. On a road course, in dry conditions, better weight distribution and dividing tasks among different tires better indeed does dictate RWD is better suited...but HOW does that translate to snowy driving at 20-35 MPH?
The bottom line is that indeed, RWD is ok for stopping, or cornering for the most part. But, the last time I checked, roads have hills, stop signs, stop lights, etc...and that is where RWD simply sucks for a lot of us. Yes, with snow tires, RWD can be nearly as good as FWD without...which leads me to my point...
Put snows on the FWD, and you raised the bar again. But, most Americans don't want to deal with snow tires in the first place...and therein lies the issue.
1) Didn't know that I wasn't supposed to downshift a manual coming to a light
However, interestingly enough, I DID use the Tap Shift in the GP to come to a light, and it didn't slide, and it did what I wanted to do, which is slow down the car without using the brakes. I've done this in normal AT cars I've owned on many different occassions, and I've never had an issue...2) Mustang Killer, I think your post is spot-on. My point has always been that you CAN do RWD in the snow with decent tires, but many don't WANT to. Indeed, studded snows can help a ton, but what if you put studded snows on a FWD car? As you said, the car would be bulletproof...
3) George, I agree slow, smooth and care will get you around, but keep in mind the average driver. They don't WANT to worry about sliding, and with FWD, sliding is something they don't have to worry about nearly as much. I'm talking about the average "enthusiast." They want at least a modicum of capability from the car...why did SUVs boom? Capability...
4) Buttercup, define "much more control" for me, please. I think the original post sort of proves to some extent that there isn't "much more control" in RWD in bad weather. On a road course, in dry conditions, better weight distribution and dividing tasks among different tires better indeed does dictate RWD is better suited...but HOW does that translate to snowy driving at 20-35 MPH?
The bottom line is that indeed, RWD is ok for stopping, or cornering for the most part. But, the last time I checked, roads have hills, stop signs, stop lights, etc...and that is where RWD simply sucks for a lot of us. Yes, with snow tires, RWD can be nearly as good as FWD without...which leads me to my point...
Put snows on the FWD, and you raised the bar again. But, most Americans don't want to deal with snow tires in the first place...and therein lies the issue.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 939
From: Lowcountry
4) Buttercup, define "much more control" for me, please. I think the original post sort of proves to some extent that there isn't "much more control" in RWD in bad weather. On a road course, in dry conditions, better weight distribution and dividing tasks among different tires better indeed does dictate RWD is better suited...but HOW does that translate to snowy driving at 20-35 MPH?
When FWD lets go, it's more like hanging on and hoping for the best.For the same reasons RWD may not feel as confident it is also a lot more flexible in controlling where the vehicle goes.
You could relate this to aircraft if you wanted to. A more agile aircraft is actually a lot less aerodynamically stable and requires more pilot input, some to the point that only a computer can keep it stable. Very stable aircraft tend to be sluggish but very easy to fly. Which is "better"? If you know how to fly than the agile aircraft gives more control.
Your average driving public doesn't know how to drive and they have no desire to learn. They don't want to be "bothered" with driving. Most people take it far too lightly and would rather be driving the simplest car possible so that they can eat, drink coffee, apply makeup, read the paper, and text their friends on the phone. This would be all fine and dandy if they weren't doing all of this next to me
It can be frustrating getting RWD going up a hill but it's downright scary when the front tires let go at speed with FWD. If you simply can't go anywhere than, yes, it's unacceptable. Any RWD car with at least all-weather tires would get me where I need to go in WI with the exception of maybe a few days out of the entire year (that FWD would be dangerous as well). Hell, the Tahoe rarely sees 4 wheel drive on any roads, no need for anything but RWD.
Is MA that much worse than WI?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
That being said, I think some fwd cars are so light in the rear that it drifts. Driving my sisters 00 neon, the back end will come around going down any ice hill if the driver isnt good in that weather. I've had to counter steer it down several hills over the winter. Also, 00 Impalas, drove my parents for a whole winter and it had trouble going up some hills as well as the back end drifting on some straight ice roads. Keep in mind these cars are base model, no traction control, with all season tires.
FWD does take off easier, and has a higher threshold before it loses front traction. But rear traction is a different story. I've personally seen quite a few vehicles spin out in front of me that were FWD as I avoided them in my RWD Thunderbird SC or mt 97 Z28. It was said above that RWD is better once you get going (meaning: "while you are actually driving") and I agree 10001%. You have absolutely no ability to control the rear half of the car in slippery conditions in FWD, and any conditions slippery enough for you to lose steering ability in RWD you'll alsoi lose it in FWD as well.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
As we all know, pretty much everything bigger than an Epsilon will be going RWD in the next few years, throughout GM's various divisions. While most people on here applaud that selection, a vocal minority continue to question the validity of going RWD across the board for midsize and larger vehicles due to the theory that RWD is less than optimal in inclement weather. Many on here scoff at that, citing modern stability control programs, better tires, etc. Understandably, with this being a performance-oriented site, this stance makes sense. But in reality, a large chunk of those actually BUYING these cars are not enthusiasts on this or other boards, and these are people voting with their pocketbooks. I've often questioned the validity of people claiming that modern RWD is perfectly fine in snow...so in my own, highly unscientific way, I did my own test. I tried to make it as fair as possible by driving 2 vehicles back-to-back, over the same roads, within minutes of each other during the most recent snowstorm we had here in Western MA. With conditions yielding heavy, slushy snow of 3-4", on unplowed roads, here were the contestants...
2004 Cadillac CTS
3.2/M5, 27k on car, brand new rear tires, front tires about 1/3 worn (P225/55/16 Bridgestone Potenza G009 all seasons). Car has Stabili-Trak, and traction control.
2004 Grand Prix GTP Comp G
s/c 3800, 15k on car, all 4 tires about 1/3 worn (P225/55/17 BFG Comp TA VR4 all seasons). Car also has Stabili-Trak, and traction control.
OBSERVATIONS:
1) The traction control in the CTS kicked on significantly more, staying on for a longer period of time, despite having the ability to both lightly slip the clutch on start-up, AND start in 2nd gear to aid traction.
2) The CTS, despite having Stabili-Trak, actually kicked the tail end to the right about 45 degrees while trying to climb a hill at about 30 MPH...I was shocked, and yet not at the same time...
3) Downshifting the CTS carefully at times, when trying to slow for a stoplight, yielded an unsettling of the rear-end (granted, it did not kick out at all).
4) When I had to stop on a hill, the tires spun so much trying to get going that the car actually stalled, because the traction control was so aggressively trying to cut power it actually killed the engine...
Now, for the Grand Prix...
1) The traction control did kick in on start-ups, but wheelspin was much easier to modulate, and obviously there was no fishtailing.
2) Stopping on the same hill that killed the CTS (I ended up doing a running start and blowing a stop sign just to make it up the hill, BTW...) yielded some tire spin, but the car went right up the hill.
3) The Stabili-Trak kicked in only once, when I was making a 90 degree LH turn, and I have to admit I was shocked and impressed by how quickly it stopped the car from nearly sliding into a curb and taking a chunk out of my chrome wheel. Whereas the system was fighting in the CTS, and losing, the Grand Prix stopped sliding almost immediately.
Now, before all you FWD-haters scream foul, consider...
1) Tires were extremely comparable on these cars
2) The conditions were actually WORSE for the Grand Prix...it was snowing like crazy, and despite hopping out of the CTS and into the Grand Prix for the same loop, there was definitely more snow on the roads for the Grand Prix.
3) Both cars have comparable forms of stability control.
4) Neither car was being driven in an irrational manner. If anything, the CTS was driven slower and more deliberately, while having the advantage of clutch modulation and 2nd gear starts (I could have done this with the Tap Shift in the GP, but didn't bother).
5) Short of a closed test track, I honestly don't know how to make things more comparable.
Which brings me to my final observations, some of which I have made on here before...
1) I know I've lost 300 and Charger sales to people who are fearful of spending a ton of $$$ on a RWD car and not liking driving it on many occassions during the year...again, these are people voting with their pocketbooks against RWD...
2) As I've said before on here, it appears that stability control programs are, in reality, somewhat of a band aid for a drive system that simply doesn't work as well in inclement weather. If ALL THE TIRES CAN DO IS SPIN AND SLIDE, and they will not get traction, what can you expect? The advantage of FWD is the fact that it has the weight over the drive wheels that aids with gaining traction, which brings me to...
3) People on here have said they dislike FWD and feel like its unsafe because when the front wheels lose traction while accelerating, you lose steering ability. The solution? LET OFF THE GAS. I have never had a FWD car careen out of control if I simply let off the gas, and let the tires re-acclimate themselves to the surface...
4) Cars like the GP GXP and Impala SS appeal to many because of the fact they are truly year-round performance cars. Sure, there's a little bit of torque steer, and some all-out cornering ability is lost with the weight distribution, but these are not sports cars...they're far more often driven in a rational manner.
In closing, what would I personally do? I'd take the CTS, throw on studded snows, and go snow-bogging. However, people today are inherently lazy. They don't want the added time/hassle/expense of swapping tires twice a year. I know this to be true...I see it all the time when I try to sell someone an LX car that is concerned over the RWD setup, and doesn't want to pay for an AWD 300. If GM needs more sales from these volume products, something tells me that maybe this RWD theory isn't necessarily the best option...
For those of you who think I'm crazy to question the FWD theory, question yourself as to what is GM's ultimate goal? Selling more cars at a profit. As for the above comparison, all I can say is that I honestly went into this with the hope I was wrong about feeling all this stability control stuff being nothing more than a band aid. I hadn't driven a RWD car without snows in, well, ever, actually. My Z28 and RS have never seen snow with me behind the wheel.
I look forward to hearing the thoughts of others...all I can do is observe what I did, and feel that it was a pretty damned objective comparison. In closing, as I've said a million times...
People CAN drive RWD in snow, and not die a firey death. However, many people in the snow belt simply don't WANT to. I have to admit, while I say I'd still take the CTS with studded snows, at the same time studded snows on the GP would make it near bomb-proof...so who knows. Factor in the fact that my girlfriend refuses to own RWD for a year-round car, and I guess I'd be overriden anyways. The joys of having my own demos...
Sorry for the novel, BTW Just thought it was pertinent with respect to GM's new direction with larger cars...
2004 Cadillac CTS
3.2/M5, 27k on car, brand new rear tires, front tires about 1/3 worn (P225/55/16 Bridgestone Potenza G009 all seasons). Car has Stabili-Trak, and traction control.
2004 Grand Prix GTP Comp G
s/c 3800, 15k on car, all 4 tires about 1/3 worn (P225/55/17 BFG Comp TA VR4 all seasons). Car also has Stabili-Trak, and traction control.
OBSERVATIONS:
1) The traction control in the CTS kicked on significantly more, staying on for a longer period of time, despite having the ability to both lightly slip the clutch on start-up, AND start in 2nd gear to aid traction.
2) The CTS, despite having Stabili-Trak, actually kicked the tail end to the right about 45 degrees while trying to climb a hill at about 30 MPH...I was shocked, and yet not at the same time...
3) Downshifting the CTS carefully at times, when trying to slow for a stoplight, yielded an unsettling of the rear-end (granted, it did not kick out at all).
4) When I had to stop on a hill, the tires spun so much trying to get going that the car actually stalled, because the traction control was so aggressively trying to cut power it actually killed the engine...
Now, for the Grand Prix...
1) The traction control did kick in on start-ups, but wheelspin was much easier to modulate, and obviously there was no fishtailing.
2) Stopping on the same hill that killed the CTS (I ended up doing a running start and blowing a stop sign just to make it up the hill, BTW...) yielded some tire spin, but the car went right up the hill.
3) The Stabili-Trak kicked in only once, when I was making a 90 degree LH turn, and I have to admit I was shocked and impressed by how quickly it stopped the car from nearly sliding into a curb and taking a chunk out of my chrome wheel. Whereas the system was fighting in the CTS, and losing, the Grand Prix stopped sliding almost immediately.
Now, before all you FWD-haters scream foul, consider...
1) Tires were extremely comparable on these cars
2) The conditions were actually WORSE for the Grand Prix...it was snowing like crazy, and despite hopping out of the CTS and into the Grand Prix for the same loop, there was definitely more snow on the roads for the Grand Prix.
3) Both cars have comparable forms of stability control.
4) Neither car was being driven in an irrational manner. If anything, the CTS was driven slower and more deliberately, while having the advantage of clutch modulation and 2nd gear starts (I could have done this with the Tap Shift in the GP, but didn't bother).
5) Short of a closed test track, I honestly don't know how to make things more comparable.
Which brings me to my final observations, some of which I have made on here before...
1) I know I've lost 300 and Charger sales to people who are fearful of spending a ton of $$$ on a RWD car and not liking driving it on many occassions during the year...again, these are people voting with their pocketbooks against RWD...
2) As I've said before on here, it appears that stability control programs are, in reality, somewhat of a band aid for a drive system that simply doesn't work as well in inclement weather. If ALL THE TIRES CAN DO IS SPIN AND SLIDE, and they will not get traction, what can you expect? The advantage of FWD is the fact that it has the weight over the drive wheels that aids with gaining traction, which brings me to...
3) People on here have said they dislike FWD and feel like its unsafe because when the front wheels lose traction while accelerating, you lose steering ability. The solution? LET OFF THE GAS. I have never had a FWD car careen out of control if I simply let off the gas, and let the tires re-acclimate themselves to the surface...
4) Cars like the GP GXP and Impala SS appeal to many because of the fact they are truly year-round performance cars. Sure, there's a little bit of torque steer, and some all-out cornering ability is lost with the weight distribution, but these are not sports cars...they're far more often driven in a rational manner.
In closing, what would I personally do? I'd take the CTS, throw on studded snows, and go snow-bogging. However, people today are inherently lazy. They don't want the added time/hassle/expense of swapping tires twice a year. I know this to be true...I see it all the time when I try to sell someone an LX car that is concerned over the RWD setup, and doesn't want to pay for an AWD 300. If GM needs more sales from these volume products, something tells me that maybe this RWD theory isn't necessarily the best option...
For those of you who think I'm crazy to question the FWD theory, question yourself as to what is GM's ultimate goal? Selling more cars at a profit. As for the above comparison, all I can say is that I honestly went into this with the hope I was wrong about feeling all this stability control stuff being nothing more than a band aid. I hadn't driven a RWD car without snows in, well, ever, actually. My Z28 and RS have never seen snow with me behind the wheel.
I look forward to hearing the thoughts of others...all I can do is observe what I did, and feel that it was a pretty damned objective comparison. In closing, as I've said a million times...
People CAN drive RWD in snow, and not die a firey death. However, many people in the snow belt simply don't WANT to. I have to admit, while I say I'd still take the CTS with studded snows, at the same time studded snows on the GP would make it near bomb-proof...so who knows. Factor in the fact that my girlfriend refuses to own RWD for a year-round car, and I guess I'd be overriden anyways. The joys of having my own demos...
Sorry for the novel, BTW
Just thought it was pertinent with respect to GM's new direction with larger cars...Bob
PS....I still prefer RWD.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
I can't recall any FWD car I've ever owned losing traction in the rear except in cases where the whole car was going squirrelly in the first place. In fact, I used to tighten up the rear drum brakes in my FWD cars so I could intentionally break loose the rear end and replicate a powerslide by using the left foot to brake enough to lock up the rears, while using the right foot to feed throttle and keep the front wheels powered. That was as close as I could get to RWD behaviour when I had a FWD car, but I had to do it intentionally. Otherwise the rear end always stayed in line.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,574
From: Arlington, Texas
Sooooo glad I live in TX! Since we don't have to deal w/ that generally, I'll keep RWD for the overall balance and handling characteristics. If i were up there, I'd have a RWD for all but the snow days, and an AWD Subaru or something for the snow.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,597
From: Mack and Bewick
As we all know, pretty much everything bigger than an Epsilon will be going RWD in the next few years, throughout GM's various divisions. While most people on here applaud that selection, a vocal minority continue to question the validity of going RWD across the board for midsize and larger vehicles due to the theory that RWD is less than optimal in inclement weather....
Im aware some people would rather save money and pick whatever FWD alternative but its not like there is going to be nothing offered that would be sure footed in the snow...
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
I know what you guys are saying about FWD & fishtailing. However, I have found that this happens because the rear tires are worn more than the front tires. The rears give up traction first and the a** end comes around.
Weight in the back of a FWD will also help to aliviate this problem.
Weight in the back of a FWD will also help to aliviate this problem.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
You bring up an issue I don't think many people know about.
FWD does take off easier, and has a higher threshold before it loses front traction. But rear traction is a different story. I've personally seen quite a few vehicles spin out in front of me that were FWD as I avoided them in my RWD Thunderbird SC or mt 97 Z28. It was said above that RWD is better once you get going (meaning: "while you are actually driving") and I agree 10001%. You have absolutely no ability to control the rear half of the car in slippery conditions in FWD, and any conditions slippery enough for you to lose steering ability in RWD you'll alsoi lose it in FWD as well.
FWD does take off easier, and has a higher threshold before it loses front traction. But rear traction is a different story. I've personally seen quite a few vehicles spin out in front of me that were FWD as I avoided them in my RWD Thunderbird SC or mt 97 Z28. It was said above that RWD is better once you get going (meaning: "while you are actually driving") and I agree 10001%. You have absolutely no ability to control the rear half of the car in slippery conditions in FWD, and any conditions slippery enough for you to lose steering ability in RWD you'll alsoi lose it in FWD as well.
One thing you do NOT want to do is put new FRONT tires on a FWD car and have back ones that aren't so hot...because that's when this spinning can take place. Also, its a bad idea to put snows on the front, with normal tires on the rear...or studded snows on the front with normal snows on the rear.
Why is that???
With the inherent nose-heaviness of FWD, when coming to a stop even more of that weight is shifted forward obviously. If the front tires can bite great, and the rear tires bite marginally, that's when the pirouette can, and sometimes will, happen. With that being said, in the 11 years I've been driving FWD cars in the snow (often in storms I went out in solely to have some fun, and had NO RIGHT being on the roads they were so bad...), I have NEVER spun a FWD car...not even close...
But I sure have had a lot of trouble getting up hills with RWD...even with studded snows
The car I'm referring to is my old '89 Camaro 2.8, on which I mounted narrower 195/75/14 studded snows on G body steel wheels...One more thing Guy...you say that if RWD loses steering control, then FWD will at the same point, under the same conditions, as well. I tend to disagree with this premise, because of the fact that the RWD car does not have the weight over the front wheels the FWD car will...thereby giving the FWD car an advantage over RWD yet again...
FWIW, what do I do in bad weather if one of my W or N bodies started sliding due to lack of steering control??? Let off the damn gas
Typically, if I lost steering control, it was entirely due to me being an idiot and having fun...not because the car was having an issue. It was the idiot behind the wheel having the issue
Last edited by Jason E; Feb 5, 2007 at 07:26 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,022
From: Newhall, CA USA
Driving my new 1998 Corvette Convertible (M6) back home through a snow/ice storm that hit Oklahoma unexpectedly was one of the most terrifying things I've ever done. No thanks. I'll ship cars in the winter from now on.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Originally Posted by Jason E :
The bottom line is that indeed, RWD is ok for stopping, or cornering for the most part. But, the last time I checked, roads have hills, stop signs, stop lights, etc...and that is where RWD simply sucks for a lot of us. Yes, with snow tires, RWD can be nearly as good as FWD without...which leads me to my point...
Put snows on the FWD, and you raised the bar again. But, most Americans don't want to deal with snow tires in the first place...and therein lies the issue.
The bottom line is that indeed, RWD is ok for stopping, or cornering for the most part. But, the last time I checked, roads have hills, stop signs, stop lights, etc...and that is where RWD simply sucks for a lot of us. Yes, with snow tires, RWD can be nearly as good as FWD without...which leads me to my point...
Put snows on the FWD, and you raised the bar again. But, most Americans don't want to deal with snow tires in the first place...and therein lies the issue.
I think people who, like me, remember winters before FWD, when people knew how to prepare for and drive RWD in snow.
I don't see it as a fault of the RWD car.
Initial FWD's had good traction right from the factory b/c of the small skinny all season tires, which didn't float up on the snow. And the weight already over the drive wheels helped that reputation.
If we're saying that, "in factory form, no weight added", I'll agree with that.
But with most RWD now (and for some time now) come with Limited Slip rears, then added weight, and good tires, are excellent in snow, on hills too, where the weight transfers to the rear tires.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,817
From: O-Town
Jason, how well do the AWD LXs sell up there in the NE? I would hope that the VE is AWD capable since people today panic and stay on the brakes if they start to slide. Here in the Midwest, I see a lot more FWD cars in ditches than anything else even though there are a lot of pickups out here that people drive year round.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
Buttercup,
When I was reading your original post, I was wondering the same thing as you!! All I can say is that we get more ice around here than years ago, which promotes a more slippery slope, if you will
Snow is one thing, but ice is another...and at times we get A LOT of ice...mastrdrvr,
AWD LXs sell ok up here...the issue is, again, people don't want to PAY for the extra ability...which is the same deal as snow tires, for example...
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
So far, some observations...
1) Didn't know that I wasn't supposed to downshift a manual coming to a light However, interestingly enough, I DID use the Tap Shift in the GP to come to a light, and it didn't slide, and it did what I wanted to do, which is slow down the car without using the brakes. I've done this in normal AT cars I've owned on many different occassions, and I've never had an issue...
1) Didn't know that I wasn't supposed to downshift a manual coming to a light
However, interestingly enough, I DID use the Tap Shift in the GP to come to a light, and it didn't slide, and it did what I wanted to do, which is slow down the car without using the brakes. I've done this in normal AT cars I've owned on many different occassions, and I've never had an issue...I'm not sure what the point of all this is.
I'd never buy a high performance FWD car, even if it is better in snow. If you want to sell to me, it has to be RWD.
