RWD in snow

I lived in Rochester NY for 10 years in the RWD days. Winter driving sucked.

Now I live in NC. A few years ago, we had 2 feet of snow over night. Raleigh was not equipped for that and the temperatures stayed cold for a week. THe only plowing was SUV ruts.

After a few days, we had no choice but to go shopping for food (the snow was a complete surprise to the weathermen). In any case our FWD 94 LHS drove thru the snow covered streets with ruts and some ice like it was nothing. And my buddies still living in Rochester would never go back to RWD.

Reply to
Art
Loading thread data ...

Can't speak for the 300-series cars, but I drive an 88 Volvo

240DL wagon, a car that has close to 50/50 weight distribution, like the 300 and Magnum. With a set of 4 Dunlop Graspic snowtires, it goes quite well in the snow - in the recent storm in NJ (~8" of snow) I was able to drive just fine and even stopped to push a riceboy in a lowered Civic out of a ditch.

You *do* have to watch the throttle to make sure you don't spin the rear wheels, but it's not like the car swaps ends even if you do. More power and an autobox will of course be worse in snow. Then again, the 300-series cars do have traction control, right?

A few other posters have mentioned 70s and 80s cars - my family's Volvo 142 did just as well in snow as my 240 - this was in the 80s and it passed its share of other cars on a notoriously steep and curvy hill near where I grew up (Summit Rd. in Mountainside). Then as now, it's more a question of proper suspension design, weight balance, and tire choice.

I'd have no issue getting the 300 in RWD, certainly - AWD just adds weight... I test drove one out of curiosity (in rain, and, no, I'm not givin' up the Volvo) and it's quite nice to drive. Actually, given the choice, I'd go for the Magnum. It's a station wagon, which earns it bonus points in my book since being able to throw a bike or 2 in back is good, the dash design is nicer and less "blingy" than the 300, and it has less of the Mafiamobile styling of the 300.

-Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

Unless you're buying an SUV, the stock tires are optimized for performance on the dry since they want the auto mags to be able to take a 'stock' car and get the bast 0-60, braking, and skid pad numbers. Note that those tests are usually done on a dry track/skidpad.

Changing to snow tires will really help the cause. BTW - the same holds true for FWD cars - my mom's Jetta was abysmal in snow with the stock Goodyear(?) tires. It would just sort of sit there and paw the bottom of a snowy hill without actually going anywhere. Changing to a set of Bridgestone all-seasons seems to have improved performance greatly, though probably not as much as if the car would have proper snow tires.

-Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

The older American RWD cars were very front-heavy due to heavy iron-block V8 engines being positioned pretty far forward. This took weight off of the rear wheels and caused the fronts to "dig in" effectively stopping the car in snow. With advances in materials (engines are lighter) and design (engines placed further back, lighter trannies, etc) today's RWD cars aren't comparable.

Keep in mind that FWD design has also advanced since the 80s. CV joints routinely last 100k miles, tires don't wear as much, and torque steer has been minimized. Why shouldn't RWD cars have advanced as well? (Still don't

*like* FWD, and wouldn't own one, but you can't argue taste :)

-Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

Was 4WD actually engaged in the truck that you saw slippin' around. I was walking around DC after the blizzard 3 yrs ago and some lady was in a Jeep Cherokee revving the snot out of it, spinning the rear wheels, and not going anywhere. (She didn't have 4WD engaged, and I had to show her what that little lever to the left of the shifter did.) "Oh, I thought it was full-time AWD." Well, it was, but not in 2WD mode :)

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

If you want a car with ~60-65% of weight up front that understeers numbly all the time, hey, be my guest.

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

Agreed: the 300 is butt-ugly. The Magnum is less ugly and is even quite functional - would be more so, though, if they did away with the downward-sloping rear that cuts cargo room and impairs visibility.

The Charger is actually decent-looking. The styling, from the side, actually reminds me of an 80s BMW 7-series (733i) for some reason. They could use some work on the front end, though - that huge muscle-boy grille isn't really necessary.

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

Yeah, ABS is useful. Legal requirement? Nah. We already have too many complex auto safety rules thanks to Nadir and Claybrick. They make the cost of entry into the US auto market prohibitive and prevent any new and innovative auto companies from starting up. Legal protection for entrenched corporations...

-Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

I wonder how much more gas mileage, if any, I would lose going to AWD?

I remember Mountainside. I worked in Berkeley Heights for several years.

Remember the awful experience I had with RWD in the snow, I always have at least one AWD or 4WD vehicle in the driveway.

Ken

Reply to
NJ Vike

You've never driven in snow, have you? :-)

Matt

Reply to
Matt Whiting

Winter flat road driving experience is very limited.

Reply to
Spam Hater

Wrong! I said one needed to learn driving again with FWD, obviously I have made that switch. I learned on RWD and drive only RWD for 28 yrs before my first FWD car. That RWD experience was in very snowy eastern Canada. Several yrs of that RWD experience was with the VW Beetle which had so much weight on the rear wheels that it didn't even need snow tires for straight ahead winter traction, but was very poor for directional control due to it's very light front end.

That's why ABS is so nice. I know how to quickly pump the brakes, but I can't come close to the effectiveness of ABS. In our very snowy conditions the roads to the ski hills are littered with 4WD vehicles off the road. They have excellent straight ahead traction, but that gives the drivers too much confidence so curves and braking are their down fall.

Reply to
Spam Hater

One of the local dealers called me today and told me they just received an AWD 300C. I took it for a test drive but didn't notice any kind of resistance that I thought I would. The dealer says that I can expect to lose

3MPG on both City and Highway driving.

I don't think that's too bad considering this winter will once again be crappy as it has started so early.

They also have 300 SRT vehicles that old sold and have one Magnum SRT inside the showroom. Very nice in Red.

They also modified one Charger and put a chrome grill and spoiler on it. Not bad. On the other side they have 4 Vipers for sale. Two were used but in very good shape.

Reply to
NJ Vike

Before you go with the AWD with its weight, cost, and gas penalties, try the RWD version in a snow/ice covered parking lot. If you're near Rt. 78, I'd recommend the dealer on River Rd. in Summit - as far as a parking lot, try the big turnout off of Tracy Dr. in the Watchung Reservation just west of the circle. As I've said, I've driven RWD in snow in NJ and it really isn't a big deal given good tires and a well-balanced car. You might be pleasantly surprised as compared to American cars of 20-30 years ago.

-Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Szafran

Andrew,

Ok - I will give it a try. You never know.

Ken

"Andrew Szafran" wrote >> I don't think that's too bad considering this winter will once again be

Reply to
NJ Vike

Just 10 years in Rochester, NY. How does it feel to be wrong all the time. :)

Reply to
Art

I don't know, but you can explain. If you think that FWD will never lose traction in the snow, then you haven't driven much in the snow.

Matt

Reply to
Matt Whiting

breaking has always been more of a concern for me, FWD, RWD, or AWD.

Reply to
Steve Stone

Breaking isn't a big concern for me as I maintain my cars pretty well. Braking, on the other hand, is a concern in the snow. :-)

Matt

Reply to
Matt Whiting

Thanks for "steering" me in the right direction.

Steve

Reply to
Steve Stone

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.