You're in Bristol aren't you Ronny? I had one hell of a laugh driving back from work in Clifton last night... Bridge Valley Rd down to the Cumberland Basin was all iced up... saw an FTO slowly sliding out of control into the verge, the Civic behind me getting sideways and a Porsche 911 going practically nowhere coming up the hill!
When I had a Carlton GSI3000, I got stuck on ice. I left it in reverse and got out, and watched the wheels slowly turning and the car not going anywhere ;)
Scorpios are good fun in snow. Even with new rear tyres, my gf's one gets thoroughly distressed by more than a couple of flakes.
No, it's a damn sight better. The only Quattro better than Subaru's 4WD system is proper, good, old fashioned with centre and rear difflock Quattro like on the mid 80s cars.
Ahh. Now I see, but surely you end up going sideways much more slowly than by handbraking it? I spent a few minutes completely sideways with full opposite lock on this morning. Fun it was :).
Thats debatable, I would rather have a Audi, have you been inside a Subaru, things snap off in your hands,
As there are so many different types of 4wd, I will stick to the tried and tested version I have, im not saying a 325i x wont handle nice on the snow, as im sure it will, but a 2wd BWM will not, and i dont care how many spare wheels you have in the boot.
If 4wd didnt work like SH say's then why do merc and BWM's now try and compete for this part of the market, they will sell some cars yeah, buts its a bit like windows vs linux, people will pay for what they know works best for the conditions. and thats quattro :)
Try it for yourself, then come back. You will be surprised....
I don't see how it's different. Whenever you get a FWD car to go sideways you're going to scrub off speed. The only way I can see to slide sideways under power is with locked back wheels, lots of opposite lock and at the very least a wet road, if not snow / ice.
*yawn* Ronny, I've had over 110 cars. Wouldn't you assume that somewhere in that bunch, I may have owned a Quattro or three, along with various other 4wd cars?
(1985 Audi 90 Quattro - the /proper/ Quattro, with mechanical diffs that could be locked - 1986ish (IIRC) Audi 100/200 Quattro (it looked like a
200, had 200 engine and interior, but the back end was a 100's ;) ), and very rare 1989 Audi 100 Quattro Turbo Avant.).
I don't like the current system as much as the 'real' Iltis-derived system. So, anyway, tell me how bad an Alfa 33 Permanent 4 is. Then go look up where they got the 4x4 system.
Ive owned tons too, inc a few 4x4's and I have to say that this one is the best, its why people who buy Audi's tend to stick with them forever,
When you say you dont like what do you mean? the fact it doesnt hold the road as good as the "old" quattro :)
I know nothing about Alfa's apart from I used to work for walon who imported them at Portbury docks, and fitted alarms etc in them. I prefer bigger, more refined cars, so will never know.
In terms of 4x4 capability, originally. Subaru's don't break so easily these days, FWIW - I've had a couple.
Hmmm. You'll notice that I don't drive an Audi now. I find modern Audis stodgy, generally.
Small q is a specific model, which I've never owned, though the system is the same as that fitted to the 90 which I owned. It's how you define the difference between an Audi quattro, with is the turbocharged, rally-derived beast, and a regular Audi GT with 4x4.
I like the mechanical simplicity of the old system. Having owned a VW Syncro, I'm very, very wary of anything that 'senses' slip and transfers drive accordingly.
I'd reckon an Alfa 33 is about on a par with an Audi 80/90, space wise. Except it has a larger boot.
VW syncro is different, and imo is poor, although reviews do say it can handle better then quattro, "syncro" is VW's early name for the "haldex" system which is not quattro.
Its used on all VW's except the Passat which is based on the B5 platform and uses Torsen Diff's 4wd the same as mine.
Other cars that are not "true" quattro are, VW Golf 4 motion / Audi A3 quattro / Audi TT quattro / Golf Syncro/Bora.
The system works on viscous clutch type system that is 2wd 99% of the time but when the wheels starts spinning heats up a liquid that goes solid when it gets hot, where as mine A4/A6/A8/ Passat 4 motion is perm 4wd all the time. There arent many true AWD cars on the road nowadays, they all use some form of haldex system, like Merc's 4-matic.
Mine uses the "mechanical simplicity" you refer too, there is no bells or whistles like ASP etc
(Clue - learn to use a killfile. This is aimed at "all".)
The big difference between 4wd and 2wd isn't the weight and stuff. It's the drag from the non-turning wheels. If you ever drive a 4wd on ice, you appreciate this. With all the wheels driving, all four are pushing the car forwards. The only thing preventing the car from moving forwards is either:
- Wind resistance (good luck with that one) - Drag from the undriven wheels (not many of those on a 4wd)
There is also the potential situation where the wheels are dug into pits. Broadly, the wheels have to climb out of the pits they have dug / sunk into. This is much the same whether there is 4wd / 2wd but you get the idea by now that this isn't an issue with one being better, you just rock the car back and forth, widening the pit until the car has grip to climb out of the pit with the grip it is getting.
Personally, I find rwd and front engine more fun, but yer pays yer money, et al.
I was just saying the other day (when a mate of mine said he wants some form of 4wd car as it'd be much better in the snow) that it'd surely be the case of 2 more wheels spinning!?
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.