Considering a new vehicle, not sure what one
- Thread starter wallyuwl
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by dippschtick
4Runner.
Thank me later.
Way later.
Based on what his wife is driving now-that would be a terrible choice. Dashboard from the 70's, rock hard seats, and most of all stiff rding on a "body on frame" vehicle which her current ride IS NOT. (Yes- I have driven one).
I agree with some of the others-the Korean have some solid offerings now in this segment.
4Runner.
Thank me later.
Way later.
Based on what his wife is driving now-that would be a terrible choice. Dashboard from the 70's, rock hard seats, and most of all stiff rding on a "body on frame" vehicle which her current ride IS NOT. (Yes- I have driven one).
I agree with some of the others-the Korean have some solid offerings now in this segment.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sopususer
Ok I'll stir the pot. Reliability and awd performance is only spelled one way... S U B A R U.
There's a reason everyone compares themselves to Subaru; they are the gold standard. Jeep has the AWD system, but overall quality lacks. Audi also has great AWD, but are expensive. Other Japanese/Korean mfgs have good quality but their AWD is second tier. I've owned the others. S U B A R U.
Once you've owned a Subaru, you will be convinced, it's hard to beat them for reliability and awd performance.
Audi does not compare itself to Subaru. It is far better system, in addition that car itself is far better.
We all have our own opinions.
Difference being that some of us can back those opinions up with many years of ownership and miles of use under all sorts of conditions.
Yes, because other cars do not go many years, miles and in all sorts of conditions
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sopususer
Ok I'll stir the pot. Reliability and awd performance is only spelled one way... S U B A R U.
There's a reason everyone compares themselves to Subaru; they are the gold standard. Jeep has the AWD system, but overall quality lacks. Audi also has great AWD, but are expensive. Other Japanese/Korean mfgs have good quality but their AWD is second tier. I've owned the others. S U B A R U.
Once you've owned a Subaru, you will be convinced, it's hard to beat them for reliability and awd performance.
Audi does not compare itself to Subaru. It is far better system, in addition that car itself is far better.
We all have our own opinions.
Difference being that some of us can back those opinions up with many years of ownership and miles of use under all sorts of conditions.
Yes, because other cars do not go many years, miles and in all sorts of conditions
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.
Originally Posted by fdcg27
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.
Whenever I read his posts, I imagine an accent similar to Borat.
Seems to help.
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.
Whenever I read his posts, I imagine an accent similar to Borat.
Seems to help.
Quote
Yes, because other cars do not go many years, miles and in all sorts of conditions
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.[/quote]
I knew exactly what you said. Point is, that horrid piece of plastic called Subaru is not a match to Audi, AWD wise, especially everything else wise. I am not going to even mention that thing called CVT.
And other people drove their cars numerous years, and put miles and miles in all sorts of conditions.
Yes, because other cars do not go many years, miles and in all sorts of conditions
While I understand that we aren't exchanging thoughts in your mother tongue, your reply makes no sense at all in the context of this discussion.[/quote]
I knew exactly what you said. Point is, that horrid piece of plastic called Subaru is not a match to Audi, AWD wise, especially everything else wise. I am not going to even mention that thing called CVT.
And other people drove their cars numerous years, and put miles and miles in all sorts of conditions.
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Rented a 2019 Legacy a couple of weekends ago.
After several hundred miles in the drivers seat, I really struggled to see what was so appealing about them.
-The base engine was terribly underpowered
-there was a strange quarter window on the front doors (several decades ago I'd imagine they opened...these didn't, so why have them
)
-the engine bay seemed to get terribly hot for normal driving
-despite having lumbar the drivers seat wasn't comfortable
-the terrible performance (over-inflating the tires to 40 vs the recommended 32-30 seemed to help with mileage too).
On the upside, I did appreciate:
-The super soft door arm rest
-the ease of maintenance on the engine (very easy to repair from a design standpoint...maybe that's why mechanics recommend them?)
-sure-footed in the rain (then again so were the Impala and Sonata I drove in the snow for the last two rentals)
-super smooth idle (mostly from being a flat 4 design)
Considering I used to love Volvo's from the 80s and 90s, I really thought I'd be impressed by the quirkiness of Subaru.
Sadly, that was not the case.
After several hundred miles in the drivers seat, I really struggled to see what was so appealing about them.
-The base engine was terribly underpowered
-there was a strange quarter window on the front doors (several decades ago I'd imagine they opened...these didn't, so why have them
-the engine bay seemed to get terribly hot for normal driving
-despite having lumbar the drivers seat wasn't comfortable
-the terrible performance (over-inflating the tires to 40 vs the recommended 32-30 seemed to help with mileage too).
On the upside, I did appreciate:
-The super soft door arm rest
-the ease of maintenance on the engine (very easy to repair from a design standpoint...maybe that's why mechanics recommend them?)
-sure-footed in the rain (then again so were the Impala and Sonata I drove in the snow for the last two rentals)
-super smooth idle (mostly from being a flat 4 design)
Considering I used to love Volvo's from the 80s and 90s, I really thought I'd be impressed by the quirkiness of Subaru.
Sadly, that was not the case.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Originally Posted by ndfergy
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Buyers of Subaru are buying AWD. They are not buying flat engine (99% of them would not be able to open the hood. That is targeted audience of Subaru today). They are not buying quality interior (that does not exist in Subaru). They are buying AWD. Here in CO, every billboard that Subaru puts next to the road is about snow, taking on blizzards etc. It is sold as the car that is "best of the best" in the snow.
Except, it is not. Performance in snow or any other condition is not dependent only on AWD or any other single variable. What makes car perform good in dry, wet, ice or snow are multiple variables. Subaru AWD is excellent. It is not better than Audi Torsen full time AWD, but it is really, really good. Problem is, rest of the car is just mediocre in every aspect.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Buyers of Subaru are buying AWD. They are not buying flat engine (99% of them would not be able to open the hood. That is targeted audience of Subaru today). They are not buying quality interior (that does not exist in Subaru). They are buying AWD. Here in CO, every billboard that Subaru puts next to the road is about snow, taking on blizzards etc. It is sold as the car that is "best of the best" in the snow.
Except, it is not. Performance in snow or any other condition is not dependent only on AWD or any other single variable. What makes car perform good in dry, wet, ice or snow are multiple variables. Subaru AWD is excellent. It is not better than Audi Torsen full time AWD, but it is really, really good. Problem is, rest of the car is just mediocre in every aspect.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by ndfergy
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Buyers of Subaru are buying AWD. They are not buying flat engine (99% of them would not be able to open the hood. That is targeted audience of Subaru today). They are not buying quality interior (that does not exist in Subaru). They are buying AWD. Here in CO, every billboard that Subaru puts next to the road is about snow, taking on blizzards etc. It is sold as the car that is "best of the best" in the snow.
Except, it is not. Performance in snow or any other condition is not dependent only on AWD or any other single variable. What makes car perform good in dry, wet, ice or snow are multiple variables. Subaru AWD is excellent. It is not better than Audi Torsen full time AWD, but it is really, really good. Problem is, rest of the car is just mediocre in every aspect.
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Originally Posted by ndfergy
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by sloinker
I know many loyal Subaru lovers. I know many loyal Subaru haters. I noticed in the last couple years that Subaru's have been drag racing air cooled VW bus's and 80000# semis up mountain passes in the far right lanes. They appear to be dangerously under powered heading up to Donner summit. They are extremely quick going down hill to re-pass all the cars with the cruise @75mph going up the grade. So if you average their speed both uphill and downhill they are super quick! Buy one!
Yep, that sums it up.
Add to that that when you overtake them uphill, especially in snow, everyone of them tries to catch up with you thinking that what just happened is simply impossible.
Vehicle performance is relative to wants and expectations so arguing what is better is silly. Take my car for instance. I'm well aware it won't cut the mustard with a majority of the members here. Does that upset me? Nope, but it suits my needs with most of my driving in city and local twisty country roads. When we go on longer trips involving the highway then the wife's Camry is the better option.
Whether xyz Audi is better than xyz Subaru I couldn't answer. If so, the degree is probably marginal not orders of magnitude you imply. A competent driver could make up that difference.
Buyers of Subaru are buying AWD. They are not buying flat engine (99% of them would not be able to open the hood. That is targeted audience of Subaru today). They are not buying quality interior (that does not exist in Subaru). They are buying AWD. Here in CO, every billboard that Subaru puts next to the road is about snow, taking on blizzards etc. It is sold as the car that is "best of the best" in the snow.
Except, it is not. Performance in snow or any other condition is not dependent only on AWD or any other single variable. What makes car perform good in dry, wet, ice or snow are multiple variables. Subaru AWD is excellent. It is not better than Audi Torsen full time AWD, but it is really, really good. Problem is, rest of the car is just mediocre in every aspect.
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize Haldex Gen V (current) is just a more primitive version of Mazda's system, right? It uses an electronic sample rate that is lower, and hydraulic pressure to operate the clutches, while Mazda has a higher sample rate, and uses an electromagnetic clutch setup for much faster reaction. They both split engine torque by the same bias (locked, 50/50 F/R). One is just faster and more efficient...
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize Haldex Gen V (current) is just a more primitive version of Mazda's system, right? It uses an electronic sample rate that is lower, and hydraulic pressure to operate the clutches, while Mazda has a higher sample rate, and uses an electromagnetic clutch setup for much faster reaction. They both split engine torque by the same bias (locked, 50/50 F/R). One is just faster and more efficient...
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize the Haldex is identical to the Mazda system, mechanically, right? Audi has a lower sample rate, though, so less control.
No it is not identical to Mazda. One os Haldex, another is Mazda. Otherwise, Mazda would perform as good as Audi (Haldex) or VW, but it does not.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize the Haldex is identical to the Mazda system, mechanically, right? Audi has a lower sample rate, though, so less control.
No it is not identical to Mazda. One os Haldex, another is Mazda. Otherwise, Mazda would perform as good as Audi (Haldex) or VW, but it does not.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize the Haldex is identical to the Mazda system, mechanically, right? Audi has a lower sample rate, though, so less control.
No it is not identical to Mazda. One os Haldex, another is Mazda. Otherwise, Mazda would perform as good as Audi (Haldex) or VW, but it does not.
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
What Audi has a Torsen Full Time AWD?
Seriously do not understand question. Even these new part time n several models are probably best in business (far better anything Mazda though. Well, haldex is better anything Mazda).
You do realize the Haldex is identical to the Mazda system, mechanically, right? Audi has a lower sample rate, though, so less control.
No it is not identical to Mazda. One os Haldex, another is Mazda. Otherwise, Mazda would perform as good as Audi (Haldex) or VW, but it does not.
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Haldex Gen 5:
Mazda AWD:
Mazda AWD:
Last edited:
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts. The Haldex V requires 10% load sent to the rear at all times because it operates slowly, and would have driveline slack/lag/etc. That harms efficiency. The CX5 gets away with 2%, because it's a much more rapidly engaging system. Less parasitic loss.
You can compare the efficacy of them all day long, but what it comes down to is not the mechanical differences of the systems. The efficiency is the only thing truly affected by this. The rest of the difference is tires/driver/programming/etc.
The Haldex accomplishes 100% the same thing the Mazda does. Not 1% more, and not 1% less. However, it accomplishes it more slowly, and with more parasitic loss, and with longer reaction times.
It is not the superior system you want to believe it is.
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts. The Haldex V requires 10% load sent to the rear at all times because it operates slowly, and would have driveline slack/lag/etc. That harms efficiency. The CX5 gets away with 2%, because it's a much more rapidly engaging system. Less parasitic loss.
You can compare the efficacy of them all day long, but what it comes down to is not the mechanical differences of the systems. The efficiency is the only thing truly affected by this. The rest of the difference is tires/driver/programming/etc.
The Haldex accomplishes 100% the same thing the Mazda does. Not 1% more, and not 1% less. However, it accomplishes it more slowly, and with more parasitic loss, and with longer reaction times.
It is not the superior system you want to believe it is.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts.
And Mazda was on winter tires.
But it does not matter, we are talking here about cars with capable AWD, not Mazda Cx-5.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts.
And Mazda was on winter tires.
But it does not matter, we are talking here about cars with capable AWD, not Mazda Cx-5.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts.
And Mazda was on winter tires.
But it does not matter, we are talking here about cars with capable AWD, not Mazda Cx-5.
Okay...tell me...what does Haldex Gen 5 (current) do? Do you know how it operates and what its parameters of operation are? Now explain to me with math how it could POSSIBLY be better than a system that operates many times faster, with less drag, and has 100% identical torque distribution capability.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
I meant identical in function (locking clutch, 50/50 F/R dist). You're right though, they AREN'T truly identical. The Mazda is far more advanced and reacts much quicker, considering it uses electromagnetic cluch, and a sample rate of 200x per second vs. hydraulics and 100x per second.
Haldex Gen V < Mazda.
Remember that humiliating video Russians did? You can remind yourself again.
It's literally the same kind of system, just very unrefined with the VAG vehicle. Lots of things go into offroading. Tires, driver, etc. I could care less about what some Russian did in some 1-off test when I'm looking at the data on both systems, and the VAG system is less efficient, slower, and has more moving parts.
And Mazda was on winter tires.
But it does not matter, we are talking here about cars with capable AWD, not Mazda Cx-5.
Okay...tell me...what does Haldex Gen 5 (current) do? Do you know how it operates and what its parameters of operation are? Now explain to me with math how it could POSSIBLY be better than a system that operates many times faster, with less drag, and has 100% identical torque distribution capability.
Here is a comparison of some of the vehicles mentioned:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme...-all-wheel-drive-system-for-snow-and-ice
Another author's take of the same event (near to compare impressions from unrelated sources).
https://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2016/02/snow-testing-mazda-s-i-activ-all-wheel-drive.html
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme...-all-wheel-drive-system-for-snow-and-ice
Another author's take of the same event (near to compare impressions from unrelated sources).
https://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2016/02/snow-testing-mazda-s-i-activ-all-wheel-drive.html
Last edited:
- Status
