Your experience was probably because you effectively had a rear-engine rear-wheel drive car when you backed up the hill in a FWD car.
Any rear-wheel-drive car I’ve tried to drive up snowy hills wound up with the rear fishtailing sideways whenever power was applied.
Just to add to the total Geek Quotient of this discussion, Subaru is the Japanese name for the constellation of the Pleiades. If you look at the badge on the car, you’ll see the seven stars!
It’s pretty clearly proven that Range Rovers are substantially better offroad than Plan B, whatever that might be. If you can pay the ticket and put up with the RR nonsense, they’re hard to beat. For reliability and economy, any Japanese car will run rings around them, but…
If it helps any, my parents had to get 4WD vehicles for their lake house, which has a crazy steep and short driveway, and if the vehicle doesn’t get a good grip, there’s potential to “land” in a bedroom or two if they should slip on the way down, or slide backwards on the way up. They did some research into “real” 4WD, that switch from 2WD to 4WD. I can’t say I understand it, but my dad’s a mechanic, so he knows what they were looking for.
He ended up with a Ford F250 crew cab ridiculously huge pickup thing, and my mom chose a Nissan Pathfinder. The Pathfinder is nice, I’ve driven it. Maybe it’s too big for your tastes since you’re looking at Subaru, but they went with these models because their 4x4 abilities were more acceptable to Dad than the full-time AWD.
Subaru and Audi have marketing departments that seem to really turn people into mindless zombies. You should take the word of anyone who seems to be a Subaru fan with a pitcher of salt, as 99% of them are people who are very passionate about a subject that they invariably know almost nothing about. It’s more of a lifestyle or religion than a car. The only people who are worse are Audi owners.
Case in point: Virtually nothing in Greasyjack’s post is correct. Poor fuel economy? Actually a number of Subaru models get excellent fuel economy comparable to the FWD offerings of other carmakers, for reasons that shouldbe quite apparent. Subarus have 3 limited slip differentials? Certain model years/trim levels of the Impreza WRX STi might, 99% of them do not. Actually the vast majority aren’t even “full time AWD” - they are equipped with exactly 0 limited slip differentials. Subaru currently uses 4 or 5 different AWD systems in there products, depending on how you count it. Audi “Quattro” is also at least 4 different systems. They behave…differently, whether one is “better” than another is complicated and depends on what the car’s purpose is, but anyone who makes blanket statements about either brand almost certainly has no idea what they are talking about.
Most other car companies do not use the drivetrain layouts that Subaru and Audi use because that drivetrain layout is inherently compromised and dynamically inefficient. Actually one of the reasons that both Subaru and Audi eventually dropped out from competing in the World Rally Championship is that their racecar drivetrains, which by regulation must bear a certain resemblance to the street model, simply could not compete without adopting the more conventional layouts of their competitors. Obviously such a move would render moot the marketing purpose of the competition. In both cases the need arises because they want to build “premium” cars on the basis of more spartan models that are front wheel drive, although this is more true for Audi than Subaru. Most other carmakers simply keep their performance and premium models on a rear wheel drive floorplan, which is dynamically far superior but obviously more expensive. Therefore, they are constantly flogging their all wheel drive feature in an attempt to compensate.
To your first point: bullshit. All currently made Subarus have at least a LSD centre. Which Subaru are you talking about that does not have at least one LSD?
To your second. Subarus are non-competitive in WRC - Bullshit. Lets take a look at the P-WRC (where the cars bear the closest resemblance to the production models) where Subarus have taken five of the last eight championships.
All the FWD ones, for starters, and yes they do make plenty of FWD cars. But I suppose the answer you are looking for are the ones that use a clutchpack coupling - 4EAT (except VTD) and Lineartronic. Coupling!=differential.
I guess it’s a good thing I said WRC and not PWRC then? Yes, PWRC regulations relatively speaking don’t hinder Subaru as much, although only due to being stricter on the other makes.
Which cars on the American market are FWD, disregarding the Sambar and other trivial imports? The transfer clutchs are continuously sending 40 - 50% of the power rearward. What’s your point?
The full WRC has about as much relationship to the production models as NASCARs have with their production models. WRC spends a million dollars on each of their cars, and is not a good measure of something you can actually buy. If you want to see what a car can do off the showroom, you need to look at the PWRC. How are the PWRC regulations any stricter on Subaru than anyone else?
I’m going to call bullshit on this as well. The Ford P/WRC car is based on a FWD, so are the Citron and Mini. I’m not going to go looking through Skoda and the others, but I am going to bet that they are all based on FWD.
All American market Subarus are AWD. Note how I didn’t say anything about the American market. Other than not understanding how AWD works, what’s YOUR point?
PWRC restricts the extent that the engine can be repositioned within the engine bay. Since on a Subaru, there isn’t anywhere for the engine to go anyway, PWRC and WRC Subarus have essentially the same engine location. A WRC Focus can have its engine leaned way back into the chassis, but not in PWRC.
And? How is this remotely related to my post that you quoted?
Who gives a fuck about the Japanese market, and further who gives a fuck about those little trucks and Kei cars. My point is that all wheels are driven. Permanently. Subaru makes a permanent AWD that functions as a permanent AWD. Did you have anything to say on the topic of Subaru AWD or did you just want to pick nits that have no relevance to the OP? I don’t suppose you bothered to watch GreasyJack’s video. It pretty much proved you wrong.
If I’m understanding your second point correctly you are saying that Subarus are given an unfair advantage in PWRC because the engine is already in the right place? Subaru’s advantage would disappear if everyone else started offering the public a properly built car?
To the third point. Most other makes do not keep their premium model a RWD. The Focus ST and RS are both FWD. The car most rally cars are based on is FWD. The manufacturers are not limited by a FWD car, they are perfectly capable of making a premium FWD. How can you say that Subaru is compensating for a lack of a RWD when everyone else is FWD?
You do, you asked the question, otherwise why do you keep bringing it up? I don’t particularly care for them one way or the other.
You are flat out wrong and have no idea what you are talking about. I can be of no further assistance to you until you acquire a baseline knowledge of the subject.
I’ve typed a lot already. Try reading.
Proves me wrong about what?
Nope. You’ve understood nothing and this style of argument bores me.
It’s a strange country you live in where a Ford Focus is a “premium” car.
Must be a very effective marketing department that follows their drivers around and gets them unstuck. I’ve lived way back in the mountains in deep snow country and if you really need to get around in the winter you either have a 4wd truck or a Subaru (or an Audi or some other higher end cars if you’re rich). The point is that the AWD systems on Honda, Toyota, Chevy, Ford, etc, are not very effective in serious snow conditions, whereas Subarus are. There are certainly cars made by some of those companys’ higher end brands that are equally effective, hence the “in their price range” qualifier. I’ve never owned a Subie, either, so I’m not some indoctrinated fan boy, I’ve just seen what they can do relative to other cars (personally I think getting stuck is fun! :D).
And BTW, if you look at the official EPA fuel economy numbers, only the CVT Legacy is competitive in its size class. The V6 Auto Legacy is a full 4 MPG lower than the slightly larger V6 Auto Accord and 3 less than the V6 Camry. Even the Cadillac CTS is better! The Impreza is even worse compared to other compacts, although it is sportier. Sure, they’re not awful, especially given the AWD and pretty good ground clearance, but you’re clearly paying a price. Where I live now, Subarus are popular as fashion statements and I regularly advise against them for people who would get by just fine with FWD and snow tires.
And I’d have to agree the WRC stuff isn’t all that relevant. Subaru pulled out of WRC because of the economy-- they had a couple of stinker seasons but were certainly competitive during most of the last decade. And, furthermore, part of why they don’t dominate like they once did is that almost all the other manufacturer teams use AWD now.
I must again point out to you that neither Subaru nor Audi use one type of AWD drivetrain in their cars but many. Since a large number of Subaru vehicles use an electronic clutch coupling in the center, same as their competitors, for what reason would they be better? Subaru’s with “full time” AWD, i.e. models with a center differential, maybe perform better(or differently anyway) under certain conditions, as would models equipped with a limited slip rear differential(these were more common back in the 90s, when I think even the base Legacy came with one, but nowadays very rare. The Outback might have one depending on trim, the STi and Legacy STI/Spec B do, and that’s about it.), but it is debatable whether these are very relevant to your average driver whose daily commute isn’t Rally Finland. There are other factors besides the type of drivetrain that affect grip in slippery conditions, tires being the most obvious. The last generation WRX was well known for coming from the factory with Bridgestone Potenza RE92 tires that were useless on dry pavement, let alone snow - the first gen Toyota Prius also used them for their low rolling resistance and long life.
So you see how the 4 cylinder CVT model gets quite different mileage than the flat 6 model? HINT: having completely different AWD drivetrains plays a big part! :eek:
Audi introduced AWD to Group A Rally with the Quattro in the 1980s. By the time Subaru came around, it was all AWD. They (and Audi) don’t do well because of their inherently compromised drivetrains. Subaru’s drivetrain layout has many disadvantages in a race car. Primarily, the far forward placement of the engine and transmission makes for terrible weight distribution and polar moment of inertia, compared to a traditional transverse inline engine which can be leaned back towards the firewall. The flat-4 engine also causes problems - the wide width tends to take up space needed for suspension, and the location of the intake and exhaust ports makes turbocharging tricky and complicated compared to most other engine layouts. The amount of intake and exhaust piping on a turbo Subaru engine is much larger than on an inline engine (longitudinal or transverse). This causes worse throttle response, turbo lag, and difficulties with charge cooling.
We have a Subaru in the family and will probably be getting another soon, that or an Audi. :o They are compelling for a number of reasons. Subarus are top notch as far as mechanical reliability goes, and are also exceptionally safe in a crash due to the high quality Boron steel used in their construction. NHTSA, IIHS, Euro NCAP, A-NCAP, there isn’t a crash test in the world that Subaru doesn’t completely dominate with full marks. Subaru, Volvo and VW/Audi are on another level wrt to safety, compared to most other car makers, although recently GM, Ford and BMW have also jumped up there. The list prices are quite reasonable, and while I’d rather get a FWD model, I can live with the base model Legacy CVT, which being a part time system gets mostly similar mileage compared to other FWD cars. Honestly, a lot of the bad mileage can also be attributed to the fact that Subaru’s engines are relatively old tech and don’t incoporate a lot of the newer technologies like direct injection and cylinder deactivation that other carmakers have brought on. The main complaint against them - relatively spartan interiors, is of no concern to us.
Sure, there’s big differences between what exact parts each models use, but every version of the AWD system that’s come in any Subaru built in the last 15 years has been superior to any AWD system in any other cheap car. And yes, some of them come with crappy tires, but unfortunately that’s par for the course for practically every car these days. Toyotas are some of the worst offenders.
Wow, that’s some bad reading comprehension. I’m saying the CVT gets decent mileage compared to other 4-cylinder automatics, but that’s because of the CVT. The 6 cylinder, which comes with a traditional automatic and is thus more comparable to other cars, gets much worse mileage compared to similar-sized cars that come with similiar-sized 6 cylinders and automatics. And the Impreza 4 cylinder auto gets downright poor mileage compared to cars in it’s size class.
I’m not going to argue about old rally races, but it is absurd to claim that Subaru were not competitive in the 2000’s. Their slide from dominance and eventual withdrawl from the sport has nothing to do with any fundamental engineering problem and everything to do with the economy and marketing.
A serious question: Do you actually understand the difference between these systems?
The difference between the a part time AWD Subaru and a full time AWD Subaru is the same as the difference between a part time AWD Toyota and a full time AWD Subaru, and in terms of “what happens when there is slip?”, the part time AWD Subaru is much more similar to the part time AWD Toyota than the full time AWD Subaru. All car companies including Subaru have differing systems across their product lineup. For example, The older generation Toyota Sienna AWD minivan has a center differential with viscous coupling differential lock, giving it permanent 50/50 torque split across all 4 wheels just like a WRX, but according to you, a 4EAT Subaru Impreza with no center differential is still better?
A 4 cylinder CVT Nissan Altima gets similar mileage as the CVT Legacy. The CVT Legacy gets quite good mileage because it uses a part time AWD system where the rear wheels are decoupled from the front when no slippage is detected. This system is used by Subaru and many other car makers precisely because it cuts the additional fuel consumption down to almost nothing vs a regular 2WD drivetrain. The Impreza is harder to compare because I can’t think of any other compact cars this day and age that use both a large (2.5l) 4 cyl engine and an ancient 4 speed auto. You can still see the difference however, when you see that the 4 speed auto Impreza gets the same mileage as the 5 speed manual Impreza, while in any other compact, a 5 speed manual gets substantially better mileage than a 4 speed auto, due to having more gears and no torque converter. The 4 speed Impreza makes up for this by having a more efficient part time AWD system. The 6 cyl Legacy gets much worse fuel economy because it uses a much more elaborate (but inefficient) full time AWD drivetrain.
I’ve just posted a very detailed explanation of the exact reasons why Subaru’s drivetrain layout is a performance handicap. What do you want to argue? So far your posts composed of nothing but half baked opinions and statements that are at best inaccurate if not completely wrong. Let’s hear your arguments.