Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs 4WD & AWD systems explained
1376 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 9:11 AM
You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2008 6:24 am) When you don't have to fix safety recalls for 24 years (1977 to 2004) that leaves a LOT of money left over for your racing program. I'm sure the racing Pajeros cost them MILLIONS, which they had due to neglecting their street cars and the safety of their customers. Honestly, when you post statements like that, you are inviting flaming (baiting people). Smiley faces or not. To balance out your post, you could have mentioned that Subaru was also guilty of hiding defects and was forced to recall 2 million cars in 1997. Fair play.
|
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (May 21, 2008 12:05 pm) To be fair, they weren't guilty of it for 24 years.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 21, 2008 7:50 am) The jack stand trick won't work. I'm pretty sure that the AWD system takes into account TPS, and weight shift (F/R) as well to determine where to put the power. It also learns combinations of TPS, weight shift, speed to pre-emptively move the power. -mike
|
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (May 21, 2008 12:57 pm) I'm not here to blindly defend any manufacturer. In my humble opinion, you can be guilty of hiding defects for just a month, you're still guilty of a serious lapse in judgment and ethics. Regardless, both companies are past this. Both have new, more transparent management structures in place. I find it unproductive to rehash the past. Especially considering that this is 2 full model generations behind us.
|
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (May 21, 2008 7:55 pm) Only in the sense, for me, I don't and won't trust Mitsubishi cars. Maybe they've changed, but I vote with my dollars.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (May 22, 2008 6:26 am) You obviously have your valid reasons. Conversely, I feel I have my valid reasons to believe that Mitsubishi makes great cars. One of many reasons being, we have owned 4 different models in several countries over the past 25 years (one of them for 7 years). Again, that's just my experience.
|
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (May 22, 2008 8:36 am) |
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (May 21, 2008 12:05 pm) Point is, racing success is mostly a marketing thing, and has very little to do with how good (or bad) a manufacturer is doing making production cars. My original point remains, and is actually reinforced by Subaru's smaller yet still significant troubles. WRC championships were great PR for Subaru, but the fact is Prodrive now owns Aston Martin, and the Subaru-based Prodrive P2 never went into production. Multi-million dollar race cars/trucks have very little in common with what you'll find for sale at the dealer. Same for Mitsubishi and its Dakar racing program - not very relevant to production cars, especially models besides the Pajero. When it comes to addressing issues that do come up, most Subaru owners are satisfied with how their dealers do repairs (better than the industry average today). So they have earned their customers' trust back. For Mitsubishi, they're not there yet. Only 44% of customers are satisfied with the service they get from their dealers, 2nd last in the industry (only VW is worse). So IMHO Subaru has made the turnaround, while Mitsubishi is still working on it. At least their products are much better - now it's time to work on customer service. To bring this back on topic, if our ramp tests cause damage to either or both of the AWD systems, at least I'd be more likely to be satisfied with the repair. |
|
|
Replying to: paisan (May 21, 2008 3:32 pm) The automatic Forester's system, specifically, supposedly uses as input the following: * wheel slippage * throttle position * braking That's from the 2009 brochure. They don't mention TPMS. Not sure about weight shift - but they could determine that from the throttle (shifts weight back) and braking (shifts weight forward), so your point is certainly valid. If you disable the traction/stability control it may eliminate the wheel slippage input, then again maybe not - the data is still gathered, it depends on which systems could still use that data. So in the jack stand test, the throttle position could be controlled if a 2nd person is sitting in the car. Same with the brakes. Wheel slippage would be fine as that is sort of the point of the whole test - to observe what occurs when the wheels are allowed to slip. I think we could still see if by default both axles get power, if one spins faster than the other, if both sides spin, etc. Not as good as a dynamic test, like the ramp, but more of a static test with small/no load. The Tribeca's AWD system goes a few steps further and uses inputs from the steering angle sensor, yaw velocity, acceleration sensors, and braking force (I think they mean pedal pressure, to measure the driver's intention). So in that case you really would need a ramp for a dynamic test. Thing is, I've already seen a Tribeca succeed at that. A Legacy GT as well. So now I want to see a Forester try it.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (May 22, 2008 11:48 am) -mike |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Suburban
2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee
2010 Subaru Outback
2010 Ford Explorer
2010 Nissan Pathfinder
2009 GMC Envoy
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
