Last post on Mar 02, 2010 at 9:36 AM
You are in the Honda Pilot
What is this discussion about?
Nissan Murano, Toyota Highlander, Subaru B9 Tribeca, Honda Pilot, Acura MDX, Volkswagen Touareg, SUV
#785 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [ateixeira]
Feb 11, 2008 (7:02 pm)
The vast majority of WRC is not off-road. The Monte Carlo segment, where the Subaru won, was on finest French roads.
The Kenya Safari Rally - yes. That's a good example of off-road rally. Subaru won 4 times - good job, but Mitsubishi won there 8 times - great job! Dakar Rally: Subaru 0, Mitsu 12! Are you still laughing? I guess I got the best laugh :--)
#786 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [ateixeira]
Feb 11, 2008 (7:12 pm)
>>So no Mitsubishi Outlander has ever passed the ramp test, then?
Marketing video does not qualify as test.
>>Why not call around and take your Outlander to a local 4x4 event, they have those ramps. Bring a video camera.
Why not to take your Forester through the snow.
>>My challenge was for you to prove the Outlander's AWD could do that, and you come back with a cool yet completely irrelevant video of an EVO and a Pajero.
Your marketing videos are just as irrelevant as my marketing videos Ė thatís my point.
>>Driving in snow is fun, but we're talking about power transfer under frictionless conditions, so neither of those videos qualifies. We're talking ICE, not snow. Still irrelevant.
We are not talking ice. You are talking ice. Iím talking snow.
>>You can continue to live in denial about Subaru having phenomenal AWD systems for the vehicles in this class, with video proof for those who have open eyes to see.
Subaru has good AWD system, but not the best. Your marketing video is not a proof.
#787 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [ateixeira]
Feb 11, 2008 (7:16 pm)
>>In the first one he nearly gets stuck at around 15-18 seconds.
Also, he never comes to a full stop, instead relying on forward momentum to keep going.
First you complain that it stops, than you complain that it does not. Could you make up your mind?
>>On the 2nd one, at about 1:35 it shows the Outlander plowing the snow from a lack of ground clearance.
Amazing that Outlander easily gets through as much snow, as it has ground clearance! And the Outlander has more ground clearance then Forester. What your Forester would do in this snow?
>>Seriously, take yours to a local 4x4 event. It would be very revealing. In theory it should be capable, given the lock button and the traction control, so go for it!
I would if I find one.
#789 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [chelentano]
Feb 11, 2008 (7:57 pm)
I don't see the Forester or the Outlander listed in this topic.
#790 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [chelentano]
Feb 12, 2008 (7:58 am)
Really guys, please take this elsewhere. Where are those ever-watchful hosts...
#791 of 800 Re: 5 Criteria for AWD (not 4WD, but AWD) [samiam_68]
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
Feb 12, 2008 (9:01 am)
I'll go page Tidester.
I don't see that any of these rigs are really trail ready anyhoo - they may be fine for getting to the ski hill, but Moab?
Feb 12, 2008 (2:09 pm)
Sorry, guys, I'm not trying to stray off topic. I'm specifically discussing Subaru's AWD systems, including the Tribeca. The Outlander is not in this thread, but its AWD system is being compared to the Tribeca's, which is.
Why not to take your Forester through the snow
I did that plenty of times, it was a ball. My family grew and I needed a lot more space so I replaced the Forester with a minivan. No more fun in the snow, the van can't hold a candle to what the Subaru could do, so....
We are now shopping for my wife and I will look at another Subaru. I will consider an Outlander but I'd like to see if it can pass the ramp test, i.e. if the AWD is truly capable of distributing power to each wheel, enough to get it to climb in those slippery scenarios.
Personally, we've owned one Mitsu and 2 Subarus, and had a better experience with the Subarus, but I'm open minded.
I could care less that you dismiss those videos. I certainly don't. To me they prove the AWD system simply works.
I wish you'd be up to the challenge and take your Outlander on such a ramp, then at least I'd know if it is as capable as you claim. Go for it, why not? What are you afraid of?
You are talking ice. Iím talking snow
Yes, because your video really says more about the tires. A Mustang with studded tires could do that. The ramps test the AWD system, not the tires.
The 2009 Forester has more clearance than the Outlander, and those are the models I'm cross-shopping, among others.
2008 Forester DOES have traction control standard
Nope, that's a different model, the XT Sports has VDC, but the one on the ramp is a basic X model, with no traction control. There are many ways you can tell - the lack of a hood scoop (not a turbo), the wheels, the mirrors are smaller, and a few other differences.
Doesn't really matter because the Forester test is only measuring front to rear AWD distribution, not side to side. It would make it up with or without traction control.
As proof, the Tribeca (which does have traction control) makes it up the ramp effortlessly.
#794 of 800 09 Murano vs. 09 Highlander Sport
Sep 27, 2009 (12:46 pm)
I was pretty sold on the 09 Highlander Sport 4x4 (though I'll most likely wait for the 2010s to come out) with all the features like nav and leather etc... and then yesterday I test drove a Murano LE fully loaded and it seemed a lot more responsive in terms of steering, acceleration, and control.
I'm sort of on the fence right now because price wise they are really very similar, so I wanted to see what others have thought of the two cars, but I don't need the 3rd row of seating, I really only require AWD for going to the mountains to ski and also some room to take my dog places.
Here's what I've found:
* Bigger cargo area
* More roomy
* Better NAV/dash system
* Exterior looks nicer - more manly
* I trust toyota more as a brand for things like maintenance and quality.
* Interior seems nicer, more luxurious
* The acceleration seems better ( same engine, but seems lighter )
* The rear camera has lines that show you how far things are away.
Is this consistent with what others have seen? Am I missing something?
Thanks in advance.