Quote:
Originally Posted by a_Username
I may sound stupid here but isn't braking kind of pointless without traction? Doesn't AWD vehicles provide much more traction that their FWD/RWD counterparts?  |
You are correct with the first part, but what? on your second part? WHY would two more drive wheels mean anything different for stopping/handling. (Though with AWD, handling could be affected for the positive if the electronic management systems are good.)
Because, either way, you punch it, and the front tires break loose (understeer), it doesn't matter HOW many horsepower is connected to the front wheels, everything is now gone. Until Stabilitrack (or whatever) realizes this, then grabs down on the rear wheels in an attempt to slow the vehicle down enough that the front tires regain traction.
The same can be said for the rear tires as well.
Or if you are punching the brakes through the floor to avoid granny that just stopped for a cat, how does AWD make a difference? All tires are asking for brakes, weight is transferred to the front of the vehicle, and it doesn't matter how the drive layout of the vehicle sits, and ABS equipped FWD is going to stop the same as an ABS equipped RWD, the same as an ABS equipped AWD (provided all were similar weights, and TIRES).
Just because a vehicle has two more drive wheels, doesn't mean it is automatically better then the next vehicle that doesn't have the extra drive wheels. But in the hands of a good enough driver, either could outperform the other.
TIRES are your biggest and main contributor to traction. Noobs up here with 4x4 or AWD think they can own the snow and ice, with the false sense of security they create (better traction availability under
good conditions). What do you see most in ditches? Yep 4x4 and AWD vehicles.
