Rear wheel drive performance car for skiing?

[Dave Marshak]

Because when I go skiing, I drive the Outback 3.6R with Hakkapellitas.
The Continentals are essentially a high-performance all season tire for the Porsche, and all I care about is the ability to comply with Colorado tread laws, to be able to drive it on I 70 between September and May. For instance this weekend, I will drive it up to Vail, which I could not do without M + S rated tires.
To drive the Michelin PS4S tires anywhere near freezing would compromise the tires for high-performance use on the track.

All season + track tires makes perfect sense, but I've given up tracking and I'm gonna trade the high performance street tires for all seasons. That way I'll get into trouble at lower speeds with a better chance of survival. I definitely prefer to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. YMMV.

dm

 

[Dave Marshak]

Old heavy cars did pretty well in the snow. My first car was a RWD 1969 Buick Impala with lousy (retread!) tires. It did great in the snow. It was heavy enough that it would dig down and find the pavement. I remember driving cross-country in it during a blizzard and spending most of the trip in the unplowed left lane, passing everything. I replaced it with an AWD Subaru that was probably half its weight -- it was a shock having it squirm and slither on a couple of inches of snow.

That's the key, weight. I passed many stuck front wheel drive cars (many of them with snow tires too) in my old 4300 lb wagons, plowing through a foot or more of snow with the bumpers. Scary going down a steep hill with a turn at the bottom though.

You two seem to be suffering from the kind of memory loss that's often related to old timers' disease. None of those old cars were as good as Civic with Blizzaks. Retread snows on the back and lose steering every time you touch the brake pedal, what could go wrong?

A heavier car will blast through short sections of deep snow or plow wash better than lighter cars, but that's their only advantage. In any event, those old cars were not as heavy as you remember. My 1958 Biscayne weighed less than my 2009 Accord. It went off the road at least 5 more times than my Accord too.

Station wagons were the worst. They had close to 50/50 weight balance, but all the extra weight was around the rear bumper. That made it it harder to get the car turning, and hard to straighten out once it did get turning. They usually had positraction, which helped you get it moving but it also meant that you would lose both drive wheels if you got into the gas too hard. That's why so many of the cars you saw of the road were station wagons.

The best old school snow car I ever had was an 85 HP Volvo 240 sedan with 4 Haakkeeppiilliittaas.

dm

 

[tball]

Only if the RWD platform has a LSD and four high end winter tires would I conceder it for non-snow country winter use. Meaning an inch or two of snow occasionally.
Not for chasing powder days. Not for high country areas.

"having four-wheel drive traction", this is such a false statement. Tires are the only thing that has traction. What (some) 4WD does is simply deliver torque to all four tires
instead of just one (in the case of an open diff RWD). So if you say were applying 200 lb/ft of torque from the engine, instead of one tire being able to resist it spinning it is being delivered through 4 contact patches.

I'm interested in folks' experiences with and without LSD.

I've wanted LSD on three different vehicles but never had it. Thought about upgrading but didn't bother as the vehicles did great in the snow with just good snow tires, and I don't track or autocross.

One of these vehicles has stability and traction control. I think when I have to turn off the traction control for traction getting unstuck an LSD would help. Not sure if it would help otherwise as I don't like driving this car around with stability control off. It's too happy to spin.

So LSD or not for my next performance car that probably won't ever see a track? Is there much benefit of LSD with good snow tires, stability and traction control?

 

[slowrider]

You two seem to be suffering from the kind of memory loss that's often related to old timers' disease. None of those old cars were as good as Civic with Blizzaks. Retread snows on the back and lose steering every time you touch the brake pedal, what could go wrong?

A heavier car will blast through short sections of deep snow or plow wash better than lighter cars, but that's their only advantage. In any event, those old cars were not as heavy as you remember. My 1958 Biscayne weighed less than my 2009 Accord. It went off the road at least 5 more times than my Accord too.

Station wagons were the worst. They had close to 50/50 weight balance, but all the extra weight was around the rear bumper. That made it it harder to get the car turning, and hard to straighten out once it did get turning. They usually had positraction, which helped you get it moving but it also meant that you would lose both drive wheels if you got into the gas too hard. That's why so many of the cars you saw of the road were station wagons.

The best old school snow car I ever had was an 85 HP Volvo 240 sedan with 4 Haakkeeppiilliittaas.

dm

Accord and Biscayne were almost the same curb weight. The Accord was a few hundred pounds more. But I see your point.

 

[bbinder]

The best car I have ever owned for driving in snow was a 1974 Pontiac Grand Am with a big V-8 motor, posi-traction, and steel belted radial snow tires in the rear. That thing would go anywhere.

 

[Blue Streak]

I definitely prefer to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. YMMV.dm

I do too, but I am limited by no talent and not enough seat time.

 

[scott43]

LSD is great for traction..would you prefer to drag race with or without one? However, LSD can be problematic in some conditions if you don't have skill and/or traction/dynamic control. There are times in very icy or slippery conditions at slow speeds where you will not be able to keep the car going straight depending on the crown in the road. For instance, if you're stuck on an off-ramp with a lot of super-elevation and it's very slippery, when you try to apply any throttle the rear of the car will immediately fall into the inside of the road effectively preventing you from going straight. It's worse when you have cold start, high rpm idle conditions. Studded tires would prevent this pretty much. But without them, you can have a handful at times which is why open diff is preferred for most drivers, it's mostly safer. Modern cars with lots of electronic driving aids like stability and traction control can help this. And obviously you need to understand vehicle dynamics..you will power oversteer more easily with LSD.

As far as AWD vs RWD for fun, RWD is more fun. It's more pure..AWD will have more traction obviously. But if you're interested in monkeying the car around, you can do it more easily in RWD. Having said that, if you have constant split torque rate you can have a lot of fun in an AWD vehicle. I can do wonderful lurid 80kmh power-slides in my Outback..constant 45/55 F/R torque split.

 

[cantunamunch]

Accord and Biscayne were almost the same curb weight. The Accord was a few hundred pounds more. But I see your point.

I'm betting the Accord had significantly wider, lower profile tires.

 

[slowrider]

I'm betting the Accord had significantly wider, lower profile tires.

Which would have less traction than a narrow tire, say a 235x78x15. AWD, aggressive tire pattern and a light foot are the best winter time combination.

 

[Ogg]

YThe best old school snow car I ever had was an 85 HP Volvo 240 sedan with 4 Haakkeeppiilliittaas.

dm

My first car was my father’s old 1976 242DL with the best snow tires he could find. I learned how to drive in the snow in that car while I was at SUNY Oswego. Lots of lake effect meant lots of chances to practice.

 

[cantunamunch]

Which would have less traction than a narrow tire,.

My point exactly.

TBH, I have exactly zero glowing memories of 70s RWD in snow. I have *excellent* memories of having to stop for chain-up and chain-off at every tunnel , of uphill cars having right of way on narrow roads and of not being able to enter uphill driveways because the rear tires polished the ice between road and driveway. Lada 1500. No power steering either.

 

[sparty]

Well, as one data point, picking a random result from 2018:
http://sccv.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ITT4-Iroquois-Gymkhana-Class-Results.pdf

The RWD class was definitely slower overall, but the fastest RWD driver still beat four AWD driver on average time. Granted, all the RWD cars were running studs, and the slowest entry in AWD studded was faster than the fastest RWD studded, and the 2WD super-studded entrant soundly beat everyone but the AWD super-stud entrants (and not by a little).

That's admittedly not street driving—it's on a lake—but I think it makes it pretty clear that tires (and the loose nut connecting the seat to the steering wheel) trump drivetrain as a predictor of performance.

 

[scott43]

The other thing to remember is that there is very little weight transfer on low traction surfaces..so some aspects of RWD may not transfer (see what I did there?? ). Unless you respring the car..which might make it undriveable at any normal speed...

 

[mdf]

Buick Impala?

Oops! Chevy Impala. It was a long time ago.

Ok, this is embarrassing. It was a Buick LeSabre. My father in law had an Impala when I met him.

I did learn something interesting comparing Impalas and LeSabres on google -- that there was one year when the Impala was offered with "Liquid Tire Chains". It was a system that sprayed ice melt on the rear tires when you pressed a button on the dash. The article says "almost none were sold."

 

[scott43]

It was a system that sprayed ice melt on the rear tires when you pressed a button on the dash. The article says "almost none were sold."

Yeah but you could put bleach in there and have awesome smoke shows..

 

[slowrider]

Sweet liquid tire chains lol.

 

[cantunamunch]

It was a system that sprayed ice melt on the rear tires when you pressed a button on the dash. The article says "almost none were sold."

I'm surprised this isn't more of a thing amongst 'makers' nowadays

 

[mdf]

Just over 2,600 Liquid Tire Chain systems made it onto the road across the 1969 Chevrolet lineup.
https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2017/11/08/liquid-tire-chain

 

[François Pugh]

You two seem to be suffering from the kind of memory loss that's often related to old timers' disease. None of those old cars were as good as Civic with Blizzaks. Retread snows on the back and lose steering every time you touch the brake pedal, what could go wrong?

A heavier car will blast through short sections of deep snow or plow wash better than lighter cars, but that's their only advantage. In any event, those old cars were not as heavy as you remember. My 1958 Biscayne weighed less than my 2009 Accord. It went off the road at least 5 more times than my Accord too.

Station wagons were the worst. They had close to 50/50 weight balance, but all the extra weight was around the rear bumper. That made it it harder to get the car turning, and hard to straighten out once it did get turning. They usually had positraction, which helped you get it moving but it also meant that you would lose both drive wheels if you got into the gas too hard. That's why so many of the cars you saw of the road were station wagons.

The best old school snow car I ever had was an 85 HP Volvo 240 sedan with 4 Haakkeeppiilliittaas.

dm

My memory isn't as good as I remember it once was, and I may have a touch of old-timer's disease, but...
My 1972 Ford LTD Country Squire Wagon had a base curb weight of 4508 lbs https://www.automobile-catalog.com/...l-size_ford_8gen_ltd_country_squire/1972.html
My 1984 Chevy Caprice Classic Wagon had a base curb weight of 4275 lbs https://www.automobile-catalog.com/...e_3gen/full-size_caprice_3gen_wagon/1984.html
My 1992 Caprice Wagon weighed 4354 lbs. https://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/caprice/1992/wagon/features-specs/

The real problem with the handling was the steering geometry, but a little skill was all you needed to get by. I remember moving the Ford out of the back yard where it was buried in 2 and a half feet of light snow one fine day, without using a shovel, just going back and forth a bit to create a runway to build up momentum and pushing a little further each time.

I'm pretty sure the last two did not have LSD, and I think the first one did not have Posidrive, but all of them had the best available Michelin snow tires. The Ford had them on when I got it, and they managed two summers and two winters before I sold the car to someone who wanted to make it into a dune buggy sort of thing (it was scrap by then).

Speaking of LSD, @scott43 pretty much covered it.
At one time I had a 68 Ford Custom 4-door sedan (straight 6, three in the tree) with a partially seized crown gear in the differential. The thing broke traction on a gravel road, let alone snow and ice. It really freaked out the passengers on snowy highways, but I was quite used to having the rear end "loose".

 

[slowrider]

My point exactly.

TBH, I have exactly zero glowing memories of 70s RWD in snow. I have *excellent* memories of having to stop for chain-up and chain-off at every tunnel , of uphill cars having right of way on narrow roads and of not being able to enter uphill driveways because the rear tires polished the ice between road and driveway. Lada 1500. No power steering either.

Memories, sounds like driving a log truck in the Winter with Armstrong steering and thrown Iron 10 xs a day.