Nygoblue

Hi. I live in a sunny state where there was no need for AWD so I signed a 3 year lease 6 months ago and didn't care about getting the 4matic. I'm now unexpectingly considering a job offer in New York ... I'm worried about driving in the snow with a RWD SUV. What are my options for the lease ... Can I trade in early for a 4matic model? And more importantly does anyone have experience driving a RWD model in places that experience snowy winters. Thank you.

super7pilot

It's all about the tires you use and driving with a smooth touch. This is what I drove in Germany (with no issues) In fact some of the most dangerous folks on a snowy road are those that drive 4X4's, As they are fully convinced that they are invincible and drive with their foot on the gas.

sethro1980

At minimum you'll want dedicated snow tires.

Diabolis

^ Amen. I drive my RWD C63 year-round in Canada, and I don't know that we get less snow than you would in NY. Besides, 4WD only helps when you are tryign to GET MOVING. When it comes to cornering or your ability to stop, 4WD is about as useful as a pair of **** on a bull. As Super7pilot pointed out, the first 10 cars that you see in the ditch at every snowfall here are SUVs whose drivers don't think the laws of physics apply to them because they have 4WD. Get a set of good snow tires and enjoy NY state.

sblvro

If New York State/city was flat then I would suggest RWD is sufficient. Since its a lease they might give you an option to get the 4matic and trade your RWD in your sunshine state.

jtgolden1s

We just purcahsed a RWD 2014 GLK and were a little nervous about the snow. It ended up snowing 10-12 inches about a week later and we decided to test it out. With the stock tires and 3 sandbags in the back we took off from our uphill driveway and all through town with no trouble at all. It was a shock because it performed better than our front wheel drive sedan. We will be getting winter tires later this year and I am sure it will perform even better. I would not be too worried.

Thanks!

fabbrisd1

Thanks for the factual post - GLK RWD - you can take it anywhere that doesn't require you to pull yourself out with the front wheels - so I guess that put's GLK RWD off limits to bayou's and swamps ! Everytwhere else - just plain dandy !

sethro1980

And yet I see plenty of 2wd cars sliding all over the road here in Denver, or spinning their tires on a hill when the light turns green. Driver skill is the main factor, but having AWD is in no way a detriment. Buying a RWD car when you have an AWD model available (assuming you are in an area that gets ice and snow) isn't the smartest move. I bought my 4Matic in Florida, where they are not common, knowing I might one day move to Denver. Great decision. These OEM Continental tires turn to hockey pucks when it's below 32F, but the AWD system coupled with traction control has been fantastic.

Diabolis

I'll make sure to tell my students at the next HPDE school that all the instructors including myself have been full of 5h!t all this time.

Driver skill is certainly a significant but certainly not the MAIN factor - it's the coefficient of friction between the tire and the road surface. The cars that are sliding all over the place are sliding because they are on "hockey puck" consistency all-season tires, not because they are one, two, four or six-wheel drive or the driver is not gentle enough on the accelerator or brakes. Do a MB or AMG Winter Driving Academy course and you'll quickly find out whether a 4Matic GLK stops any better than a RWD C63.

And, I never said that AWD is a detriment when it comes to snowy climates - only that it only helps when you're tryign to GET MOVING. When it comes to turning or braking, it's all in the tires. You'd be a lot safer on the road with 2WD and proper snows than your 4Matic and all-seasons. And, if you want a proper performance car, AWD usually gets in the way so in that regard RWD is still king.

Glad yoru 4Matic on all-seasons is working well for you. I just wouldn't want to have you behind me when I need to hit the brakes on the slippery white stuff and get rear-ended.

sblvro

This is a misnomer about 4wd/AWD stopping longer vs RWD cars. All things being equal=tires, 4wd/AWD will stop shorter than RWD if you know how to do it. Sure if you use your brake and let the ABS working then measure the distance then you might have an argument that because of the weight the 4wd/AWD will will stop longer. But if you put the gear of the autotranny to manually downshift/shift, you will have all 4tires working for you and will have more control whether downhill uphill and fast snow driving.

Diabolis

Bu115h!t. Here goes another educated and experienced driver... NOT.

I am afraid you are confusing engine braking vs. using the brakes to slow down the vehicle. The discussion is not about whether in any particular situation you would be smoother to ease off the gas or downshift vs. using the brake pedal. For all intents and purposes, you could take two identical cars, take out the engine out from one of them and fill the emply space with rocks to make sure they weigh the same, let both cars accelerate down a hill, and the outcome in a braking test - as in which car could stop in the shortest distance - would be completely identical.

As to the effect of engine braking, just FYI - an AWD car with a torque-converter automatic will provide LESS braking than a clutch-coupled FWD, RWD or AWD car because you have a lot more slip in the TC when you take your foot off the gas, so I am afraid that with the large majority of cars you're wrong there as well (I said most, because there are automatic transmissions that use clutch coupling like the MCT in the C63 instead of torque converters). In fact, on a snow-covered road I could I lock up the rear wheels on a C63 simply by letting go of the gas too abruptly in a lower gear, just like I could lock up all four wheels on my stick Audi RS4 under the same circumstances. In all of the above scenarios regardless of how many driven wheels you have (incuding 0 in the "test" car with no engine but functioning brakes), it all comes down to the amount of friction you have between the road and the tire and the weight / inertia of the vehicle. Period.

BluetecKING

get some winter tires

sblvro

Winter driving is not HPDE. If you're saying RWD is superior than AWD in snow flats and hilly or mountainous terrain both using all seasons you are in for a rude awakening. Stick to discussion not profanity that helps too.

sethro1980

I wrote a longer post in response to his condescending lecture that didn't go through and I'm too lazy to do it again. Bottom line is, my GLK is not a high performance roadster, and i stand by my original statement that AWD with all season tires trumps RWD with all season tires. I never said RWD with snow tires wouldn't be ideal. If someone lives in an area with lots of snow and ice and can choose between AWD or RWD for their GLK, they should choose the AWD, and if conditions are really bad, throw on snow tires. I live in suburban Denver. Snow tires are overkill since the snow we get melts within a couple days. The cost to have two sets of tires, rims, TPMS, and installation twice per year is not worth it. And my GLK on all seasons is way better than all the FWD and RWD cars on all seasons.

Diabolis

Please re-read my posts - I never said that RWD is superior than AWD in winter. I only said that AWD vs. FWD or RWD helps you accelerate but does nothing for turning or braking. And, I belive the discussion was about all-seasons vs. snow tires. All seasons don't have have the number of small sipes that dedicated snow tires do so, plus the rubber compound starts to harden at about -5 C, so they are never going to provide the grip in snow that proper winters tires do. Essentually the core of the argument was that AWD does not make up for the absence of proper winter tires.

I wouldn't classify "BS" as a profanity, but I do apologize if I offended you or anyone else. That was not my intention.

Diabolis

Regarding AWD vs. FWD/RWD - when you accelerate, it helps. When you brake or turn it does not - they are equal. Which part of that is so difficult to understand?

I am not disputing anythign you said earlier if the two vehicles you are comparing weigh the same AND HAVE THE SAME TIRES. But - given a choice between a RWD with proper winters and AWD with all-seasons, on snow or ice there is no comparison. The car on all-seasons is going to take 30% longer to stop despite what you like to think. We had three identical E350 4Matic cars at the last winter driving school (not HPDE - just get to be a better driver kind of stuff), one with snows, one with all-seasons and one with summers. We got all three to exactly 60 km/h and hit the brakes at the same spot. The one with winters stopped in ~90 m, the one with all seasons in ~130 m, and the one with summers ran off into the field past the edge of the skid pad some ~200+ m further down. I still have the videos from the little RC camera helicopter somewhere if you'd like to see them for yourself. Or, seeing as you obviously have acceess to the Internet, Google "stopping distance winter tires vs all season" and see what you come up with.

I don't know if you're just tryign to delude yourself that somehow AWD makes all-seasons perform just as good as winter tires in cold and slippery conditions, but please don't preach your own ignorance as the gospel. It is your right to choose a compromise due to financial issues, but just because you (mistakenly) believe in somethign it does not make it universally true. Yes, snow tires may be overkill if you live in Florida, Hawaii, Africa or other parts of the world where it never snows or the temperature never drops below -5 C. For those of us that don't and wish to have the most amount of traction available in any given situation - and in partcular in winter when it does get slippery - winter tires are a must. Period.

jtgolden1s

sblvro

if you are testing it in a flat road so yes AWD will stop longer because of weight. now try driving same vehicle in a snowy incline, let say a grade of 25 degrees as well as descent of the same grade. do you think the FWD or the RWD will be able to climb the grade? new york is not all flat. I live in a valley with a very steep grade. no plows nor salt during winters. BMW with snow tires, owners usually walk and leave their cars until the snow melts. my 2003 honda pilot awd with all seasons, no problem, my 2006 Evo 9 MR with winter performance blizzaks-no problem, my 2009 escalade hybrid with dueler alenzas all season-no problem, 2014 GLK350 4matic with continental all seasons-no problem, my 2015i escalade platinum with dueler alenzas-I'm sure will be good during winter. my old 2003 IS300 RWD, forget driving it snow, or even wet with its stock oem RE011. my 2013 RRS is a garage queen with oem summer performance continental crosscontact-so no winterdriving there.

Diabolis

We are 100% in agreement that going up on a snow-covered hill with an AWD is a lot easier. But, the opposite is not true when you are trying to descend down that same incline. Regardless of how many wheels are driven, it would be equally easy (or hard) to descend with a AWD vs. no-WD (no engine) vehicle.

As I have repeatedly stated, it all comes down to the amount of traction you have. On a given car - any car - the traction is in the contact patch between the tires and the road, regardless of the road conditions. Yet, with the arguments you are presenting, we are debating about two different thigns here. Allow me to restate my point one last time for the sake of clarity.

When you are trying to accelerate and you exceed the available traction beween the driven wheel(s) and the road surface, the driven wheel(s) start to slip. If you have a FWD or RWD car with no limited-slip differential, you essentially have one-wheel drive as the moment one of the driven wheels starts to slip all of the engine torque goes to that particular wheel, and you are 100% correct that said car is going to have more trouble accelerating - under any conditions includiong dry pavement - than the same car when the torque can be distrubuted to more wheels. Hence the invention of the LSD, where you transfer some of the torque to the other wheel on the same axle that is not slipping, again in order to assist with acceleration (you now have two driven wheels). If you also put a center differential on the car and nother LSD at the other driven axle and thus now have 4WD, that means that the torque can be distributed to all four wheels of the vehicle, which of course is going to provide you with the best ability to accelerate when enay one of them overcomes the available grip with the road surface.

Now, seeing as all cars have four brakes, when it comes to braking the number of driven wheels is irrelevant. Seeing as the brakes on any car can easily overcome the amount of traction you have beween the tires and the road surface, your stopping distance is going to be THE SAME on an otherwise identical vehicle under all circumstances, whether said vehicle has 4 wheel drive or no wheel drive are you are not triyng to accelerate the wheels using the engine - you are trying to slow them down using the brakes.

The same also holds true when you are steering the vehice - the number of driven wheels has nothing to do with it. The vehicle always wants wants to continue moving in a staight line due to intertia, and you ability to force the vehicle to change direction is again 100% dependint on the amount of friction you have benween the front tires which do all the steering and the road surface. The number of driven wheels has nothgin to do with it.

Now - in all of the above scenarios, the amount of available traction any vehicle has is in the contact patch beween the tires and the road surface. In cold, snowy and slippery conditions, winter tires provide anywhere from 35 to 50% better grip than all-seasons. So - when you are tyring to accelerate with all-season on an AWD car, you still have 35 to 50% less grip than when trying to accelerate with that same AWD car on snows. If you have four wheel drive it simply means that you are able to distrbute the torque to all driven wheels, so of course you have better ability to climb up a hill than someone who only has one driven wheel. But even in that example, if you are able to climb up an 18% incline on your all-seasons before all four wheels start to slip, the same car with winters under the same conditions will be able to climp up a 25% incline before all four wheels start to slip. When it comes to braking when you're coming down that same incline (or for that matter steering) where the number of driven wheels has nothign to do with your ability to stop or change direction, between two cars that weigh the same the one that has greater friction between the tires and the road is the one that is going to be able to stop in the shortest distance or change direction more rapidly regardless of wheter you are on flat ground, going up, down, sideways or on the Moon. In other words, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE TRACTION BETWEEN THE TIRES AND THE ROAD. Your AWD car on all-seasons may be able to descent down an 18% incline before you no longer have the ability to stop, or in a panic stop situation you will take, say, 135 meters to stop from 60 km/h. Your same AWD car, or any of my "example" cars that weigh the same as yours even if they have RDW, FWD, one-wheel-drive or no wheel drive (no engine at all) but on proper winters will be able to go down a 25% incline before they no longer have the ability to stop, or in a or in a panic stop situation will take 90 meters to stop from 60 km/h instead of 135. That is the point of the entuire argumet I was making.

Seeing as even this is obviously too hard for some of you to comprehend, and furthermore because as one of you (correctly) pointed out that we're not discussing performance driving, I am not even going to attempt to explain the "traction circle" and the physics as they pertain to a particualr tire that is tryign to both steer and accelerate or decelerate at the same time (if you are inclined to learn a bit more, again Google" traction circle" and you'll get tons of relevant results), but the bottom line is that AWD - while it is certianly able to distribute the available engine torque when you are trying to accelerate to more wheels - does NOT make up for lack of traction between the tires and the road, and the ONLY way to maximize tha traction is to use tires that provide you with more grip.

And, as an actual real-world example, I have proper snows on one of my Porsches and my C63 (both have LSDs, so both of the rear wheel are driven even when one stars to slip). I was able to make it up our own steep driveway with either of those two cars with no drama whereas the AWD GLK was actually having trouble on the all-seasons it came with from the dealership. At the top of the hill where there is a sharp right turn, and again either of the two cars on winters are able to slow down and turn perfectly while the GLK understeered (plowed) on its all-seasons for another 5 m. The following Saturday I picked up the winter wheels and tires for the GLK, and it makes a MASSIVE difference. Yes, with winters it can climb on inclines where I wouldn't be able to make it with either of my two cars because it can distribute the torque to all four wheels instead of just two, but when it comes to slowing down or turing AWD offers no advantages whatsoever.

Anyway - I've spent enough time here beating what appears to be a dead horse. Believe what you want, drive on whatever tires you want, and may your G-d look after you and keep you safe regardless of your tire choices. It's just that I personally like to depend less on G-d and blind lick, and more on sound and safe decisions when it comes to my own safety and that of others around me.

sblvro

since it is a MB forum......

Diabolis

Are you really that freakin' dense or are you just so insecure that you can't possibly swallow the fact that you're wrong? All your video demonstrates is that a 4WD car will out-acclerate a RWD car when the driven wheels start to slip, as I have already stated six times.


Since you obviously like videos, here's a couple for you that demonstrates my point, in hopes that these will finally get through your thick skull.

sblvro

of course they're selling tires.

Diabolis

Wow... that is all I can say. You really, honestly belive that the specific videos are somehow biased or doctored, and that despite the overwhelming evidence and proof to the contrary winter tires are just a big conspiracy by the tire manufacturers and retailers tryign to pull a fast one on you? Well, at least that answers my question whether you are really that stupid or just suffering from low self-esteem.

sblvro

nope, no self esteem issues here. I think the OP was asking IF his RWD is okay in NY which as you know is not flat vs AWD. then the link you show is all season vs winter tires which doesn't address the issue of RWD vs AWD but instead you call names and start flaming? hence the video link of AWD MBGLA45 AMG vs a RWD AMG C63.