On 11/08/2017 04:39 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:18:01 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>On 11/7/2017 11:00 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
>
>>> Snow and rain handling. FWD is better. Not snowing or raining?
>>> Doesn't matter to me, I'm not racing.
>>
>>Best car I ever had in the snow was RWD. Yes, my '62 Corvair
>
> My VWs were good in the snow too. Not much clearance though.

Remember the "How does the snowplow driver drive to his snowplow?"
commercials?

My 83 Sentra (FWD of course) with real-chain chains was very good on the
20 miles of 2-3 inches of packed snow/ice on the mountain road up to the
ski are. Nobody told me you weren't supposed to drive 40, which is what
I was doing. After maybe 4 trips one of the chains broke.

>>You can argue the merits or each, but, snow aside, the fact is, 99% of
>>the drivers can't see the difference 99% of the time. The typical
>>commute to work or shopping is under conditions that you cannot see the
>>variance in handling.

I don't know whether it was the RWD or the soft racing tires, but
driving down the mountain in my friend's S2000 was the best driving
experience I've ever had even including the botched shifts!

In my defense, I hadn't driven stick for 15 years and the shifter only
provided a TINY amount of physical space between the gears and I had no
idea where I was most of the time.

> Try telling the other guy that handling is a non-issue most of the time.
>
>>Present and last car are AWD. It varies from F/R 40/60 normal, 50/50 in>


>>snow mode and if the front or rear are on slippery road it can shift to
>>either 90/10 to 10/90 depending on traction. It was great one day in
>>the snow going up a hill passing 3 cars stuck or struggling. Retired
>>now, I have no plans to drive in the snow.
>
> I suppose to the other guy that's a marketing gimmick.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Calling someone an asshole for being rude to a telemarketer
is like accusing someone who's shot a burglar in his home
of being a poor host." -- W.S.Rowell