[WWM3]

Originally Posted by Ali Shiralian

Unless you have proper winter tires, don't matter what you get, awd or rear wheel. Having said that, I'd go with XDrive vs RWD if both equipped with winter tires. Sure there is compromise with performance in XDrive, but how many times you want to track your car?

I would do winter and summer tires whether AWD or RWD. I'm leaning towards AWD.

[tjlees]

Originally Posted by WWM3

The diff option on the Audi is nice for sure. However, I would rather do a 328 xDrive over an A4 IMO.

I'm grappling with the same decision. I've been driving an SUV and a fun car for years and now I'm ready to consolidate. I live about an hour north of Philly so I deal with the snow. Strongly considering an xDrive 435i, but I'm not sure if AWD is necessary.

+1

I'm not an Audi fan, mainly because in the S Line format (M Sport equivalent) the suspension is bone crushing, the handling (feedback and feel) is worse, the performance is less and, for a diesel, the mpg is worse, but also because the monthlies at the time were more.

It is a cooler car IMHO, especially with the LED front/rears and quality of the inside is better.

[Polo08816]

Originally Posted by WWM3

The diff option on the Audi is nice for sure. However, I would rather do a 328 xDrive over an A4 IMO.

I'm grappling with the same decision. I've been driving an SUV and a fun car for years and now I'm ready to consolidate. I live about an hour north of Philly so I deal with the snow. Strongly considering an xDrive 435i, but I'm not sure if AWD is necessary.

I'm confused. Are we considering a 328 xDrive vs. Audi A4 OR the 435i xDrive which would be a competitor with the Audi S4/S5?

You want to a compromise between an SUV and a fun car, so the logical choice is a 4 door sedan instead of a coupe. If you want AWD but don't want to make performance sacrifices, then Audi Quattro with torque vectoring rear diff >> xDrive.

[WWM3]

Originally Posted by Polo08816

I'm confused. Are we considering a 328 xDrive vs. Audi A4 OR the 435i xDrive which would be a competitor with the Audi S4/S5?

You want to a compromise between an SUV and a fun car, so the logical choice is a 4 door sedan instead of a coupe. If you want AWD but don't want to make performance sacrifices, then Audi Quattro with torque vectoring rear diff >> xDrive.

Not considering a 328. Just explaining that I would rather own one over an A4.

I like the look of the 435 and I don't need the four doors at this point. I drove a used 435 xDrive with DHP and I was impressed. I haven't had the opportunity to drive a dif equipped S4/5.

[335BOY]

Originally Posted by tjlees

+1

I'm not an Audi fan, mainly because in the S Line format (M Sport equivalent) the suspension is bone crushing, the handling (feedback and feel) is worse, the performance is less and, for a diesel, the mpg is worse, but also because the monthlies at the time were more.

It is a cooler car IMHO, especially with the LED front/rears and quality of the inside is better.

If you're comparing to xdrive, I think you have that backwards.

[335BOY]

Originally Posted by WWM3

Not considering a 328. Just explaining that I would rather own one over an A4.

I like the look of the 435 and I don't need the four doors at this point. I drove a used 435 xDrive with DHP and I was impressed. I haven't had the opportunity to drive a dif equipped S4/5.

I'm an Audi fan but the current cars are about 8 years old.

[tjlees]

Originally Posted by 335BOY

If you're comparing to xdrive, I think you have that backwards.

For a A4 S-Line 3.0D Quattro v 335d in the UK? Night and Day for me.

The A4 suspension had the S-Line lowered suspension - it was bone crushing and doubtless my back would have gone within a couple of hours. The BMer is more comfortable, and a subsequent run in a loaner verified that I could easily do and walk away from three hours straight over the worst pot-holed roads the UK could throw at me.

Both the A4 S-Line and 335d have fairly numb steering ,but the BMer definitely had the edge in terms of turn-in, feel and feedback. I sure the track would have pointed more towards the Audi and it superior 4WD, but on the public road, the BMer felt more settled and had less understeer moments.

In terms of performance, the Bmer is ridiculously fast - the Audi is fast but trails the Bmer by some margin (0-60 in 4.8 v 5.9 seconds).

The fuel consumption is usually a mute point on these types of cars. The combined for the Bmer is 52.3mpg and the Audi is 49.6mpg. In reality, I'm getting 42 to 46mpg - only doing 70mph do I get 50+mpg in a 335D.

The final killer was the monthlies because of the 25% discount on the Bmer and the 4.9%APR at the time.

The Audi is cooler and probably better on the track, but for the sake of my back and wealth its a No from me.

[casualDIYer]

Originally Posted by RJH

....
On the other hand, my position is that not only do automakers grossly exaggerate the need for AWD, AND it's benefit ...there are many others, as well as myself, that believe they encourage a false sense of security (exponentially so if we are talking SUVs) leading to greater risk taking - among 20 years olds and 50 year olds alike.

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

[tjlees]

AWD is purely for traction in wet, frost, ice, snow or extreme conditions. It's not a FAD. If you don't need it, you don't have to get it.

Great thing is BMW gives you the choice

I think RWD is great, but I'm no driving God and on one or two occasions I've swapped ends, or had to put a serious amount of opposite lock on to prevent a scenery interface problem in the wet/damp UK weather.

[335BOY]

Originally Posted by menncars

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

I think that is the most misinformed and delusional post I have ever read on any forum. Wow.

[Polo08816]

Originally Posted by menncars

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

...huh?

Originally Posted by 335BOY

I think that is the most misinformed and delusional post I have ever read on any forum. Wow.

This.

[F87_LCI]

Originally Posted by menncars

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

Let me guess...you also think the Earth is flat.

Consider this a free education...below is from a Car Manufacturer website. One that knows a thing or two about AWD. I think I see them tout the "safety advantages" at least three times just here...

All-Wheel Drive (AWD) vs. Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD)

What is the advantage of an All-Wheel Drive (AWD) car compared to one that only has Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD)?

The accepted understanding of an All-Wheel Drive vehicle is that it drives all of the wheels all of the time. That is, regardless of the type of road surface or the application in which the AWD car is being used, all four wheels are being used to generate forward momentum. A Rear-Wheel Drive car as the name describes only uses two of the four wheels to develop forward momentum.

This means that AWD vehicles have twice the grip available to transmit driving forces than that, which is available to a RWD car of the same weight and tyre configuration.

This feature of AWD vehicles having twice the grip is a significant safety benefit, because the stability and degree of driver control of the best AWD is greater than that of the best Rear-Wheel Drive car when the vehicle is being driven forward.

One example of this increased level of safety in AWD vehicles is during a take off at a road junction on a slippery road surface, where the level of grip between tyre and road is low and the driver is trying to move into a gap in the oncoming traffic.

Depending on the coefficient of friction between the tyre and road surface each tyre has a maximum level of grip. If the amount of engine power applied to the wheel exceeds the available grip the tyre will lose traction and the wheel will spin. In the case of an All-Wheel Drive car because the total engine drive force is distributed to all four wheels, each tyre is only required to transmit one quarter of the total and therefore it is less likely that the tyre will lose grip and spin. This means that because an AWD car is driving all four wheels the total drive force is less likely to exceed the amount of grip required to move the vehicle forward.

The result is more stable and reliable acceleration of the vehicle into the gap in the oncoming traffic, because in this situation the grip of the best AWD car is twice that of the best RWD car.

Another important example of the increased level of safety of an All-Wheel Drive car compared to a Rear-Wheel Drive car is when cornering under drive power. The tyres in an AWD car are transmitting half the total drive force compared to a Rear-Wheel Drive car. When cornering not only is a tyre transmitting driving forces but also cornering forces. Because a Rear-Wheel Drive car drive axle is transmitting twice the driving forces of an All-Wheel Drive car there is less grip available for cornering forces.

This means that in a RWD car if engine power increases and uses more of the available grip leaving insufficient grip for cornering forces the tyre will lose traction and slip sideways. This results in the rear of the car sliding sideways in what is known as oversteer manoeuvre, meaning the car turns a smaller radius of turn than the driver intended.

Because an All-Wheel Drive car only transmits half of the drive force at each wheel, the amount of grip available for cornering forces is greater than a Rear-Wheel Drive car for the same level of engine power. Meaning that the best AWD car will lose sideways grip at much higher cornering forces than the best RWD car.

The result is an All-Wheel Drive car that can more safely negotiate a corner under drive power that suddenly and unexpectedly is more slippery than the driver expected

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by 335BOY

I think that is the most misinformed and delusional post I have ever read on any forum. Wow.

Yeah, pretty much

[educated_layman]

Originally Posted by menncars

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

At least one man of the seventeenth century understood more about your car than you do.

[Polo08816]

Originally Posted by menncars

I completely agree. AWD is a fad. It's use in road-going family cars is a marketing gimmick. "Hey, can we get 100 MPG? No? Okay, stick in AWD because if we don't add something new everyone will notice their 6 year old car is fine and hold on to it another 4 years, after which it will . . . still run fine but looked dated"

AWD has been around for close to 100 years and has been mostly used for off-road use where one wheel off the ground happens from time to time. For off-road, it really makes sense. For paved road, it's wasted.

Interestingly enough I have not seen any manufacturer make the following claims:

"All wheel drive is safer than non-all wheel drive cars"
"All-wheel drive has more traction"

The only street car I've seen alluding to more traction was the 4TRAC by GM. Being a sh*tbox it was ultimately pulled from the lineup but no other maker of cars has called a drive system a traction system. I have a suspicion the government leaned on the auto makers to avoid unproven claims about safety and AWD.

Regarding safety stats, lots of them on seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, improved front/rear bumpers, lowered hoods, removal of hood ornaments, windscreen glass, improved door hinges, side impact bars, etc. but none on AWD (and none on ABS either btw).

Want to have a good discussion on a misunderstood technology? Jump into one on anti-lock brakes. It's been around for almost 25 years and I still find people who think it's lets them brake faster and in a shorter distance than whatever it replaced. Not a big surprise some are fooled by AWD jingoisms too.

Riddle
What do an ambulance, police car, and fire truck all have in common besides being emergency vehicles?

Rear wheel drive!

Originally Posted by educated_layman

At least one man of the seventeenth century understood more about your car than you do.

LOL. That man is Isaac Newton.

[iJay]

Drive both and see if you notice the difference.

If you drive the X and like it the same as RWD, just get X. If you enjoy the RWD better, get it, you aren't likely to ever have it be the single difference from being stuck in the snow vs not.

I live in Michigan where we just came out of one of the snowier winters and didn't have a single issue related to accelerating, and I used the stock all-seasons on my RWD. I have owned an RWD 3 series for 10+ years here and only got stuck once to where I had to get out and shovel the road and push (plow had not been through and the snow was 12" deep.) I still got out, but it took some extra effort.

I have driven quite a few X's and I don't love them as much as the RWD.

For the record, I do recommend swapping out the stock all-seasons in the cold months, they really don't stop as well as winter tires.

Cheers!

Originally Posted by Raptor7

I've just been reading about RWD vs FWD car and I've read a lot of mixed opinions. I live in Ontario (Canada) where we do get snow. I read one thread somewhere where a young driver was going to get one of those small Mazda miata's and people were saying its not recommended for a young driver in the winter. Whats your take on it, I'm 22 right now? Will I be getting stuck in snow? Are there any challenges I will be facing?

Note: I will get winter tires once I purchase a 428i/435i, also looking at getting an automatic transmission

[RJH]

Originally Posted by dwalls90

I still find this suprisingly low. Non-xDrive BMW's are like unicorns.

Of course if you go to FL or CA, I'm sure they're more common.

NOT by choice!!! - BMW and their local dealers put a full court press on selling (exaggerating) the virtues of AWD because they both earn more $ and it deftly counters Audi's key value proposition. Getting a RWD 328 is darn near impossible and finding one with a manual is rarer than a 'pink' unicorn. I wanted to buy a RWD 6-speed, but am embarrassed to have gotten "sold" on what I did not need, nor wanted. It's just too easy to go with the flow (even when it's circling the bowl).

IMHO - I bought a very nice appliance, but not the sport sedan I wanted. AWD and all the other nanny device may offer some comfort to the less skilled or those uninterested in the "sport" in sport sedan; but they really do mess up true sport driving. And if you do live in a polar vortex and need a snowmobile or all terrain vehicle - may I suggest the F30 may not be your best choice.

Another key point is that the AWD handling of the F30 is far more UN-predictable and down-right dangerous than the RWD, when in the hands of an average driver; who only occasionally engages in sport driving.

With enough laps at track-day I was able to learn to guess the handling limits and adapt to AWD, but having had the opportunity to drive the RWD back-to-back, it limits are apparent to the even the most uninitiated/ inexperienced driver, it was much mush easier to drive fast AND a whole lot more fun.

Some claim that affordable sport cars and sport sedans will become as rare as unicorns, but I argue it is our decision whether let the driver drive the car or the car to drive us, that is the defining criteria of "sport".

[WilliCO]

Originally Posted by RJH

IMHO - I bought a very nice appliance, but not the sport sedan I wanted.

That is exactly the way I feel about my xDrive F10, and it might just be the modern lament of long-term BMW fans everywhere right now.

[335BOY]

If I never drove in snow, I wouldn't even consider awd.

[Polo08816]

Originally Posted by RJH

NOT by choice!!! - BMW and their local dealers put a full court press on selling (exaggerating) the virtues of AWD because they both earn more $ and it deftly counters Audi's key value proposition. Getting a RWD 328 is darn near impossible and finding one with a manual is rarer than a 'pink' unicorn. I wanted to buy a RWD 6-speed, but am embarrassed to have gotten "sold" on what I did not need, nor wanted. It's just too easy to go with the flow (even when it's circling the bowl).

IMHO - I bought a very nice appliance, but not the sport sedan I wanted. AWD and all the other nanny device may offer some comfort to the less skilled or those uninterested in the "sport" in sport sedan; but they really do mess up true sport driving. And if you do live in a polar vortex and need a snowmobile or all terrain vehicle - may I suggest the F30 may not be your best choice.

Another key point is that the AWD handling of the F30 is far more UN-predictable and down-right dangerous than the RWD, when in the hands of an average driver; who only occasionally engages in sport driving.

With enough laps at track-day I was able to learn to guess the handling limits and adapt to AWD, but having had the opportunity to drive the RWD back-to-back, it limits are apparent to the even the most uninitiated/ inexperienced driver, it was much mush easier to drive fast AND a whole lot more fun.

Some claim that affordable sport cars and sport sedans will become as rare as unicorns, but I argue it is our decision whether let the driver drive the car or the car to drive us, that is the defining criteria of "sport".

Unpredictable, yes. Downright dangerous... well, the average driver should not be engaging in that type of driving.

Unless we're talking about some high end AWD system such as those found in the Evo, 911, GTR, etc., I'm not a fan of a AWD system that uses a servo motor to bias torque between the front and rear axles. I like the simplicity of a fixed or mechanical (ie. Torsen) system. I've had a friend whose servo motor failed in his xDrive and it essentially became a heavier AWD car.

If you need AWD, the Audi S4 with it's torque vectoring rear differential and Torsen center diff IS the car to get.

[Fast400]

Originally Posted by Polo08816

Unpredictable, yes. Downright dangerous... well, the average driver should not be engaging in that type of driving.

Unless we're talking about some high end AWD system such as those found in the Evo, 911, GTR, etc., I'm not a fan of a AWD system that uses a servo motor to bias torque between the front and rear axles. I like the simplicity of a fixed or mechanical (ie. Torsen) system. I've had a friend whose servo motor failed in his xDrive and it essentially became a heavier AWD car.

If you need AWD, the Audi S4 with it's torque vectoring rear differential and Torsen center diff IS the car to get.

If by dangerous, you mean to say that I'll be brave enough to cruise along the unplowed autobahn at 60mph while all rwd vehicles are creepin in the right lane hoping not to get stuck, ...then your right it's dangerous.
Biggest bunch of crap I've ever heard!! AWD is always safer! Now if you intend to drift, and have fun that way, then get rwd, but don't make a stupid claim that it's safer.

[335BOY]

Originally Posted by Polo08816

Unpredictable, yes. Downright dangerous... well, the average driver should not be engaging in that type of driving.

Unless we're talking about some high end AWD system such as those found in the Evo, 911, GTR, etc., I'm not a fan of a AWD system that uses a servo motor to bias torque between the front and rear axles. I like the simplicity of a fixed or mechanical (ie. Torsen) system. I've had a friend whose servo motor failed in his xDrive and it essentially became a heavier AWD car.

If you need AWD, the Audi S4 with it's torque vectoring rear differential and Torsen center diff IS the car to get.

Unpredictable? Dangerous? Can you enlighten us?