Mazda Ice Academy: Trial By Ice And Snow CX-5, CX-3 And MX-5

[V8toilet]

There are limitations of AWD, as it does nothing to improve braking or regular cornering. Thus, such systems don't enable you to drive the same way or at the same speed as you would on a dry road. Arguing over their differences seems pointless because they all aid in getting the vehicle through the snow very well. You want to make your SUV superior in the snow than get some snow tires.

 

[sillyxone]

How is 50% front or rear awd even in the same class as all time driven near 50 50 split with 100% variable to any tire at any time?

I'm not very experienced in this matter, but drawing from simple physic, if you apply a single force to a corner of a car, wouldn't that make the car spins around its center of gravity/center of rotation? That doesn't help much with moving the car forward, does it?

Put a book on a surface, and try to move it forward by pushing near a corner, that would make the book spins out of the intended path. To move it forward, I would apply the force near the middle of the back, or in other words, there should be similar forces to the wheels on both sides. I had my Civic turning to the side quite a few times when one side of the wheels are on an ice patch, for both braking and accelerating.

 

[Unobtanium]

The talk about the rotary coming back gives me dj vu. Remember when Mazda said they were going to bring the diesel to the US.

Yeah, but Mazda never had a diesel, at least, not a modern one, in the US, in a passenger car, did they? They had the Rotary as late as the last decade, via RX8. The RX8 left noone feeling happy, really. It was underpowered (so much so that a buy-back occurred because it didn't make as much power as advertised), and the styling was very "Meh" (opinion).

Honda/Acura has brought the NSX back.
Ford and GM and Chrysler keep selling the hell out of their "retro" muscle and pony cars.
The BRZ and FRS are much sexier than the MX5, and I bet have cut into MX5 sales, if only a tiny bit.

It's high time for Mazda to bring back the RX platform/engine/etc. and I hope they do!

 

[Unobtanium]

I'm not very experienced in this matter, but drawing from simple physic, if you apply a single force to a corner of a car, wouldn't that make the car spins around its center of gravity/center of rotation? That doesn't help much with moving the car forward, does it?
With an intelligent AWD system, you get traction to the tires that can use it, and power to the driveline is cut via the engine ECU, and what is left is redistributed to the tires that can most use it without spinning. It's EXTREMELY effective. The vehicle goes in a straight line because you are steering it and aiming it that way. When the system DOES end up spinning all 4 tires briefly before the ECU dumbs things down, it feels a lot like a RWD vehicle doing a burn-out, at least, that's how my Jeep felt on ice/snow if I floored it from a 20mph roll just learning how it would do. Felt like a powerful car when you punch it and lose traction at speed. A TINY bit of slew, but very controllable.

Put a book on a surface, and try to move it forward by pushing near a corner, that would make the book spins out of the intended path. To move it forward, I would apply the force near the middle of the back, or in other words, there should be similar forces to the wheels on both sides. I had my Civic turning to the side quite a few times when one side of the wheels are on an ice patch, for both braking and accelerating.

In the world of physics, I think you are correct. In the dynamics of the 'real world', though, I don't think it works like that. At least, when I purposefully put my Jeep in situations where only 1 tire got traction or whatever, it didn't work like that. It worked beautifully. It simply WENT. At least, as fast as it could with only 1 tire getting traction and the ECU dumbing it down so no spin occurred.

I learned a long time ago that physics and books do not supersede the real world all the time. They simply model the real world, and when there is a disparity, the model must be adjusted, not the real world, so to speak.

However, I know what you mean about torque steer in a FWD vehicle with an LSD. I hate it. I have to think, though, that it's due to the wheels both powering AND steering losing traction, and the ECU management, and a host of other things. I wouldn't try to relate FWD loss of traction to only 1 wheel pushing or pulling in AWD.

 

[sillyxone]

The vehicle goes in a straight line because you are steering it and aiming it that way.

When the three other wheels are on ice/has no traction (thus the fourth wheel getting 100%), you can't steer it or aim it because it has no traction. How about getting a plastic box and float in on water, simulating no friction. Try to see if you can move it straightly forward pushing at one corner. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the case when a single wheel got all power.

 

[Unobtanium]

There are limitations of AWD, as it does nothing to improve braking or regular cornering. Thus, such systems don't enable you to drive the same way or at the same speed as you would on a dry road. Arguing over their differences seems pointless because they all aid in getting the vehicle through the snow very well. You want to make your SUV superior in the snow than get some snow tires.

I don't disagree in the least, but for those of us that do not live where snow tires make sense, and still need to deal with snow on occasion, the best AWD systems do have merit, especially on hilly, curvy roads. Not because they allow you to go faster, but because they allow you to go. period.

 

[Unobtanium]

When the three other wheels are on ice/has no traction (thus the fourth wheel getting 100%), you can't steer it or aim it because it has no traction. How about getting a plastic box and float in on water, simulating no friction. Try to see if you can move it straightly forward pushing at one corner. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the case when a single wheel got all power.

I think you are. Just because a tire cannot get enough traction to move a vehicle, does not mean that it cannot get enough traction to help steer said vehicle.

This is a great illustration of a well-controlled AWD system that can send 100% power to any one tire, in real time.

Notice how slick it is? Also notice how he can just punch it and go? That's how my Jeep was. I have yet to fully test my Mazda on ice, and am curious how it will do, but I am somewhat doubting it does this well. I hope to be positively surprised, though.
Here is another demonstration of it in snow.

Again, I doubt the Mazda will be this competent, but I will wait and see!

You will also note that Mazda is trying very hard to ape Jeep's system with the new CX3. They aren't there yet, but they are headed there. If it wasn't superior, Mazda wouldn't be trying to re-create it in their product line, no?

 

[fdew]

Amazing. The jeep made it up the hill with SNOW tires. I wondered why he bothered when he had good AWD and ground clearance.

 

[Unobtanium]

Amazing. The jeep made it up the hill with SNOW tires. I wondered why he bothered when he had good AWD and ground clearance.

I wonder how the CX-5 would do? Goodyear all-terrain tires in this video:

*Notice that he is able to steer/control the vehicle?
Mazda's getting there. The AWD system in the CX3 seems closer yet!

 

[yugrus]

You will also note that Mazda is trying very hard to ape Jeep's system with the new CX3.

I wonder what do you consider to be remotely common between two systems, besides the obvious "AWD" moniker?

 

[Unobtanium]

I wonder what do you consider to be remotely common between two systems, besides the obvious "AWD" moniker?

Mazda keeps trying to get more and more on the ball with the torque distribution and early activation and I think the cx3 might even drive both front and rear wheels initially.

 

[yugrus]

Understood. However, that's what all OEMs are trying to hone out, don't they? From what I experienced in snow, Mazda did a great job, for what its system was intended.

 

[Unobtanium]

Understood. However, that's what all OEMs are trying to hone out, don't they? From what I experienced in snow, Mazda did a great job, for what its system was intended.

I'm anxious to see how I like it on ice/snow compared to my Jeep, myself!

I'm just saying that Jeep has an AWD system that can vary torque instantly 100%-0% to any 1 tire(s), and drives the front tires 52%, and the rear 48%, and has a less than 1mpg penalty for their system...Mazda be tryin'! I am curious how "in the real world", they compare though. On paper, the Jeep destroys the Mazda, but I want to drive the Mazda on snow/ice and see. I hope it works great, because that's the only reason I have a CUV instead of a sports car.

 

[yugrus]

I'm sure you will not be disappointed, particularly providing the price you paid for this system and its relative hardware simplicity.

 

[Unobtanium]

I'm sure you will not be disappointed, particularly providing the price you paid for this system and its relative hardware simplicity.

I don't think I will be. Anxious to see though.

 

[sillyxone]

Another report with verdict, too bad I were expecting a more detailed report/analysis and more videos. At least they are honest: "They may not have dominated as thoroughly as the event organisers would have liked, but the Mazdas were still the best AWDs on display."

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/2016-mazda-cx-3-and-cx-5-awd-review-snow-test-39534

 

[Scythe024]

Another report with verdict, too bad I were expecting a more detailed report/analysis and more videos. At least they are honest: "They may not have dominated as thoroughly as the event organisers would have liked, but the Mazdas were still the best AWDs on display."

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/2016-mazda-cx-3-and-cx-5-awd-review-snow-test-39534

All I could think while watching that is wish the US version had paddle shifters too. I doub't I'd use them much, but would still be fun to have.

 

[Chris_Top_Her]

I'm anxious to see how I like it on ice/snow compared to my Jeep, myself!

I'm just saying that Jeep has an AWD system that can vary torque instantly 100%-0% to any 1 tire(s), and drives the front tires 52%, and the rear 48%, and has a less than 1mpg penalty for their system...Mazda be tryin'! I am curious how "in the real world", they compare though. On paper, the Jeep destroys the Mazda, but I want to drive the Mazda on snow/ice and see. I hope it works great, because that's the only reason I have a CUV instead of a sports car.

Is this your jeep?

 

[Unobtanium]

Is this your jeep?

No, but is that your mom?

 

[inlinev]

To people like Mike, I tend to actually be a dick in real life. When they insult me due to my age,, their income, etc, I tend to be an ass using backhanded comments, or just being somewhat obnoxious like above, because I know I could smash their face if they tried to take it beyond words, and it's my way of frustrating them, because if I get under their skin with being an ass, well...I've "won", so to speak, in that it's pretty near impossible to rile me with just words. Maybe thay makes sense, maybe no, but you asked a question and you got an answer.


Simply put: when you hold things like age, income, etc (immediate facts)over me, I'll hold the fact over you that push comes to shove, I could likely smash yiu, and violence is the golden standard and always has been. I do this by insulting you in ways that all but demand a physical response that you refuse to try and muster. It's my way of pushing indisputable fact in your face. When you and I both know you're scared to dance, it's terribly funny to me, and infuriating to you, as one could imagine.

Since this is the internet though, it takes a lot of the meaning out of it, and is just petty banter.

Anyway, enough real talk. I doubt you've seen me be a dick to anyone other than Mike, which Kindof proves my point. It's more my way of dealing with certain people than with everyone.

There are two opposing thoughts going on here. In your first paragraph you describe how you don't like "bullies" but in your second paragraph you describe yourself as a bully.

Violence is not the golden standard. I don't know where you heard that, or how you came to that conclusion, but it is unequivically false. Violence begets violence, it doesn't solve long problems or earn you respect. If it did, the middle east would be the shining beacon of the world. Violence is cheap, and doesn't require much. It's why our "enemies" utilize it.

The secret service, or any branch of police within the US is not a "pro-violence" organization, as you implied (and please, this is not an invitation to discuss the recent media coverage about police). The secret service's mission is to protect the president, not to conduct violence on the presidents behalf. If they did, the secret service would be murdering citizens within the street, they don't.