AWD Systems Comparison With Europeans

I think all cars in germany sells for a premium compared to North American cars when compared with same engine and option list. Sure you can get a cheaper bmw or Mercedes or jaguar, but they are also usually significantly cheaper built (smaller engine, less option, etc). Mercedez cars are not all luxury models overthere.

During my time in england, i could have bought a jaguar for 20 000 pounds ish. But it was a cheapened version with a 4 cylinder engine and not much standard equipment.
 
Last edited:

HardRightEdg

2020 CX-5 Touring AWD Soul Red
I'm not as versed in off road detail, but I know Euro cars often have torque vectoring left to right. Which helps handling the curves on pavement.

To my knowledge, no Mazda has this.
I brought up the desert examples as a general point relating to Toyota durabiliry. 4-wheel drive on what amounts to a truck chassis is a different animal than a unibody with AWD, to be sure .

It is true tha Mazda does not have torque vectoring. Instead they have what they call G-Vectoring Control which they differentiate from mechanical torque vectoring. Among other things the electronically controlled weight transfer is pretty interesting. You can find one compare-and-contrast here:

).

At a certain point one has to recognize they are driving a CUV with a high center of gravity. The boundaries of physics that must be overcome to get it to handle like a decent sports sedan, let alone a race care, are probably insurmountable. It comes down to how close they can get it and how does it feel relative to the competition in ordinary and spirited real world driving regardless of the systems used or the marketing names they put on them..
 
Last edited:
:
North of Toronto
:
2019 CX-9 Sig
At a certain point one has to recognize they are driving a CUV with a high center of gravity. The boundaries of physics that must be overcome to get it to handle like a decent sports sedan, let alone a race care, are probably insurmountable.
No doubt there are limitations. I always find it interesting that even with it's less advanced AWD, both the CX5 and CX9 lead their class for driving dynamics. I always chuckle at Subaru and it's constant talk of it's AWD aiding handling, when many of it's models aren't really competitive when it comes to handling. Snow, they seem great but where I am the snow is manageable for pretty much any AWD system. So I'm good there. (I believe the OP is in a hot climate though, so snow not the issue?)

I'd read about G vectoring after getting my CX9...I guess it's hard to argue with the results on the road!

Toyota...they are the fav over there. Also works for them to stick with the brand, that way parts easier to stock and for maintenance the knowledge base is there. Last 3 yrs, wife's colleague lost 2 Lexus SUVs and close buddy lost 4 runner. And although unibody, Highlanders are also known around here to go missing. Maybe it's a remote start system the brand has that's easy to crack?

One of the local police services recently lost a Highlander. I assume it was unmarked. I hope.
 

HardRightEdg

2020 CX-5 Touring AWD Soul Red
No doubt there are limitations. I always find it interesting that even with it's less advanced AWD, both the CX5 and CX9 lead their class for driving dynamics.
That begs the question: Is it really less advanced, then? Or is it just a good fit for the G-Vectoring system? Or put another way, is the newest technology necessarily a better mousetrap? Of course not. The proof is in the pudding.

As for thefts, the most frequently stolen vehicles have a high correlation to sales volume. They get chopped for a large market in need of them. Scroll to the bottom of the following link to see recent data:


I can't explain how you know all these people who have had their cars stolen. In my 65 years on this planet I don't know anyone or have encounted anybody personally who has had a car stolen. A good test would be to have them buy different brands and see if those get stolen. ;) Or it just might be where they park them.

Seriously, though, the models that get stolen can vary regionally. As noted in the article, Impalas of all things, have a high theft rate in Illinois and Michigan. Highlanders must be a high value target in your area. It wouldn't take long for a thief to know he's stealing a cop car and he drives off anyway.
 
Last edited:
... you're looking at about $41,300 which gets you 3/4 of the way to that 40% differential.
Thanks for digging into the numbers. My 40% came from chatting with friends there and what they said they'd have to pay to duplicate my 2019 CX-5 Signature. This was about a year ago so there may be some time variance too. (At the time the turbo option was very new for the CX-5 and commanded a premium of its own.) In any case, the Germans I've chatted with view the Mazda as a somewhat costly car. They're reasonably popular, though, and highly-regarded. One friend's daughter was at the time an executive with a car-rental company and had told him that Mazdas were their most trouble-free cars. We see that here too in recent reliability rankings by Consumer Reports and others. Post-Ford Mazda is doing really well on that point.


I'm not as versed in off road detail, but I know Euro cars often have torque vectoring left to right. Which helps handling the curves on pavement.

To my knowledge, no Mazda has this.
Correct. As stated in this informative Road & Track article, "
Done correctly, torque vectoring can be wonderful. But Mazda does not embrace the solution, as it finds it unnatural and disruptive to the purity of their driving dynamics. Further, torque vectoring systems are often set up to help only at higher speeds. This is not to discount torque vectoring—not at all. It's just not a solution Mazda loves. It went its own path."

That article describes Mazda's GVC (G-Vectoring Control) system as of 2017. Since then, some Mazdas have benefited from "GVC Plus," which additionally slightly skims the brake on one wheel to assist the responsiveness of the car in cornering. Here is an article about that.

Bottom line: it works, it works over a broad range of speeds and situations, and it meaningfully contributes to Mazda's enjoyable driving dynamics. It is also a very simple solution, and another example of Mazda avoiding the over-complication and reliability issues of European cars down the road.
 
:
North of Toronto
:
2019 CX-9 Sig
That article describes Mazda's GVC (G-Vectoring Control) system as of 2017. Since then, some Mazdas have benefited from "GVC Plus," which additionally slightly skims the brake on one wheel to assist the responsiveness of the car in cornering. Here is an article about that.
Thanks for the article. I hadn't heard the brake aspect of the "Plus".

No one can doubt the results of how Mazdas handle, but the GVC seems counter intuitive to me and so does the new Plus.

By cutting torque and slightly having the car tilt forward, seems to me that is what we don't want cars to do in a turn. Seems that would contribute to understeer. Weight in front is supposed to be bad, as Porsche would say.

As for the tap of the brakes, it's the outside wheel rather than the inside wheel. These lesser brake vectoring systems usually brake the inside wheel (I don't mean lesser as insult, I believe the Golf R uses brake vectoring and not too many complain about it's handling). I know it's on the return of the wheels to the straight line rather than the entry to the curve, but still. I'd think understeer is considered any movement to the outside of the curve thru any portion of the turn, this seems to further that understeer. With the tech already there, why not tap the inside wheel as you enter the curve then the outside wheel upon leaving...

But what do I know, I studied economics not engineering. It is neat that Mazda bucks the trend and still gets the results in it's driving dynamics.
 
Understeer happens when the front wheels lose frictions ( wheels are turned but car keep going straight). One way to increase friction is to increase the weight on the wheels, by shifting the weight forward on the front wheels.
 
Well the goal of GVC is not really to prevent understeer, it is to smooth out the weight shifts that causes drivers correction mid turn initiation. Not really for handling improvements per say but more to improve the feeling of it.

But if we take the question at face value, it doesn’t matter what the neutral weight distribution of the car is, shifting weight forward will increase front wheel grip. In situation where your 60-40 car wants to understeer, and we know most stock car do ( and this one definitely does), shifting weight forward will help prevent it. The physics are the same.
 
:
CX5 GT-R
Well the goal of GVC is not really to prevent understeer, it is to smooth out the weight shifts that causes drivers correction mid turn initiation. Not really for handling improvements per say but more to improve the feeling of it.

But if we take the question at face value, it doesn’t matter what the neutral weight distribution of the car is, shifting weight forward will increase front wheel grip. In situation where your 60-40 car wants to understeer, and we know most stock car do ( and this one definitely does), shifting weight forward will help prevent it. The physics are the same.
I've never wished for a computer to dial in this value. I have a skinny and a fat pedal, and would prefer to do it myself. Especially because I can look ahead and know the corner, and the computer cannot.
 
I can only speak from experience here. I had a 2015 BMW X1, driven a 2016 VW Tiguan and most recently drove a 2020 Ford Escape in a snow storm in Denver before C-19.

The X1 did beautifully in the snow, minus losing traction over black ice. And that was with stock AS tires that were on their way out. This was the last hydraulic power steering BMW they made and arguably it did drive better then the CX5.

My ex-gf had a Tiguan that was absolutely terrible in the snow. It was a 4motion and had relatively new Michelin premier (I think) A/S when I drove it. She ended up getting studded tires because she went snow boarding a lot. But we ended up taking the X1 everywhere.

The escape was a rental in Denver and a sudden snow storm hit. I drove around right before they had a chance to clear the roads and it didn't struggle once. It also had different drive modes, I don't think that contributed to the capability all that much, but it did give a little bit of confidence.

I haven't had the chance to drive my CX5 in the snow, but it's gone on some gravel roads, sand, and a lot of rain and I haven't once lost confidence. Last weekend I took the CX5 to Pacific City and watched as a newer X1 got stuck in front of me. The CX5 had no problem going around it.

I'm not a hard offroader by any means, but I feel like the CX5 is more than capable for most daily activities and soft off roading.
 
:
was 175ps Mazda CX-5 Auto AWD Sport Nav, now 190ps DSG Tiguan 4M
Mazda cx5 is good in snow mainly because it rides on 215 tyres, but my Tiguan permanently drives a minimum of 10% to the rears and can send near 100% to the rear if required.

I have no experience in snow yet but it rides on 235 tyres so may not be as good. But I often floor it to set off with no wheelspin.

The Mazda system in 2013 wasn't that good and I did get wheelspin on wet grass while the 2015 version I had didn't, it had extra sensors fitted that could detect spin before it happened, ironically it was then as good as my 2009 xtrail.
 
Top