Does CX-5 always start in AWD?

Back to topic.

None of the three AWD vehicles tested could climb the hill from a standing start even though you could see both front and back tires spinning simultaneously on all of them (check out the CX-5 at 3:30).

BMW: All 4 wheels spin https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m1s
Forester: All 4 wheel spin https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m28s (obviously with too much throttle)
CX-5: Back wheels don't spin, front wheels do https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m8s
Yes, all 4 wheels spin at 3:34, but why not at 2:08? Looks like the driver starts with really light throttle then increases power gradually, some torque is being transferred to the rear, but not enough to spin.
What is happening? Does the system protect the clutch in this case?
 
Back to topic.



BMW: All 4 wheels spin https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m1s
Forester: All 4 wheel spin https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m28s (obviously with too much throttle)
CX-5: Back wheels don't spin, front wheels do https://youtu.be/iSj9UEVYI8o?t=2m8s
Yes, all 4 wheels spin at 3:34, but why not at 2:08? Looks like the driver starts with really light throttle then increases power gradually, some torque is being transferred to the rear, but not enough to spin.
What is happening? Does the system protect the clutch in this case?

In that scenario the AWD clutch was likely completely locked (no slipping).

The first run the driver left the traction control on. This reduces engine power upon detecting excessive spinning. It is the same thing as reducing how far the accelerator is depressed. If this reduction in power is not enough for the front wheels to regain traction, the back wheels will be getting very little torque because an open differential ALWAYS transfers the torque 50/50. If the front wheels have very little traction (spinning) then not much torque is being applied to the rear wheels. That is how open differentials are designed to work. However, applying the front brakes will automatically transfer whatever power is consumed by the front brakes (still spinning) to the rear wheels. I don't pretend to know for sure why the computer did not apply the front brakes in this video but I suspect it was due to two factors, lack of off-road driving experience and temperatures well above freezing. I'll explain shortly.

Two days ago the driveway to my ski cabin was a solid sheet of wet ice (temperature about 38 degrees). This driveway starts level, becomes VERY steep and then becomes almost level at the top. I drove up it as usual, no slipping, and came to a stop at the top. Thinking about this thread, instead of parking I backed back down to the steepest portion and tried to stop there. But the driveway has a slight slope to the left. All four tires started slipping (because I was using the brakes gently to try to stop on the steepest portion) and I started sliding off towards the edge of the driveway. I immediately released the brakes and continued backing to the bottom. Then I tried to climb the steepest portion at a crawl. I felt the front wheels start to slip and power to the engine was reduced. So, without backing down, I turned TCS off and reapplied power. All four wheels started spinning and the front of the car started to rotate sideways towards the left edge of the driveway necessitating a manual reduction in throttle (because I no longer had TCS). I backed down enough to straighten the car, stopped, and using the two foot throttle/brake technique, applied power without releasing the brake (which had light-moderate pressure on it). The car climbed right up that sheet of wet ice with very minimal wheel slip and amazing acceleration (considering the slickness of wet ice). Then I backed down again and turned TCS back on (the default state). I drove forward and stopped on the steepest portion. I repeated the previous run (but this time with TCS). This was just as successful as the run with TCS off, probably because there was not enough wheel slippage to differentiate the two.

The lesson here is, if you're on a steep low-traction surface and you can't make forward progress, use the two-footed brake/throttle technique. This technique largely eliminates the need to turn the TCS off and, unless you are on a surface where you need tire spin in order to dig down to a higher traction layer, it is best to leave it on. I will say, the two footed technique is only necessary in unusual or very extreme situations and, as much as I am driving in the mountains during all kinds of nasty conditions, I still have to invent scenarios extreme enough to need to do this. In all my regular driving, the car has always been surefooted and had the forward drive to get out of snowed in parking spots, up icy hills, etc. It's only when I purposefully stop on a particularly treacherous spot that I have ever found it beneficial or necessary to use the two-footed technique. The car is simply that sure footed. The AWD programming is very complex and Mazda does not release the specific parameters that trigger specific behavior because it is proprietary to Mazda. But they do disclose that the AWD module takes into consideration such things as steering wheel angle, ambient temperature, vehicle speed, brake application and even whether the windshield wipers are on/off. The complete list is much longer.

One thing I have learned from decades of off-roading is most beginner-intermediate off-roaders get themselves in trouble from one thing in particular. And that is sliding sideways on an off-camber (sloping sideways) portion of a steep/slippery trail due to excessive spinning of the wheels. This is what TCS is particularly good at preventing. So I recommend keeping TCS on unless you are an expert and know what you're doing. There are times wheel spin can help you make forward progress but they are few and far between and you need to insure there is enough available traction to over-come any unfavorable camber to the trails surface. The two-footed brake/throttle technique should be all that's necessary.

Of course the traction provided by your tires are the final arbiter of whether you slide off the trail or not.

Today I was once again delayed on the State Hwy. to the Ski Area about 20 minutes even though the road was freshly plowed and there was only 1/4" of fresh, wet snow on the well-maintained road. An idiot in a Subaru Forester thought he didn't need winter tires because he had AWD and failed to make forward progress after a steep hairpin turn. A steady string of downhill traffic prevented those immediately behind from attempting a pass. I don't know what it will take people to learn that AWD is not a substitute for winter tires!
 
Last edited:
I haven't made 7 figures/year for over 10 years (I've been 90% retired). I don't think about money very much, it's my nature to be somewhat frugal (how do you think I retired so young?). Once you have enough to do the things you love, money is not so important. And this is good because it allows you to focus on the things you love. Some people never have enough (even at $30 million) so money is always important to them. I spend most of my money on meals out, good food at home, plenty of good beer, property taxes, tropical vacations, skiing vacations, motorcycle vacations and the rest of it I just waste.
Nothing wrong with that. But why you drive a cx5 is beyond me, and always will be.
 
That's only because you don't know the same things I know.
Like what OTHER vehicles are in your garage? Seriously, if not, there is nothing you could know, that I could learn, that would allow me to enjoy a CX5 with the noballs motor option when I could be driving around in something fun. Hell, you could afford a REAL offroad vehicle for that little hill of yours. Roll around in a G55 AMG or whatever. I dunno, I presume you have something absurdly expensive that you enjoy, the CX5 just isn't it, lol
 
Is there an open diff between the front and rear wheels, or is it only the clutch which provides slack? If open diff, I can see why the front wheels would spin, while the rear would be fairly stationary when the clutch is fully engaged.

In this video (Subaru marketing material) you see how many systems can't climb a hill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvTDD7RrhXc

It seems that in most cases it is TCS which prevented it, because almost no wheel spin (not sure about the RAV4). While, yes, we can disable the TCS, it would be nice if we did not need to. Ideally, the car should figure it out, because it can do it in a split second and send more power to the rear and prevent a problem before it becomes one.
 
While I never owned a Chrysler / FCA product because they are unreliable and not fuel efficient among other things, their Jeep 4WD system is well regarded in the off-road community. In addition to more hardcore hardware it too has brake-based traction system:

https://youtu.be/JJza9fGbCAc?t=1m43s

Of course, there is a down-side to this, more hardware weighs more and has more parasitic losses, hence the less favorable fuel efficiency. Weight is also a killer to handling and acceleration.

Here you see how a Diesel Grand Cherokee diagonal climb. See how it does it with no drama at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzzBvWKR5Lg
Same thing with the Wrangler. See how long wheel articulation is. The wheels barely lose traction. Only at the end of the video the driver manages to get a rear wheel spin. The Wrangler can even just climb that thing head on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g4favvKNYk

Of course, wheel articulation is great for off-road, but not really for good handling on the road.
 
Hell, you could afford a REAL offroad vehicle for that little hill of yours. Roll around in a G55 AMG or whatever.

A G55 to get to the ski hill? It's nonsensical for a young driver from the South to pretend to know which vehicle would be best suited to make regular trips up the twisty road to the ski area holding the world record for annual snowfall. Especially when the person he's pretending to know better than is a lifelong snow skier that has driven professionally in the snow/ice and winter storms for 9 years and driven in the same conditions for recreational purposes the remaining 25 years and has more snow/ice driving experience than 99% of all drivers. In fact, you could hardly choose a worse vehicle for this kind of duty.


I could afford the Mercedes but what is this idiocy? I bought the Mazda because it's much better at driving on icy roads. You simply have no clue what you're talking about.



I dunno, I presume you have something absurdly expensive that you enjoy, the CX5 just isn't it, lol

You would presume wrong. Someday you will learn that shopping the luxury end of the auto spectrum is not nearly all it's cracked up to be. The Mazda is exceptionally good at the things that matter most to me in terms of driving through winter storms with the utmost confidence. The G55 is a joke in this regard.
 
The CX-5 is not and never was intended to be a true off road vehicle.

Oh and the clutch is the only means of drive to the rear axle.
 
Is there an open diff between the front and rear wheels, or is it only the clutch which provides slack? If open diff, I can see why the front wheels would spin, while the rear would be fairly stationary when the clutch is fully engaged..

FWD CX-5's have one differential, AWD CX-5's have three differentials (one inside the transaxle case like the FWD, one in the AWD transfer case and one between the rear wheels). When the AWD clutch is locked up, torque is distributed 50/50 F/R. As the AWD clutch is allowed to spin, more torque is transferred to the front.
 
The CX-5 is not and never was intended to be a true off road vehicle.

True. The style of AWD that most CUV's are equipped with is better suited to driving on snow/ice and other slippery surfaces than purpose designed off-road vehicles (which are comparatively poor on icy roads). The military version of the Hummer is a purpose built off-road machine. It sucks on icy roads.
 
I just went on a cruise on Texas backroads with a FB mazda group I'm in. If you actually drive the gear selector like a manual, and downshift on turns where you want max traction (just like in RWD), you can get some very good AWD cornering; I felt it lock up a few times. Last time I did the route I did not do use it as much and I was amazed by the result. If you don't live in a snow region and can spare some ground clearance you can improve the DD driving pleasure a lot.
 
FWD CX-5's have one differential, AWD CX-5's have three differentials (one inside the transaxle case like the FWD, one in the AWD transfer case and one between the rear wheels). When the AWD clutch is locked up, torque is distributed 50/50 F/R. As the AWD clutch is allowed to spin, more torque is transferred to the front.
I believe the transfer box is just a bevel drive - no diff???
 
Last edited:
A G55 to get to the ski hill? It's nonsensical for a young driver from the South to pretend to know which vehicle would be best suited to make regular trips up the twisty road to the ski area holding the world record for annual snowfall. Especially when the person he's pretending to know better than is a lifelong snow skier that has driven professionally in the snow/ice and winter storms for 9 years and driven in the same conditions for recreational purposes the remaining 25 years and has more snow/ice driving experience than 99% of all drivers. In fact, you could hardly choose a worse vehicle for this kind of duty.


I could afford the Mercedes but what is this idiocy? I bought the Mazda because it's much better at driving on icy roads. You simply have no clue what you're talking about.





You would presume wrong. Someday you will learn that shopping the luxury end of the auto spectrum is not nearly all it's cracked up to be. The Mazda is exceptionally good at the things that matter most to me in terms of driving through winter storms with the utmost confidence. The G55 is a joke in this regard.
The G55 looks good at stoplights. That's all it needs to do, lol! use what you find best in snowstorms, I just can't believe you'd choose to use the CX5 for other things. Can't fathom it. It truly boggles my mind how you could enjoy driving a CX5 if other vehicles are within your means at the time.

I'm hoping to see how my Mazda handles ice, but as for now, it's just a cheap FWD topheavy car. AWD should be fixed in a few days, though. The new windshield broke in transit, in true Japanese glass fashion, so ANOTHER replacement was ordered, lmao! (seriously, Japanese glass is fragile. Every Japanese car I've owned has required replacements, and this one's replacement needs a replacement before it even got to me, lol!)
 
Last edited:
True. The style of AWD that most CUV's are equipped with is better suited to driving on snow/ice and other slippery surfaces than purpose designed off-road vehicles (which are comparatively poor on icy roads). The military version of the Hummer is a purpose built off-road machine. It sucks on icy roads.

Which is what I came across, as well. nothing "Off road" is good on ice EXCEPT for the Chrysler offerings. Chrysler manages to nail it with their QD2, though. If you want offroad (legit offroad) and on-road ice performance, I can't think of a better choice than a JGC w/QD2 and the HEMI or Diesel.
 
You would presume wrong. Someday you will learn that shopping the luxury end of the auto spectrum is not nearly all it's cracked up to be. The Mazda is exceptionally good at the things that matter most to me in terms of driving through winter storms with the utmost confidence. The G55 is a joke in this regard.

Like Mike, I pay cash for cars and can definitely afford to pay more. I feel perfectly good in a Touring CX-5, without some of the extras other people paid more for. I don't need an expensive car to feel good. In fact, getting back from the SJ Auto Show I see no reason to buy a luxury vehicle and in fact I see many reasons why not to get any Mercedes Benz, in addition to the higher cost.

The G55 AMG is especially nasty choice, exactly what I'd stay away from. It is an old-tech brute which is not especially fast for its engine size nor does it handle well, and it is ugly.
 
I believe the transfer box is just a bevel drive - no diff???

True, the portion of the transfer case on the far left side of the diagram you posted slips inside the case holding the AWD differential. The AWD differential is not inside the transfer case, it's immediately adjacent to it.
 
My key to retiring in my early 50's is no debt and living humbly with my current income.

My only interest bearing debt at this part is a small mortgage on my cabin. My house is paid off. I planned to outright buy the CX-5 but at 0% interest I couldn't turn that down... so I do have that note but no interest.

Hey, that's similar to my plan for my mid-to-late 50's! I guess great PNW minds think alike...
 
Back