Re: Rav 4 question-4WD?


"Retired VIP" <Jackj14321@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ql2ta39ns4hkk3n49uril27gam2r17be70@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:51:20 -0700, Darren <darrenli516@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Hello all,
I am preparing to buy a 2008 Rav4 as soon as they come out. But I
have
a question about 4WD.
Is it a good idea to get it? Does it make sense to get e Rav4
without
it?
I am assuming the 4WD would perform better in snow and icy driving
conditions.
I do normal highway driving (if you can call driving on Long Island,
NY normal that is).
Any tips would be appreicated.

Darren

I drove 4wd company-owned trucks for over 25 years into and out of
remote microwave repeater sites and on railroad right-of-ways in all
kinds of weather. These trucks were both SUV type and pickups. I
have NEVER owned and will NEVER own a 4wd vehicle. Here's why:

1. 4wd will get you stuck worse than 2wd. It will get you into the
mess (snow or mud) so much farther that you won't be able to get out
without help.

Well if you are not careful this may be true. However, I've never
gotten stuck when driving a 4WD vehicle. I used to routinely get stuck
driving 2WD pick-ups. I'll never buy another 2WD truck to use on my
farm.

2. The mileage is worse even in 2wd mode. You have about 1200 lbs
more weight to carry around ALL the time. Handling is also worse,
90%
of that extra weight is on the front axle.

I agree the mileage is somewhat worse (maybe 1 to 2 mpg assuming you
don't also get a lower axle ratio than for the 2WD truck). I think you
are over stating the difference in weight. For a 2007 Tacoma, the 4WD
version weighs only 225 lb more than the equivalent 2WD version
(according to Cars.com).

3. Maintenance is much higher. If you get 75k miles out of the CV
joints on the front axle, you're lucky. Leave it in 4wd-locked mode
for 15 or 20 miles on a hard surfaced, dry road and you can figure
on
replacing some very expensive CV joints and plastic gears in the
transfer case.

I've owned six 4WD vehicles. Total mileage on all of them combined is
around 500,000 miles (one had 147,000 alone). I've never had to
replace a CV joint or any parts of the 4WD system.

4. Tire costs are higher than on comparable 2wd models. The extra
weight on the front end will cause your tires to cup. This happens
regardless of the type of suspension on the front (solid axle or
independent). The only thing that I've found that helps is to
replace
the OEM shocks with heavy-duty, double action ones.

Never a problem for me. I owned two Ford Expeditions. For both the
original OE tires lated 60k miles and I only repalced them becasue I
wanted something better. When replaced they still had more than enough
tread to pass inspection. On my current Frontier, the front tires are
wearing great. The rears are a problem. Inflated per Nissan's specs,
they have worn rapidly in the center.

5. Most 4wd American trucks do not have provisions for complete
front-end alignment. If you need to change camber (sp?), you have
to
bend things.

Which American 4WD truck are you talking about? 1980 F150's? Current
4WD half ton trucks have IFS and are just as adjustable as the 2WD
version. Heavy duty trucks with solid front axles have bushing to
allow for front end adjustment - but they almost never needed. I have
not need a front end alignment on any of my trucks in the last 20
years.

6. If your vehicle has anti-lock brakes, that feature is disabled
in
4wd-locked mode.

I am not sure what you mean by "locked" mode. I know that for my last
Expedition, the ABS continued to operate if I was in 4WD high (of
course the ABS was also active in the automatic 4WD or the 2WD modes).
ABS was disabled in the 4WD Low mode, but you'd expect that wouldn't
you? The ABS is also active when my Frontier is in 4WD High.

7. There is NO improvement in handling in snow using 4wd over 2wd.
There is a great improvement in traction/accelleration away from a
stop but no improvement in braking. That will get you in trouble
FAST.

I disagree. Often in low traction situations (snow or mud), the rear
of my 2WD trucks tend to fishtail sharply. With 4WD this is rarely a
proplem. Certainly there are cases where even 4WD is not enough - a
couple of years back I was on ice so slick that even with 4WD it was
impossible to go straight ahead. However, in my experience, 4WD gives
you the best oppurtunity to keep moving in low traction situations.

8. The ride is rougher.

Maybe in some vehicles, but I ridden in both 2WD and 4WD Expeditions,
and there was not significant difference in ride quality. I currently
own an AWD Fusion. I test drove both FWD and AWD versions, and there
was no detectable difference in the ride. When test driving Nissan
Frontiers, I thought the 4WD version actually rode better than the 2WD
version, but the tires and trim level were not the same, so that might
not be a fair comparison.

If you feel you have to have one, go for it. Just don't say you
weren't warned.

If you are just going to ride around on dry pavement, 4WD is a waste.
For many people front wheel drive cars are adequate for almost all
situations. However, in low traction situations, 2WD pick-ups are a
joke (at least these days). If you are going to regularly drive in low
traction situations, 4WD gives you the best chance of making it home.
However, for a RAV4 I think 90% of all owners don't actually need 4WD
(actually the RAV4s have AWD - All Wheel Drive, instead of the truck
like 4WD). RAV4s are nice vehicles, but, in my opinion, they are not
true SUVs. They are more of a tall Camry wagon than a truck. If the
RAV4 is to be used in an area that has hilly terrain and gets lots of
snow, then I recommend the AWD. If the vehicle is going to be mostly
driven on relatively flat pavement, or an area with little snow, I'd
recommend the front wheel drive version. If the vehicle is going to go
off road or be driven on poor quality dirt roads frequently, then I'd
suggest a 4Runner instead.

Ed


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Michael Moore gets it right sometimes.
    ... their product strategy around trucks and SUVs and failed the car market. ... Where did you read that Steve indicated that "YOU" did not need a SUV. ... been a poor decision to buy a vehicle that does not get better gas mileage. ... made in light trucks and SUVs, not cars. ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: Explanation why the truck analogy doesnt demonstrate how natural processes result in nest hierar
    ... slowly modify this particular vehicle over time until it eventually ... they do not share with previous years' models of those same trucks. ... Design processes result in overlapping categories because designers ... The neoDarwinian process was forumlated as a natural process; ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Latest Mis-Leading Tundra Commercial
    ... As former Group Sales Manager for a major vehicle sales group, ... salesmen learns is to "qualify" their customer so as not lose his valuable ... PROVES most car salesman are slobs, who know nothing about the trucks ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
  • Re: No love for the Tundra
    ... free', meaning that people make their own decisions on which vehicle to buy, ... trucks etc who drive alone and seem to tote only ... I am in favor of increasing the tax on fuel as a means of encouraging ... then the income tax can be reduced on the ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
  • Re: Rav 4 question-4WD?
    ... I am preparing to buy a 2008 Rav4 as soon as they come out. ... These trucks were both SUV type and pickups. ... of that extra weight is on the front axle. ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)