Is 4 motion really necessary?

[WelshGas]

Since this thread is really about grip or the lack there of, going of at a tangent doesn't seem to be out if place.

Prefer to keep on the Straight and Narrow rather than at a Tangent.

 

[clarinetbcn]

My nephew is a professional Alpine guide in the Canadian Rockies, and I have many friends who are guides in the Pyrenees. I asked them about 4WD before buying my van. They all told me that when it comes to snow, company cars are 4WD for image, but no one has 4WD for their personal cars, because of weight, mechanical complications, and maintenance costs. They all said first class winter tires are essential, and chains for emergencies. Rocky off road tracks are a different topic. I have always felt that in that environment a Jeep is the logical choice, but in that case I would almost always prefer to hike than be in a vehicle. So, I bought accordingly, and very happily have never looked back.

 

[Velma's Dad]

My nephew is a professional Alpine guide in the Canadian Rockies, and I have many friends who are guides in the Pyrenees. I asked them about 4WD before buying my van. They all told me that when it comes to snow, company cars are 4WD for image, but no one has 4WD for their personal cars, because of weight, mechanical complications, and maintenance costs. They all said first class winter tires are essential, and chains for emergencies. Rocky off road tracks are a different topic. I have always felt that in that environment a Jeep is the logical choice, but in that case I would almost always prefer to hike than be in a vehicle. So, I bought accordingly, and very happily have never looked back.

In St Anton (Austrian Alps) a few years back I asked one of the taxi drivers if their T5 Caravelles were 4WD - he said no, for similar reasons to what clarinetbcn's nephew said.

 

[WelshGas]

Methinks that those without 4Motion doth protest too much.

 

[Calimili]

with a heavy van, rainy conditions, would it better go into a tight curve at moderate speed with the gear in Neutral, with 2wd or with 4wd ?

 

[Velma's Dad]

with a heavy van, rainy conditions, would it better go into a tight curve at moderate speed with the gear in Neutral, with 2wd or with 4wd ?

4WD if I had it, because it would potentially give more traction on the way out. But it makes no difference to lateral grip while in the corner.

As has been said time and again on this forum (but the 4Mo'ers seem to not want to acknowledge), 4WD is a performance enhancement (if you're really trying to set the best lap time... in a van?), not a safety enhancement.

 

[Legin]

Well it looks like landrover and jeep have got it all wrong and i have wasted my money. Would have been much better to fit snow tyres and save the weight. I guess the revolution in rallying with the quattro was down to the something else.

I have driven and owned 4x4,s from tractors to porsche 911,s (sprinted them)with many varieties in between , I still own three today. There is no question that on UK roads in inclement weather a 2wd wouldnt see which way a 4wd went. All this talk of snow merely shows that snow tyres work very well in snow, so yes got that and fully agree. But rest of the time and therefore most of the time 4x4 is an advantage. If you drive so sedately on pavement it doesnt matter then good for you.

 

[WelshGas]

Well it looks like landrover and jeep have got it all wrong and i have wasted my money. Would have been much better to fit snow tyres and save the weight. I guess the revolution in rallying with the quattro was down to the something else.

I have driven and owned 4x4,s from tractors to porsche 911,s (sprinted them)with many varieties in between , I still own three today. There is no question that on UK roads in inclement weather a 2wd wouldnt see which way a 4wd went. All this talk of snow merely shows that snow tyres work very well in snow, so yes got that and fully agree. But rest of the time and therefore most of the time 4x4 is an advantage. If you drive so sedately on pavement it doesnt matter then good for you.

Totally agree.
As I said above, snow/mud or wet grass. The first requirement is traction and that is down to tyres.
Once you have traction then drive becomes the next important factor, and no matter how you look at it drive on all 4 corners is better than drive on 2.

 

[Calimili]

Well it looks like landrover and jeep have got it all wrong and i have wasted my money. Would have been much better to fit snow tyres and save the weight. I guess the revolution in rallying with the quattro was down to the something else.

I have driven and owned 4x4,s from tractors to porsche 911,s (sprinted them)with many varieties in between , I still own three today. There is no question that on UK roads in inclement weather a 2wd wouldnt see which way a 4wd went. All this talk of snow merely shows that snow tyres work very well in snow, so yes got that and fully agree. But rest of the time and therefore most of the time 4x4 is an advantage. If you drive so sedately on pavement it doesnt matter then good for you.

Agree with what you say up to the snow. Snow tyres work well for 2wd, but 4wd will get you unstuck where 2wd would just slip even with snow tyres. One example: starting on an incline. 2wd get stuck in summer on wet grass... If you add the temperament of DSG at start sometimes it would be even worse.

 

[Velma's Dad]

If you drive so sedately on pavement it doesnt matter then good for you.

Well that's me then, when I'm driving a campervan anyway (and I guess you mean 'on pavement' in the US sense, not the British one! ).

If I may... the thread's 'exam question' was "Is 4 Motion really necessary?" and I'm guessing that for the great majority of California owners, who don't live up a mountain track and just want the van to drive competently and safely in various road conditions, and get in and out of campsites, the answer is going to be, pretty clearly, no.

If this was a thread about loose-surface rallying (I do that, but not in a Cali), or over-landing (ditto, occasionally) or b@lls-out driving near the limits on public roads (which I try to avoid, generally) it might be a different answer.

I will dip out now and give someone else a chance.

 

[Legin]

Or just a wet road or muddy field. Round we go again.

 

[Calimili]

If I may... the thread's 'exam question' was "Is 4 Motion really necessary?" and I'm guessing that for the great majority of California owners, who don't live up a mountain track and just want the van to drive competently and safely in various road conditions, and get in and out of campsites, the answer is going to be, pretty clearly, no.

Ok, I'm with you here. 4motion is not really necessary, to answer the thread.
When I ordered mine last year I thought about it a lot. As a pure holiday vehicle it is not necessary. Almost all of the big whites don't have 4x4. Even people pulling Caravans manage to get in and out of camping sites and have a great holiday.
If you plan to use it as a daily driver though, especially a heavy Ocean, you are driving a van that it is 3t. As a 3t daily driver, including often rain and occasional snow, going to work or run errands, maybe living in a hilly area, than 4 motion is to be recommended. It is hands down better. Necessary? Nothing is necessary. 102 HP are ok, 150HP are also not necessary.

 

[Redrick Esq.]

Hang on a mo

$motion is only 4 wheel drive when it is needed

So a simple question for all you cali owners and be honest

Faced with a long uphill section of road covered in snow and ice which would you chose to be driving at that particular time Frontwheel drive or 4WD ?

Come on it really is a no brainer

To0 sit on a forum professing that frontwheel drive is better than 4wd and you prefer it because you have invested several hundred quid on winter tyres to save weight instead is quite frankly ridiculous

4WD is just better for grip in all conditions

 

[Calimili]

How much weight are we talking about ? 70kg ?
70Kg on 3t. i.e. 2.3%..
As a 4M owner though, I must admit I've seen tests that 2wd with snow tyres are better in snow than 4wd with summer tyres. But 2wd cannot compete with 4wd when both have snow tyres, which by the way are recommended for all vehicles.

 

[Borris]

Well it looks like landrover and jeep have got it all wrong and i have wasted my money. Would have been much better to fit snow tyres and save the weight. I guess the revolution in rallying with the quattro was down to the something else.

I have driven and owned 4x4,s from tractors to porsche 911,s (sprinted them)with many varieties in between , I still own three today. There is no question that on UK roads in inclement weather a 2wd wouldnt see which way a 4wd went. All this talk of snow merely shows that snow tyres work very well in snow, so yes got that and fully agree. But rest of the time and therefore most of the time 4x4 is an advantage. If you drive so sedately on pavement it doesnt matter then good for you.

In a straight line having four driven wheels will obviously give you a lot more grip and therefore a performance advantage over 2wd. However thinking that it has any other superior driving qualities under other circumstances is highly likely to lead the average driver into trouble. Using 4wd to drift under power may get you round a corner quicker on a rallying stage but it's neither practical, sensible or legal on Britain's roads.

The landrover was originally developed as a go anywhere road going tractor and the Jeep an all terrain military utility vehicle. They were both purpose designed and built for those roles. On the other hand the California in all it's forms started out based on a humble road going van. Whilst having four wheel drive enhances certain driving dynamics, comparing the former with the latter is like comparing Calcium carbonate with Camembert.

 

[Velma's Dad]

4WD is just better for grip in all conditions

NOOOOO! It's not! Unless you only mean Grip = Traction, ie when power is being applied to the wheels. No more grip than 2WD (or no-WD) under braking, or lateral grip when cornering. That is really important as a lot of people think 4WD will somehow stop them crashing on a slippery road.

Oh god oh god I said I would shut up...

 

[Sunstoner]

As a majority of cars are not 4wd and are not subsequently falling off the road, doesnt that say more about the answer to this question?

By definition, a Cali is going to be driven more sedately with more care too given its form, after all its van and not an M3. Ok, a camper may endure slightly more off the beaten track routes but they're mostly not freshly ploughed muddy bogs.

So 4Motion isnt necessary but perhaps a nice to have. ?!

However, 4WD has to be better than 2WD when the going gets tricky. Surely.

Its definitely an option I'll be ticking.

 

[Bellcrew]

NOOOOO! It's not! Unless you only mean Grip = Traction, ie when power is being applied to the wheels. No more grip than 2WD (or no-WD) under braking, or lateral grip when cornering. That is really important as a lot of people think 4WD will somehow stop them crashing on a slippery road.

Oh god oh god I said I would shut up...

What you are missing is that there are some people who do drive their vans like rally drivers, every other driver on the road is a **** and they think that getting over 25 mpg is a result. As for overtaking on roundabouts or other such esoteric pursuits "Sunday" drivers like us are just not worthy.

 

[Borris]

Hang on a mo

$motion is only 4 wheel drive when it is needed

So a simple question for all you cali owners and be honest

Faced with a long uphill section of road covered in snow and ice which would you chose to be driving at that particular time Frontwheel drive or 4WD ?

Come on it really is a no brainer

To0 sit on a forum professing that frontwheel drive is better than 4wd and you prefer it because you have invested several hundred quid on winter tyres to save weight instead is quite frankly ridiculous

4WD is just better for grip in all conditions

Using your example and assuming the same tyres are being used on both vehicles the answer is clearly the 4WD. However this thread was entitled " Is 4 Motion really necessary? From the answers given it clearly is to some but not others. I don't think anyone has professed that front wheel drive is better than 4WD. Instead most of the debate has been aimed at answering the question.

 

[Calimili]

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1198751194216189952/pu/vid/1200x720/J5c3r-iq0pioK5kE.mp4?tag=10

So this answers it. 4wd is better

 

[Legin]

In a straight line having four driven wheels will obviously give you a lot more grip and therefore a performance advantage over 2wd. However thinking that it has any other superior driving qualities under other circumstances is highly likely to lead the average driver into trouble. Using 4wd do drift under power may get you round a corner quicker on a rallying stage but it's neither practical, sensible or legal on Britain's roads.

The landrover was originally developed as a go anywhere road going tractor and the Jeep an all terrain military utility vehicle. They were both purpose designed and built for those roles. On the other hand the California in all it's forms started out based on a humble road going van. Whilst having four wheel drive enhances certain driving dynamics, comparing the former with the latter is like comparing Calcium carbonate with Camembert.

Your getting there as you agree its superior in a straight line. So whilst your 2wd is still tramping trying to get onto the roundabout the 4 motion is gone.
Next it does change driving qualities around corners because the motive force is shared between 4 wheels rather than 2 and this means larger slip angle can be achieved before breaking traction so therefore reduced drift.
This doesnt mean your driving on the limit its the mechanics of the forces acting on the tyres, even at a steady speed power is going through the tyre. So the higher achievable slip angle is an extra margin of safety.

 

[Borris]

Your getting there as you agree its superior in a straight line. So whilst your 2wd is still tramping trying to get onto the roundabout the 4 motion is gone.
Next it does change driving qualities around corners because the motive force is shared between 4 wheels rather than 2 and this means larger slip angle can be achieved before breaking traction so therefore reduced drift.
This doesnt mean your driving on the limit its the mechanics of the forces acting on the tyres, even at a steady speed power is going through the tyre. So the higher achievable slip angle is an extra margin of safety.

Well if nothing else, I admire your confidence. Lets hope you are right.

 

[Legin]

Well if nothing else, I admire your confidence. Lets hope you are right.

Nothing to do with confidence and everything to do with hard engineering. Happy to be shot down by a chassis/ tyre engineer.

 

[Redrick Esq.]

Using your example and assuming the same tyres are being used on both vehicles the answer is clearly the 4WD. However this thread was entitled " Is 4 Motion really necessary? From the answers given it clearly is to some but not others. I don't think anyone has professed that front wheel drive is better than 4WD. Instead most of the debate has been aimed at answering the question.

Yes my mistake i was getting carried away

Right 4 Motion is better and I believe this wholeheartedly

Is it really necessary

well that depends on the circumstances of course but in most i would agree it isnt necessary desirable but not necessary

 

[Wesel]

Is a Cali really necessary ?