Quote:
Originally Posted by ideliver
OK...now I will be arguementative...from Tirerack testing... http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=109
The braking comparison measured the tires' ability to provide traction during an ABS-assisted panic stop in a straight line. We drove the two Cayennes side-by-side at a speed of 30 mph, gave both drivers a braking signal at the prescribed mark and compared the distances it took them to come to a complete stop. The winter tire-equipped Cayenne stopped in an average distance of about 61 feet, while the all-season tire-equipped Cayenne took 102 feet (an additional 41 feet or about two and one-half car lengths). A 41-foot difference in stopping distance during a panic stop at 30 mph on a snow-packed road is more than enough to determine whether it's a near miss or an accident!
Additionally, while the all-wheel drive Cayenne offered noticeably faster acceleration than the rear-wheel drive sedan, the winter tire-equipped BMW's 59-foot stopping distance and all-season tire-equipped 89-foot stopping distance showed that all-wheel drive didn't really offer a measurable advantage when it came to stopping.
I did  prior to posting and could find no objective evidence to support your opinion that AWD vehicles stop better than RWD vehicles in limited traction situations. |
That has to be the most ridiculous braking comparison I have ever seen. Only one question: How much do each of those vehicles weigh. I have no doubt the cayenne is heavier. Weight has a huge affect on braking over snow/ice.
Not that I agree standard braking is improved with AWD, but engine braking and cornering is improved with AWD in slick conditions.