[SWPacLim]

Well car salespeople are typically not the greatest in terms of salespeople lol. There was a time when you could make a good living selling cars but those days are gone.

Point is the OP coming here to ask as a salesman is a good thing, IMO.

 

[pounce]

Point is the OP coming here to ask as a salesman is a good thing, IMO.

I think we feel differently about that. This person is simply using this forum to sell warranties and milk all these friendly people for sales hooks. I'm sure at the end of the day they have a hard time knowing if they have any legitimate relationships or if they are all just sales. ABC.

 

[Lorifun]

Name me one car salesman that doesn’t up sell ...lol....the reality is every piece of equipment could be quantified as a necessity in a certain situation or instance . Nothing is off the table in a car buying experience , too funny .

When I ordered my 2021 (from Ourisman in Clarksville, MD, USA) a few days ago there was zero upsell attempt. I'd been in touch with the salesman (Mike) for the last several weeks as we were waiting for ordering to open up. He knew I knew as much or more about the vehicle than he did already and had a spreadsheet with all my numbers and details. I am a self-actuating buyer, and it's apparent. So neither he nor the manager putting the actual order into the system tried to convince me to upgrade from a Touring L to a Limited or to add any additional packages or options beyong the one I wanted. I wasn't really expecting the salesman to based on our previous conversations, but I was sort of expecting the other manager to. I was glad not to have to deal with it.

That said, as mentioned by several others, often customers do require some educating and/or suggestions. It can be helpful to offer additional features the customer may not have thought they wanted initially. I have changed my mind about features and options and trim levels before because of that. But a good salesperson will know both when that's valuable and also how to do that in a way that meets a customer's needs rather than just increase sales and commission numbers.

 

[samcombs77]

I think we feel differently about that. This person is simply using this forum to sell warranties and milk all these friendly people for sales hooks. I'm sure at the end of the day they have a hard time knowing if they have any legitimate relationships or if they are all just sales. ABC.

God bless you and your day.

 

[SWPacLim]

I too have never had a car salesperson try and upsell me on the car I want at all. Now, the finance guys trying to sell me all kinds of stuff in the finance office is a different story.

God bless you and your day.

Thats the right response...

 

[Mope R]

Just wanting to get some feedback here. I have been in the auto business for 19 Years and I remember the Town & Country AWD.
It was short lived. There is a debate among me and my coworkers, Is the Pacifica good enough in the snow the way it is?
Is there much interest in the AWD and why?

What are some of your thoughts? Thanks for all positive feedback.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only Cover Your Chrysler Pacifica With A Factory Backed Chrysler Extended Warranty.
Buy Direct And Save Chrysler Factory Warranty - Your #1 Source for Extended Coverage for Chrysler Vehicles

Our 2017 Pacifica gas engine was a pig on ice with the tires that came from the factory. We immediately installed BF good rich radial Long Trail I think and then it did quite a bit better. My 98 town and country that had all wheel drive was crazy good in the snow. I plan to trade my 17 model soon for an all-wheel-drive.

 

[Thundering Banshee]

Just wanting to get some feedback here. I have been in the auto business for 19 Years and I remember the Town & Country AWD.
It was short lived. There is a debate among me and my coworkers, Is the Pacifica good enough in the snow the way it is?
Is there much interest in the AWD and why?

What are some of your thoughts? Thanks for all positive feedback.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only Cover Your Chrysler Pacifica With A Factory Backed Chrysler Extended Warranty.
Buy Direct And Save Chrysler Factory Warranty - Your #1 Source for Extended Coverage for Chrysler Vehicles

My 2017 Pacifica is terrible in the snow, Absolutely terrible. My next Pacifica will definitely have awd.

 

[Peddler]

I've had almost every version of Chrysler minivans from the original Caravan to the Pacifica.
Being a fly fisherman and living in Michigan a needed to travel some hilly, sandy two-tracks and soon learned the only way to go uphill in those two-tracks was backwards! That got the vehicle weight over the front drive wheels and gave me the traction needed.
I had two Jeep GC’s before the Pacifica and got spoiled with their 4WD. In the Pacifica a spot I was in meant going over a simple rise of wet grass and it was embarrassing the way it slipped and slid.
After inventing the minivan when I worked at Warren Truck where they built full-sized vans via the suggestion box, complete with sketches. I thought it time that during the gas crunch of the time Dodge built a small van with good gas mileage. They did and whoever emptied the suggestion box probably took credit.
After that and getting a Caravan I always thought the next phase should be a 4WD, off-road ready minivan built to take on the same terrain the Off-Road Ready 4WD Jeeps could.
No builder I know of makes one as of yet so maybe Chrysler could set the pace once again by doing so. The new AWD Pacifica is a step in the right direction but a beefier Pacifica with the proper suspension and grippy tires would fill a niche that is totally open.
To answer your question, AWD seems perfect if you travel in area’s with snow, mud or hills and would alleviate some of the frustration just FWD can bring on.

 

[InvaderZim]

I have a 2019 Pacifica Hybrid that I got last year -- terrific car in just about every way, but I do spin the front wheels if I take off too quickly, even on a dry road. I suspect it's the tires (Yokohama AVID S34 is what they say), but I'm not driving very much these days (work at home) so it just doesn't matter right now.

However, my previous car was the 1999 Town and Country Limited AWD (yep, it lasted nearly 20 years and I replaced it after it stranded me a couple of times during my commute with fuel pump problems). I ordered that car and the dealer said they'd never seen one before in Texas, but I live on top of a steep hill (yes, we have those here in Austin) and have been through enough marginal weather and full-blown ice storms to want AWD so I can get down the hill in an emergency. It was great -- I'd be at an intersection during a drizzle or light rain, and the car or pickup truck next to me would spin its wheels and fishtail when the light changed. The T&C AWD just smoothly accelerated without a hitch.

Anyway, only the gas-powered Pacificas are getting AWD, so I don't have to think about trading up. I'd be tempted if they offered a hybrid with motors on the rear wheels.

 

[Lscman]

AWD makes many people feel safer, including those living in areas with no snow. Chrysler can't force or otherwise convince the masses to buy FWD over AWD, so many purchase a Toyota van to obtain AWD. If you go to northern Canada and Alaska you will see many competent drivers piloting rear wheel drive and front wheel drive vehicles around on snowy roads without a care in the world. For them, AWD and 4WD is totally unnecessary and wasteful for most street use. Front wheel drive vans do not accelerate quite as well on snow or ice as a FWD car, but they are far better than RWD. This is because vans a greater percentage of weight in the rear and less on the nose compared to a car. Car weigh distribution is roughly 60F/40R while passenger vans are much closer to 50/50. The finished rear cargo area, 6' roofline, windows and rear seats are not light compared to smaller car with modest windows and a 50lb trunk lid. It is best to have more weight over the driven wheels. A set of Blizzaks would make a FWD van accelerate almost like it has AWD in the snow, but they would wear out real quick, and dry braking and handling would be subpar.

 

[Lscman]

The issue is most people equate getting moving from a stop with being good in the snow. Thats why most people think FWD cars are better than RWD cars in the snow, and thats actually not the case. FWD cars have some very serious dynamic issues in low traction environments stemming from the fact that the drive wheels and steering wheels are the same. So, when you have a lack of drive traction, you loose directional control, and vice versa. A RWD car is harder to get started in the snow, but once underway doesnt have these dynamic limitations. If you take advanced driving training you'll experience these differences and once you do, you can't un-experience them and you won't trust FWD cars in the snow anymore.

As others have said, tires are key. Any car will be made much safer to drive in the snow on winter tires, FWD, RWD or AWD. However, for people who live in places like I live, winter tires don't make sense. By and large we have mild winters, and more days are over 45 than are below, and we have sporadic snow but we can have big snows. Climates like this are where AWD vehicles are really a huge benefit because they give you much better traction without winter tires.

A big heavy vehicle like the Pacifica in FWD, you come down a hill and try and turn, you're going to be in trouble. With AWD you can apply some throttle and regain control, with FWD you can't.

So, like I said, I would always choose the AWD version ofd any FWD vehicle if its available, and for the Pacifica no question. I had two AWD Lexus sedans and the one I have now is RWD, and while the AWD was much more sure footed, the RWD is very drivable with the skid and traction control.

I am a performance driving instructor, ex-SCCA driver and have 45+ years experience driving FWD, RWD, AWD and 4WD in the snow of Pennsylvania. I think you are overselling AWD, and strongly disagree with the argument you are making that it greatly benefits cornering. I think AWD provides greatest benefit for average drivers in snow or icy conditions when driving up hill or accelerating hard (in a straight line). AWD and 4WD can actually induce understeer in corners under throttle when rear tires try to push the vehicle in a straight line. This can occur unless an elevated rear slip rate is reached or when transfer case f/r drive action "cooperates" with the situation. Power transfer system operating behavior isn't perfect despite modern electronic slip sensing and controls. Driven wheels are seldom under power when the "typical driver" is struggling to turn in slippery snow or wet conditions. If tires are sliding in a corner, they are likely entering too fast & braking too late (overcooked it). They will not be on the throttle under that scenario. Drivers are generally coasting or on the brakes in corners, and gently feathering the throttle when exiting the turn. Corner exit under throttle does not cause many accidents. I agree that corner slip understeer UNDER THROTTLE is reduced with AWD, but I see post-apex wheelspin as avoidable, easily correctable driving error. Don't accelerate so hard to cause slip lol. Dynamic traction limitations in a corner can ALWAYS be managed by reducing throttle application, unless you are churning up a steep hill while turning. Momentum will get a vehicle with proper velocity thru a sharp corner. Average drivers with AWD don't apply hard throttle at the apex to improve cornering under slippery conditions. AWD/4WD is indeed great for 4 wheel drifting. This allows the advanced driver to use a throttle-induced elevated rear slip rate to repoint the nose, but this technique is illegal for public roads can sometimes puts cars into guide rail or upside down.

Ignoring reduced performance and efficiency, the biggest beef I have with AWD is the fact that it creates a lot overconfidence in marginal drivers. They feel no slip upon aggressive acceleration and this encourages them to overcook corners and wreck, or fail to stop in time, leading to them rear-ending other vehicles. Every Winter, vehicles in my city with front end damage are predominantly AWD/4WD SUV's. This is not a mystery to me lol.

AWD is not very beneficial for turning unless you are an advanced driver in a low traction off-road environment looking to use 4 wheel drifting techniques beat a stopwatch. For typical drivers AWD is largely for straight line acceleration and for climbing hills. The low ground clearance on Pacifica limits it's deep snow potential with AWD.

 

[SWPacLim]

AWD makes many people feel safer, including those living in areas with no snow. Chrysler can't force or otherwise convince the masses to buy FWD over AWD, so many purchase a Toyota van to obtain AWD. If you go to northern Canada and Alaska you will see many competent drivers piloting rear wheel drive and front wheel drive vehicles around on snowy roads without a care in the world. For them, AWD and 4WD is totally unnecessary and wasteful for most street use.

You'd actually be surprised. The take rate for AWD on the Sienna is not that high. AWD in a minivan has definitely been a niche thing, thats why Chrysler had abandoned it and Honda has decided not to explore it despite the Odyssey being on the same platform and having the same powertrain as the Pilot. It will be interesting to see how many Pacificas are AWD.

Bear in mind you're talking to someone who drives a RWD car himself in the winter. As for plenty of people piloting around FWD and RWD vehicles in the snow without a care in the world in northern Canada and Alaska, thats true...but that doesnt change the fact that AWD would make the cars they are driving better. Those drivers are also typically using winter tires and not making do on all seasons like people in more mild/variable climates are, and they have far, far more experience driving cars in winter weather. Having had the same car I have now thats RWD in AWD and driving both in winter conditions. The RWD does better than older ones I've had, but its no replacement for AWD. The AWD car was just better.

Front wheel drive vans do not accelerate quite as well on snow or ice as a FWD car, but they are far better than RWD.

Depends on the traction and skid control aids in the RWD car. MY FWD van does not accelerate as well in the snow as MY RWD car. Thats purely a function of the technology in the RWD car though which has dramatically improved its snow performance over older versions of the same car I've had in RWD. Absent any traction or driving aids I would agree a FWD van will accelerate better from a stop than a RWD car.

Car weigh distribution is roughly 60F/40R while passenger vans are much closer to 50/50.

Pacifica weight distribution is 55/45.

I am a performance driving instructor, ex-SCCA driver and have 45+ years experience driving FWD, RWD, AWD and 4WD in the snow of Pennsylvania. I strongly disagree with virtually everything in your post. AWD provides greatest benefit for average drivers in snow or icy conditions when driving up hill or accelerating hard (in a straight line). Driven wheels are seldom under power when the "typical driver" is struggling to turn in slippery snow or wet conditions. If tires are sliding in a corner, they are braking late or entered too fast and overcooked it. They will not be on the throttle under that scenario. Drivers are generally coasting or on the brakes in corners, and gently feathering the throttle when exiting the turn. Corner slip understeer UNDER THROTTLE is reduced with AWD as you say, but I see that as a driving error. Don't accelerate so hard to cause slip lol. Dynamic traction limitations in a corner can ALWAYS be managed by reducing throttle application, unless you are churning up a steep hill while turning. Momentum will get a vehicle with proper velocity thru a sharp corner. Average drivers with AWD don't apply hard throttle at the apex to improve cornering under slippery conditions. AWD and 4WD will encourage a car in a turn to go in a straight line under heavier throttle. AWD/4WD is indeed great for 4 wheel drifting. This allows the advanced driver to use a throttle-induced elevated rear slip rate to repoint the nose, but this technique is illegal for public roads can sometimes puts cars into guide rail or upside down.

Even when not applying throttle a FWD car with a more nose heavy weight distribution is more prone to understeer in the first place in the scenarios I outlined in my post. You're looking at this through the lens of a professional driver, the vast majority of drivers are not professional drivers. Its about what makes a common driver safest in the snow, and the propensity for a FWD car to lose traction when entering a turn too quickly in slick conditions vs a RWD or AWD car that is more evenly balanced is absolutely a fact. The real negative for RWD vehicles is their propensity for oversteer which is hard for an inexperienced driver to correct for, that issue has been largely negated by standard yaw control systems in cars. Skid control is less effective at combating understeer than it is overseer. You also have the added problem as you mentioned of losing the ability to steer when accelerating up an incline, etc. Of course its driver error. but nearly every cause of a collision in those sorts of driving conditions is going to be driver error. Its about what platform is the most forgiving of driver error and the easiest for someone ...and thats AWD.

I'm not saying a FWD car can't be driven safely in the snow, of course it can. Millions and millions of them are, they are just dynamic limitations people don't realize.

The low ground clearance on Pacifica limits it's deep snow potential with AWD.

The AWD Pacifica does have 1 inch higher ground clearance, but again its not about deep snow. I had both an AWD Lexus sedan and a 4WD Jeep Grand Cherokee at the same time. In snow less than 5-6 inches, I preferred to drive the AWD Lexus despite the Jeep having much more ground clearance. Of course in deeper snow the Jeep was much better. Just because a Pacifica can't plow through a foot of snow like a Jeep doesnt mean the AWD doesn't have value. Its pretty rare you encounter a public road with a foot of snow on it, even during a heavy snowstorm because the roads are tamped down, plowed periodically etc to keep the snow depth down. For most people, an AWD car or van will serve them very well in winter weather despite not having more than 6 inches of ground clearance.

AWD will make the Pacifica more satisfying and safer to drive in a variety of conditions, and increase the van's utility a ton. Take off from a stop on a rainy day with anything but the lightest of throttle in both a FWD and an AWD Pacifica...you're going to want the AWD.

 

[Lscman]

.......... Its about what makes a common driver safest in the snow, and the propensity for a FWD car to lose traction when entering a turn too quickly in slick conditions vs a RWD or AWD car that is more evenly balanced is absolutely a fact........

Its about what platform is the most forgiving of driver error and the easiest for someone ...and thats AWD.........

I'm not saying a FWD car can't be driven safely in the snow, of course it can. Millions and millions of them are, they are just dynamic limitations people don't realize..........

AWD will make the Pacifica more satisfying and safer to drive in a variety of conditions,........

Steve, I disagree with some specific points you made, and I quoted above. All things being equal (avg street driver with same tires, conditions, vehicle etc), it is my opinion that FWD may result in fewer accidents than AWD. AWD improves acceleration in limited traction conditions, making owners "feel" safer. This makes them drive faster than they normally would with FWD. I think that FWD is generally SAFER than AWD.

1) AWD offers no "dynamic benefit" when a non-professional driver enters a snowy, wet or icy turn too fast or can't stop in time! These scenarios are the safety (crash) issue of main concern. As a driver enters a turn too fast and head toward a wall, curb, another car or oak tree, they are not on the throttle. Same goes for late braking for a stop. This makes powertrain and drivetrain irrelevant. They are either coasting or on the brakes, and hoping for steering response to return. They are not going to whip the wheel, mash the gas to initiate a 4 wheel drift thru the turn, all crossed-up like a Subaru or Focus RS rally driver.

2) AWD makes it more difficult for drivers to sense slippery conditions. Reduced feedback to the driver about road surface condition problems makes AWD less safe than FWD. Momentary traction loss under throttle is an invaluable indicator of potential traction issues that could later put you into the guard rail. When drivers feel loss of traction under throttle they SLOW DOWN. When they don't, they become oblivious and may even speed up. AWD minimizes slip feedback under inconsequential straight line throttle conditions. Lack of feedback gives owners a false sense of security, lulling unwary drivers into going too fast for conditions, and either overcooking a turn or finding themselves unable to stop in time. AWD will not reduce or prevent such driver errors. It's my opinion that AWD actually causes more of them.

Conclusion: It is my opinion that reduced feedback under limited traction conditions with AWD ADDS risk and causes MORE accidents compared to FWD. Superior AWD traction under throttle does not equate to better braking, or better turning under braking, or better turning when coasting. This is when traction loss may result in a collision. An AWD Pacifica will go up hills better and accelerate much harder from a stop sign with less wheelspin, but it is not safer. Automotive insurance companies customarily offer discounted rates for significant safety features, not for AWD or 4WD.

 

[SWPacLim]

Basically you edited your post from the other day after I responded to it and changed a ton of what your originally said. The original post can be see in my quotes from yesterday. To be clear I am NOT making an argument that AWD "strongly benefits cornering" in any way shape or form. I'm saying that the dynamics of FWD, RWD and AWD vehicles are different, and that FWD vehicles have the least desirable snow cornering characteristics in the context of a modern car and that virtually nobody understands that.

Steve, I disagree with some specific points you made, and I quoted above. All things being equal (avg street driver with same tires, conditions, vehicle etc), it is my opinion that FWD may result in fewer accidents than AWD. AWD improves acceleration in limited traction conditions, making owners "feel" safer. This makes them drive faster than they normally would with FWD. I think that FWD is generally SAFER than AWD.

Thats fine, you can disagree with me.

You're assuming a set of behaviors, and that has nothing to do with whether or not a specific Pacifica driver should choose FWD or AWD. You may very well be right, that AWD vehicles lead drivers into a false sense of security and that contributes to accidents, but that doesn't weigh on whether or not I would choose a FWD or an AWD car. I control my own actions, so I select the better tool...which is the AWD vehicle. Its up to me to use that tool well and safely.

By your logic, RWD cars would be the safest because they feel the least secure starting from a stop and should impart the largest lack of confidence in the vehicle's ability to handle the conditions.

1) AWD offers no "dynamic benefit" when a non-professional driver enters a snowy, wet or icy turn too fast or can't stop in time!

The weight distribution and dynamics of the vehicle do have an impact in those situations as I mentioned. FWD cars are more prone to understeer, which is the loss of traction you would experience in that scenario. People are totally unaware and unprepared for that which was my point.

As a driver enters a turn too fast and head toward a wall, curb, another car or oak tree, they are not on the throttle. Same goes for late braking for a stop. This makes powertrain and drivetrain irrelevant.

But as you mentioned the weight distribution and setup of the vehicle are not irrelevant, and that is different depending on the drivetrain layout of the car. If you have a front heavy FWD car, adding an AWD system to that car will even out the weight distribution.

And as you know, as you become a more experienced driver the application of some throttle in situations like that can actually help you regain control of the car.

They are not going to whip the wheel, mash the gas to initiate a 4 wheel drift thru the turn, all crossed-up like a Subaru or Focus RS rally driver.

I never said that they would.

2) AWD makes it more difficult for drivers to sense slippery conditions. Reduced feedback to the driver about road surface condition problems makes AWD less safe than FWD. Momentary traction loss under throttle is an invaluable indicator of potential traction issues that could later put you into the guard rail. When drivers feel loss of traction under throttle they SLOW DOWN. When they don't, they become oblivious and may even speed up. AWD minimizes slip feedback under inconsequential straight line throttle conditions. Lack of feedback gives owners a false sense of security, lulling unwary drivers into going too fast for conditions, and either overcooking a turn or finding themselves unable to stop in time. AWD will not reduce or prevent such driver errors. It's my opinion that AWD actually causes more of them.

Again, that doesnt negate the fact that the AWD vehicle is better in those situations. You're talking about people's behavior not the ability of the vehicle.

An AWD Pacifica will go up hills better and accelerate much harder from a stop sign with less wheelspin, but it is not safer.

Its absolutely safer, and better it just potentially invites unsafe drivers to drive it in an unsafe way. Lots of better, easier to use tools invite the potential for abuse. Doesn't mean we all should go out and buy less effective, harder to use tools.

Going up hills better and accelerating better is exactly what I want. The rest of it is under my control.

Automotive insurance companies customarily offer discounted rates for significant safety features, not for AWD or 4WD.

Actually, the reason why AWD vehicles don't get you a discount on insurance is because of their increased complexity and cost of repair, not because they are more likely to be involved in an accident.

Does All-Wheel Drive Make Insurance Cheaper? - Policygenius

Car insurance may cost more if your car has an all-wheel drive system, since they can be more expensive to repair after damage.

www.policygenius.com

Look at this chart from the above article. As you can see, cars that are likely to be AWD are the least expensive to insure overall aside from a few outliers, like pickup trucks etc:

Bottom line still is, the AWD system will make the Pacifica a better car. Will it be "so much better" that you abuse it and put yourself at risk, thats up to you.

 

[samcombs77]

This has all been very good feedback. I am sure I will make good use of the information that everyone has shared here.
I hope others have been able to take something away from this also.

Stay Positive!




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only Cover Your Chrysler Pacifica With A Factory Backed Chrysler Extended Warranty.
Buy Direct And Save Chrysler Factory Warranty - Your #1 Source for Extended Coverage for Chrysler Vehicles

 

[Lscman]

Basically you edited your post from the other day after I responded to it and changed a ton of what your originally said. The original post can be see in my quotes from yesterday. To be clear I am NOT making an argument that AWD "strongly benefits cornering" in any way shape or form. I'm saying that the dynamics of FWD, RWD and AWD vehicles are different, and that FWD vehicles have the least desirable snow cornering characteristics in the context of a modern car and that virtually nobody understands that.



Thats fine, you can disagree with me.

You're assuming a set of behaviors, and that has nothing to do with whether or not a specific Pacifica driver should choose FWD or AWD. You may very well be right, that AWD vehicles lead drivers into a false sense of security and that contributes to accidents, but that doesn't weigh on whether or not I would choose a FWD or an AWD car. I control my own actions, so I select the better tool...which is the AWD vehicle. Its up to me to use that tool well and safely.

By your logic, RWD cars would be the safest because they feel the least secure starting from a stop and should impart the largest lack of confidence in the vehicle's ability to handle the conditions.



The weight distribution and dynamics of the vehicle do have an impact in those situations as I mentioned. FWD cars are more prone to understeer, which is the loss of traction you would experience in that scenario. People are totally unaware and unprepared for that which was my point.



But as you mentioned the weight distribution and setup of the vehicle are not irrelevant, and that is different depending on the drivetrain layout of the car. If you have a front heavy FWD car, adding an AWD system to that car will even out the weight distribution.

And as you know, as you become a more experienced driver the application of some throttle in situations like that can actually help you regain control of the car.



I never said that they would.



Again, that doesnt negate the fact that the AWD vehicle is better in those situations. You're talking about people's behavior not the ability of the vehicle.



Its absolutely safer, and better it just potentially invites unsafe drivers to drive it in an unsafe way. Lots of better, easier to use tools invite the potential for abuse. Doesn't mean we all should go out and buy less effective, harder to use tools.

Going up hills better and accelerating better is exactly what I want. The rest of it is under my control.



Actually, the reason why AWD vehicles don't get you a discount on insurance is because of their increased complexity and cost of repair, not because they are more likely to be involved in an accident.

Does All-Wheel Drive Make Insurance Cheaper? - Policygenius

Car insurance may cost more if your car has an all-wheel drive system, since they can be more expensive to repair after damage.

www.policygenius.com

Look at this chart from the above article. As you can see, cars that are likely to be AWD are the least expensive to insure overall aside from a few outliers, like pickup trucks etc:

View attachment 44479

Bottom line still is, the AWD system will make the Pacifica a better car. Will it be "so much better" that you abuse it and put yourself at risk, thats up to you.

Steve, you are blaming drivers for AWD’s reduced road traction feedback and feel. No way. The inability of AWD drivers to sense hazardous road surface conditions that get them into trouble under braking or turning IS the safety issue. The lack of feel and sense is a function of the drivetrain, not the driver. Its all about balance between accel, decel and lat G’s. This is almost like comparing a 1980 Mustang to a 1980 BMW. A tiny handful of highly skilled drivers CAN keep the Mustang off the tire wall while running similar lap times. Typical drivers who can’t deal with an unbalanced vehicle should not be labeled as “unsafe or abusive”. Vehicles with better road surface feedback help to keep you out of trouble. In this respect, AWD is clearly inferior. It can more easily get ANYONE into trouble under braking or turning.

 

[SWPacLim]

Not sure where I'm blaming drivers for anything, but okay. Expecting people to make good decisions and to use tools properly is not "blaming" them. No tool that is not defective causes an accident. Misuse of the tool causes the accident.

I just totally and completely disagree. I want the best tool, and its up to me to use it safely. A safe driver can certainly drive an AWD vehicle safely the snow. I've been doing so for many years. If you don't feel you can trust yourself to drive a vehicle safely understanding that the dynamics of stopping and turning are not enhanced by AWD, then you shouldn't be driving any vehicle in icy and snowy conditions.

I see no logic in wanting a vehicle that has a hard time getting moving in the snow because one that doesnt might lull me into a false sense of security. Its up to the driver to make an accurate assessment of the road conditions and adjust their driving accordingly. By your logic we shouldn't have any technology that helps a vehicle drive more securely in the snow because it might "hide the road conditions from us". Should we not buy cars with better headlights? They might cause us to drive faster at night. Should we look for cars with the slowest and worse windshield wipers because that way we wont want to drive so fast in the rain? Makes no sense.

 

[Lscman]

“Accurate assessment”???? You can’t gauge or otherwise “accurately assess” traction limits without some amount of slip, and neither can I. Do you want to first experience slip when bearing down on a stopped car in front of you? You do, I don’t. That is the sticking point. AWD is not safer for the average driver because it reduces feel and sensitivity under slippery conditions. Drivers wreck when they fail to sense poor traction. Ok, let’s blame them. Newsflash, people including Indy drivers are not perfect. Drivers who do not sense loss of traction may occasionallly go too fast and wreck in snow with AWD or 4WD. To be clear, I was not recommending a vehicle for you, nothing personal. Neither of us are typical drivers. My opinion on this point is obviously not budging. Wheel spin in snow or ice is a useful measure of traction limit for all drivers including me. Feedback during acceleration helps a driver set proper speed before a stop or turn, which avoids front end collisions. Nobody can gauge the traction limit without wheel spin, not even you. Limited traction during acceleration may be annoying or slow you down; limited traction on turning or braking can cause a wreck. The annoyance of FWD wheel spin is safer and less risky. If you do not want wheelspin, get AWD and hope traction issues don’t sneak up on you upon braking or cornering. It’s real simple. Bye

 

[SWPacLim]

I just don't agree with that. I think all of these technologies make vehicles safer in general, if I were choosing a Pacifica right now today, I would absolutely get the AWD model for that reason, bearing in mind that its my wife primarily who will be driving it.

I have a little more faith in people's abilities to make informed choices than you do. I am perfectly capable of looking at a snow covered road and knowing that I need to slow down to aid in turning and stopping whether or not my car confidently accelerated from a stop or not, and so are most drivers. If a driver isn't, then they shouldn't be driving any car in those conditions. You can make the same argument against skid and traction control, and I don't think it carries any weight there either.

And again, its not just about snow driving. As an example, I was driving the Pacifica today, it had been raining and the roads were damp. I came up to a 4 way stop, and the car on my left did not immediately yield me my right of way. So you do that little stop, hitch, who's going to go thing, and finally, I went. Well, you guessed it the quicker than normal throttle response coupled with the FWD and the Pacifica's weight meant my front wheels spun out and I just sat there for a second. In an AWD Pacifica, that wouldn't have happened. Is that a safety thing? It could have been...adding to that the story I posted earlier about not being able to get up the steep gravel driveway of the cabin we rented in the FWD Pacifica when I would have been able to in an AWD Pacifica. There are many reasons why AWD is a superior powertrain layout to FWD, to just ignore all of that because AWD confidence may cause you to become overconfident when you are in control of whether or not you let that happen to you is just silly, IMO. Just choose not to become overconfident.

Nobody ever said "I really wish I had less traction in that situation".

 

[peterweb]

Can we get this back on track please. This can be continued in the Off Topic section of the forum.