[Mark600]

I live in NJ. I was thrilled with my first Front Wheel Drive vehicle. It was an 87 Buick with 3.8. Having front wheel drive was nice in snow. After a while tho, I longed for 4WD. Then I got am 87 Expedition and an 04 Expedition. Both had a switch for two wheel (rear) drive and 4 wheel drive. In the 20 years I owned those two cars, I think I used the 4 WD under 10 times.
So now I am faced with Front Wheel Drive or All Wheel Drive. Full time AWD seems nuts to me. More tire wear, less gas mileage, greater cost. I am not in Maine or Mass or the upper midwest. Should I just go back to Front Wheel drive and enjoy the savings, lack of a transfer case and the better gas mileage or will I regret not haveing AWD.

 

[Eric2203]

Being AWD doesn't mean all wheels drive all the time. It just means they can. This is true of any AWD vehicle. Not to be confused with 4WD where all 4 wheels are driving. Which you don't want to do for very long or at speed. Typically, on the Palisade, the front wheels get power most of the time.

Get the AWD.

 

[palisade29]

Consumer Reports tested several different vehicles, in both wet and snow-covered roads, comparing 2WD and 4WD. The results showed that there was almost no difference in traction, braking, or handling between the 2WD and the 4WD. Consumer Reports concluded that the only way to improve traction and handling in snowy conditions is to put snow tires on your car. I think we have all been brainwashed into thinking that we need 4WD, but independent scientific testing has shown that 2WD is just as safe and just as good when it comes to braking, stopping and crash avoidance. Save yourself some dough. Get 2WD.

 

[Eric2203]

Consumer Reports tested several different vehicles, in both wet and snow-covered roads, comparing 2WD and 4WD. The results showed that there was almost no difference in traction, braking, or handling between the 2WD and the 4WD. Consumer Reports concluded that the only way to improve traction and handling in snowy conditions is to put snow tires on your car. I think we have all been brainwashed into thinking that we need 4WD, but independent scientific testing has shown that 2WD is just as safe and just as good when it comes to braking, stopping and crash avoidance. Save yourself some dough. Get 2WD.

That's true in general. I daily-drive a FWD car (the Palisade is my wife's car) in the north-east US, so I get snow every winter, and I've never had an issue. I don't even use snow tires - I stay on all-weathers.

But... that doesn't mean AWD (not 4WD, for the record) is useless. To put it simply, it offers more ways to put the power down. That makes you more likely to get moving when the conditions are bad enough for people to get stuck. The key part is that getting stuck doesn't happen as often as people might perhaps think, although in some rural areas, it can happen often enough. It also helps when the conditions aren't that bad, but bad enough that care should be exercised (heavy rain, some snow). Even if a FWD car can manage it, an AWD car gets you that extra security. Electronics in the car react fast enough to detect slip on front wheels (hydroplaning for example) and switch power to the rear wheels. Just an example...

How often this happens and whether one feels AWD is warranted is really up to everyone to decide for themselves.

 

[anthpalisade]

No way. If you live in a place with snow and ice you need AWD. I have slipped and been unable to to get up hills plenty of time in FWD and RWD. 4 Driven wheels is always going to give you more traction when its needed. Do snow tires on 4 wheels help as well, of course they do.

Do we need both. That depends where you live. I would argue that I would personally rather have AWD than swap snows for all season tires. In a perfect world I would have both, but where I live in the northeast we get 5 to 12 snows a winter. There are places that get much more. When it snows I also have the option of driving less most of the time, waiting for the snow to clear, waiting for roads to be plowed at least some of the time. There are plenty of places that's not an option.

I used to live further North in Saratoga Springs NY around 30 miles above albany and where trips to even snowier places further north and west were common. My apartment parking lot was basically an ice skating rink. I had to use Studded snows to get around even to get up the hill to my parking lot.

Anyway yeah AWD is the way to go. Its AWD is Automatic in smart mode it will apply the amount of power needed 4 wheels as needed. Lastly, there is a reason that it is tough to find a FWD car in the northeast if that model also comes with AWD. Your in the NE it will be easier to find your trim and options in AWD.

 

[Shaggy77]

To the OP, it depends on which side of the state you live on. If you are on the Southern side, I would say it's a coin flip since there terrain is generally flat. On the Northern side it is more hilly. Technically there are 3 to 4 mountain chains between NYC to the border with PA to the west. After all when you come across the GWB in the Palisades that is one of the them. The next set would be the Watchung range. There is another set that cuts though Western Morris, Eastern Sussex, Western Passiac, Warren and Hunterdon counties. Finally the Kittatiny ridge which is also considered the Appalachian mountains. Many sections of Northern NJ are just hilly like Morris county. Once you get below New Brunswick area it starts to level out some. The top 1/3 of the state has a number of ancient ranges. The next 1/3 gets flat pretty quickly. The southern 1/3 is pretty flat with very gentle hills if anything.

Good luck.

 

[anthpalisade]

Thought i would post the link and important Summary which confirms what i said but also the value of snow tires and being safe.

“All-wheel drive is far better than two-wheel drive when it comes to driving on slick surfaces where you need serious traction to get going, such as a snowy uphill driveway. But our tests found that all-wheel drive by itself won’t help if you’re heading too fast toward a sudden sharp curve on a snowy night.
That’s an important point for people who overestimate the capability of their all-wheel-drive vehicle. We’ve all seen them, zipping past us in blizzards with their illusory cloak of invincibility.
Don’t be one of those guys—unless you want to risk a crash or find yourself stranded far from civilization.
Our test-track observations lead us to advise that using snow tires provides the best grip and assurance for going, stopping, and cornering no matter what you drive: all-wheel drive, front-drive, or rear-drive. And buying winter tires for a front-drive car will cost far less than the several-thousand-dollar premium you’ll pay for all-wheel drive.”

Do You Really Need AWD in the Snow? - Consumer Reports

Automakers have long boasted that AWD, or all-wheel drive, is all you need to get your car through winter’s fury. Consumer Reports' exclusive tests tell a different story.

www.consumerreports.org

 

[Safeplayer22]

We are talking about $1,600 + taxes. Not thousands of $ (I know to each its own). Be smart and no regret. Get the AWD. I live in NYC and I would suppose that I would get by ok with FWD most days. But I know I will be driving out of NYC to upstate, new England area, etc. Better to have it than to regret it.

 

[xerostatus]

I think AWD on these cars are more gimmicky than anything else. All cars are "four wheel stop/braking", which is what's actually important in snow/etc. driving. Also, it's already been mentioned to death, but having proper tires for the season/conditions is always, always, always better than just "having AWD". The Palisade, while a very capable car for most road conditions, doesn't need AWD; it's not an off-road crawler... Sure, it's nice to have it for a little extra peace of mind if your climate calls for it, but the benefits of AWD on these grocery-getters is a bit overblown, imo.

Also, AWD tends to be a lot more complicated mechanically and more costlier to fix when something goes wrong. My previous car ('14 CX-9) also had a pretty pervasive issue with their AWDs that caused vibration/etc. at higher speeds, not unlike the issue we've seen with Palisades. Made me thankful to have the FWD version having zero problems, while everyone on the forums were replacing their diffs, driveshafts, etc. all spending $1000s of out of pocket costs (Mazda doesn't have as generous of warranty..) So, more expensive parts to go wrong, and personally, living in california myself i see virtually zero reason to need/desire AWD. Even if I were to make it up to the snowy mountains a few times a year, they still require snow chains regardless of AWD or FWD during snow in CA. I much rather put on a set for two wheels, rather than struggle in the snow to put on all fours lol... but again, these are just my own personal considerations.

 

[Stormy]

 

[Stormy]

Above is why I like AWD on my Palisade Limited. I fully understand all the reasons in this tread for desiring FWD but I have plenty of time and places to explore in Nevada and this Palisade goes places my Santa Fe FWD wouldn't dare.

 

[Gene]

Stormy
I live in Glendale, Arizona and held out for an HTrac for the same reason and others.
If I head towards Utah in the winter, Have to go through Flagstaff. People don't think we
get snow, think again, at times snow in Flagstaff is worse than snow we got in upstate New York
That is why they have snowbowl ski center.
We also go places like the Apache trail and look around on side roads, great to have AWD.
We only get rain here in the valley a couple of times a year. That makes the roads super slippery
as the grease, oil and tire rubber from cars just sets on the roads. With my last FWD cart, when
trying to turn on to the steep onramps of highway in wet weather, traction control would at times
almost shut the car down. Doesn't happen with this HTrac.
Yes we have stupid people here who think they can cross a flash flood stream because they have
AWD. That is why Arizona has a stupid motorist law, and they make you pay for the rescue
after they save you

 

[Stormy]

Long live HTRAC - for those that actually use it.

 

[Gene]

I live in Arizona and purchased the HTRAC. While stopping the Palisade HTRAC doesn't help over FWD
When we go over the mountains getting out of Phoenix in winter, it is a lot better with the HTRAC.
I also notice how much the Torque vectoring helps when driving places like the Apache trail.
Really sharp turns and twists on a dirt road HTRAC beats FWD or 4WD all to H***. I've driven it with
all three types. When we get rain, Not often, The roads here get pretty slick as the oil and crap sets
on the road for long periods of time, with out getting washed off. A left turn getting on an on ramp will
spin tires with FWD in the rain or when road is wet or the traction control shuts down the engine
Not with the HTRAC. I just find it better to drive in some cases. again that is a personal preference.
If you only drive in the city it is a gimmick. Then to I see people driving Jeeps, and big off road vehicles with 22-24" extra wide off road tires while they never leave the city and use only for driving to work. Hey we don't get snow in Phoenix it self, well almost never, sometime next to the mountains it has happened and hail.
I don't regret getting the HTRAC at all

 

[braddallas]

I would recommend test driving both. I test drove a FWD and hated how the front wheels seemed to "grab" the road when pushing on the gas. I went with an AWD and definitely don't regret the purchase. I would highly recommend driving both to get a feel for your own personal preference.

 

[CVP33]

Unless you live where there is ice I’d go with snow tires as FWD is plenty good. You also give up MPG with AWD.

 

[Eric2203]

Unless you live where there is ice I’d go with snow tires as FWD is plenty good. You also give up MPG with AWD.

Ice isn't the only reason to buy an AWD car. It provides advantages in many other road conditions. It also changes how the car drives since it does direct a little bit of power to the rear wheels, even on dry pavement (there is a display on the AWD Palisade that lets you watch which wheels are getting power). It can help with torque steer and wheel spin as well.

Sure, a FWD is fine pretty much everywhere, even on snow, and even more so if you use snow tires. I daily-drive a FWD car (my wife drives the Palisade) and we get snow and ice here. But that doesn't mean the only reason to buy an AWD car is if you get ice. Ultimately, it comes down to preference and everyone should be aware of all driving differences between the two - not just in case of ice.

 

[CVP33]

The Palisade is frankly too slow to be worried about torque steer. 6.9 0-60mph times, 7.1 for AWD? Doubtful that AWD is ever truly needed under anything but the most severe icy conditions. As already stated qualitatively, there was really no difference in snow or rain when comparing cars with AWD or FWD unless ice was involved. But hey:

1) if facts don’t matter
2) You don’t mind spending a little more to get AWD
3) You don’t mind losing 2mpg in hwy mileage
4) You don’t mind losing a little acceleration in an already slow-ish vehicle

For the record only slow compared to the BMW X7, Ford Explorer, Honda Pilot, Lincoln Aviator, Lincoln Navigator, Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Tahoe, Infiniti QX80, Audi Q7

It is on par with the 4 cylinder Subaru Ascent though.

Then go for it if it makes you happy. I drive a 650hp vehicle with a top speed of over 200mph. I have the pinnacle of unnecessary automotive excess, I just try to convince myself that it’s to avoid torque steer.

Ice isn't the only reason to buy an AWD car. It provides advantages in many other road conditions. It also changes how the car drives since it does direct a little bit of power to the rear wheels, even on dry pavement (there is a display on the AWD Palisade that lets you watch which wheels are getting power). It can help with torque steer and wheel spin as well.

Sure, a FWD is fine pretty much everywhere, even on snow, and even more so if you use snow tires. I daily-drive a FWD car (my wife drives the Palisade) and we get snow and ice here. But that doesn't mean the only reason to buy an AWD car is if you get ice. Ultimately, it comes down to preference and everyone should be aware of all driving differences between the two - not just in case of ice.

 

[Eric2203]

The Palisade is frankly too slow to be worried about torque steer. 6.9 0-60mph times, 7.1 for AWD? Doubtful that AWD is ever truly needed under anything but the most severe icy conditions. As already stated qualitatively, there was really no difference in snow or rain when comparing cars with AWD or FWD unless ice was involved. But hey:

1) if facts don’t matter
2) You don’t mind spending a little more to get AWD
3) You don’t mind losing 2mpg in hwy mileage
4) You don’t mind losing a little acceleration in an already slow-ish vehicle

For the record only slow compared to the BMW X7, Ford Explorer, Honda Pilot, Lincoln Aviator, Lincoln Navigator, Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Tahoe, Infiniti QX80, Audi Q7

It is on par with the 4 cylinder Subaru Ascent though.

Then go for it if it makes you happy. I drive a 650hp vehicle with a top speed of over 200mph. I have the pinnacle of unnecessary automotive excess, I just try to convince myself that it’s to avoid torque steer.

You have trouble with reading comprehension and you love to twist what people say.

1. I said "Ice isn't the only reason to buy an AWD car." I didn't say an "AWD Palisade". I'm speaking in general. Meaning that when I mentioned torque steer, I wasn't speaking of the Palisade specifically. Try reading more slowly.

2. There have been multiple reports on these forums of people experiencing wheel spin with FWD Palisade. Not torque steer, but wheel spin. Not on ice. AWD helps on wet roads too.

3. You have examples in this post of people noticing the difference. See @Gene's post above about driving the same twisty road with both AWD and FWD Palisade and noticing the difference. Also not on ice.

4. I did also say that a FWD can also do most of this and that I daily-drive a FWD car. I mentioned that it comes down to personal choice and was simply addressing your point that ice is the only reason to buy one. Because it's not. You instead post this idiotic, childish response focusing on torque steer and completely ignoring everything else that was said. Oh and these are also facts, since you bring this up.

5. Since you love to bring up your Corvette and how much power it has, I certainly hope you realize that AWD supercars do get up to speed faster than their equivalent RWD models. Obviously, they're also heavier, which has other disadvantages.

 

[CVP33]

Yeah, like Consumer Reports stated, it’s just really not needed. I didn’t notice any torque steer in the Palisade. Really not enough torque @262 ft/lbs to cause torque steer in a 5,000 pound vehicle with a lazy 6.9 second 0-60. I don’t know that I had wheel spin either for the same reason - physics. I suppose if you floored it on gravel or in the rain you could induce wheel spin, but not sure what would be the purpose of hooning a Palisade. But if AWD makes you feel better, I say go for it!

Ice isn't the only reason to buy an AWD car. It provides advantages in many other road conditions. It also changes how the car drives since it does direct a little bit of power to the rear wheels, even on dry pavement (there is a display on the AWD Palisade that lets you watch which wheels are getting power). It can help with torque steer and wheel spin as well.