Volvo AWD and Subaru AWD

[alf]

You're right. You don't. There is TONS of information around all-seasons
and how poor a compromise they are in any weather; tons. If you think
otherwise, you are the ignorant one.

I do not mean to troll, but just can you provide a couple sources with
real scientific data.

 

[JD]

I do not mean to troll, but just can you provide a couple sources with
real scientific data.

Its not trolling at all. Perfectly valid question.

http://www.bchighway.com/myvehicle/allseasonsnowtires.html

http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/tires/at_011101.htm

This one is from the Rubber Association who regulates tires in Canada.

http://www.betiresmart.ca/pdf/2005_1204.pdf

http://www.tirerack.com/winter/tech/techpage.jsp?techid=129

There are more if you would like them

 

[JD]

but looses the action on what? I went once to the north Michigan state. It
was -6F (-21C), roads were black but covered with a slippery thin layer of
a salt. To my surprise, I was able to carve quite aggressive corners at
high speeds on all-season Continentals.

and I am still look for raw data showing exact speeds/surface type
(tarmac/deep snow/shallow snow/ice/slush)/tire combinations where the car
is loosing control/traction for braking/acceleration/cornering.

are such available?

I imagine it is, but to be honest, I wouldn't know where to find it. Most
of the stuff around has to do with side-by-side comparison on ice,
snow-covered tarmac, and dry cold road. All-seasons don't fair well on any
of those.

 

[Bugalugs]

Shows you know nothing using meaningless metric statistics. In US
driving from deserts to mountains I've found good all seasons to work
on ice and snow just fine. The vehicle and driver are more crucial
than the tire. So you can waste money if you want but I'm smart
enough to see through the hype. You probably think DRL's are good
too!

Here we go again

What works for you in your neck of the woods may not work for the bloke
down the road. Different vehicle, road surface, snow/ice thickness,
temperature, length of time road is frozen, etc,etc,etc.

You're never gunna win ! :>)

 

[bigjim]

Another one who wastes his money on hi test fuel because he thinks it
will cause damage, who buys "winter" tires even though he may live in
a moderate snow area and who likes replacing bulbs bacause DRL's are
"safer". No one has ever been able to backup the claim that lower
octane has caused damage that wasnt warranteed!

 

[JD]

They don't need to back up the claim. If it reduces the life of the engine,
it costs you money. If you get fuel consumption that is worse than on the
recommended, then it costs money. I have never had to change a high-beam
bulb on any car that I had DRLs on (and I generally keep them six to seven
years). Its all false economy.

The only thing that keeps any driver from disaster is good brakes and good
tires. I prefer not to compromise on either. Its false economy; just like
getting crappy gas mileage by using lower grade fuel.

 

[bigjim]

It DOESNT cause damage and the difference in economy will NEVER equal
high priced gas. Subaru Outback uses low beams for DRL- I had to
replace 3 in 4 years. I disabled DRLs and feel so much better.

 

[JD]

Of course it does. If the engine is knocking, it is causing damage. And if
the timing is retarded (which it will do when knocking) gas mileage is
worse; if your mileage drops by 2MPG, its cheaper to use high test.