Volkswagen Mark IV Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
Not surprising really, they are heavier, more costly and drive at 90% front wheel drive 90% of the time anyway.
True....but I wouldn't go back to 2wd now.
But you are 90% of the time anyway [:)] I have nothing against 4-wheel drive - our 'other' car is an A4 Quattro!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
I also have a GT TDI 4motion and would not go back to Front wheel drive again for my everyday road car.

The Drive on these Golfs can be sent anywhere anytime ! when needed ,So as you Say 90 % goes to the front under normal high grip conditions ,You can pull away in this car in the wet or on greasy roundabouts and you just go with no wheel spin,In a front drive car all that happens is you spin a wheel and the esp comes in and limits the power and the steering wheel pulls slightly ,There is none of that in this car.

I really rate this system as you do not need full time 4 wheel drive on a dry road,When Haldex get there Gen 3 controller out that will send more power to the rear all the time if any one is interested.

Also having 4 wheel drive does not make you car handle any better ,All road cars are made to understeer at there limits,Subarus etc are a fast road car but if you ever see one on a track they look rubbish ,A light car like a Lotus Exige will run rings round most things on road or track.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
hi had mine for a few weeks now , great car to drive , my wife has the same engine in her 2 wheel drive golf gt . i would say they have the same power , but the 4motion is by far a better drive imo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
Not surprising really, they are heavier, more costly and drive at 90% front wheel drive 90% of the time anyway.
This may seem like a really dumb question but it's generally accepted rear wheel drive cars handle much, much better than fwd cars. Let the rears handle the power, let the fronts handle the steering.

From a layman's point of view then, wouldn't the 4 Motion be a better if the drive was 90% rear most of the time? Any particular reason why VW use the fronts to drive the car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
This may seem like a really dumb question but it's generally accepted rear wheel drive cars handle much, much better than fwd cars.
Not so sure I would put it like that - I would say rear wheel drive cars may favour the keen driver and are better suited to dry conditions. Front wheel drive cars are more forgiving and less prone to unpleasant charactersitics in the wet. That is why 'performance marques' such as Porsche, BMW, Merc etc are traditionally rear wheel drive and smaller cars, most hatch-backs included are front wheel drive. A high power rear wheel drive car can be a handful on a wet roundabout to the un-trained (me included) or inexperienced. Of course the ideal solution is four-wheel drive so that you can get the best characteristics of both and maximise traction and grip in marginal conditions. Since we owned a 3.2 Merc CLK (rear drive) and had one or two small incidents we have gone for Audi Quattro drive on our last two cars (A4 and A6) and have not regretted it. The full size Quattro (non Haldex for want of a better word) system is really excellent and we have never faulted it.

From a layman's point of view then, wouldn't the 4 Motion be a better if the drive was 90% rear most of the time? Any particular reason why VW use the fronts to drive the car?
Because they are setting the car up for the 'layman' who is more used to front-wheel drive in the average hatchback and using the haldex system to increase traction and grip only when its really needed.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top