Ranger compared to Subaru in snow

[staryoshi]

Most not apply to the Crosstrek - my girlfriend's feels just like the Subarus I sold in the late 90s - tinny, cheap, and delicate. She might have gotten a lemon but she's got 2018 and it's been in the shop at least 4 weeks a year since she bought it.

Same platform, but might be built in Indiana now. Mine came from Japan with 8 miles on it and has been a golden child lol. *knock on all surface materials*

Sponsored

 

[dtech]

they've come a long way from the 360 back in 68. CR clocked it at 37.5 secs to get to 50mph. I'm confident though the Ranger could outperform the 360 in the snow. For me interest in Subaru ended when they no longer carried the spare tire in the engine compartment.

"The magazine derided the car for its perceived sub-par safety—again, remember that the car was light enough to avoid federalization—the 37.5 seconds it took to accelerate to 50 mph, and its dodgy handling"

 

[Dgc333]

Depending on the Ranger, the Outback actually has more. Ranger starts a 8.4 inches. Outback is at 8.7.

The difference is that the 8.4 of the Ranger is at one relatively small point on the rear differential. The clearance is about 15" or more long the bottom of the truck between the axles. The Subaru the difference between the lowest point and the bottom of the vehicle is much less. So when you start getting into deep snow the Ranger will have a very distinct advantage.

It is because of the overall lack of ground clearance that in my 30 years of driving on the beach Subarus are the most commonly stuck vehicle, the get hung up on the floor.

 

[D Fresh]

For me interest in Subaru ended when they no longer carried the spare tire in the engine compartment.

I still dig 'em.


But I learned to drive in an '86 GL wagon, and '49 Ford F-1.

I'm partial to the spare in the engine compartment too.

 

[Motorpsychology]

I had a 2018 Escape AWD (the sticker on the hatch lid said "4WD" but it wasn't). It had graphic in the driver information display showing which wheels were getting power. Starting from a dead stop, the rear wheels got 100% power on all surfaces except glare ice until about 15mph, then it would gradually hand off power to the front, and at a steady speed, was about 80/20 front.
I've been very pleased with the 4wd in the Ranger, except the tires. The Hankooks are a joke in snow. I think they were chosen for EPA milage over anything else.

The most amazing car I had for winter driving was my 1999 Cougar. Straight FWD with all season tires, but rock solid on snow and black ice.

 

[Cabose-1]

Well dsiler all i can say is the ranger, as much as i like it, can not do everything. Subaru all wheel drive vehicles do have there olace and so does 4x4. This is like the 9mm or 45 debate. Just goes in circles. In town, in the suburbs, most definitely the awd. What articulation? I dont need it, im in the city! Cornering, acceleration the all wheel drive systems are awesome! Even on dry roads!! Like having 4wd on dry pavement! Awesome. That being said, id never take a Subaru to moab or the beach. They each have strengths and weaknesses. And the op is doing just that, doing his homework before he decides for himself what he wants or needs.

 

[Flowgod]

Jesus people, give Wes a break. I have owned a Subaru and now my Ranger. The Subaru was good but I prefer the Ranger in the snow

 

[D Fresh]

Jesus people, give Wes a break. I have owned a Subaru and now my Ranger. The Subaru was good but I prefer the Ranger in the snow

A person sharing their incorrect opinion as such gets a break.

An ignorant, hack who passes of his incorrect opinions as fact does not.

 

[dtech]

Link to his recent article in outside, I cannot say I bothered to read it, but I would surmise that he decided to come here and enlighten us - however there are some informed educated people on this site as it pertains to technical aspects of things like 4wd and awd systems, expressing an anecdotal opinion as many have on snow traction of Ranger vs Subaru is one thing, passing on inaccurate info on how these systems actually operate is altogether a different matter - and this forum is decidely different from those who get automobile info from outside magazine.

https://www.outsideonline.com/video/traction-control-explained/

 

[Dgc333]

Yep, same with VW 4Motion. Full-time AWD is the gold standard for on-road traction and control.

There are a lot of vehicles that have what is called AWD and they are very different. Most of them are not full time AWD.

The most common configuration is based off a FWD system. Most compact SUVs use this system including my wife's Cherokee and the VW Tiguan. They are FWD with computer controlled switching to 4WD.

In this system there is a power distribution unit attached to the carrier of the differential that will spin a drive shaft going to the rear axle. In most of these the drive shaft is spinning all the time and there is a clutch in between the drive shaft and rear differential that connects the power to the rear wheels. In these systems 100% of the power is routed to the front wheels with zero to the rear wheels when the computer does not sense any traction loss. If the computer does sense loss of traction the clutches in the rear end close and can route up to 50% of the power to the rear wheels. The computer using the brakes can route up to 100% of the power to either front wheel and up to 50% to either rear wheel.

The Subaru system has a center differential that is always sending power to both the front and rear axles. It is biased so more power is going to the rear wheels than the front. Some of their vehicles will have a viscus center differential that will allow all the power to go to the front or back wheels.

Then there are the systems like Audi's quattro system that uses a viscus center differential that allows for up to 100% of the power to go to either axle and can happen without computer intervention.

 

[Wes Siler]

Maybe, instead of being so condescending about 4wd capabilities (which aren't really that hard to understand), you should try to figure out why awd systems are so popular? I mean, I guess it's possible that it's only because all the awd users are too stupid to figure out how to use part time 4wd, but maybe not?

I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

All I'm asking you guys here is to learn how the systems you're advocating for actually work. This isn't a conversation about brand loyalty, and capability isn't something you can divine by reading tea leaves. These are mechanical systems that can be understood, have clearly different applications, and through those things can be used correctly to drive safely.

Facts, not feelings, will make you better, more empowered drivers.

This is obviously a problem that extends beyond this forum, as evidenced by Ryan's poor understanding of that Forester Wilderness in his video. How and why does it perform like he claims? Look for reviewers who can explain that.

Snow is a traction problem like any other. And is overcome in the same ways: tires, driven wheels, and matched wheel speeds.

 

[dtech]

Link to Subaru's AWD systems - there are 4 variants. What has impressed me regards Subaru is that on many vehicles they get good mpgs while having full time awd and relatively high clearance. A part of this though is accomplished thru CVT - which some don't care for.

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1111627_heres-howsubarus-4-all-wheel-drive-systems-work

 

[Bob902]

This has gotten as bad as the thread on removing crash bars.

 

[halligan1201]

There are a lot of vehicles that have what is called AWD and they are very different. Most of them are not full time AWD.

The most common configuration is based off a FWD system. Most compact SUVs use this system including my wife's Cherokee and the VW Tiguan. They are FWD with computer controlled switching to 4WD.

In this system there is a power distribution unit attached to the carrier of the differential that will spin a drive shaft going to the rear axle. In most of these the drive shaft is spinning all the time and there is a clutch in between the drive shaft and rear differential that connects the power to the rear wheels. In these systems 100% of the power is routed to the front wheels with zero to the rear wheels when the computer does not sense any traction loss. If the computer does sense loss of traction the clutches in the rear end close and can route up to 50% of the power to the rear wheels. The computer using the brakes can route up to 100% of the power to either front wheel and up to 50% to either rear wheel.

The Subaru system has a center differential that is always sending power to both the front and rear axles. It is biased so more power is going to the rear wheels than the front. Some of their vehicles will have a viscus center differential that will allow all the power to go to the front or back wheels.

Then there are the systems like Audi's quattro system that uses a viscus center differential that allows for up to 100% of the power to go to either axle and can happen without computer intervention.

It depends on which Audi or VW you're talking about. Some (mostly high-end models) still use a Torsen system and it works as you described at the end; others (increasingly most) use a Haldex system, which is the system you describe at the top. Where the maker specific nuances come into play is how the computers get involved. That's why VW/Audi Haldex seem to work so much better than Kia or Chevy for example; the way the stability and traction control computers deal with perceived slippage.

Even not all Subarus still use the system you described either (their traditional legacy system, which is 50/50 torque split and the ability through the limited slip to send up to 80% power to one axel); the system they use in some of their vehicles with a CVT uses computers to determine where to apply torque (it's at 45/55 split normally and then goes to 50/50 when it detects slip) because it's faster than the mechanical system. These systems are forward biased. The Crosstrek is an example of one such vehicle. And they also have their two-center diff configuration (one limited slip, the other electronic). And then they have several variations of each.

To a point, it's preference and experience based as to which is better. From a stop on an icy driveway, my truck wouldn't make it up on 2WD. Try 4H; traction control nannied it. Turned off traction control. Now just spinning wheels and sliding down the driveway backwards. Put it in 4L, truck walked right up the driveway. VW and and Subaru both managed it flawlessly without hesitation, loss of power or momentum, or having to send it to gain some momentum. Does this mean AWD is better than 4WD? Nope, means that on that particular icy pavement, the VW and Subaru AWD both did a better job than the Ranger in 2WD and 4H. I've had the same experience on streets with the Ranger - because it's a truck. Same 4WD in a heavy SUV probably sees 4H get it done because there's enough weight to keep the tires down and not slipping. And once there's more than 6-7 inches of fresh snow, the Ranger will obviously be the stronger performer.

 

[silverflash]

i am a new pickup truck owner and had a 2017 jeep patriot 4x4 before my 21 fx4. I had the patriot up a gnarly (compacted snow/ice/curvy/uphill switchback going to the top of white top mountain in virgina last winter and it was a blast and i felt totally safe. Only when i hit the deeper snow further up did i decide i needed to turn around. Coming down I never once slipped. We got out of the jeep and walked and we almost slipped ourselves while on foot. So it was icy. I replicated this at other places along blue ridge parkway last winter. The jeep really impressed me. Mid last year, Carvana made me an offer i could not refuse on that jeep and i let it go. I sort of regret it but water under the bridge. I have had the ranger in the recent snows up there and so far it's done great. Though i was just driving on my private road in about 5 inches or so of snow. I have a slight hill on my drive and went up in 2wd but with some slip. 2wd with locker on, less slip. 4wd hi no slip.

The jeep was the perfect vehicle for me BUT it had some flaws namely longterm reliability and i had experienced the rear dome light leak many times and dealer did finally fix- maybe- but it had some other issues, though minor, that the dealer could never resolve so i decided to sell her to reduce my vehicle maintenace burden. Having 3 vehicles that need maintenance was just too time consuming for me. Also, always having a car parked outside just goes against my grain. 2 car are just easier to keep track of and so i have the ranger and my 07 xterra 4x4. I had the xterra in snow before and never had issues. But living in the mountains is new to me and with RWD/4x4, is new territory for me. I think if i just take it slow on the icy parts i should be good and i will use 4x4/snow mode when there seems to be enough stuff on the pavement to allow some slip.

AWD to me seems better on paved roads and very light snow/ice conditions. The jeep could be locked 50/50 from inside and if a wheel on either axle slipped, power would be sent to the opposing wheel on same axle.

If jeep just had a little better quality, i think i would have def kept it.

Sponsored