Transmission Opertion

[bbf2530]

Sorry, just couldn't leave the untruths lay.

 

Hi everyone, well no one can say that I did not try (see post #24).

 

So first, I encourage anyone who is not sure which individuals information is correct to do their own research. Please ignore both me and wwest and get your information from expert automotive resources. No one can argue with that advice (well not if they are sane, anyway)

 

Next: Wow Willard, do your "arguments" actually work with some people? The answers to your replies are so simple it is laughable. But what it all boils down to is this: No corroboration or expert sources for your off the wall beliefs makes your automotive opinions concerning RWD, FWD AWD and 4WD, ABS (the FBI, CIA, etc etc) complete non-starters. Save the "No links are required when providing perfectly logical information to those with minds open enough to listen" B.S for the rest of the "Prohibition Times"/Government Conspiracy crowd.

 

Ironically, I always tell people not to take my word (or the word of any Internet stranger), and to perform their own research, especially to verify any Internet Forum type of information. You on the other hand say that links and corroboration are not necessary, we should simply believe you. Uhh...no that is not the way the world works. At least not for intelligent individuals. However, it is a very telling indictment of your incorrect information and motives.

 

Yes, we see your type all the time and it was obvious that you would eventually get around to continuing this BS, even though I did not debate you and attempted to politely disengage in my previous reply. I did have in the back of my mind that it would probably drive you nuts if I did not reengage in your argument fest. Boy, was that ever true.

 

It is actually laughable that you are not the type to let people read the information, research and judge for themselves. You are the "Internet Argument Warrior" type. You will try to beat people to death with your opinion.

 

If anyone is interested, they can simply Google "wwest" (as I did) to get a taste of how you have been essentially excommunicated from other Forums.

 

Let's give anyone interested just a small taste of how well your opinions go over in the automotive forums world: As one individual remarked (and I quote), "1st - I've put you on my ignore list, don't waste your time responding to me. I won't engage you.

2nd - You clearly do not understand the engineering and technical aspects of these things. Your apparent recommendation to use gear oil in the FEH transaxle would void a warranty - just read the manuals on the FEH, its the wrong lubricant.

3rd - When you put out baloney I will call you on it and the more you do it the more clearly I will ID the wrong stuff in your posts as baloney. Go pass on your bum info to the Prius crowd.

 

And a second individuals opinion of your unique automotive philosophies which seem to be shared by no recognized experts in the automotive field. Again, I quote, "Willard, Now that I am aware of the option, I have added you (you are the only one) to my ignore list. Should you see a posting by me and be tempted to respond, please know that I will not see it - so you can save your time. Consider staying with the Prius forum, as it appears you are persona non grata in the Escape/Mariner forum."

 

So, as can be discovered by a quick Google of your screen name, you are already an unwelcome presence on several automotive forums. Fine work.

 

You provide junk answers, twisted stats and junk science (like your ABS argument). They are the types of stats that only work for the lowest common denominator.

 

Life is too short to waste debating Internet Warriors such as yourself. Amazingly enough, this type of behavior is usually demonstrated by those with much less life experience than a 68 years old (such as yourself). Perhaps the spare time of retirement was not a good idea for you. Too much time to waste attempting to win Internet arguments and aggravate strangers.

 

So instead of debating you and wasting time that I can not get back, we will leave it up to everyone else here to check out the information provided and your Internet references. Then everyone can decide for themselves who is providing the correct, verifiable information. Information that is backed by the opinions of any expert automotive source.

 

I have been helping people here and on the other Blue Oval Forums for some time now. So my reputation for providing accurate information is a known commodity. You on the other hand, besides having quite a questionable reputation elsewhere, have already caused aggravation on some of the other Blue Oval Forums. You have even been previously admonished by other respected Blue Oval forum members (e.g. your ridiculous "SCAM" posts). Quite an early track record.

 

As I stated in an earlier reply, "Let's just drop it. It's a double dead end (I know one when I see it and hope you do too)." While I was intelligent enough to see the writing on the wall, you are not.

 

I will not debate well known automotive facts and information with a Professional Internet Arguer with too much time on his hands. Maybe a part time job would be a good idea, instead of retirement? Volunteer work even? Something to get you off the Internet.

 

I still see the dead end concerning your type and others will too. You will get few things right once in a while, but you will also provide some very incorrect, misleading and even dangerous information to the gullible and innocently uninformed.

 

So again, I encourage anyone who is not sure which individuals information is correct to do their own research. Please ignore both me and wwest, and get your information from expert automotive resources.

 

Good luck, Willard.

Edited June 25, 2009 by bbf2530

[wwest]

Yet another "If you don't like the message, then by all means KILL the messenger..!!"

 

Or as the politicians do...

 

If you can't argue, refute, the facts, then denigrate the person.

 

 

 

 

 

Hi everyone, well no one can say that I did not try (see post #24).

 

So first, I encourage anyone who is not sure which individuals information is correct to do their own research. Please ignore both me and wwest and get your information from expert automotive resources. No one can argue with that advice (well not if they are sane, anyway)

 

Next: Wow Willard, do your "arguments" actually work with some people? The answers to your replies are so simple it is laughable. But what it all boils down to is this: No corroboration or expert sources for your off the wall beliefs makes your automotive opinions concerning RWD, FWD AWD and 4WD, ABS (the FBI, CIA, etc etc) complete non-starters. Save the "No links are required when providing perfectly logical information to those with minds open enough to listen" B.S for the rest of the "Prohibition Times"/Government Conspiracy crowd.

 

Ironically, I always tell people not to take my word (or the word of any Internet stranger), and to perform their own research, especially to verify any Internet Forum type of information. You on the other hand say that links and corroboration are not necessary, just believe you. A very telling indictment of your incorrect information and motives.

 

Yes, we see your type all the time and it was obvious that you would eventually get around to continuing this BS, even though I did not debate you and attempted to politely disengage in my previous reply. I did have in the back of my mind that it would probably drive you nuts if I did not reengage in your argument fest. Boy, was that ever true.

 

It is actually laughable that you are not the type to let people read the information, research and judge for themselves. You are the "Internet Argument Warrior" type. You will try to beat people to death with your opinion.

 

If anyone is interested, they can simply Google "wwest" (as I did) to get a taste of how you have been essentially excommunicated from other Forums.

 

Let's give anyone interested just a small taste of how well your opinions go over in the automotive forums world: As one individual remarked (and I quote), "1st - I've put you on my ignore list, don't waste your time responding to me. I won't engage you.

2nd - You clearly do not understand the engineering and technical aspects of these things. Your apparent recommendation to use gear oil in the FEH transaxle would void a warranty - just read the manuals on the FEH, its the wrong lubricant.

3rd - When you put out baloney I will call you on it and the more you do it the more clearly I will ID the wrong stuff in your posts as baloney. Go pass on your bum info to the Prius crowd.

 

And a second individuals opinion of your unique automotive philosophies which seem to be shared by no recognized experts in the automotive field. Again, I quote, "Willard, Now that I am aware of the option, I have added you (you are the only one) to my ignore list. Should you see a posting by me and be tempted to respond, please know that I will not see it - so you can save your time. Consider staying with the Prius forum, as it appears you are persona non grata in the Escape/Mariner forum."

 

So, as can be discovered by a quick Google of your screen name, you are already an unwelcome presence on several automotive forums. Fine work.

 

You provide junk answers, twisted stats and junk science (like your ABS argument). They are the types of stats that only work for the lowest common denominator.

 

Life is too short to waste debating Internet Warriors such as yourself. Amazingly enough, this type of behavior is usually demonstrated by those with much less life experience than a 68 years old (such as yourself). Perhaps the spare time of retirement was not a good idea for you. Too much time to waste attempting to win Internet arguments and aggravate strangers.

 

So instead of debating you and wasting time that I can not get back, we will leave it up to everyone else here to check out the information provided and your Internet references. Then everyone can decide for themselves who is providing the correct, verifiable information. Information that is backed by the opinions of any expert automotive source.

 

I have been helping people here and on the other Blue Oval Forums for some time now. So my reputation for providing accurate information is a known commodity. You on the other hand, besides having quite a questionable reputation elsewhere, have already caused aggravation on some of the other Blue Oval Forums. You have even been previously admonished by other respected Blue Oval forum members (e.g. your ridiculous "SCAM" posts). Quite an early track record.

 

As I stated in an earlier reply, "Let's just drop it. It's a double dead end (I know one when I see it and hope you do too)." While I was intelligent enough to see the writing on the wall, you are not.

 

I will not debate well known automotive facts and information with a Professional Internet Arguer with too much time on his hands. Maybe a part time job would be a good idea, instead of retirement? Volunteer work even? Something to get you off the Internet.

 

I still see the dead end concerning your type and others will too. You will get few things right once in a while, but you will also provide some very incorrect, misleading and even dangerous information to the gullible and innocently uninformed.

 

So again, I encourage anyone who is not sure which individuals information is correct to do their own research. Please ignore both me and wwest, and get your information from expert automotive resources.

 

Good luck, Willard.

[bbf2530]

Yet another "If you don't like the message, then by all means KILL the messenger..!!"

 

Or as the politicians do...

 

If you can't argue, refute, the facts, then denigrate the person.

 

Hello again, Willard. I ask people to ignore both of us and do the research for themselves. That bothers you because you need a pulpit to spew forth your agenda. You want to play an endless game of "I'm right...you are wrong" because you enjoy it. For some odd reason you long for an argument with no resolution. I will no longer engage in that childishness with you. And your above reply makes it obvious that being ignored takes away that feeling of power you tend to enjoy, when you argue with strangers over the Internet.

 

You claim that FWD and AWD vehicles (along with ABS and a host of other goodies) are unsafe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g. everyday driving). Your claims attempt to contradict the accepted facts of any respected expert automotive source. When asked to provide some sort of link to corroborating evidence, you simply state that your opinion should be obvious to anyone (except the automotive experts I guess). Well, that means you are presenting yourself as an expert on the subject. And since you are doing so your references, background and motives are up for discussion and inspection. And they do not stand up well. This was your decision.

 

While it is a shame that you are in the same predicament on several other forums, it is your doing, not mine. So take the blame like a man and learn from your mistakes.

 

I on the other hand do not claim to be an expert, only to be relaying expert information. My stance is simple. FWD and AWD cars are perfectly safe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g everyday driving). This is information that is widely accepted as fact by the automotive world, and is readily available to anyone who cares to briefly research it (or has a shred of common sense). In addition, I clearly state to everyone that they should do the research and not to take my (or your) word for it. On the other hand, you clearly state that everyone should take your word for it with no proof, because if they don't they do not have "...minds open enough to listen" (your words). In reality, it looks as though you are the politician. Quite ironic.

 

And what makes it even more ironic is the fact that your own personal vehicles are FWD and AWD. The very vehicles that are too dangerous for the rest of us mere mortals to drive on the road. In other words, you attempt to employ the classic politicians ploy: "Do as I say, not as I do." Again, the facts show that you are the political here.

 

And be careful, your "Government Conspiracy" colors are beginning to shine through even more now.

 

All you need to do is provide links to any professional automotive experts who back your automotive "theories". Something other than writers from the "Prohibition Times" and other types of Conspiracy/Religious fanatics. But you can't, because your "facts" are "refuted" by any respected automotive expert.

 

You now have incorrect information being refuted in several threads in the Edge Forums (and the Blue Oval Forums), by several respected forum members (with just 20 posts to your credit, quite an accomplishment). You have advised people to rewire their powertrains, rewire their A/C systems etc etc, ad nauseum. Your advice is junk, will cost people unnecessary damage and repair costs if they should follow it, and in some cases is even dangerous.

 

Provide corroborating evidence, or let others do the research for themselves and decide what is correct. The truth concerning the safety of FWD, AWD, RWD and 4WD is easy to find for anyone who wishes to. There is no "Government Conspiracy" to hide the truth.

 

In closing I would simply add: Willard, you may be a great guy in person and in everyday life. And I am not stating that you are a bad person. That I can not judge over the Internet. I am saying that you give incorrect information, with no corroboration, which flies against all accepted expert automotive knowledge. And people need to know that following some of your advice could be costly, or even dangerous for some people.

 

Instead of "Show me the money" we ask you to "Show us the corroboration". Recognized automotive experts of course, not "Prohibition Times" type of "conspiracy theory" drivel. And the question is asked in a rhetorical manner of course, since there are no recognized automotive experts who agree with you that FWD/AWD vehicles are unsafe for their intended use of everyday driving.

 

Unfortunately, I feel that you will not end this yet, so be aware that my future replies will be similar to this one. And highly likely simply copied and pasted from this reply, so as not to waste any more time than minimally necessary on this dead end.

Edited June 25, 2009 by bbf2530

[akirby]

Just ignore wwest. He's not worth the effort.

[wwest]

Hello again, Willard. I ask people to ignore both of us and do the research for themselves. That bothers you because you need a pulpit to spew forth your agenda. You want to play an endless game of "I'm right...you are wrong" because you enjoy it. For some odd reason you long for an argument with no resolution. I will no longer engage in that childishness with you. And your above reply makes it obvious that being ignored takes away that feeling of power you tend to enjoy, when you argue with strangers over the Internet.

 

You claim that FWD and AWD vehicles (along with ABS and a host of other goodies) are unsafe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g. everyday driving). Your claims attempt to contradict the accepted facts of any respected expert automotive source. When asked to provide some sort of link to corroborating evidence, you simply state that your opinion should be obvious to anyone (except the automotive experts I guess). Well, that means you are presenting yourself as an expert on the subject. And since you are doing so your references, background and motives are up for discussion and inspection. And they do not stand up well. This was your decision.

 

While it is a shame that you are in the same predicament on several other forums, it is your doing, not mine. So take the blame like a man and learn from your mistakes.

 

I on the other hand do not claim to be an expert, only to be relaying expert information.

 

 

In your own words..."would you mind providing links to the "pertinent" expert information.

 

My stance is simple. FWD and AWD cars are perfectly safe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g everyday driving).

 

"..perfectly safe.." "..e.g. everyday driving.."

 

There you go again taking things to the EXTREME.

 

I have NEVER said FWD vehicles, or F/awd vehicles even, are unsafe for "everyday driving".

 

It could even be said that's why my daily driver is a F/awd RX300 and a portion of why I own (but do not drive) a Prius. I know the vehicle is UNSAFE and when so I act accordingly.

 

What I have said is that FWD and F/awd vehicles are patently UNSAFE in certain specific situations, adverse wintertime roadbed conditions, or slippery, low traction, roadbed conditions.

 

This is information that is widely accepted as fact by the automotive world,

 

Yes, "this" is widely accepted.

 

And it was once accepted as fact, spewed widely by salespersons, that ABS activation resulted in shorter and/or quicker stops. It was even said, and accepted as fact, that the very purpose of ABS was to provide shorter/quicker stopping.

 

It was also once accepted as fact that the sun circled the earth..

 

and is readily available to anyone who cares to briefly research it (or has a shred of common sense). In addition, I clearly state to everyone that they should do the research and not to take my (or your) word for it. On the other hand, you clearly state that everyone should take your word for it with no proof, because if they don't they do not have "...minds open enough to listen" (your words). In reality, it looks as though you are the politician. Quite ironic.

 

And what makes it even more ironic is the fact that your own personal vehicles are FWD and AWD. The very vehicles that are too dangerous for the rest of us mere mortals to drive on the road. In other words, you attempt to employ the classic politicians ploy: "Do as I say, not as I do." Again, the facts show that you are the political here.

 

And be careful, your "Government Conspiracy" colors are beginning to shine through even more now.

 

All you need to do is provide links to any professional automotive experts who back your automotive "theories". Something other than writers from the "Prohibition Times" and other types of Conspiracy/Religious fanatics. But you can't, because your "facts" are "refuted" by any respected automotive expert.

 

You now have incorrect information being refuted in several threads in the Edge Forums (and the Blue Oval Forums), by several respected forum members (with just 20 posts to your credit, quite an accomplishment). You have advised people to rewire their powertrains, rewire their A/C systems etc etc, ad nauseum. Your advice is junk, will cost people unnecessary damage and repair costs if they should follow it, and in some cases is even dangerous.

 

Provide corroborating evidence, or let others do the research for themselves and decide what is correct. The truth concerning the safety of FWD, AWD, RWD and 4WD is easy to find for anyone who wishes to. There is no "Government Conspiracy" to hide the truth.

 

In closing I would simply add: Willard, you may be a great guy in person and in everyday life. And I am not stating that you are a bad person. That I can not judge over the Internet. I am saying that you give incorrect information, with no corroboration, which flies against all accepted expert automotive knowledge. And people need to know that following some of your advice could be costly, or even dangerous for some people.

 

Instead of "Show me the money" we ask you to "Show us the corroboration". Recognized automotive experts of course, not "Prohibition Times" type of "conspiracy theory" drivel. And the question is asked in a rhetorical manner of course, since there are no recognized automotive experts who agree with you that FWD/AWD vehicles are unsafe for their intended use of everyday driving.

 

Unfortunately, I feel that you will not end this yet, so be aware that my future replies will be similar to this one. And highly likely simply copied and pasted from this reply, so as not to waste any more time than minimally necessary on this dead end.

 

So, now, how about the rest of us wait for YOU to provide links to the specific conditions of concern relating to the safety of FWD vs RWD. Statistics, documents, EXPERT information of any type or source.

[bbf2530]

So, now, how about the rest of us wait for YOU to provide links to the specific conditions of concern relating to the safety of FWD vs RWD. Statistics, documents, EXPERT information of any type or source.

 

Hi Willard. You obviously do not have any scientific nor legal training Willard. If you did, you would realize that the burden of proof is on you. Your spurious arguments may work with the rest of the early-birds at Denny's, but not with us. You are the one claiming that "right is wrong", "black is white' and "safe is unsafe". Since you again claim all that is known by automotive experts and accepted as automotive fact is incorrect, the burden of proof is on you to provide corroboration. I do not need to prove that our cars are safe. We drive them safely everyday. You need to prove they are unsafe.

 

To loosely use your analogy, I do not need to prove the Earth orbits the Sun (or that our vehicles are safe), since the experts (and the rest of us) already know that. You are spouting the new, unproven and backwards theory that the Sun orbits the Earth (since according to you, our vehicles are unsafe). So you need to prove your unproven theory. So to paraphrase you, "The rest of us are waiting".

 

And just to show you how foolish you are beginning to sound: Since when is everyday driving an "extreme"? Everyday driving is the complete opposite of extreme. I guess anything that proves you incorrect is an extreme. Do not try and backtrack now. As I told you earlier, skip the word parsing. You are out of your league.

 

And laughably (and briefly), all that you claim concerning ABS is also wrong. It is still an accepted fact that ABS is safer then non ABS equipped cars by anyone who does not hide in their basement with a tinfoil hat on so that the Government can not read their mind. Your cherry picked stat about "single vehicle run off the road accidents" is easily dispelled (and has been widely discredited as a anti-ABS argument). Actually, I am sure you already knew that, but Conspiracy Theorists always pretend that the facts do not matter, since they do not fit their anti government paranoia.

 

Ironically, the only thing you got right is that the sun does not orbit the earth (since you like to word parse, planetary and universal bodies orbit, they do not "circle"). As I said earlier, you'll get one right once in a while and I guess that was your one. You are making a bigger and bigger fool of yourself.

 

Other than that, as promised I will simply copy and paste my previous reply until you provide corroboration for your universally incorrect "opinions". So here it is again Willard (all bold and underlined):

 

Hello again, Willard. I ask people to ignore both of us and do the research for themselves. That bothers you because you need a pulpit to spew forth your agenda. You want to play an endless game of "I'm right...you are wrong" because you enjoy it. For some odd reason you long for an argument with no resolution. I will no longer engage in that childishness with you. And your above reply makes it obvious that being ignored takes away that feeling of power you tend to enjoy, when you argue with strangers over the Internet.

 

You claim that FWD and AWD vehicles (along with ABS and a host of other goodies) are unsafe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g. everyday driving). Your claims attempt to contradict the accepted facts of any respected expert automotive source. When asked to provide some sort of link to corroborating evidence, you simply state that your opinion should be obvious to anyone (except the automotive experts I guess). Well, that means you are presenting yourself as an expert on the subject. And since you are doing so your references, background and motives are up for discussion and inspection. And they do not stand up well. This was your decision.

 

While it is a shame that you are in the same predicament on several other forums, it is your doing, not mine. So take the blame like a man and learn from your mistakes.

 

I on the other hand do not claim to be an expert, only to be relaying expert information. My stance is simple. FWD and AWD cars are perfectly safe for their engineered, designed, manufactured and intended purpose (e.g everyday driving). This is information that is widely accepted as fact by the automotive world, and is readily available to anyone who cares to briefly research it (or has a shred of common sense). In addition, I clearly state to everyone that they should do the research and not to take my (or your) word for it. On the other hand, you clearly state that everyone should take your word for it with no proof, because if they don't they do not have "...minds open enough to listen" (your words). In reality, it looks as though you are the politician. Quite ironic.

 

And what makes it even more ironic is the fact that your own personal vehicles are FWD and AWD. The very vehicles that are too dangerous for the rest of us mere mortals to drive on the road. In other words, you attempt to employ the classic politicians ploy: "Do as I say, not as I do." Again, the facts show that you are the political here.

 

And be careful, your "Government Conspiracy" colors are beginning to shine through even more now.

 

All you need to do is provide links to any professional automotive experts who back your automotive "theories". Something other than writers from the "Prohibition Times" and other types of Conspiracy/Religious fanatics. But you can't, because your "facts" are "refuted" by any respected automotive expert.

 

You now have incorrect information being refuted in several threads in the Edge Forums (and the Blue Oval Forums), by several respected forum members (with just 20 posts to your credit, quite an accomplishment). You have advised people to rewire their powertrains, rewire their A/C systems etc etc, ad nauseum. Your advice is junk, will cost people unnecessary damage and repair costs if they should follow it, and in some cases is even dangerous.

 

Provide corroborating evidence, or let others do the research for themselves and decide what is correct. The truth concerning the safety of FWD, AWD, RWD and 4WD is easy to find for anyone who wishes to. There is no "Government Conspiracy" to hide the truth.

 

In closing I would simply add: Willard, you may be a great guy in person and in everyday life. And I am not stating that you are a bad person. That I can not judge over the Internet. I am saying that you give incorrect information, with no corroboration, which flies against all accepted expert automotive knowledge. And people need to know that following some of your advice could be costly, or even dangerous for some people.

 

Instead of "Show me the money" we ask you to "Show us the corroboration". Recognized automotive experts of course, not "Prohibition Times" type of "conspiracy theory" drivel. And the question is asked in a rhetorical manner of course, since there are no recognized automotive experts who agree with you that FWD/AWD vehicles are unsafe for their intended use of everyday driving.

 

Unfortunately, I feel that you will not end this yet, so be aware that my future replies will be similar to this one. And highly likely simply copied and pasted from this reply, so as not to waste any more time than minimally necessary on this dead end.

 

PS - If any fellow Edge Forum member has any questions concerning the "ABS conspiracy" or anything else, I would be happy to answer you personally. Simply send me a PM and I will respond back. No sense in keeping this thread going any longer than necessary. Time for the curtain to drop and the little spotlight to be extinguished. Also, while I do not want to volunteer anyone else, there are other very knowledgeable forum members who I am sure would be willing to help. Just not in this thread.

 

PPS - And thank you akirby. You are 100% correct. But actually his inane replies are now helping to expose him completely. Now even the most trusting and non-car savvy forum member will be able to see through his foolishness. At least they will now know enough to ignore him. But thanks for the heads up. I appreciate it.

Edited June 26, 2009 by bbf2530

[wwest]

"...burden of proof.." is on me...

 

No, I have NOTHING to prove, you either have an open or logical mind or you don't.

 

All I expect to accomplish is to alert "those" to the dangers and therefore prevent a few accidents.

 

I did search once again for "on-point" documentation and not surprisingly, found NONE.

 

"On-point" being FWD vs RWD safety in adverse roadbed conditions.

 

If I remember correctly the ABS vs non-ABS statistical information I quoted was provided by the National Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

 

And I will make you a bet that within just a few years ABS will be modified such that it does NOT activate unless VSC first indicates the need. At that point there will be no question of the positive safety factor of ABS.

[bbf2530]

And I will make you a bet that within just a few years ABS will be modified such that it does NOT activate unless VSC first indicates the need. At that point there will be no question of the positive safety factor of ABS.

 

Hello again Willard. Well then, I tell you what: To save a lot of needless debate over easily researched information, I'll make a deal with you. Over the next few years we will both keep an eye out to see if the ABS standards are changed. Maybe all the other forum members will join us in our task?

 

If and when they are changed, one of us will have won the "bet" you spoke of and then we will know the "truth".

 

An "open and logically minded" solution to a dead end situation.

 

Good luck.

Edited June 27, 2009 by bbf2530

[akirby]

"...burden of proof.." is on me...

 

No, I have NOTHING to prove, you either have an open or logical mind or you don't.

 

All I expect to accomplish is to alert "those" to the dangers and therefore prevent a few accidents.

 

I did search once again for "on-point" documentation and not surprisingly, found NONE.

 

"On-point" being FWD vs RWD safety in adverse roadbed conditions.

 

If I remember correctly the ABS vs non-ABS statistical information I quoted was provided by the National Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

 

And I will make you a bet that within just a few years ABS will be modified such that it does NOT activate unless VSC first indicates the need. At that point there will be no question of the positive safety factor of ABS.

 

RWD tends to oversteer in slippery conditions. Recovering from oversteer requires opposite steering input and sometimes throttle modulation. Lifting off the throttle in RWD can make oversteer worse (ask 911 owners).

 

FWD tends to understeer. Recovering from understeer only requires lifting off the throttle and/or applying the brakes. Lifting off the throttle helps reduce understeer.

 

Which is why engineers always try to tune the suspension for mild understeer in normal vehicle - anybody can lift off the gas or touch the brakes but most people can't recover from the back end stepping out.

 

Stability control can avoid both situations by braking one or more wheels individually to correct the understeer or oversteer situation. This can't be duplicated by a human since the brake pedal cannot brake only one wheel at a time.

 

AWD (whether it's FWD based or RWD based) simply increases traction opportunities by sending torque to all 4 wheels (potentially).

 

There is absolutely nothing inherently dangerous about FWD/AWD vehicles in adverse roadbed condtions. Any problems that would affect a FWD/AWD vehicle would affect a RWD vehicle the same or worse.

 

Your theories are sheer uneducated speculation with no basis in real world experiences or physics.

 

I apologize for breaking my own suggestion to ignore him, but I needed to get this off my chest one time.

[wwest]

RWD tends to oversteer in slippery conditions. Recovering from oversteer requires opposite steering input and sometimes throttle modulation.

 

Lifting off the throttle in RWD can make oversteer worse.

 

No, if you do your research you will undoubtedly find that you have this wrong. RWD overstearing/skidding, is most often caused by the use of too much engine torque for roadway conditions. Take note that when those rear wheels begin to come around they remain POINTED in the direction the rear of the car needs to move in order to bring the rear back into "line". Lift the throttle to restore a bit of traction to those rear wheels and the problem literally solves itself. So what if a bit of engine compression braking results..??

 

Isn't that what tractor trailer rigs are taught to do if the trailer is tending to jack-knife, throw out an "anchor" (tire chains on the rearmost trailer wheels.) "too" the rear..??

 

(ask 911 owners).

 

Here we go again....!!

 

EXTREMISM...!!

 

Back in the 50's when I was in the USAF in NH the VW bug, rear engine RWD, was THE vehicle of choice in the NH winters.

 

As it happens I own 3 911's, a '78 Targa, an '88 Carrera Special Edition, (gave the 79 Targa {friend}and the '99 C2 {charity} away) and an '01 911/996 C4. So yes, the rear engine weight bias is a big help in low traction conditions but a real nightmare if you let it get away from you.

 

FWD tends to understeer.

 

Recovering from understeer only requires lifting off the throttle and/or applying the brakes.

 

You really should start to take the advice of YOUR OWN "EXPERTS".

 

When a FWD is understearing/plowing lifting the throttle will often result in enough engine compression braking on those front wheels to exacerbate the situation. "..applying the brakes.." The front wheels ALWAYS do 70-80% of the actual braking so there again you are giving BAD advice.

 

Suppose you have a clutch at hand, wouldn't that be the FIRST corrective measure to use...?? So second to that might be quickly shifting into neutral. Third would be to "lessen" the turn angle of the front wheels. And it wouldn't hurt at all if you apply the rear implemented e-brake slightly.

 

And by-the-by, almost all of the newer vehicles with electric power stearing and stability control will actively RESIST turning the stearing wheel in a direction that would worsen the situation. You will only get full power assist in a direction to lessen the plowing/understearing.

 

On of the german brands, BMW or MB, now have the ability to counter-stear against the driver input in this circumstance.

 

 

 

Lifting off the throttle helps reduce understeer.

 

Maybe...

 

But to be sure you should only lift the throttle to reach the "sweet=spot", the point at which the engine is providing neither leading or lagging torque. Basically what the VW technique is about.

 

Which is why engineers always try to tune the suspension for mild understeer in normal vehicle - anybody can lift off the gas or touch the brakes but most people can't recover from the back end stepping out.

 

Stability control can avoid both situations by braking one or more wheels individually to correct the understeer or oversteer situation. This can't be duplicated by a human since the brake pedal cannot brake only one wheel at a time.

 

AWD (whether it's FWD based or RWD based) simply increases traction opportunities by sending torque to all 4 wheels (potentially).

 

There is absolutely nothing inherently dangerous about FWD/AWD vehicles in adverse roadbed condtions. Any problems that would affect a FWD/AWD vehicle would affect a RWD vehicle the same or worse.

 

Your theories are sheer uneducated speculation with no basis in real world experiences or physics.

 

I apologize for breaking my own suggestion to ignore him, but I needed to get this off my chest one time.

 

And as near as I can tell the engineers have pretty much solved the Porsche "tail-out" problem with the rear suspension geometry of the new water cooled 911 series. Of course having the C4 (R/awd) certainly helps my confidence level tremendously, not to mention PSM.

[akirby]

Your facts are totally incorrect as many of us have tried to point out. I give up. Enjoy your alternative reality.

[wwest]

Your facts are totally incorrect as many of us have tried to point out. I give up. Enjoy your alternative reality.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/safevehicle...brochure_en.pdf

 

Transport Canada: Safe winter driving.

 

http://www.syracuse.com/weather/snow/stories/driving.html

 

National Safety Council.

 

https://www.nysdot.gov/transportation-partn...for%20web_0.pdf

 

New York State DOT

 

 

hhhh

Edited June 27, 2009 by wwest

[bbf2530]

Wow Willard, so now you are quoting Government printed brochures to back your assertions of a great Government FWD/AWD dangerous handling cover-up. Brochures which when read carefully, with an "open and logical mind" (to quote you), do not even back your extreme views. Willard you are joking I hope (not a question, just a statement). Actually either way, it does not matter.

 

You should pick up a copy of the old Styx song, "Too Much Time On My Hands". It is perfect for you.

 

Copied and pasted from my previous reply:

 

Hello again Willard. Well then, I tell you what: To save a lot of needless debate over easily researched information, I'll make a deal with you. Over the next few years we will both keep an eye out to see if the ABS standards are changed. Maybe all the other forum members will join us in our task?

 

If and when they are changed, one of us will have won the "bet" you spoke of and then we will know the "truth".

 

An "open and logically minded" solution to a dead end situation.

 

Good luck.

 

 

And please be sure to let us know in a couple of years how the "Great ABS Conspiracy" is resolved.

 

Fortunately for us, unfortunately for you (Dear God so unfortunately for you), we see the trend that you don't, Willard.

Edited June 27, 2009 by bbf2530

[wwest]

Just as I said previously, there are NO documents available that are "on-point" with regards to FWD vs RWD in adverse roadbed conditions.

 

The Government quotes I linked are in response to your totally erroneous and/or misleading, DANGEROUSLY misleading, information as to how to best recover from overstearing/skidding or understearing/plowing.

 

 

Wow Willard, so now you are quoting Government printed brochures to back your assertions of a great Government FWD/AWD dangerous handling cover-up. Brochures which when read carefully, with an "open and logical mind" (to quote you), do not even back your extreme views. Willard you are joking I hope (not a question, just a statement). Actually either way, it does not matter.

 

You should pick up a copy of the old Styx song, "Too Much Time On My Hands". It is perfect for you.

 

Copied and pasted from my previous reply:

 

Hello again Willard. Well then, I tell you what: To save a lot of needless debate over easily researched information, I'll make a deal with you. Over the next few years we will both keep an eye out to see if the ABS standards are changed. Maybe all the other forum members will join us in our task?

 

If and when they are changed, one of us will have won the "bet" and then we will know the "truth".

 

An "open and logically minded" solution to a dead end situation.

 

Good luck.

 

 

And please be sure to let us know in a couple of years how the "Great ABS Conspiracy" is resolved.

 

Fortunately for us, unfortunately for you (Dear God so unfortunately for you), we see the trend that you don't, Willard.

h

There is no ABS conspiracy, just evolutionary, technologically enabled, design advancements.

 

ABS..rear only

 

ABS...three channel.

 

ABS...four channel

 

Then TC,

 

Next, VSC

 

Then refinements, EBD, BA, F/awd(TC), virtual LSD(TC)

 

Now...VDIM

 

Next...??

 

As in very soon DFI will be implemented across the board.

Edited June 27, 2009 by wwest

[bbf2530]

Uh, Willard. Perhaps you should reread the thread. I have made absolutely no assertions, in any of my replies, concerning "how to best recover from overstearing/skidding or understearing/plowing." That would be another of our forums long standing, helpful and respected members you are railing at. :shades:

 

Oh by the way, I (and surely everyone else) can read the standard font size just fine (in my case, even without glasses). So you might want to tone down the large font size and red coloring. No need to lose your cool, plus the "extreme" fonts and colors make your "opinion" no more convincing than before. Would not want you to have a coronary. While your "opinions" are certainly off the wall and far from the norm, I certainly wish you no ill.

 

So again from my previous post:

 

Hello again Willard. Well then, I tell you what: To save a lot of needless debate over easily researched information, I'll make a deal with you. Over the next few years we will both keep an eye out to see if the ABS standards are changed. Maybe all the other forum members will join us in our task?

 

If and when they are changed, one of us will have won the "bet" you spoke of and then we will know the "truth".

 

An "open and logically minded" solution to a dead end situation.

 

Good luck.

 

In other words, to keep arguing at this point over easily researched facts and information would show that you are not here to help people. It would prove that you are one of those people that simply likes to endlessly argue with strangers on the Internet (and God knows where else). Hopefully, you do not want everyone to think you are another one of those people, because they are "a dime a dozen".

Edited June 27, 2009 by bbf2530

[druck52]

I shouldn't get involved, but I have been reading his replies and can't take all the wrong information anymore. He says fwd or awd are flawed and unsafe. The following is a quote from his link.

 

" In a rear-wheel drive vehicle, you can usually feel a loss of traction or the beginning of a skid. There may be no such warning in a front-wheel drive, however. Front-wheel drives do handle better in ice and snow, but they do not have flawless traction, and skids can occur unexpectedly. Don't let the better feel and handling of a front-wheel drive car cause you to drive faster than you should."

 

Doesn't that contradict what he has been telling us? I wonder what his reply for that will be?

[wwest]

Sorry, my sincerest apologies, looking back, it seems it was akirby who gave us the misleading information.

[wwest]

I shouldn't get involved, but I have been reading his replies and can't take all the wrong information anymore. He says fwd or awd are flawed and unsafe. The following is a quote from his link.

 

" In a rear-wheel drive vehicle, you can usually feel a loss of traction or the beginning of a skid. There may be no such warning in a front-wheel drive, however. Front-wheel drives do handle better in ice and snow, but they do not have flawless traction, and skids can occur unexpectedly. Don't let the better feel and handling of a front-wheel drive car cause you to drive faster than you should."

 

Doesn't that contradict what he has been telling us? I wonder what his reply for that will be?

 

I posted the links to the benefit of those that might have been mislead by akirby's post regarding recovery from under-over-stearing.

 

As we all already know there are arguments and personal positions on both sides of this FWD VS RWD wintertime condition issue.

 

But there should NEVER be an argument about how to SAFELY recover from loss of directional control, FWD or RWD.

 

Just find and read a few of the automatic stability control systems theory of operation for a detailed description of what would be best in these cases. Recognize that many of the exact functions of VSC, AdvanceTrac, are not humanly possible but the functions give you guidance anyway.

[Portagie68]

Just found a new edge in my Garage. Drove it a few times and still trying to figure out this grade assist. No light goes on any where I can find indicating it is on or off. How do I know I have it.

[akirby]

Just found a new edge in my Garage. Drove it a few times and still trying to figure out this grade assist. No light goes on any where I can find indicating it is on or off. How do I know I have it.

 

First you have to find a downhill grade. If you tap the brakes going downhill you should feel a downshift. If you lock out Overdrive by pressing the button on the shifter you should feel it downshift and lock out 4th and 5th gears.

 

Essentially you should not have to hold the brakes going downhill - it should select a lower gear for engine braking to varying degrees based on the shifter position (D, then D with O/D turned off, then L).

 

 

Suffice it so say that Willard is wrong about just about everything, here and on several other forums. He hasn't been here for almost a year. Hopefully he won't come back. If he does I'm sure the moderator will take care of the problem swiftly.

[Portagie68]

Thank you. Fun learning how to drive a new vehicle. Will try it out soon. I just wish they had OD lockout for town without the manual mode. Again thank you.