Isnt the evos systemmuh more simpler design? It can transfer 50/50 or 100/50 with a front biased? No left or right wheel dependency?

 

Which is exactly why I said that exact same thing. But wanted to give the OP at least an idea from someone who has owned both for a steady amount of time. Especially since the OP didn't specify the year/model of car. I can promise the X's AWD out performs the previous generation STi as well.

I even went on to say again that technology has changed so much that it really depends on what he's comparing. The 2010 X I drove honestly/definitely felt better in the dry (didn't own one, but test drove one, so no sample in the snow or wet) than the STi and had a similar feel to the GTI as many reviews have stated time and time again. Point -> shoot. The car does exactly what you want.

 

Good video regarding this subject.

 

I personally have an 05 and think it handles great, very direct. So considerin the sti handles better and has a better awd they must be really fun to drive. Never driven one.

 

You clearly read the wrong post.

 

All I was getting at is which AWD system is better and its pretty obvious the STInwins there. I was mainly asking for handling comparison, and for snow and wet situations.

 

The post is sort of informative in an opinion sort of way... but it still isn't correct.

Regarding Audi's Quattro. I've driven it heavily in the snow on a 2003.5 A4. I thought it was atrocious. In any mode.

I also witnessed my dad get that car high centered, and with 1 wheel on the ground or 2 wheels on the ground it was incapable of pulling itself out. It was hilarious.

I don't disagree what Audi's Quattro tech has done historically, or that it might be good in a performance capacity on another vehicle, but on that car... it was like a bunch of hoon hating lawyers living in my transmission.

 

Simple is a relative term. You also can't have a 100/50, because that would be 150%.

The Evo was actually the first AWD system developed that was able to shift it's power left and right to aid in vectoring. Note... that is different than how Subaru's system does that.

 

I mant 100/0...so the evo is capable of shifting left and right? Or is that the non usdm models? How much do we really suffer from not having ayc

 

Haha... I know what you meant. I'm messing.

AYC is only available on non USDM models.

As for AYC, don't think of it as shifting left and right, because that's not really it. For example, if you had no traction on the entire right side of your car, but had traction on the left, with or without AYC isn't going to change anything.

The AYC is designed to help the car rotate. It helps it yaw around a corner better by applying power to the rear wheels in a left right fashion.

Whether we're better off or not is up for debate. Many non USDM Evo's disable their AYC because it appears to be finicky, or fragile (though it's worth noting I could never confirm or deny any of those things).

If you're looking for improvements that can be made to your Evo's AWD system, I suggest doing some research on restacking your rear diff plates, and re-flashing your ACD controller. Doing those two things will have you well ahead of any car with AYC in my opinion.

 

I just want to know I can hang with STI's in rain/snow...alota cocky sti's around my way.

 

Before arguing about whether the Evo or the STI has the better AWD system I think we need to stop and think about the why of an AWD system in a performance car.

If the Evo had only FWD, due to weight transfer, every time we punched WOT the front wheels would spin. This causes two problems: 1. pretty soon you have bald tires on the front and nearly new tires on the rear and 2. you can't steer when the wheels are spinning.

So, lets say we make the Evo RWD. Well, now on low traction surfaces the rear of the car get very active due to wheel spin. Many of the old rally cars were RWD and it is fun watching them on You Tube. For the driver they were a hand full.

By splitting the power between the front and the rear, most of the spinning tire problem is solved. Yeah, you can spin all four but this takes more power meaning more power on average gets put to the road.

Talking about whether the car can move with only one tire having traction is for the most part goofy. Situations don't happen like this at highway speed.

 

 

Its obvious the evo is superior on tarmac. But how inferior is it, in stock trim, in wet/snow conditions.

 

The quattro system is a joke, and Audi has multiple AWD systems.
Its largest downfall is the front wheels must slip to transfer power to the rear, there will always be a delay in power delivery, its designed around fuel economy. Which is why you can FWD dyno these vehicles by unplugging the ECU.

you mean you can't have more then 100%

Now for the record I'm pretty sure Honda/Acura held one of the first patents for 'ACTUAL' torque vectoring AWD, technology taken from the 'super handling' SH versions of their FWD preludes...

Acura's SHawd is one of the bests awd systems period, and I just don't say that because I work for Honda, its because its true. Its capability is insane, and if you have ever truly tested AWD systems in the split mu and low mu situations where they are needed and actually know what you're doing, then you already know why.

Its one of the few systems that can actually transfer the power effectively to climb a 30% grade where two wheels are on high mu concrete and two wheels are on low mu ice. Now I haven't tested a crap load of vehicles, but the MDX and X5/X6 where the only vehicles we had that could actually do it, where the MDX did it with easy, the x5 struggled but still climbed the hill eventually. (now some vehicles could do it on a 20% grade, but others could only do it on 10%)