i guess i'm as old fashioned as one can get (still no cell phone), but i still prefer rear wheel drive with a stick, although my '90 760 wagon has an auto tranny (couldn't find a stick). all i hear from my wrong wheel drive friends is how great fwd is on hills in snow. seems to me if you keep decent radials on your rear wheel drive volvo, you should be fine (i have backed up a hill or two on occasion). nobody listens to me when i tell them that pretty much any rwd volvo with around 100k mi is among the best values in the used car market today. i also think it would be quite competitive with most new cars selling for $2ok or so.

I live in pittsburgh and drive a 244. We have about as steep of hills as anywhere and about as icy of conditions as anywhere. I don't have issues. The mantra that FWD is better in snow is so worn out that it is amazing that it is replayed. The idea came from the days when cars still had up to 70% of their total weight over the front wheels...like my 68 firebird 6.6 liter. today many cars have perfect 50/50 distributions front to rear negating this argument. the second flaw is that automobiles are not static systems...unless you live in WV and keep them on blocks as "lawn ornaments". Any drag racer will tell you that weight transfer is an important part of making a car work right. when one hits the gas the front suspension extends, the rear compresses thereby shifting weight to the rear of the car...where if you are lucky the power is going. what does this spell??? harder and more smooth launches with rwd. not to mention that fwd parts wear out....who hasn't had to replace a cv joint or an axle on a fwd car? rwd parts tend to last much much longer...the mantra is 3x what the average engine will. lastly we come to the handeling aspect. fwd is a curse on turning ability. if you put a big enough tire under the front to launch hard, the wheels will be limited in how far they can turn. next if one finds themself entering a turn too quickly and an a rwd car, one can induce oversteer and drift through the turn...a-la the old scandenavian-flick that rally drivers do. in a similar situation in a fwd car one will be looking directly at the apex of the turn which could be a guard rail or on-coming traffic. this is all without talking about torque steer...you know that feeling in the stearing wheel that feels like the car is possesed and trying to oust the driver from control... I personally have sworn never to own a fwder as they disgust me....as a kid i grew up thinking i hated japanese cars...when really what it was was that i hated fwders....my stepdad has a 350z that is a joy to drive...whereas out passat turbo is nothing but garbage when tossed into a turn. for a wife or daughter i say fwd...it is mindless and safe so long as u don't come anywhere near the car's maximum limits. for me and anyone eles who loves to drive and drive hard....rwd or if if you must awd is the way to go. good tires are a must on any car....do that and your brick will rock in the snow...if one must have a fwder...an 850r is prolly the best bang around...

The argument you're making about weight transfer to the rear tires during acceleration only holds up if you're able to actually get the car going forward in the first place at all, which is not necessarily the case when you're in snow.

What makes you say that the weight distribution is nearly 50/50 on modern day cars? My friend had a '99 Nissan Sentra, FWD and its weight distribution was closer to 70/30 unoccupied. My '90 Volvo 740 is 55/45 unoccupied (I actually checked at a weigh station.)

By no means am I saying that FWD is better than RWD, or even vice versa. I think it really depends on the situation. From a standstill in snow, FWD is better for the simple fact that the weight is all up front of the vehicle during the initial acceleration and it is less likely that you'll be stuck.

Also, it's a safety factor. In FWD, you understeer when you are powering out of a turn too hard. Most drivers can handle correcting understeer; all you do is slow down by releasing the gas. In RWD, if you accelerate too hard while turning, you oversteer, and you have to control by countersteering AND reducing your speed.

For a racing applications, RWD is better, I agree, but we're talking apples and oranges here.
--
Ken
1990 Volvo 740 base sedan (B230F)
My Volvo 'Project'

Only reason fwd is better in snow is because you have more weight on the driving wheels. Put some ballast in the back of your wagon, and you should be fine.
--
- 85' 740GL b230a m47 in Tromsø, Norway

I live in colorado, and have NEVER been stuck with my rear drive 240's and 740. I use 4 dedicated snow tires october thru march, and pass FWD cars up slippery hills. And donuts are more fun in a rear driver.

I have a 740 turbo and my brother has a 850 turbo and the performance is uncompairable his car is so much faster and during the winters her in boston the car with snows on it is unbeleivable, however i have been tuning my car up and now it's performace is getting better and last winter I got studds on my snows and I drove in two of the snow storms that hit here and had no problem getting up any hills or getting around it was a whole different world so rwd drive with studs and snows they are great deffently recomond that I will never drive in the winter with out snows and studds. I love my rwd car and it handles better.

I bet you the 850 is lighter too! The 850 turbo was higher performance than the 740 turbo, no questions asked.
--
Manual tran 16v Wagon... Booyah!

I live in central Mass where plenty snow falls each year (125 inch last winter). We have a 1990 Acura Legend and a 1994 Volvo 944 at home, so I was able to do the comparison.
The Volvo, with four close to brand new Nokian NRW's (they are the Nokian version of all weather tires, but many reviews say they are on par with the best dedicated snow tires provided by other brands). The car simply got stuck almost every time there was some packed snow on the ground. It helped when I put to bags of salt in the trunk. However, when the tail did kick loose, it was harder to gain control with the added weight. It wouldn't climb the slightest hill with packed snow on ground.
Now the Acura, with four cheap all season tires (two Kumbo, Two Nitto). Never get stuck in any situation, once it was buried on street by the snow plow, I shoved half the snow and the car could climb out. Another time we had one foot fresh snow on my company parking lot, the Acura pushed through the snow with no problem at all.
I know
--
1994 944NA 100K miles

Hi masupra,

I live in eastern Ma. and we have gotten buried here last winter(shoveled my house roof off 3 times last winter) and for last few winters. My daughter drives a '90 740 that in prior winter had Kumho all season tires mounted. This 740 was all over the road with crappy traction and way scary handling. This past fall I mounted 4 Dunlop Graspic D2(dedicated snow/ice tires with snowflake symbol) on her car and the result was a rwd car that never got stuck and went where it was pointed. I even stopped the car several times going uphill on snow to see if i could get into trouble but the 740 always clawed it's way to the top. Next season I'm putting this same setup on my 745t for ski trip insurance.


Dan

p.s. new Kumho are back on her car for the other 3 seasons

I live in Maine, and I also run Dunlop Graspic snow tires (although on my Benz) and I am very happy with them. I still don't think they do quite as good a job as the studded Hankooks I have on the Volvo, but if the "clickity, clickity, clickity" of studs on dry pavement bothers you, then the Dunlops are the way to go.

Jeff Pierce
--
'93 945 Turbo ( one kickass family car ! ) 197K miles, '92 Mercedes 190E (my daily driver) 170K miles, '85 Jeep CJ-7 w/ Fisher plow 225K miles, ’95 Lawn Chief

This sounds very interesting. I may give it a try for the coming winter and use the Nokian for the other three seasons (they claim to be all seasons anyway). If you don't mind how much did you pay for the set of Dunlops? How did they handle on dry pavement? I knew studded snows are the best, but driving on dry pavement with that are beyond my threshold of tolerance.
--
1994 944NA 100K miles

Hi again masupra,
I bought them online at tire rack(www.tirerack.com) and paid about $60.00 each for them plus delivery and mounting once they got here. They are referred to as a studless snow/ice tire. Handling on dry pavement was o.k too...but for the other 3 seasons we got Kumho 716. These definately handle better on dry pavement, we got these also at tire rack for $37.00/ea plus ship and are a great buy.


Dan


p.s. at the tire rack site you may be able to read others reviews of the Dunlops if they show reviews for snow tires in the off season

THanks Dan. $60 apiece sounds to be pretty good price. I will give them a try this coming winter.
--
1994 944NA 100K miles