Is this 4WD false advertisement from ford?? Check out the picture..

[Osco]

Um wrong,,, My Bronco sport was $28,000 out the door.

Sponsored

 

[sajohnson]

Um wrong,,, My Bronco sport was $28,000 out the door.

The ~$28,900 price comes straight from the Ford Motor Company build sheet. It does not include: taxes; tags; title; dealer doc/prep fees, etc. So -- according to Ford -- the out the door price would be significantly higher. Sales tax alone here in Maryland is 6% -- $28,900 x 1.06 = $30,634. Then there is the $500 "doc prep" <cough> bs <cough> fee (legal state maximum) that essentially all dealers charge. So that takes it to $31,134. MVA tags & title fees are over $300 -- so the minimum out the door price for a stripped, base model BL is around $31,500 (in MD anyway) and that's if the dealer does not try to tack on extra fees -- ADM; pin stripes/fabric guard/paint protectant/floor mats/mud flaps/rust proofing/undercoating -- or my personal favorite (pushed by a local dealer): an antiviral treatment for the ductwork that allegedly kills 99.98% of all corona virus that circulates through the HVAC system. That was "normally" $1,700, but he'd let me have it for $1,200.

Those dealers are a clever bunch. They really know how to play people.

 

[Ramseyi]

The ~$28,900 price comes straight from the Ford Motor Company build sheet. It does not include: taxes; tags; title; dealer doc/prep fees, etc. So -- according to Ford -- the out the door price would be significantly higher. Sales tax alone here in Maryland is 6% -- $28,900 x 1.06 = $30,634. Then there is the $500 "doc prep" <cough> bs <cough> fee (legal state maximum) that essentially all dealers charge. So that takes it to $31,134. MVA tags & title fees are over $300 -- so the minimum out the door price for a stripped, base model BL is around $31,500 (in MD anyway) and that's if the dealer does not try to tack on extra fees -- ADM; pin stripes/fabric guard/paint protectant/floor mats/mud flaps/rust proofing/undercoating -- or my personal favorite (pushed by a local dealer): an antiviral treatment for the ductwork that allegedly kills 99.98% of all corona virus that circulates through the HVAC system. That was "normally" $1,700, but he'd let me have it for $1,200.

Those dealers are a clever bunch. They really know how to play people.

never heard of that antiviral treatment for the ductwork before. When I bought mine, my sale person did not ask me anything for add on excepts for sheehy vip club.

 

[Osco]

That guys wrong anyway. He don’t know what I did as he was not there…….
guess he forgot about price increases. Got my Base back in 2020 1st one they sold.
It was there only one day, they wanted it on the road for people to see I guess.
So $ 28k minus trade and the extra thousand to make My wife happy.
I financed $19,000

Ah Ha !
I found the paper work. What a mess.
It showed $20,942 financed after trade in and they gave me. $7,000 for my trade.
They upped the trade that extra thousand, that’s how I got that, As I wouldn’t take 6 grand.
I gave nothing else down. In all that mess was destination and sales tax.
Oh wow I was off, Under $28k by $58 LoL
I do remember the second one they sold, talked to the customer,
His was like mine, a base model. Instead of getting an extra $1,000 on his trade they took off the $1400 something destination charge. He did better than I did !
I think they wanted for people to see them on the road asap and to learn how slow they were coming out.
From 2020 til now as far as I can tell the longest one sat on the lot was four days including shop prep work. I’d estimate they had them overall less than 10 days a month with none this past summer back in July and August.
Not so with the big Bronco’s
They’ve had the same three for two weeks now. Sold 2 so far.

 

[DMEARC]

Hi Osco,

First off, you may realize this, but just to be clear, I'm referring to the viscous coupling units (VCUs) in the WRX -- not the differentials themselves.

This should probably be a separate thread (maybe even on another forum, like NASIOC) but briefly, I remember guys talking about replacing both center and rear VCUs with 'stronger' units, for more torque transfer. I believe the 5MT WRX STi came from the factory with stronger VCUs.

That begs the question -- why didn't SOA just use the stronger VCUs in both cars? I know mfrs like to have differences between models that they can point to, but the STi had/has a more powerful engine; better transmission; bigger brakes; better suspension, etc. All-wheel drive is Subaru's claim to fame, and when the WRX came out, there was no STi -- it came later. The WRX was a 'flagship' car for Subaru, yet they chose to use pathetically weak VCUs in it.

The VCUs SOA used in the 5MT WRX (at least the early models like mine) are practically worthless. It can get stuck with one tire on ice. I can put the car on the lift, start it, put it in gear and stop either rear tire from spinning by pressing on it with my (gloved) hands. With the rear end in the air on a floor jack, it will not even drive over a 2x4 (a 1.5" obstruction) with the front tires! It tries, and then rolls backwards. So sad.

Most importantly though, why use VCUs to begin with? They will always be too strong or too weak for many conditions. Too strong, and it can be close to running with locked diffs, which is obviously bad, too weak (like mine) and it's like the 5AT RAV4 I mentioned above that was stuck in the grass at the Toyota dealer because one (1) tire was spinning.

Bringing this back around to the BS -- I'm *really* glad Ford chose to use a system with adjustable clutches. We probably would not have ordered the Badlands (or any BS) if it used VCUs.

I worked for Subaru for a few years. You can’t test the AWD system (at least not the older ones) on a lift. The system was built to work against the weight of the car. Take away the weight and the system won’t behave properly.

The manual transmission cars had to use a slightly different method of moving power around because you can rev the engine and dump the clutch. That’s not really a concern on an auto where the torque converter can alleviate some of the “shock” of a large amount of power suddenly being applied. That‘s not unique to Subaru. Many manufacturers use a beefier transmission in manual cars for the same reason.

And SOA has nothing to do with how WRX’s were built. Those are built In Japan.

 

[sajohnson]

I worked for Subaru for a few years. You can’t test the AWD system (at least not the older ones) on a lift. The system was built to work against the weight of the car. Take away the weight and the system won’t behave properly.

The manual transmission cars had to use a slightly different method of moving power around because you can rev the engine and dump the clutch. That’s not really a concern on an auto where the torque converter can alleviate some of the “shock” of a large amount of power suddenly being applied. That‘s not unique to Subaru. Many manufacturers use a beefier transmission in manual cars for the same reason.

And SOA has nothing to do with how WRX’s were built. Those are built In Japan.

Just for the record, I like my WRX. I think Subaru makes good cars. My intent is simply to give examples of the range of ability of various AWD systems. We happen to own a '97 RAV4 (5MT) and a '02 WRX (5MT). We also test drove a '97 RAV4 (4AT). So those are the examples I chose.

Regarding the testing the dealership did -- it was a shop full of certified Ford and Subaru technicians. They were all watching the show. Not one said the test was invalid. But let's say the AWD cannot be tested with one or more wheels in the air. The fact remains that with one rear tire on ice and the other 3 on dry blacktop, my WRX was stuck -- pathetically rolling backwards as the tire on ice spun forward.

A more accurate slogan might be: "From the wheels that GRIP to the wheels that SLIP!"

I initially thought the weak VCU-based system was related to the manual trans. That theory fell apart when the STi (6MT) came out a year or 2 later. It had/has a killer AWD system -- completely different from my WRX. So the manual trans has nothing to do ith it.

Of course I realize my WRX was made in Japan. It's really irrelevant, but the reason I referred to SOA is that they are who we'd deal with if we had problem the dealer couldn't fix. I'm just used to using "SOA" for "Subaru", that's all. The plate under the hood says Fuji Heavy Industries (Japan).

The bottom line is that AWD systems are not created equal. I'm glad the Bronco Sport uses clutches and not passive/dumb VCUs.

 

[DMEARC]

Just for the record, I like my WRX. I think Subaru makes good cars. My intent is simply to give examples of the range of ability of various AWD systems. We happen to own a '97 RAV4 (5MT) and a '02 WRX (5MT). We also test drove a '97 RAV4 (4AT). So those are the examples I chose.

Regarding the testing the dealership did -- it was a shop full of certified Ford and Subaru technicians. They were all watching the show. Not one said the test was invalid. But let's say the AWD cannot be tested with one or more wheels in the air. The fact remains that with one rear tire on ice and the other 3 on dry blacktop, my WRX was stuck -- pathetically rolling backwards as the tire on ice spun forward.

A more accurate slogan might be: "From the wheels that GRIP to the wheels that SLIP!"

I initially thought the weak VCU-based system was related to the manual trans. That theory fell apart when the STi (6MT) came out a year or 2 later. It had/has a killer AWD system -- completely different from my WRX. So the manual trans has nothing to do ith it.

Of course I realize my WRX was made in Japan. It's really irrelevant, but the reason I referred to SOA is that they are who we'd deal with if we had problem the dealer couldn't fix. I'm just used to using "SOA" for "Subaru", that's all. The plate under the hood says Fuji Heavy Industries (Japan).

The bottom line is that AWD systems are not created equal. I'm glad the Bronco Sport uses clutches and not passive/dumb VCUs.

Most techs I’ve worked with are nothing more than “parts changers.” It doesn’t surprise me that none of them realized the test was invalid. They learn very little theory during training.

The early WRX’s were not meant for ice and snow. That particular AWD system was supposed to enhance “spirited” driving performance (think Lamborghini Huracan).

 

[Osco]

How else can you keep the birds from shi---g on it?

I use my Crosman 362 and hollow points. :,P

 

[sajohnson]

DMEARC,

You have an incredibly low opinion of automotive technicians.

I'm curious, if all of those technicians were wrong, how is the AWD system in the early model 5MT WRX supposed to be tested? Seriously, I'd like to know, because at the time, when I contacted SOA, I was told to take it to a gravel parking lot, rev it up, and dump the clutch. If all 4 tires spun it was good!

Obviously, that is not a valid test. A vehicle with all open differentials would pass that "test". The idea is to determine how much torque can indeed be transferred from "The wheels that slip to the wheels that grip" -- as Subaru has claimed for decades. I never could find an official Subaru test procedure.

Proper testing aside, the fact remains that with one rear tire on ice and the other 3 on dry blacktop, my WRX was stuck -- pathetically rolling backwards as the tire on ice spun forward.

All of Subaru's advertising and marketing emphasizes their AWD, and the fact that it enhances safety, traction, and performance in slippery conditions (rain/snow/ice). They did/do not say, "Except for the WRX". If they (and other mfrs) were honest they would say, "There are several different AWD systems that are used in our vehicles. They have a range of characteristics and levels of performance. Ask your dealer for more information." Or something similar.

Once again, I am not intentionally singling out the WRX. I just happen to own one. My primary point is that auto mfrs use a wide range of "AWD" systems -- dozens of them. Some work much better than others. Some are almost completely ineffective -- essentially one (1) wheel drive, others, like the BS Badlands work extremely well -- if even one tire has traction the vehicle can still move.

Intentionally or not, auto mfrs do not disclose the limitations of their AWD systems. It's a "buyer beware" situation.

 

[Mark S.]

I use my Crosman 362 and hollow points. :,P

This would be nice too.

 

[Carolo]

I use my Crosman 362 and hollow points. :,P

Where I live, that will get you a $1500 fine (POA in Kalifornia). However, if he comes inside my home, I can use the 12g!

 

[hwildey]

"There really should be a standardized diagram that mfrs have to put on a window sticker showing exactly what their "AWD" system consists of."

I couldn't have said it better myself!! specially for novice who don't know anything about AWD system just like myself lol, like I stated in my post, I came from rear wheel drive majority of my cars. When some people hear AWD some may think its actual AWD that powers all 4 wheel full time.

Yes, for me AWD meant full time 4wd like in the old Audi Quattro, or at least that is what I thought it meant. Sometime later they came out with the intelligent slip AWD systems that started to put power to non slipping wheels (I think Subaru was the first to market and build that). Now they are so good, it seems, that it knows when to be 4WD and can turn it on and off when needed.

 

[Osco]

What ? It’s the new breed of 4x4’s.
Technology moves forward and waits for no one.
I remember stopping, getting out and locking, then shifting, getting all muddy feet…
This all happened back when men were men.
We got in bar fights, smoked Marlboro reds. Had real jobs. Drove real steel Trucks not SUV’s (Stupid Useless Vehicles), We had JEEPS and Blazers and Bronco’s and made so much money our wives could stay at home and raise the younguns…

 

[sajohnson]

Yes, for me AWD meant full time 4wd like in the old Audi Quattro, or at least that is what I thought it meant. Sometime later they came out with the intelligent slip AWD systems that started to put power to non slipping wheels (I think Subaru was the first to market and build that). Now they are so good, it seems, that it knows when to be 4WD and can turn it on and off when needed.

It's common for people to think AWD = a vehicle that has all 4 wheels driven all the time, and can move if just one tire has traction.

Both of our older cars -- a 2002 5MT WRX and 1997 5MT RAV4 -- do have torque distributed to all 4 wheels all the time. That's becoming less common as mfrs try to increase fuel economy. The BS is a good example -- it is primarily a FWD SUV that uses a power distribution unit (PDU) to send power the rear when front wheel spin is detected, or when certain GOAT modes are selected.

Either -- "full-time" AWD or part-time AWD -- can work well. Personally, I like the idea of torque being distributed to all 4 wheels all the time. Then there is no delay -- no waiting for spin to be detected and the PDU clutch to engage, no need to manually select a 'drive mode'. That said, most of the time it's not a big deal.

So that's full-time vs part-time. The other major factor is how torque distribution is controlled. There is:

* No control -- all 3 diffs are open. Essentially ONE (1) wheel drive. Path of least resistance.
* All open diffs with the ABS used to limit wheelspin. It works, but risks brakes overheating.
* Viscous coupling units (VCUs) -- like my 2002 WRX.
* Clutches -- like the BS uses. Also the old-school "posi-traction".
* "Torsen" type differentials.
* Some combination of the above.

An example of "no control" is the 1997 4AT RAV4 we test drove (see post above). It would not even move off the dealer's property because it was parked in the grass and the right front wheel was spinning (that pesky path of least resistance).

The BS BL has clutches center and rear. I believe the front diff is open but ABS is used to limit spin and transfer torque. That works but is less than ideal. Still, it's obviously an off-road monster.

There are dozens, if not hundreds of variations of AWD. They definitely are not all created equal.

"4WD" typically refers to a system that has (at a minimum) a transfer case that locks -- providing a minimum of 2WD -- 1 front and 1 rear -- and low range gearing. Our RAV4 has a manually locking center diff (essentially four wheel high) and a Torsen rear, but no low range. It is very under powered, and even though the gearing is relatively low, there have been times when I wished it had a low range.

 

[AmazingSieve]

I’m really starting to think any car that can supply drivetrain power to all four wheels should be listed as 4WD and then differentiated from there.

The AWD vs. 4WD is clearly confusing and muddled even to those who know what’s going on. Why not simplify the language then expand on the tech after that?

Sponsored