2007 or 2009 MDX

[symmetrical]

Originally Posted by PieceOfChum

I believe Mass allows this also which is where I am at. Thanks for the advice. Also I am happy that the MDX does well in the snow I love driving in the snow when we get some at least. I heard conflicting things about the MDX in the snow and that the SH AWD wasn't that good in the snow but I didn't understand why I think it is that people have unrealistic ideas about snow capabilities and the fact that breaking isn't improved with AWD although it is possible in some case to control the slippage much better with AWD. The 2007 has nearly brand new tires where the 2009 has tires around 70% worn.

Not sure if you seen this yet, but this is a pretty popular video showcasing SH-AWD.

Lexus ATC vs. Audi Quattro vs. Acura SH-AWD - YouTube

Lexus ATC vs. Audi Quattro vs. Acura SH-AWD - YouTube

[PieceOfChum]

Originally Posted by symmetrical

Not sure if you seen this yet, but this is a pretty popular video showcasing SH-AWD.

Lexus ATC vs. Audi Quattro vs. Acura SH-AWD - YouTube

Yes I have but it is always fun to watch that video. That is why I thought that basically yes it is great for handling but also for ice and snow. There is a lot of misperception about AWD so I think people have very high expectations that are unrealistic so it is hard to tell if someone is actually saying this AWD system is not good for the snow versus AWD isn't helping as much as I thought it would. What people really want most of the time is a perfectly balanced (50/50 front back weight distribution) car with AWD and at least a rear differential so they can play with their car in the snow and that means they need an Evolution or Subaru WRX not a Acura MDX. For instance I had an Eagle Talon TSI AWD in the 90's and that car wasn't just good in the snow it was awesome in the snow and you could skid and still maintain control my Subaru Legacy in no way can match my Eagle Talon. Although the Subaru is awesome at climbing up snowy hills.

[symmetrical]

Originally Posted by PieceOfChum

Yes I have but it is always fun to watch that video. That is why I thought that basically yes it is great for handling but also for ice and snow. There is a lot of misperception about AWD so I think people have very high expectations that are unrealistic so it is hard to tell if someone is actually saying this AWD system is not good for the snow versus AWD isn't helping as much as I thought it would. What people really want most of the time is a perfectly balanced (50/50 front back weight distribution) car with AWD and at least a rear differential so they can play with their car in the snow and that means they need an Evolution or Subaru WRX not a Acura MDX. For instance I had an Eagle Talon TSI AWD in the 90's and that car wasn't just good in the snow it was awesome in the snow and you could skid and still maintain control my Subaru Legacy in no way can match my Eagle Talon. Although the Subaru is awesome at climbing up snowy hills.

Oh I agree. Most of the AWD systems of today from various manufacturers like Honda, Toyota, etc. are designed more as a safety feature, not necessarily for attacking all weather or terrain. They are just basic FWD cars with contingency traction.

IMO I think SH-AWD was designed more for driving feel and dynamics back when they introduced it in the RL. It just so happens to work pretty good as an AWD system on poor surface conditions too.

But I will stand that Subarus are still one of the top AWD brands because they mechanically designed for that type of stuff and doesn't rely too much on electronic wizardry. The low center of gravity of the boxer engines and symmetrical AWD are tried and true.

[nsxtasy]

Originally Posted by symmetrical

IMO I think SH-AWD was designed more for driving feel and dynamics back when they introduced it in the RL. It just so happens to work pretty good as an AWD system on poor surface conditions too.

Gee, you make it sound like the AWD system in the MDX was derived from the SH-AWD in the RL, when in fact it's more the other way around. (You can read about the history of SH-AWD here.)

[kokerj]

I think my favorite AWD system is the old VW/Audi torsen system - all mechanical. I would run with 4 hakkapeliitta Q's and my old Audi 90 could climb a tree. Lots of subarus, mitsus and audis in the rally car history books. Not too many hondas.

[symmetrical]

Originally Posted by nsxtasy

Gee, you make it sound like the AWD system in the MDX was derived from the SH-AWD in the RL, when in fact it's more the other way around. (You can read about the history of SH-AWD here.)

The RL was introduced in 2004 while the second gen MDX was introduced in 2006.

[nsxtasy]

Originally Posted by symmetrical

The RL was introduced in 2004 while the second gen MDX was introduced in 2006.

The AWD portion of the SH-AWD system in the RL was derived from the VTM-4 system which was introduced in the first gen MDX for the 2001 model year.

[skinny2]

Originally Posted by nsxtasy

The AWD portion of the SH-AWD system in the RL was derived from the VTM-4 system which was introduced in the first gen MDX for the 2001 model year.

Well I know I'll be able to sleep better tonight

[nsxtasy]

Originally Posted by skinny2

Well I know I'll be able to sleep better tonight

Why do you ONLY post nasty comments, and never never never anything informative, or useful, or helpful, or truthful, or accurate? Many of us are here to post accurate information to help other people. Too bad there are also a few jerks who just like to post insults and false information.

[riontegra]

I would not choose either one. Check out this 2009 Tech with 65K for only $23,500. Not mine.

Acura MDX 2009 (Tech Package)

[symmetrical]

Originally Posted by nsxtasy

The AWD portion of the SH-AWD system in the RL was derived from the VTM-4 system which was introduced in the first gen MDX for the 2001 model year.

Yes I see, but it says it's a combination of the ATTS and VTM-4 systems. So technically SH-AWD was introduced with the RL.

[skinny2]

Originally Posted by nsxtasy

Why do you ONLY post nasty comments, and never never never anything informative, or useful, or helpful, or truthful, or accurate? Many of us are here to post accurate information to help other people. Too bad there are also a few jerks who just like to post insults and false information.

I tend to follow-up an informative, useful, and helpful post with one that is equally informative, useful, and helpful. Get it? Probably not.