Tires... tires make a far more significant difference than the AWD system. Good tires and FWD will outperform AWD with bad tires.

But I'd say they're all pretty good. We're up to pretty much 50/50 when you need it, so given you need a constant AWD a day or two out of the year where I live, saving fuel the other 363 days would make it better then being always engaged. None of these cars are likely to ever be driven where you need anything crazy, and if you do, then none of these are the right choice. So while I could agree Subarus might be "best" its only best at an unrealistic never occurring situation where if it did, the difference is still so subtle it won't actually matter, and still isn't the correct choice.

 

My primary concern is over/understeer. I think my old Toyota Camry had better tires than my Subaru, but it's like night and day difference when it comes to cornering. The region I'm in is very mountainous in areas, and driving those places is so much better with my Subaru. I could barely go faster than maybe 30 mph down those hills, but the Impreza I can go 50 mph quite comfortable. Now obviously, there wouldn't be that much of a difference between Audi, Volvo, and Subaru as there is between the 01 Camry and Impreza.
I'm just curious how quickly Volvo's system gets "triggered." Do you have to do almost a skid out? Or is it just a light curve? Or is it a significantly slippery surface?
But yea, most of it is driving skill. I was at a county fair a few years ago, and it had been raining a lot that summer, and the parking lot was ankle deep squishy mud. And there was this Audi slipping and sliding, but I did fine with my Camry just anticipating the sliding and using that to propel myself in the direction I wanted to go in.

 

As you mentioned, Volvo uses the Haldex AWD system and I believe current Volvo's have version 5. There is what Volvo calls an "Active On-Demand Coupler (AOC) attached to the front of the differential and the propshaft drives the AOC. The AOC is a system of clutches with a pump that can vary the torque the goes through to the rear differential and out to the wheels. Lots of data, like individual wheel speeds, steering wheel angle, throttle position, yaw, etc.. are constantly analyzed by the onboard computers to help in torque distribution calculations.

All of the Haldex systems work fairly well - each generation improving on the previous generation - and are usually imperceptible in operation, so no, you will not skid out before it reacts.

The thing with AWD is it is an aid to help the car get torque to the ground. It does not make cars invincible in less than ideal conditions and it doesn't help stop the car. Just drive safely in all conditions and have good tires on your well maintained car and your car should do fine.

I had a 1996 Subaru Impreza bought new when I lived in Colorado. That car was incredible in the snow. My wife and I have many stories of how that little car was so nice to drive when there was fresh snow on the roads. When my daughter was a toddler, I would sometimes take her in the Subaru and find an empty mall parking lot after (or during) a snow storm and hoon that car around doing AWD donuts, drifting and sliding. She loved it!

I don't live where it snows anymore, so I don't really need the AWD that my XC90 has except to keep that V8 torque from chirping the tires on acceleration.

 

One thing that makes this kind of sticking point for me, is my dislike of FWD. I know there are many advantages, but I have fond memories of driving my old 245. I was actually quite shocked at my lack of skill parallel parking my Camry, because I'd always managed quite easily with the 245. But it was the RWD that I was used to that enabled me to parallel park despite the 245's size. It was also much more 'fun' cornering.
This is why I will never ever buy another FWD car. They're just no fun. So, when I hear an AWD system is 90/10 alarm bells go off in my mind. I guess I should go down to this Volvo dealer and see if I can't test drive something like a V60.

 

Youre mixing two different things.

4x4 is a system which drives all four wheels directly and thus constantly. Note the wording "directly". It means here is a mechanical continuous engagement between the gearbox output shaft and the wheels.
AWD systems is a FWD car with a coupler to the rear wheels.

Subaru and the older quattro systems traditionally are real 4x4 cars. These cars have one center diferential and one for each axle. A AWD solution doesnt need to handle all the power. It only sends whatever it whants to the rear wheels.

A Haldex car has no center differential. It is only direclty engaged to the front wheel axle. This is a much cheaper layout. There is a huge cost saving in removing the center differential that would need to be designed to handle all the power.

Another cost saving is to remove all the locking functions and use the brakes with the help of the ABS system instead. Traditionally real 4x4 cars have real torsen differentials or some other limited slip differentials to split the power. Todays cheap haldex solutions have simple open differentials on front and rear and use the brakes to send torque between the wheels.

Real 4x4 cars are always-on powertrains active all the time. AWD/Haldex is a FWD car with rear wheel assistance to get you out of a potthole.

 

To add some "insult to injury" regarding late AWD systems in volvo and such...

Haldex have (had) different modules to apply torque vectoring through the transmission system instead of using the brake system to transfer torque (which is a destructive system from a energy perspective as it has to steal/absorb energy from one side to send the equivalent to the other side.) but these costs money and for what I know few produers used these systems and implemented them in their lineup. However Saab used one such haldex trorque vectoring module on their Saab 9-3 Aero X with the Haldex 4 system.

Audi on their B8 platform offered their own solution for the S4, but this was an extra option you needed to tick when ordering and pay another $5-10k extra or whatever. But this was the only way to have a real mechanical "torque-sending" solution in place for the previous rather expensive torsen differentials. The bonus here was the torque vectoring system could actually send MORE than the 50% to whatever side. Nothing like this is possible with the halxes solutions used by Volvo.

Since the Volvos, including the S/VR have none of that, from what i have heard, installing a quaife (which is a torsen diff) on a FWD car, will add much better traction thant the AWD-system on the S/VR with its open diffs. Arguably this shouldnt be surprising. Two wheels engaged on the same axle will give better traction than one wheel with the least grip per axle. Not to mention a 4x4 system with a torsen or a torque vectoring solution.

 

Love Subarus and Volvos….

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought Subaru used a rather primitive but effective viscous coupling system mounted symmetrically.

At the time this was miles ahead of other cars, but I think tech has moved on since then.

My understanding is that Volvo uses a more sophisticated torque-vectoring system.

https://www.fcpeuro.com/blog/volvo-awd-systems-explained

My ’24 Honda Pilot used (IIUC) a similar system, and it was awesome and unbeatable in the snow and bad conditions.

I think all modern systems at least on Japanese and European cars are fine for typical road conditions even snow and ice. Especially icy roads.

4WD as on the ‘19 Tacoma I had has several deficiencies—not always on, speed supposed to be limited to under 55 mph, and not variable power, i.e., all wheels spin all the time. This is NOT great for slippery road conditions, as a slipping tire can still spin and worsen traction. Where it IS good for (along with axle locking) is more extreme conditions, like hill climbing and stuck in a snowbank. Then you want all the wheels spinning to generate traction wherever you can get it.

As said, wheels make a big difference. I had Blizzaks on my WRX which were great but did wear fairly quickly. The Conti A/Ts on my Pilot were awesome as well.

Will have to see how well the S60 Pirellis perform this winter. Last winter was hardly a test. These days not enough snow in my neck of the woods to justify changing tires out to full winters.

 

Love Subarus and Volvos….

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought Subaru used a rather primitive but effective viscous coupling system mounted symmetrically.

At the time this was miles ahead of other cars, but I think tech has moved on since then.

My understanding is that Volvo uses a more sophisticated torque-vectoring system.

https://www.fcpeuro.com/blog/volvo-awd-systems-explained

As explained above, volvo doesn't have any torque vectoring as it doesn't have any such system to allow for it. Volvo has DSTC (and whatever it's called on newer volvos), that can force torque to one wheel by applying the brake on the corresponding wheel on the other side.

 

To simply reply to your question without going in to much details. The Subaru 4wd will outperform the Volvo AWD in traction but not in all conditions. I own a v90CC and a v60 3.0 polestar and it’s both haldex 2nd and 1st gen if not mistaking. The v90cc even with the weight climb very well and handle the snowy/icy road of Alps without issue except icy road and turn that can be tricky if lost traction with weight but has a lock 4x4 mode with speed up to 50km/h. The Polestar however is more a fun car where you can send the back to front if you wish with good control but less traction. The joy of haldex is the flexibility of usage you may have where my friend’s forester sti it’s more one scenario which is full traction

 

My son lives near a ski resort in New England. The vehicles I often see there are from Subaru and Audi.

 

 

Noob to the forums.
I've been struggling with this whole AWD v 4WD here in Colorado. I currently have an '03 F250 which offers 4wd (it lurches when turning on dry pavement), but I am looking to get out of that into something more... comfortable.
I don't rock crawl, but some of the forest roads I use for dispersed camping are nasty, and I am a bit concerned about getting stuck. Do I really need locking diffs? Probably not. But I haven't had a modern (2010 +) vehicle up some of these roads.

Yes, CO is FULL of Subarus and to a lesser extent Volvo's. My goal is to be a bit unique and build me a battlewagon

 

Noob to the forums.
I've been struggling with this whole AWD v 4WD here in Colorado. I currently have an '03 F250 which offers 4wd (it lurches when turning on dry pavement), but I am looking to get out of that into something more... comfortable.
I don't rock crawl, but some of the forest roads I use for dispersed camping are nasty, and I am a bit concerned about getting stuck. Do I really need locking diffs? Probably not. But I haven't had a modern (2010 +) vehicle up some of these roads.

Yes, CO is FULL of Subarus and to a lesser extent Volvo's. My goal is to be a bit unique and build me a battlewagon

If you want a good bang for the buck off-roader get a Tacoma Offroad. If you want more refinement and a closed bed, get a Honda Pilot Trailsport (MY 23+). The TS has good clearance, a skid plate, trail modes, cameras and a good torque-vectoring AWD system.

 

Late to the party here but a subjective response from soneone who had an old-style Audu Quattro in 1991 Audi 100 and 1997 Audi S6... pretty much equal power distribuion to all four wheels. Swithched to 2010 Vovlo S80 in 2014... for regular driving this was an FWD car with maybe 10% power to rear wheels in normal everyday driving. Only difference I can say I felt in the transition was an ability to exit highway ramps a higher speed in the Audi's than in the S80. I attributed that to different power distribution. Back then an Audi was indeed a "Quattro" car in the original sense of the term. All Audi's are not like that today.

We have also had a 2013 Outback and now a 2022 Outback (and still the S80). Handling over all seems quite stable but not trying to commpare an SUV with a sedan. Similar Conti tires on each car. And on the old Audis as well. Thinking that the closest I'd get re traction to my Audi A6 today might be a Subaru Legacy.

For sure of course the "quattro" was no guarantee of driving invincibility. Was waiting years ago to leave a conference in Columbus Ohio highways were ice covered. A colleague asked why I wasn't leaving since I had an Audi. Had to explain that all the four wheels skidded just as easily on a ice-covered road as a "normal" car.