Drove many AWD and wondered if their would be much of a difference driving 'just' a FWD SUV, and in my view, the FWD is much better - less weight, better response and slightly quicker, more MPG, less to go wrong, less mechanical noise and less on servicing costs - all the gains including purchase costs, and without telling its FWD - AWD's make little or no sense in this country, unless you off-road of course
@Oldie, good to see your views on the difference between the FWD and AWD. Pretty much as I would have expected.
My issue is I don't go off road but do traverse some pretty bad roads during the winter and "like" having the AWD available as a get out of jail card. I guess as soon as you accept you don't need AWD then one has to question do I need an SUV rather than say a normal hatch or estate? Which I would expect to be even lighter and more economical.
It's a question I'm struggling with since Volvo have pretty much stopped making AWD models.
My main need for AWD is caravanning. Towing with a FWD passat, with drive up front and weight at the back would frequently get wheel spin pulling away from junctions. Never have this with AWD now.
We often use small sites which are just fields. One time, the field sloped up to the road, and all us caravans were at the bottom. Next caravan went to leave with a Citroen FWD and just couldn't move the caravan, wheels got no traction. I hooked him up with my then Tiguan AWD and cruised out to the road no fuss. Definitely a must for me.
B4 AWD Inscription , Fusion Red, Blond interior. Drivers Assist, Climate, Tinted rear windows and Towing pack.
Ordered 14 Dec 20, delivered 10 March 21
It's a very thin suggestion to question - "do I need an SUV if I don't need AWD'' - folk drive SUV's for many reasons and probably the need to be AWD for those odd days driving in winter conditions maybe quite low on the list - especially when the real question then should be - if I need AWD to be safe venturing out - should I be going out at all? Drive height, style and versatility etc would be my guess as to the main reasons - in my view the XC40 FWD is a much better all-round concept for reasons mentioned, unless you have to venture out in deep snow - and even then, I guess two driven wheels under a heavy 2.0 engine will do just fine
…in my view, the FWD is much better - less weight, better response and slightly quicker, more MPG, less to go wrong, less mechanical noise and less on servicing costs…
I couldn’t agree more, based on these same facts I made the decision to order FWD. My driving style and needs proved AWD a waste of money. It was great that Volvo decided 2 years after launch to add the FWD option for XC40 (also for XC60).
AWD's make little or no sense in this country, unless you off-road of course
There’s a lot more to AWD than off-roading. Vastly improved grip on wet roads, snow, ice, and loose surfaces. I don’t think anyone intends any of the AWD super cars (Lamborghini, McLaren etc) to be taken off road.
My XC40 is 2WD, but I would have preferred AWD. I quite often have to put 2 wheels onto soft verges when passing tractors etc on single track lanes and most of the roads near me don’t get salted in the winter. I usually fit all season tyres on my cars to help with winter weather.
If you live in a city and drive mostly on urban roads / motorways, I would agree that AWD is probably an unnecessary expense.
MY22 XC40 Inscription B4P. Denim blue, Blond Leather, Climate, Versatility, Sunroof, Tints. (My last 3 Volvos were: 2017 XC60 SE Lux Nav D4, 2011 V60 SE Lux Nav D5, 2004 S60 T5 SE).
@JFDIT - always love the misinterpretation of ones comment - no, I stated " if you NEED an AWD to venture out" i.e. the weather is so bad only an AWD would be deemed safe to venture out - then maybe one should not be going out at all - we have all seen the pics of folk getting into trouble because of often poor judgment to drive in severe weather