Honda Element Owners Club banner

1 - 20 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I've taken mine mudding and all four wheels pulled - or I would have been stuck. Sure that CRV was working right?

In fact, I was throwing rooster tails of mud off the rear tires
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,881 Posts
too bad you cant see the rear wheels, it would be nice to see if they were spinning or what the rear differences were
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
All I got out of that is Superoos climb "simulated ice" better. I usually drive on "real ice and snow" and have not had any traction problems, real or simulated.
It's too bad Subaru only makes little cars, wagons and that grossly hideous B9 Tribeca. A useful Subie SUV would be sweet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
My 03 EX AWD 5-speed can pull no my brother's 07 Civic Si in 1st gear. I know the rears are providing power. They just probably cannot support the load of the entire vehicle on an incline...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
just because your rear tires were slingingmud dosent mean they were pulling thier weight.if they were spining they didn't have much traction. alittle help goes along way, a lot of help gets you out.I havent yet got my E stuck.but I know it wont do what my montaro did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,024 Posts
So what difference would it have made for the CRV's rear wheels to push it up the rollers if the VSA was turned off?

I've got the same reservations about that test result because my E has pulled in real ice and snow situations instead of rollers and it sure didn't act like that CRV did. It's been especially fantastic on icy hills.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts
If the VSa was turned off it would have probably gone up the ramp as the throttle was cutting back causing the diff pump pressure to not in guage that hard. Its funny that they say that Honda will not disclose how the real time 4X4 works. Thought we had seen that a lot on how it works on here.:grin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
It appears to me that the test was designed to discredit Honda and Toyota. You really can't believe the results because of that hidden agenda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
It appears to me that the test was designed to discredit Honda and Toyota. You really can't believe the results because of that hidden agenda.
I agree. They knew exactly what angle and situation to use to make the rest fail and make there car look amazing. A good job by them but nothing to make me want to get one. I love my E and have been very impressed with the handling in the snow. I didn't buy the E thinking it was a good hardcore off road vehicle. Just a good all around vehicle that is fully capable of on and light off road use. .02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
It appears to me that the test was designed to discredit Honda and Toyota. You really can't believe the results because of that hidden agenda.
The demo showed the advantages of Subi's symmetrical all-wheel-drive. The rollers were only on one side, eg, the front left wheel. Since Honda has an open diff, all the torque and power will go to that single wheel, nothing to the right, AND nothing to the rear. That is why they don't show you the rear wheels. If you were to put the Subi on 4 rollers, it too would not go anywhere. The simple fix for Honda would be to integrate the LSD from the Civic Si for and aft, and one woud have a rather competent off-roader. Now, it is alright to get through a pack of snow in a sensible fashion....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,238 Posts
I find the test VALID !!

The Honda system CAN NOT, and DOES NOT GIVE THE REAR WHEELS 100% OF THE TORQUE !

I have also noticed that when I had my CRV, it was not as capable in slick conditions as my wifes Element! That was the primary reason I traded it for an Element.

I have posted this before.: On a snowy day with just over 12 inches of snow on the street, My wife was able to drive the Element out up the hill. The street was unploughed. I was not able do drive up the same hill only 25 seconds later. When she returned from the store I had to take the E to run my errands. It had no trouble on the hill at all! They each had New stock tires, so lets rule that out immediately.

I believe it's the weight distribution, that's the key factor here.

Dom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
I dont think they were trying to dis honda, they were just tooting thier own horn.,at least thats what it smelled like.kinda like my 4 wheeldrive motercycle that thing can climb clouds !!! but you cant be there when I test it.just take my word for it. I gess I could post pics but,then theres that whole photoshop thing going aroung and I wouldn't want some one thinking that my test might be tainted. now there's a word tainted. taint heard form ted in a while .hey and what about that dog with a rocket tied to his butt !!! subaru dont have nutten on him !!!! and he was riding my motercycle in the clouds yesterday I got a great picture.that it.:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,263 Posts
The QuebecCRV document shows an instantaneous peak of about 70% rear torque on a CRV. This quickly drops when the front ones get traction (in an acceleration from stop case).

If all 4 wheels are on the same slick surface, I don't see much point in intentionally spinning the front ones. If the rear ones don't have any more traction, they aren't going to get you moving. And the spinning ones loose all directional control. If there is side slope to the road, the spinning front will drift to the side.

On a hill, the rear might have better traction due to a rearward shift in weight. On some surfaces a spinning wheel might break through the surface ice, and gain traction that way. But on an all-slick surface, the best bet is apply equal light torque to all wheels, so the total torque is enough to get you moving, but the torque on anyone wheel isn't enough to break traction. There's where a symmetric awd system could have a real advantage (open diffs all around).

I've mentioned a test case where I got the E going from a stop on an ice hill. As I gently played the gas, I could feel one wheel, then another, momentarily gain traction and then loose it. Evidently, if a front lost traction, it would spin a bit, sending just enough power to the rear to nudge the car forward, allowing the front to regain traction. In was, in an intermittent fashion, imitating the 'equal torque all around' system.
 

·
Moderatorium
Joined
·
6,408 Posts
It appears to me that the test was designed to discredit Honda and Toyota. You really can't believe the results because of that hidden agenda.
Exactly. Just like the demonstration given during the EOC/ROC meet last year at the 4WD test "slope" at the Honda test track in Ohio. It was intended to illustrate the Ridgeline's superior traction ability when left and right sides had widely divergent friction coefficients. They used a Toyota Tundra as the "inferior" example.

It was an interesting demo, but a very narrow illustration relative to the entire performance spectrum. It was "we've solved this very specific problem" without necessarily tipping their hand as to the other issues left on the table.

IOW, this sort of to-our-advantage "comparisons" are done all the time. And by professionals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
We happen to be a highly sophisticated and intelligent group of automobile owners however this type of test is geared to the average Joe who believes what he reads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
They are all selling something and therefore not to be trusted fully. It makes for fun dog & pony shows, but have no real point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
Two things struck me about this video:

1- That ramp was pretty cool with four sets of rollers that could be individually braked.

2- The ramp ending in a wall seems incredibly stupid. In the tests you have the driver with his foot holding the accelerator pedal to the floor with the front of the vehicle just a few short feet away from the wall. He had better hope that the AWD doesn't engage.:roll:
 
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Top