Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

If Lexus dealer service should teach us anything- it's never buy packages.


search JUST wheels that fit the AWD IS250.

There's at least 3 different 17x8 wheels for $59 a wheel.

Then look for tires- 4 blizzaks are $684 plus shipping for an AWD 250.


That's just the 30 seconds of looking search... I'd be shocked if I can't do it cheaper if I actually put 10 minutes into looking for cheap wheels, plus called discount tire for them to beat tire racks price as they always have in the past.



ah... not even 10 minutes-

Discount Tire has several different sets of wheels for $83 each that fit the AWD... and there's a promo going on for $100 back for any 4 wheels installed. So 4x83-100 is $282 for 4 wheels... then have em price match tirerack on the tires and you're all set.

xnfsx

iTrader: (3)

then if im getting those mpg numbers, other rwd drivers should be getting 30+ like a hybrid -_-. point of physics fail. im sure a few hundred lbs doesnt affect gas as much as your driving style, e.g,. aggressive style.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Again... what? Physics don't fail.


If someone drove the same style as you, in a RWD version of your AWD vehicle, assuming all else was equal (same weather, same octane fuel, same tire inflation, etc) they'd get better mileage due to lower vehicle weight and lower drivetrain losses. Period.

I'm not sure which part of this you're not understanding?

Sango

iTrader: (10)

Well with 36 MPG freeway driving, you can definately get more on RWD with the reduced weight right off the bat. In comparion, driving the same speed, the engine for the AWD slightly harder (noticable on the RPM needle), so you would be using more gas in that sense.

I can too can get good MPG on my 250 AWD like get 37mpg on certain parts of the freeway which I am driving. However with all the other driving I do, at the city including going up a mountain my MPG down to about 20-21 MPG. With RWD, it will be higher.

However on occasion where I make my trip between Canada and US, can estimate what I can get from full tank. For my AWD, about 380-390 miles (mostly freeway and a portion is city). I can esimate I can get up to 400+ miles on RWD once I switch over doing the same thing.

Yep! Definately correct.

xnfsx

iTrader: (3)

actually incorrect, i got 400+ not 380+ on a tank. honestly all these bickering comments against the AWD is nonsense. as if 10 miles more makes a difference, as if 3 dollars makes a difference. have fun continuing the senseless argument against the awd.

Sango

iTrader: (10)

Definately more than 10 miles difference between the two. About 2-3 MPG hit, multiply by how many gallons how much you would need to fill. 3 dollars no big deal (even I think it's nothing), but overtime and the number of refills?

GrandSedanFan

iTrader: (1)

I called the dealer to get a quote on factory wheels because I've seen warranty claims denied for aftermarket wheels before. Issues like snapping a wheel stud, hub runout, so on and so forth. And the AWD car will maintain its full warranty. This was supposed to be an all things being equal argument. Which is why I based all of the handling characteristics on the OEM RE92s.

And clearly you're never going to absorb the concept that a compromise may BE the best value to people who don't want to fiddle with their cars. This is literally 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. You just keep jumping up and down screaming that half a dozen is always better, because it fulfills YOUR goals.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Man I'd love to see that warranty denial...

(so would any lawyer I suspect... the dealer in question might wanna look into the manguson moss warranty act)

(assuming they were stock sized wheels like the ones I described... which I'd imagine they weren't if they actually caused the issues you describe)



Yeah... I guess I'm never going to see the value in spending thousands more to compromise performance, mileage, and safety 100% of the time... all to avoid having to let the tire shop swap (for free) your wheels/tires for you twice a year.

colosilver

Yeah, this debate seems to be more about the tires than the cars. Why a comparison is being made between a RWD with snows and an AWD with all seasons, which apparently suck all year 'round, is odd. Using controlled conditions, with the same drivers over and over, for a short period of time isn't overly scientific but does give good advertising.

With the torque split in AWD, I can't see the benefit of having RWD over AWD in the snow and rain if you have the proper tires on both. If you are the type to put snows on a RWD, you'd likely put them on an AWD.

The people who don't change tires usually don't have the funds or don't want to go through the hassle. Or they are hedging bets on the weather.

Tires aren't created equally either. This whole thing is being generalized way too much, IMO.

Look at the tire comparison on tire rack, and there's the point, per category. Factor in the amount of wear on the given tires for each in the real world, things like having your tires siped and those things. Add in the human factors.

I do agree that a RWD with a quality snow tire will handle most things. Just don't skimp on the fronts.

I drove a 1972 Gran Torino sport with studded snows and sand tubes in the back. I couldn't make it out of a parking lot with a small hill because of a stoplight keeping me perched on the hill.

I came the next day with a Mazda 626 FWD with the factory crap tires on there, which is all my folks could afford at the time, and had the same thing happen. Yes, even that spun a little, but it made it versus wagging back and forth and never going anywhere.

I learned the lesson and parked the Torino across the street on a flat road from then on and was relatively fine from then on.

On FWD cars, I don't like losing steering control when the tires lose traction.

When the front drive wheel/s/ on a FWD/AWD/4WD have traction while going around a corner, it is nice to have them pull you around the corner versus drifting the car around the corner.

I did learn my lesson last winter with my first RWD (GS300) car in a long time. I figured the winters around here were mild enough for the last few years that I could make it with the crappy tires I bought the car with. I learned that the onboard systems coupled with crappy tires make for scaring the crap out of a person.

I am going to likely try the car with some dedicated, quality snows this year and expect I'll be in good shape. I am, however, still debating getting an AWD, which is why this thread and others like it are interesting to me.


There's no magic, be all-end all solution and there's trade-offs on each. I loved my Duramax with all terrain tires for hammering through mud and deep snow because I could always just crawl out with the torque and 4-low if I wanted. I could fishtail and drift the thing and have fun that way. Of course the tires howled like a banshee on the highway and the truck would light up the rear tires almost any time throttle was applied around the corner, but that is the trade off.


Snows will cut your mileage as well. Especially if you go wider for some reason, which I've seen people do.

chi123

iTrader: (12)

Going back to the guy with AWD equipped with all seasons and RWD with snow tires. I'm sure under ordinary driving conditions, the AWD with all-seasons will outperform the RWD with snow tires. Kurtz, as you may remember from my other post in another thread, a friend from my school had summers on his '07 IS250 AWD. The numbers you're posting are test proven, yes but under no regular driving conditions would a person slam on their brakes to test the stopping distance in snow. Everyone driving in the winter should know to use common sense and give more time to stop properly and not have to slam on the brakes. Yes, you could argue it may be helpful in avoiding an accident if you need to stop urgently, the extra distance may help. Now the kid with the IS250 AWD got out of his parking spot after school with ease even with summers, I on the other hand couldn't get out. Why? The streets in Chicago are curved for water run-off and there was a heap of snow in front of my front wheels. He got out since all his wheels turn and crushed the snow in front of him. My car couldn't do anything since it has to go up a slight incline to get onto the street and with the heap of snow in front, and only back tires turning, it just keep spinning out. So I had to shovel for 30 minutes and gun it out eventually. Point being is AWD even with all-seasons I can say gives better starting traction than the RWD with snow tires.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Because apparently nearly all AWD drivers never change their tires.

In fact that seems to be (from Panyos posts here... and posts from others in the last thread bragging how they 'never had to change tires in winter!') the main reason they bought AWD- so that they could avoid having to change tires twice a year.


I've seen all of one AWD driver in any of these threads mention he actually uses snow tires in the snow... and I agreed his choice of AWD made a ton of sense, especially given he's driving the thing up and down mountains to go skiing... and as you note later, sloped roads (especially steep ones) are the one place AWD genuinely outperforms RWD with snows.





How?

The snow tires offer significantly better traction regardless of driving style.

You will either see no difference (if you're not doing anything extreme)... or you'll see the snow tires both handle and stop better if you push the vehicle as the testing shows. In neither case would the all-season tires "outperform" the snow tires



Yeah, actually, that's exactly what I'd argue. When it actually matters (an emergency stop) the snow tires would significantly outperform the all season tires... and the weight of the AWD drivetrain would make that car do even worse.

Your friends case is even worse as he's on summer tires, and the difference in stopping distance there in the snow is massive

Like, a couple of hundred feet longer massive from just 40 mph... and twice that distance longer from 60.

Bichon

Well, the package did remind me that you'd need to order another set of TPMS sensors, something that you left off your shopping list that kicks the price up by another $336 (if you buy them from Tirerack)

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Or you could buy em for 60-something bucks a set like many other do...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/4-Lex...Q5fAccessories



Many just run without em too, there's no functional loss doing so if you're manually checking pressure monthly like you're supposed to... but personally the dash light would bug me so I'd spend the 62 bucks...and discount tire'll program em free with the install.

But you're right I left them out of my math...

So my apologies... you're only saving $2338 by going RWD with proper tires in my example now

GrandSedanFan

iTrader: (1)

This thread is awesome. I'm bowing out because there is no changing the mind of a pedant.

smokyis350

iTrader: (21)

There is really no point arguing with Kurtz. No one can ever change his perspective. Regardless of how much evidence you display.

Btw, in b4 the lock.