Tires make all the difference. Both the size/proportion and materials.
I’ve had RWD cars that were beasts in the snow (East Coast ice no less) because they were near perfect weight distribution and had the best winter tires on the market (Nokian).
I’ve had AWD cars that sucked, because the car was poorly balanced, the tire sidewall was too small (so the tire can’t flex much), entry level winter tires (rubber was harder), and stupid electronic traction control that tried to out think the driver but just got in the way.
RWD will still usually be more challenging to drive than AWD (I think even more so with RWD cars post 2000), though some AWD systems can be unpredictable. Part of the issue with newer RWD cars is the tire sizes - it can be hard to get proper winter tires (plus they cost a lot). I’ve seen some cars for which winter tires didn’t exist, or were exorbitantly expensive to get (it’s assumed by both car and tire manufacturers that these cars won’t be driven in snow).
Fortunately Subaru uses a dead simple AWD system (basically open diffs at each end) - the most complex thing they do is use the brakes for traction control/torque distribution, which is less likely (In my experience) to get in the way than things like electronic diffs (can you tell I’m a fan of Subaru AWD?).
I’ve driven RWD sports cars in the snow with ease. Tires are aboslutely everything. People tend to ignore their tires for WAY too long before getting them replaced, and/or get shitty all seasons that suck in every condition possible.
The trend of “I need AWD SUV because snow” terrifies me because people are buying bigger, heavier, and worse handling cars when they really just need better tires. A FWD sedan with good tires will do WAY better than an AWD SUV with crappy tires. The only upside is people will tend to put better tires on their SUV because it’s more expensive than their shitty sports car/sedan.
Tires make all the difference. Both the size/proportion and materials.
I’ve had RWD cars that were beasts in the snow (East Coast ice no less) because they were near perfect weight distribution and had the best winter tires on the market (Nokian).
I’ve had AWD cars that sucked, because the car was poorly balanced, the tire sidewall was too small (so the tire can’t flex much), entry level winter tires (rubber was harder), and stupid electronic traction control that tried to out think the driver but just got in the way.
RWD will still usually be more challenging to drive than AWD (I think even more so with RWD cars post 2000), though some AWD systems can be unpredictable. Part of the issue with newer RWD cars is the tire sizes - it can be hard to get proper winter tires (plus they cost a lot). I’ve seen some cars for which winter tires didn’t exist, or were exorbitantly expensive to get (it’s assumed by both car and tire manufacturers that these cars won’t be driven in snow).
Fortunately Subaru uses a dead simple AWD system (basically open diffs at each end) - the most complex thing they do is use the brakes for traction control/torque distribution, which is less likely (In my experience) to get in the way than things like electronic diffs (can you tell I’m a fan of Subaru AWD?).
I’ve driven RWD sports cars in the snow with ease. Tires are aboslutely everything. People tend to ignore their tires for WAY too long before getting them replaced, and/or get shitty all seasons that suck in every condition possible.
The trend of “I need AWD SUV because snow” terrifies me because people are buying bigger, heavier, and worse handling cars when they really just need better tires. A FWD sedan with good tires will do WAY better than an AWD SUV with crappy tires. The only upside is people will tend to put better tires on their SUV because it’s more expensive than their shitty sports car/sedan.