I had written this passage, following, as response to another message that you posted elsewhwere -- so in case you've forgotten to check that other site for answers:

Forget the hype about FWD -- it's largely the manufacturers trying to convince buyers to accept these cars which are much cheaper to build (more profit).
I've owned FWD (unhappily), an extremely docile '76 Honda Accord and a very "hot" '85 Shelby GLH Turbo. Neither worked better than my Volvos -- or, the Volvos were as good as these FWDers in snow (fact is, I used them only for fuel economy and fun, and not either for long, at that). The main trouble with FWD is that, in trying to negotiate a turn, application of power (e.g., trying to go uphill, g-d forbid) and turning (e.g., an uphill curve) just asks too much of a tire. Wheelspin and understeer to a point where your car just goes straight and (e.g., on an uphill right-turn) right across oncoming traffic! There are engineering principles to explain this (e.g., traction circle graphs), but simply, a tire cannot resist high lateral forces and tractive forces at the same time. In contrast, RWD shares these forces -- front tires steer, while rear tires propel, a much better situation.

But then, I've driven all over New England in winter (our family pursues winter sports a lot) for over 30 years, sometimes in very heavy snow and ice, and I've become convinced of one thing -- the main factor is having really good snow tires. It puts me on a par with anything else on the road (even 4WD cars if they have just ordinary tires).
My personal favorites have been Nokian (formerly Nokia) tires -- I change all 4 tires on each of my cars to studded snows every winter. Currently, their best is the Nokian Hakka-2 (studded).

You really should try these (all four tires per car) one winter before you go to the expense of buying another car -- especially if you love your 940 and don't want to give it up.

Good luck, and season's greetings.