I started a thread about 240s vs others in snow and Farm Boy mentioned the BMW X5 as great snow car (his post at bottom). I forwarded this to some gearhead friends (most in Europe) and one's reply is below. I'd forgotten about Subarus, which I also had in New England late-1970s. Note that he doesn't mention Volvo AWD - possibly an oversight. And perhaps if my Swedish friend replies she'll say "Volvo AWD w/ snow tires. What else is there to say?"

Driving my 244 in snow & ice for the past few days hasn't been fun but I'm running low-budget all-season tires and the car is loose. On these roads (SE OH) in snow I need more aggressive tires but I still think an AWD car would be a better choice. And my wife got around quite well in the 4WD Toyota Tercel wagon we had for a few years.

Again, for the cost ($500-$1K) 240s w/ snow tires are great winter cars. But if cost were no object it'd be a modern AWD for me. Whatever I could get in a diesel - but that's just my own pref.

====================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 8:58 AM
Subject: RE: Best snow car?

This is a popular subject in Switzerland, as you may imagine.

In general, lighter cars with good AWD are better than heavy cars in most conditions. From the lighter cars, here the Subarus are probably the favorites among mountain people and farmers, and that tells a lot. ... had one years ago, an Impreza Turbo, it was unbelievable how fast we could go on snowed in roads in the mountains.

From the heavier cars, the better the AWD system, the better the traction, that is the same physics for snow or mud. Looking at the big SUV's, our journalists have again and again voted the Range Rover as best AWD car in all conditions, unless you take into account the heavy duty cars that are significantly less good on the dry street. Then the Mercedes G-Wagen and the Land Rover Discovery get better grades if you look at serious all terrain ability with steep bank angles etc.

In a test lately conducted in by a car magazine, looking at family sized station wagons, the Mercedes 4-Matic got the best overall grade. That's what my R-class has too, plus the R-class rides higher than the E-Class.

Having said all that, my personal experience in truly awful freezing rain conditions was that the Cadillac STS with it's excellent FWD and great anti-slip system performed incredibly well, while outfitted with serious winter tires.

The X5 would be probably half way down my list if cars I'd consider for serious snow use. To go cheap, I'd buy a Subaru, to go in style it would be a Range Rover, as an all year compromise car, the R-Class is perfect for me.

-------------------------------------------
200-series cars in snow - Good/ bad/ just old?

posted by Farm Boy on Sun Dec 20 11:05 EST 2009

20 years ago as my friends and co-workers started driving front wheel drive cars, they tried to tell me that FWD was superior for snow and ice. I just smiled and pointed out that FWD cars exist only because they are cheaper to assemble than RWD. Also, the Sweedes know a thing or two about snow and ice.

It is pretty exciting to drive a stick shift FWD and have the front wheels break loose because you took your foot off the gas. Tricky to get traction back as well.

Now that traction control and AWD have become commonplace, the cold weather handling of a brick had become pretty poor by todays standards, but that is because the standards are so much higher.

By the way, AWD Volvos are good, but the gold standard for a steep, icy or snowpacked roads is a BMW X5. Here in Calif there is a subset of mountain cabin owners who use their cabins year-round for cross-country skiing and such. Those residential roads are steep, snowpacked, don't get plowed very often. In those neighborhoods, the X5s rule.
--
240s: 2 drivers and some parts cars

I'll have to cast a belated vote for my late, lamented, full-sized 1979 Jeep Wagoneer (the basic full metal jacket version, not the faux wood country club cruiser). The quadratrac transfer case was the original full-time four-wheel-drive system and worked brilliantly in varied conditions w no fancy electronics (and had a lockout bailout for you really got stuck, which rarely if ever happened because the weight gave excellent traction and the clearance was sufficent for most conditions). Add to that the classic boxy styling and green-house visibility, which made it something of an Uber-Brick, even more of the platonic brick ideal than the 240 itself. High-single-digit gas mileage forced us to part ways when gas topped $4.00 two years ago. I sort of think of my 245 GLTi as the mini-waggie.

I've run some of these winters and used one until recently on the farm. Agree, good snow vehicle. Drawbacks were low ground clearance, rear main seal oil leaks, poor MPG, and the frame rusting through under the driver's-side rear door (all 3 of ours).

I preferred my FJ60 LandCruiser but my wife liked the AT and lower profile of the GW.
--
240s: 2 drivers and some parts cars

I had a 2007 Audi A4 Quattro with the stock Eagle tires, traction control, ABS, all that. It was merely OK in snow, but I'd imagine the tires had a lot to do with that. It was leased so I didn't want to put the $ into winter tires/rims for that car.

I put four Continental "ExtremeWinterContact " (ooo! Xtreme!) winter tires on 14" stock steelies last month and haven't had any problems. They're not perfect but I don't think any winter tire is and studs aren't permitted here. The Yokohama Avid TRZ (highly recommended) on Draco rims are snoozing in the basement.

One gripe about winter tires, at least on the tirerack.com comments, is that they are "squirmy" on the highway. The Contis don't feel much if at all different at speed than the Yokos, though there's a huge difference cornering.

When I was back in CT, I had the '92 245 (M47 with limited slip axle) and an 850 with traction control. Both had ABS, the 850 with 4-channel and the 245 with 3-channel. Ran 4 good snow tires on each car.

I had plenty of opportunity to drive both cars in extreme, low-traction, snow and ice situations. Call me old-fashioned, but the combination of rear drive, manual trans and a limited slip was more helpful than the 850's traction control in terms of keeping the car on the road. The FWD of the 850 created a continuous understeering condition which can't be corrected for with throttle.

I think I posted this link last year around this time,anyway its worth the watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSZLSfBDyhs

I used to have the website for a film of an incredible demonstration of Volvo 240s racing around a test circuit in deep snow -- but can't find it now.

Well anyway, I can't say that I have experience with enough different cars to be able to say authoritatively what's the best of all cars in the snow. I've had mostly Volvos (two 164's and a bunch of 240's), as well as three Mercedes. The two Mercedes sedans I had were all positively AWFUL (much too light in the rear)! But up until a couple of years ago, I had a third MB: an '84 (grey-market) Mercedes 280GE (a.k.a., G-Wagen or Gelaendewagen). Relatively small (re length and width) but heavy (~5,600 lbs unloaded) and barely civilianized from its military heritage, it towed over 6,000 lbs, and I used it to tow/launch my boats in even the slipperiest [sp?] ramps that stumped other guys even with the 4WD/locker-equipped pickups (I loved to see their jaws drop when I pulled up my boat without drama). I understand now, sadly, that these GWagens have been changed to a plush pansy, with MB rating it merely at 3,500 lbs towing weight.

Anyway, with in-cabin locking of the center diff (putting it in 4WD), selective locking of the front and/or rear diff, and an incredibly low (2.8:1), low-gear transfer case that would let the car pull up my boat while merely idling (no exaggeration), it was likewise also unstoppable in any slippery road (especially with 4 snow tires). But of course, you had to use prudence when driving because it had none of the modern miracle electronics that hover like fairy-godmothers over incompetent drivers on the road today.

Nowadays, though, I only have my RWD Volvos, with 4 studded Nokian Hakka's (latest iteration, Hakka-5): my wife gets the '93 with ABS, and I use my '84 without) -- I save my good '93 for summer-only. I've been through all sorts of New England winter-vacation storms without problems with these tires on these cars.

What part of SE Ohio?

If you're out here on relatively good paved roads, just put good snow tires on the 240. You should take care of any suspension looseness regardless of the weather. I'm in Athens if you ever need a hand.

If you're out in the sticks, AWD/4WD is a good idea. I'd try a Subaru. Pretty tried and true. Even my Mom-in-law's Honda CR-V does fine.

As for a Bimmer X5, I don't think I'd call that a gold standard by any stretch... especially if you don't have ginormously deep pockets.

-Ryan

--

Athens, Ohio
1987 245 DL 324k, Dog-mobile, E-codes
1990 245 DL 137k M47, E-codes, GT Sway Bars, GT Braces, Dracos
1991 745 GL 304k, Regina, 23/21mm Turbo Sway Bars

I'm fine w/ my 240 in snow given the cost. If cost wasn't an issue, I'd want an AWD or 4WD diesel car. But I have a 4WD truck if I need it.

Understand about maintenance and replacing loose things. It's a constant battle on these rough roads. But still way better than when I was tearing up FWD cars.

Yes, I could replace all the bushings and the steering rack inner balls and I do those kinds of things on my wife's car. But for me the point of an old 240 is to "get the good out of it" as we say here.

do have snows I can put on if weather warrants it.

Anyway, my point wasn't to b*tch about the 240. Great car, been driving Volvos for years .... I chose the 240 based on cost. Jorrell's snow-trek posting - where he chose his XC AWD over his 240 - made me wonder if there were folks who thought the 240 was good in snow.

Some commented that they had multiple cars and thought their 240 was as good or better; others thought, no, AWD is the way to go. I'm in this 2nd camp.

I'm NE of you. I've been down in Hocking Hills a good bit recently but I'm NE of that.
--
240s: 2 drivers and some parts cars

Tires are the key. 100%. Yes, a good AWD car will accelerate far faster in snow than a 240, especially with winter tires. But I'll take a 240 with snow tires ANY day over any AWD car. Tires steer the car, not AWD.

That said, to mate a good AWD car with snow tires is glorious. The pickup in deep snow is quite astonishing. My friend had a super base model Impreza wagon. With snow tires on, I think it accelerated just as fast in deep snow as on dry pavement. Though on pavement it was beyond slow, that speed in snow was quite impressive!

I'm really not sure how the X5 would be so many miles ahead of a number of other AWD offerings in that class, but I've never driven one, nor do I have any intention of buying one.

Welp, that's all I got for opinion.

Nate

--
1997 850, 1979 242GT, 1990 740GL

I'll throw my vote in with the 4-matic-equipped cars from Benz only because I haven't driven any of the AWD vehicles from Volvo. The whole traction control and AWD technology subject is astounding when it works properly, especially with four premium winter tires and a good driver that is paying attention.

Believe it or not, I had a 1994 Geo Metro which was Chevy's version of the Suzuki Swift. Two door hatchback, 3 cylinder / 1 liter engine with a five speed trannie. I was always fascinated by these micro cars. So one day I saw one 4 sale along the road and bought it for 800.00. I didn't think it would be good in the snow with it's light weight. Boy was I wrong. It was a blast in the snow! Handled great and was very predictable with all-season radials. I think I had it for about 3 years and sold it with about 160,000 miles for 500.00. I ran the heck out of it all over Northern NJ. The only maintenance was replacing the wheel bearings. As with any vehicle, take it into a deserted, snow covered/icy parking lot and do some donuts and hard braking and see what the vehicle will do and how it behaves. Get a feel for it so as to be prepared on the road. The problem is no matter how good of a winter driver you are, there is always the other idiot, I mean motorist, on the road.

As far I have heard Suzuki Sidekick aka Geo Tracker is also very capable machine for snow and other applications requiring 4WD. Suzuki has been selling one or different version of Side kick in other countries as well(e. g. Suzuki/Maruti Gypsy for one).

Audi models with their Quattro transmission(with torsen middle diff) are very strong contender in AWD market. I do not know much about their longevity,
This contains good info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro
--
DD-1990 240 DL SW M47II FI 3.1 234 K miles

My personal preference at this point in time is the XC-70, an 06 in particular. Between the mechanical AWD system and the traction control system the car has simply stunned me with it's abilities. That being said, I'm certain that Subaru has similarly equipped vehicles but they have their issues as well.

I think it is key that a AWD vehicle is chosen with traction control and ABS, without those two features you will be moving back down the safety curve by about 20 years.

jorrell
--
92 245 287K miles, IPD'd to the hilt, 06 XC70, 00 Eclipse custom Turbo setup...currently taking names and kicking reputations!

I drive a similar vehicle .. wife's '06 Ford 500 AWD with traction control. very impressive in the snow however I notice significant understeer on ice. Creased a snow bank because of this last year. Anybody else notice understeer w/ AWD ?