When I lived in Oregon I used to take my 2014 GTI into various national forests, on all sorts of dirt trails. It had road-biased tires (yes, low profile), not much ground clearance, and 2 wheel drive. I never once got stuck. In winter, I would get up to the mountain faster than any of my friends in their lifted 4x4’s (still on the summer tire), and everyone would freak out when I got to the trailhead.
I just took my time, went slow, and didn’t take the car further than where it could go. Modern cars are plenty capable, given half a chance.
This was great. Is one of those articles that you read and think, man those are exactly my thoughts articulated in an amazing way with great points. Orange covers don't mean good recovery points! Stay safe.
You are correct but I still drive Subarus. I would never go off-road with them. I do believe that a Subaru, especially if equipped with good snow tires, is an excellent vehicle on an icy, snowy day. Moreover, they are very reliable, on pavement.
Fascinating and I actually read the whole article. Usually gear articles don't interest me. But this led me to then research what is my 2008 Honda CRV? I came upon my Honda when my Civic was initially rebuilt after the engine blew. Then a few months later the hood rod bounced when I went over these train tracks that I consistently cross. The rod landed on the battery and within a mile my electric system was completely fried.
Ok. Onward. My mechanic and I went to see this CRV that had been pulled behind an RV. And that had been its primary purpose. Only one time did the family take a trip outside of NC, otherwise Maggie Valley was the destination. The way that the car had been offered on Facebook Marketplace was problematic. Hence they were eager sellers. This vehicle was bought for luxury travel while they added other elements such as a post factory keyless entry automatic starter. And a really great deal was completed. I only had to replace the original brakes and tires. 168k miles.
Turns out the CRV is an EX-L with the lone option of a touchscreen navigation system that includes a rearview camera and digital audio card reader. With the navigation system, the premium sound system's CD changer migrates to the center console and a single-CD player is added behind the retracting touchscreen.
But is it an AWD, 4WD, or something else? Turns out that it is FWD that becomes a 4WD when the front wheels slip. Therefore this absolutely fascinating post by Wes doesn't technically apply to me.
Yep, you have an honestly pretty interesting 4WD system. Limitations are obviously the reactive only nature of it, and the lack of a low range transfer case. I'd definitely still carry a set of Maxtrax Minis.
Interesting read. I think it’s a little disingenuous to say that crossovers don’t offer any off-road capabilities over their standard unibody counterparts, there’s plenty of people who do some light off-roading in them, but I think your larger point still stands.
Most people would be better off just investing in a good pair of winter tires of knobby all terrains as needed.
Visit any developing country and you'll find beat old 2wd economy cars in places most Americans wouldn't take a 4x4. The idea that a Subaru can just about get down a gravel road is by no means "light off roading."
I think this is my fundamental issue with this article. If I didn't know better, I would go sell my car and buy a 4WD truck.
While I totally respect Wes' perspective, my mind goes back to my experience driving an old RAV-4 over the Andies. We did fine.
I drive a Lexus NX in California. It is a fancy RAV-4.
Why?
Because almost all of our driving is on pavement, and my "off-road" use is very limited. We get great gas mileage, which is really important when you are going all the way across California and half of Nevada to get to the trailhead. We have excellent driver assist features, which dramatically increase safety in the real world.
"Off-road" means going up a fire road to a campsite. I checked the distance on one of our preferred backcountry campgrounds in rural NV and the drive is 96% highway.
We put snow tires on in the winter to pass chain control, although I will try Michelin Cross Contacts this year, as I am tired of dealing with snow and ice, as well as 90-degree temperatures in Sacramento on the same day. It eats snow tires.
The real tricks to safely traversing the rural west are:
1. Not do anything stupid
2. Get appropriate tires
3. Not running out of gas
Would a Land Cruiser be a better vehicle?
I would still need snow tires in the winter. I would functionally drop my MPG in half. I would be able to drive marginally further up some trails in the middle of nowhere.
Remember this is an article about recovery gear, and the disparity between user ignorance of that gear, and the reality of its incompatibility with gussied up economy cars.
I felt it was necessary to include a basic description of traction systems here in order to highlight how limited a gussied up economy car's need for recovery gear is. If this is the first time you've ever been intercepted with a reality based message around traction systems, this probably isn't the best starting point.
The fact that this information isn't commonplace represents a huge problem. One you identify by again repeating false marketing claims about capability. I'll ask you the same question I ask all other people who insist on believing the crossover lie: what does your NX do that a Prius could not? The answer is: nothing beyond cost more money, drive less adeptly, and produce more carbon. I understand that in some circles the badge and the leather may be perceived as desirable.
You are right in identifying tires as the primary determine factor in a vehicle's capability. You are wrong in perceiving the Cross Climate as a tire it is safe to use in winter. It's just an economy tire with a three peak mountain snowflake rating. 3pmsf is a test in which the tire in question must demonstrate acceleration traction on packed snow that's 10 percent superior to the Michelin Standard Reference Test Tire (think shitty all season economy tire). No braking or lateral traction is tested, and no other relevant conditions (like ice) are included. To safely drive in winter weather, you need a tire capable of much higher performance, including on ice. Mount a set to a second set of wheels, and swap those on when necessary.
If you are unable to receive this information, please just save more responsible drivers the headache and expense of dealing with the crashes you cause, and stay home.
I'm sorry your trip to the Andes wasn't more interesting. Let me know next time you're headed that way and I'll get you some real off road routes from local friends.
Let's clarify. I think we are on the same page; I just lean more towards the pavement side of the equation.
I look at this through the same lens I do small airplanes. I think it would be cool to have a STOL CubCrafter that I can land on a sand bar. I also know that the real use case for private pilots is droning along on the way to Portland with one other person. I think I have landed off the pavement three times in the past 20 years. You buy for the 95%+ use case
There is very little difference between a prius with decent tires and any crossover.
There is also, for the average outdoorsy person, very little difference between a Prius and a Wrangler. The average Prius can go 99 %+ of the same places that the average Wrangler can. We do not need 4wd to travel up fire roads to campgrounds and trailheads. In fact, I saw a Prius at my preferred off-grid campground (Lye Creek, NV. Go! It is spectacular!). Take it slow and you will be fine.
Most people in cross-overs buy them because they are actually station wagons. A friend, who's family has a house on Donner Summit, drives an AWD 3 series wagon all winter with snow tires. It gets him through one of the snowiest places in the country just fine. He needs AWD to pass chain control. Unfortunately, there are very few station wagons available in this country. Subaru Outbacks are the default for a reason.
Why don't I drive a Prius? Cause I cannot fit a gunner kennel in a Prius. Why not a truck? Inner suburb parking. In fact, in my perfect world, I would have a Chevy Bolt and a Sequoia. Gotta keep the puppers in the climate control.
I am perfectly clear as to how AWD vs 4WD works. I remember locking the 4WD hubs on the old farm trucks. That does not change the fact that, even when we drove a vehicle with those features, we barely used them, even on Montana ranches. A regular 2WD would have been plenty sufficient most of the time.
The last "real" off-roader was my dad's Lexus GX470. He had crappy tires on it. It was terrifying.
We should carefully distinguish the use cases. Most people who like the outdoors are engaged in touring. They go somewhere to hike then drive to the next spot. I solve for this use case because I am like most people.
Moab-style off-roading is a highly specialized use case, even in places like Nevada, where opportunities exist. If off-roading is your chosen recreational activity, go for it. Even there most people trailer in dedicated off roaders like motorcycles, utv's, etc. That does not mean that your average hiker going to a trailhead in the Eastern Sierra needs a 4WD vehicle all summer.
The vast majority of people driving F-150 Raptors around are going nowhere near dirt. A random day in a muddy parking lot is not a good reason to buy that style of vehicle. But hey, recovery gear looks cool strapped to a rack!
We do carry recovery gear in a bin in the back. I pack straps, shackles, tire plugs, etc. The last time that stuff was used was to pull someone else out of the mud near Lassen. Fortunately, my buddy had his Tacoma on hand, so we used that vehicle. The time before was to extricate a truck from a dune/parking lot on the Sonoma coast. Would Maxtrax have been easier? Yes, but in both cases, we weren't off-roading, so we used what we had on hand. Having thought about it, the little maxtrax should go in the car on a full-time basis. When we really go out there, we carry a completely different set of gear including ranging from extra water to satellite comms.
Thanks for the offer on the Andes. I lived in South America for a while so I got that covered.
Yeah, totally agree that any normal car can reach most organized campgrounds. My one big argument for 4x4s (beyond winter, I really think the traction provided by 4WD is a necessary prerequisite) is going further. There's SO MUCH OUT THERE once you have a capable, safe, reliable 4x4, and most people will never see it.
And yes, the explosion in popularity for crossovers replacing normal sedans, hatches and wagons has been really depressing to watch. If you asked the normal American if they care about pollution, they'd probably give an enthusiastic yes, but then that same person is hoodwinked or forced by lack of choice into buying a significantly more polluting vehicle that offers only disadvantages compared to a similar normal car.
Having owned a Subaru (twice), I am always looking at the newer models and I just saw a Wilderness in the grocery store parking lot the other day and said to myself - that is pretty nice. But I had all sorts of issues with my Subarus.......and I am very happy with our Toyotas (two in the family). Mine is the hybrid van and I love the space, comfort and the fuel economy. The only issue - low ground clearance but it is AWD and other Toyota Sienna owners say it is excellent in the snow. With that said, when we have a foot of snow around here, we take the Toyota SUV.
"All-Wheel Drive: I’d never before believed the hype around Subaru’s full-time AWD system. But man, living with is believing. I’m getting ahead of myself here, but a big reason for not getting it before was because I’d only driven on the stock tires, which are so bad that the AWD system invests all its capability in fighting them, rather than helping increase performance. Swap them for something better and all of a sudden you have a car that can’t put a foot wrong. Unlike pretty much every other AWD or 4WD system in a crossover or SUV, Subarus drive all four wheels all the time, constantly re-apportioning torque as appropriate. Other vehicles have to wait until the driven axle loses traction before trying to fix that by sending drive elsewhere. Those systems are band-aids; Subaru’s is a performance enhancer.
As an AWD CRV owner this caught my eye. It was confusing to me because im unfamiliar with a lot of this. It started to make sense as I focused a bit. The steps to get unstuck are helpful and a little familiar to me from driving in deep heavy snow.
I didn’t mean to criticize. Just saying that I am so unfamiliar with the subject that I was confused at first but then you broke it down in a way helped me learn. For example. I had no idea what crossovers referred to and now I do.
Great article. As an owner of an AWD and 4WD, I know which one to depend upon and drive in sketchy conditions.
When I lived in Oregon I used to take my 2014 GTI into various national forests, on all sorts of dirt trails. It had road-biased tires (yes, low profile), not much ground clearance, and 2 wheel drive. I never once got stuck. In winter, I would get up to the mountain faster than any of my friends in their lifted 4x4’s (still on the summer tire), and everyone would freak out when I got to the trailhead.
I just took my time, went slow, and didn’t take the car further than where it could go. Modern cars are plenty capable, given half a chance.
Enjoyed that. All true. That's why I drive a Defender.
This was great. Is one of those articles that you read and think, man those are exactly my thoughts articulated in an amazing way with great points. Orange covers don't mean good recovery points! Stay safe.
Bulls Eye.
I've been following this for its public land articles, I had no idea it would also appeal to one of my favorite hobbies: Offroading
You are correct but I still drive Subarus. I would never go off-road with them. I do believe that a Subaru, especially if equipped with good snow tires, is an excellent vehicle on an icy, snowy day. Moreover, they are very reliable, on pavement.
What do you feel the Subaru does for you in snow that a Prius wouldn't, while using half the fuel?
Having driven a Prius and a Forester in Maine winters the Forester allowed me to actually reach work. I'm sorry for whatever Subaru did to you.
I don't think that factually describing how AWD works should offend anyone.
Fascinating and I actually read the whole article. Usually gear articles don't interest me. But this led me to then research what is my 2008 Honda CRV? I came upon my Honda when my Civic was initially rebuilt after the engine blew. Then a few months later the hood rod bounced when I went over these train tracks that I consistently cross. The rod landed on the battery and within a mile my electric system was completely fried.
Ok. Onward. My mechanic and I went to see this CRV that had been pulled behind an RV. And that had been its primary purpose. Only one time did the family take a trip outside of NC, otherwise Maggie Valley was the destination. The way that the car had been offered on Facebook Marketplace was problematic. Hence they were eager sellers. This vehicle was bought for luxury travel while they added other elements such as a post factory keyless entry automatic starter. And a really great deal was completed. I only had to replace the original brakes and tires. 168k miles.
Turns out the CRV is an EX-L with the lone option of a touchscreen navigation system that includes a rearview camera and digital audio card reader. With the navigation system, the premium sound system's CD changer migrates to the center console and a single-CD player is added behind the retracting touchscreen.
But is it an AWD, 4WD, or something else? Turns out that it is FWD that becomes a 4WD when the front wheels slip. Therefore this absolutely fascinating post by Wes doesn't technically apply to me.
Yep, you have an honestly pretty interesting 4WD system. Limitations are obviously the reactive only nature of it, and the lack of a low range transfer case. I'd definitely still carry a set of Maxtrax Minis.
I will take that under advisement!
Thanks Wes!
Interesting read. I think it’s a little disingenuous to say that crossovers don’t offer any off-road capabilities over their standard unibody counterparts, there’s plenty of people who do some light off-roading in them, but I think your larger point still stands.
Most people would be better off just investing in a good pair of winter tires of knobby all terrains as needed.
Visit any developing country and you'll find beat old 2wd economy cars in places most Americans wouldn't take a 4x4. The idea that a Subaru can just about get down a gravel road is by no means "light off roading."
I think this is my fundamental issue with this article. If I didn't know better, I would go sell my car and buy a 4WD truck.
While I totally respect Wes' perspective, my mind goes back to my experience driving an old RAV-4 over the Andies. We did fine.
I drive a Lexus NX in California. It is a fancy RAV-4.
Why?
Because almost all of our driving is on pavement, and my "off-road" use is very limited. We get great gas mileage, which is really important when you are going all the way across California and half of Nevada to get to the trailhead. We have excellent driver assist features, which dramatically increase safety in the real world.
"Off-road" means going up a fire road to a campsite. I checked the distance on one of our preferred backcountry campgrounds in rural NV and the drive is 96% highway.
We put snow tires on in the winter to pass chain control, although I will try Michelin Cross Contacts this year, as I am tired of dealing with snow and ice, as well as 90-degree temperatures in Sacramento on the same day. It eats snow tires.
The real tricks to safely traversing the rural west are:
1. Not do anything stupid
2. Get appropriate tires
3. Not running out of gas
Would a Land Cruiser be a better vehicle?
I would still need snow tires in the winter. I would functionally drop my MPG in half. I would be able to drive marginally further up some trails in the middle of nowhere.
All to solve less than 1% of the problem.
Remember this is an article about recovery gear, and the disparity between user ignorance of that gear, and the reality of its incompatibility with gussied up economy cars.
I felt it was necessary to include a basic description of traction systems here in order to highlight how limited a gussied up economy car's need for recovery gear is. If this is the first time you've ever been intercepted with a reality based message around traction systems, this probably isn't the best starting point.
The fact that this information isn't commonplace represents a huge problem. One you identify by again repeating false marketing claims about capability. I'll ask you the same question I ask all other people who insist on believing the crossover lie: what does your NX do that a Prius could not? The answer is: nothing beyond cost more money, drive less adeptly, and produce more carbon. I understand that in some circles the badge and the leather may be perceived as desirable.
You are right in identifying tires as the primary determine factor in a vehicle's capability. You are wrong in perceiving the Cross Climate as a tire it is safe to use in winter. It's just an economy tire with a three peak mountain snowflake rating. 3pmsf is a test in which the tire in question must demonstrate acceleration traction on packed snow that's 10 percent superior to the Michelin Standard Reference Test Tire (think shitty all season economy tire). No braking or lateral traction is tested, and no other relevant conditions (like ice) are included. To safely drive in winter weather, you need a tire capable of much higher performance, including on ice. Mount a set to a second set of wheels, and swap those on when necessary.
If you are unable to receive this information, please just save more responsible drivers the headache and expense of dealing with the crashes you cause, and stay home.
I'm sorry your trip to the Andes wasn't more interesting. Let me know next time you're headed that way and I'll get you some real off road routes from local friends.
Let's clarify. I think we are on the same page; I just lean more towards the pavement side of the equation.
I look at this through the same lens I do small airplanes. I think it would be cool to have a STOL CubCrafter that I can land on a sand bar. I also know that the real use case for private pilots is droning along on the way to Portland with one other person. I think I have landed off the pavement three times in the past 20 years. You buy for the 95%+ use case
There is very little difference between a prius with decent tires and any crossover.
There is also, for the average outdoorsy person, very little difference between a Prius and a Wrangler. The average Prius can go 99 %+ of the same places that the average Wrangler can. We do not need 4wd to travel up fire roads to campgrounds and trailheads. In fact, I saw a Prius at my preferred off-grid campground (Lye Creek, NV. Go! It is spectacular!). Take it slow and you will be fine.
Most people in cross-overs buy them because they are actually station wagons. A friend, who's family has a house on Donner Summit, drives an AWD 3 series wagon all winter with snow tires. It gets him through one of the snowiest places in the country just fine. He needs AWD to pass chain control. Unfortunately, there are very few station wagons available in this country. Subaru Outbacks are the default for a reason.
Why don't I drive a Prius? Cause I cannot fit a gunner kennel in a Prius. Why not a truck? Inner suburb parking. In fact, in my perfect world, I would have a Chevy Bolt and a Sequoia. Gotta keep the puppers in the climate control.
I am perfectly clear as to how AWD vs 4WD works. I remember locking the 4WD hubs on the old farm trucks. That does not change the fact that, even when we drove a vehicle with those features, we barely used them, even on Montana ranches. A regular 2WD would have been plenty sufficient most of the time.
The last "real" off-roader was my dad's Lexus GX470. He had crappy tires on it. It was terrifying.
We should carefully distinguish the use cases. Most people who like the outdoors are engaged in touring. They go somewhere to hike then drive to the next spot. I solve for this use case because I am like most people.
Moab-style off-roading is a highly specialized use case, even in places like Nevada, where opportunities exist. If off-roading is your chosen recreational activity, go for it. Even there most people trailer in dedicated off roaders like motorcycles, utv's, etc. That does not mean that your average hiker going to a trailhead in the Eastern Sierra needs a 4WD vehicle all summer.
The vast majority of people driving F-150 Raptors around are going nowhere near dirt. A random day in a muddy parking lot is not a good reason to buy that style of vehicle. But hey, recovery gear looks cool strapped to a rack!
We do carry recovery gear in a bin in the back. I pack straps, shackles, tire plugs, etc. The last time that stuff was used was to pull someone else out of the mud near Lassen. Fortunately, my buddy had his Tacoma on hand, so we used that vehicle. The time before was to extricate a truck from a dune/parking lot on the Sonoma coast. Would Maxtrax have been easier? Yes, but in both cases, we weren't off-roading, so we used what we had on hand. Having thought about it, the little maxtrax should go in the car on a full-time basis. When we really go out there, we carry a completely different set of gear including ranging from extra water to satellite comms.
Thanks for the offer on the Andes. I lived in South America for a while so I got that covered.
Yeah, totally agree that any normal car can reach most organized campgrounds. My one big argument for 4x4s (beyond winter, I really think the traction provided by 4WD is a necessary prerequisite) is going further. There's SO MUCH OUT THERE once you have a capable, safe, reliable 4x4, and most people will never see it.
And yes, the explosion in popularity for crossovers replacing normal sedans, hatches and wagons has been really depressing to watch. If you asked the normal American if they care about pollution, they'd probably give an enthusiastic yes, but then that same person is hoodwinked or forced by lack of choice into buying a significantly more polluting vehicle that offers only disadvantages compared to a similar normal car.
Having owned a Subaru (twice), I am always looking at the newer models and I just saw a Wilderness in the grocery store parking lot the other day and said to myself - that is pretty nice. But I had all sorts of issues with my Subarus.......and I am very happy with our Toyotas (two in the family). Mine is the hybrid van and I love the space, comfort and the fuel economy. The only issue - low ground clearance but it is AWD and other Toyota Sienna owners say it is excellent in the snow. With that said, when we have a foot of snow around here, we take the Toyota SUV.
You have to remember that AWD is a scam, nothing more. If you need traction, you need four wheel drive.
True.
This you? https://gizmodo.com/how-i-turned-my-subaru-outback-into-a-real-adventuremob-1716068985.
"All-Wheel Drive: I’d never before believed the hype around Subaru’s full-time AWD system. But man, living with is believing. I’m getting ahead of myself here, but a big reason for not getting it before was because I’d only driven on the stock tires, which are so bad that the AWD system invests all its capability in fighting them, rather than helping increase performance. Swap them for something better and all of a sudden you have a car that can’t put a foot wrong. Unlike pretty much every other AWD or 4WD system in a crossover or SUV, Subarus drive all four wheels all the time, constantly re-apportioning torque as appropriate. Other vehicles have to wait until the driven axle loses traction before trying to fix that by sending drive elsewhere. Those systems are band-aids; Subaru’s is a performance enhancer.
Yep, that was me 10 years ago, before learning better.
As an AWD CRV owner this caught my eye. It was confusing to me because im unfamiliar with a lot of this. It started to make sense as I focused a bit. The steps to get unstuck are helpful and a little familiar to me from driving in deep heavy snow.
What parts did you find confusing?
I didn’t mean to criticize. Just saying that I am so unfamiliar with the subject that I was confused at first but then you broke it down in a way helped me learn. For example. I had no idea what crossovers referred to and now I do.
Oh no criticism taken. I love to hear from people who are less familiar with these topics to learn how I can better communicate them to you.
Good feedback on crossover definition!
😊 I actually printed it (double sided) so I can study it. I can let you know more later if you like.