User Controls
Shopping for a new car/truck
-
2020-02-29 at 2:59 AM UTCmodern stock AWD for suv's is perfectly sufficient for driving around in bad weather and crummy roads, and i've seen very very few issues with them. they don't need to be any stronger than they are. it'd just be more expensive with no benefit.
what i mean is dual clutch central differential AWD transmissions don't fail any more than regular transaxles or RWD transmissions. and combined with ESC, they provide the absolute best solution for sub-optimal driving conditions and automated corrections in dangerous situations. what i see most often when vehicles come in with traction control and ESC related diagnostic trouble codes is wheel speed sensors. this problem isn't unique to AWD vehicles, but it does make the computer panic more than normal because it relies on that information for safety on a constant basis, rather just in traction-loss events.
some of these sensors are easily replaced by a retard on his driveway. others are cap-type that require you to remove the wheel bearing. which a retard can do, and NAPA will loan you a slide hammer to do it, but you'll probably take it to a mechanic, and they'll probably charge you 2-3 hours labor and the sensor costs 75-150 dollars.
i've never seen a differential fail in a AWD system on a modern suv. automatics are more likely to have a 'failure' than a manual only because torque converters aren't considered a wear item and i've seen TCCS (torque converter clutch solenoids) and that thing that adjusts tension based on detected RPM slip between crank and TC likes to go bad. of course, manual clutches are considered a wear item, but the problem is that many shops don't like to work on automatic transmission guts. dealerships will often simply give you a quote for a new transmission and the old one gets remanned. but they can be serviced if that happens. find a shop that likes to do trannie refurb.
so, no, AWD isn't 'less reliable' than any other transmission system. within it's intended use case, and in modern designs, it's both highly effective and sturdy. it's just not for hauling - it's for managing bad road conditions. if i had to bet on which vehicle is gonna need service first i'd bet on the old truck in a heartbeat. -
2020-02-29 at 3:08 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib modern stock AWD for suv's is perfectly sufficient for driving around in bad weather and crummy roads, and i've seen very very few issues with them. they don't need to be any stronger than they are. it'd just be more expensive with no benefit.
what i mean is dual clutch central differential AWD transmissions don't fail any more than regular transaxles or RWD transmissions. and combined with ESC, they provide the absolute best solution for sub-optimal driving conditions and automated corrections in dangerous situations. what i see most often when vehicles come in with traction control and ESC related diagnostic trouble codes is wheel speed sensors. this problem isn't unique to AWD vehicles, but it does make the computer panic more than normal because it relies on that information for safety on a constant basis, rather just in traction-loss events.
some of these sensors are easily replaced by a retard on his driveway. others are cap-type that require you to remove the wheel bearing. which a retard can do, and NAPA will loan you a slide hammer to do it, but you'll probably take it to a mechanic, and they'll probably charge you 2-3 hours labor and the sensor costs 75-150 dollars.
i've never seen a differential fail in a AWD system on a modern suv. automatics are more likely to have a 'failure' than a manual only because torque converters aren't considered a wear item and i've seen TCCS (torque converter clutch solenoids) and that thing that adjusts tension based on detected RPM slip between crank and TC likes to go bad. of course, manual clutches are considered a wear item, but the problem is that many shops don't like to work on automatic transmission guts. dealerships will often simply give you a quote for a new transmission and the old one gets remanned. but they can be serviced if that happens. find a shop that likes to do trannie refurb.
so, no, AWD isn't 'less reliable' than any other transmission system. within it's intended use case, and in modern designs, it's both highly effective and sturdy. it's just not for hauling - it's for managing bad road conditions. if i had to bet on which vehicle is gonna need service first i'd bet on the old truck in a heartbeat.
You say "modern"
where does say, a 2005 and a 2010 fit into this equation? -
2020-02-29 at 3:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by Cheyes So, I'm NOT an independent contractor, I'm an employee (we are going to IOC very shortly) for a delivery company, but they made us give them proof of personal insurance, which I have. I thought I read on the website that they guaranteed liability towards the other driver just like uber so I didn't worry about getting a commercial endorsement (retarded, yes) but I can no longer find that webpage and they just told me "no we don't have anything for you, you're required to have your own to drive with us".
long story short my insurance company was told by other driver that I was driving for my job during the accident so they know, but I can't get ahold of them till Monday to figure this out now.
You were in your personal vehicle or the companies vehicle? Also did the vehicle you were operating require a cdl or not? If yes do you have your cdl? -
2020-02-29 at 3:14 AM UTC
Originally posted by Cheyes You say "modern"
where does say, a 2005 and a 2010 fit into this equation?
i'd say 2009 to 2013 is about when really reliable SUV AWD systems started being built. you can probably find a nice 2009 subaru forester for about 6000 dollars.
edit: avoid vehicles which have been leased unless you have the complete service history back to the pre-delivery inspection. -
2020-02-29 at 3:17 AM UTC
-
2020-02-29 at 3:18 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib modern stock AWD for suv's is perfectly sufficient for driving around in bad weather and crummy roads, and i've seen very very few issues with them. they don't need to be any stronger than they are. it'd just be more expensive with no benefit.
what i mean is dual clutch central differential AWD transmissions don't fail any more than regular transaxles or RWD transmissions. and combined with ESC, they provide the absolute best solution for sub-optimal driving conditions and automated corrections in dangerous situations. what i see most often when vehicles come in with traction control and ESC related diagnostic trouble codes is wheel speed sensors. this problem isn't unique to AWD vehicles, but it does make the computer panic more than normal because it relies on that information for safety on a constant basis, rather just in traction-loss events.
some of these sensors are easily replaced by a retard on his driveway. others are cap-type that require you to remove the wheel bearing. which a retard can do, and NAPA will loan you a slide hammer to do it, but you'll probably take it to a mechanic, and they'll probably charge you 2-3 hours labor and the sensor costs 75-150 dollars.
i've never seen a differential fail in a AWD system on a modern suv. automatics are more likely to have a 'failure' than a manual only because torque converters aren't considered a wear item and i've seen TCCS (torque converter clutch solenoids) and that thing that adjusts tension based on detected RPM slip between crank and TC likes to go bad. of course, manual clutches are considered a wear item, but the problem is that many shops don't like to work on automatic transmission guts. dealerships will often simply give you a quote for a new transmission and the old one gets remanned. but they can be serviced if that happens. find a shop that likes to do trannie refurb.
so, no, AWD isn't 'less reliable' than any other transmission system. within it's intended use case, and in modern designs, it's both highly effective and sturdy. it's just not for hauling - it's for managing bad road conditions. if i had to bet on which vehicle is gonna need service first i'd bet on the old truck in a heartbeat.
I am out tonight and not going to type up a response on my phone to this until I am home on my computer. There is alot I disagree with in this post -
2020-02-29 at 3:22 AM UTC
Originally posted by jesus enriquez you could have just said 'i have absolutely no clue about the legalities of such things' and saved yourself the embarrassment of trying to pretend you have a clue when its obvious you dont.
is or isnt wont stop a marginally decent lawyer from going after the company and holding them liable to the victim for damages. im not explaining the legalities of it
You have absolutely no clue what the fuck you are talking about. You are talking about a completely different situation based on how irrelevant that statement is -
2020-02-29 at 3:24 AM UTC
-
2020-02-29 at 3:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by jesus enriquez read the OP, idiot. the topic is the OP getting in a wreck while at work and his concern about going bankrupt due to the legal situation.
youre the idiot that keeps asking questions and expressing confusion about issues that were already pointed out in the OP
You stupid fuck, there are so many variables that have not yet been brought to light, but here you are making assumptions about how the whole situation went down. Did you read the contract word for word between him and his employer? Did you contact his insurance company and review his policy? Do you know what state he is in? Do you know if he was on lunch or actually doing his job? Are you this retarded all the time? -
2020-02-29 at 3:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by jesus enriquez if you never go off-road you dont need 4WD
and dont listen to that idiot saying 2WD are more reliable than 4WD. 2WD and 4WD trucks are literally identical except for the front axle, differential, and xfer case.
yep. there's really not much of a difference. i understand that the layman thinks 'more stuff = more complex = more break' but it doesn't pan out like that practically. -
2020-02-29 at 3:46 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib yep. there's really not much of a difference. i understand that the layman thinks 'more stuff = more complex = more break' but it doesn't pan out like that practically.
I am no longer taking your posts seriously. Any idiot knows more parts = more to fail. If that wasnt the case then every vehicle would be awd or 4wd since according to you "it doesnt pan out like that" -
2020-02-29 at 3:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by cigreting I am no longer taking your posts seriously. Any idiot knows more parts = more to fail. If that wasnt the case them every vehicle would be awd or 4wd since according to you "it doesnt pan out like that"
i am a master technician working heavy line with a dealership for an upscale import manufacturer. heavy line means that when driveability tickets enter the shop because of engine, transmission, or suspension concerns, the foreman dispatches them to me first. i specialize in engine management and diagnosis.
when i say things like that, i'm not just speculating. -
2020-02-29 at 3:51 AM UTC
-
2020-03-01 at 4:58 AM UTCI found a 2016 Chevy Trax (yes I kno thats gay as fuck) AWD with 90k miles for 9 grand.. and a Hyundai Santa Fe 2009 3.3L AWD 164k miles for 5.5k, and a 2010 Santa Fe 3.5L AWD with 75k miles for 8 grand.
I would like to save money if possible but not if it doesn't make sense... I will almost certainly be doing a TON of driving in this car for the forseeable future. -
2020-03-01 at 5:10 AM UTCI really don't know anything about a trax but the 2010 with 75k is the way to go. Santa Fes wont go forever but parts are cheap. As long as theres no rust and the frame is good you can get another 175 on it easy then resell and actually get something towards a new vehicle.
You seem to take employment very seriously for someone your age. Thats very admirable and unlike myself when I was your age what the fuck, I really wouldn't have given a fuck if I was an astronaut I was incapable of working for anyone other than myself
