39% of Yeti's are 4x4

[HKPhooey]

I cannot see the point in buying something that looks like a 4wd but that's actually a 2wd.

If I wanted a smaller 2wd, I'd buy the Roomster and save a few pounds.

Because I don't need a 4x4 and I like looking over hedges!

I didn't want a smaller car - the Yeti makes a much more interesting Golf/A3/Focus alternative.

[Llanigraham]

Skoda please provide a dashboard rotary controller for the Haldex modes: economical, automatic and permanent 4WD...!

Trekker,

sorry to tell you this, but that would probably be the worst thing that Skoda could do for probably 99% of owners, simply because they wouldn't actually understand what they need.

Haldex 4 is perfectly good because it does all this for you without any thought by you:

It is economical because if you don't need 4x4 you don't have it.

It is automatic because when it senses you need drive elsewhere it puts it there.

It is permanent 4x4 when it needs to be. There are times when permanent 4x4 is dangerous and potentially mechanically damaging; would you recognise those times?

I am not surprised by the numbers of 4x4's, as I am not surprised by the sales of Freelander 2WD's. Many people want the "concept" of the four wheel drive but have no need for the actuality. A good example are the "yummy mummys" on the school run. Also many have believed the "greenies" and their "4x4's are killing the world" cr@p. I don't worry about other peoples choices as thankfully we still live in a "generally" free world. I have a 4x4 because I want one and it makes my life and my hobbies much easier, plus it gives me a chance to help my local community when required.

[GJay]

I have a 4x4 because I want one

Exactly, how boring would it be if we only got what we needed rather than wanted. I'm getting a SM 170 4x4 not because I need it but because I want one, I want to enjoy driving it (more so than my Cashcow) and I feel that a 4x4 will help me achieve that. if I get the chance to do some mild offroading and tackle snowy winters then so much the better.

[rockhopper]

I have a 4x4 because I want one

[Frank Bullitt]

A few things to disagree with here.

Where do you get the impression that the 4 wheel drive will not be as light to drive as the 2wd? I find my 4wd lighter than the 2wd Octavia it replaced and also my wife's 2wd Roomster Scout. The 4wd Yeti is a dream to drive.

You are not far away in Cambridgeshire and I commute daily to the Essex/ Cambridgeshire border. This winter has been much worse than last and I was mighty pleased to have a 4wd Yeti on winter tyres to do the 60 mile round trip.

My Yeti experience of Haldex has been very positive and in summer I find the 'Quattro' factor to make the car very pleasant to drive on twisty country roads. There is a price to pay for the 4wd but I am much happier year round to be driving something that feels so secure and remains very economical to run.

In my strictly personal opinion, I cannot see the point in buying something that looks like a 4wd but that's actually a 2wd. So much so that I found this weeks test of the new 2wd LR Freelander quite a laugh. If you compare the circuit times (wet or dry) the 4wd Yeti runs rings around a more powerful and much more expensive 2wd Landrover.

I'm sure that the 2wd Yeti is still a brilliant car and I like the sound of the 'small' 1.2 and 1.4 petrols but I am sure I made the right choice with my 4wd. If I wanted a smaller 2wd, I'd buy the Roomster and save a few pounds.

As Trekker points out, model-for model 2wd is lighter than 4wd - otherwise you you could look at a Suzuki Jimny that weighs about 1000kg, compare it to a 2-tonne S-klasse and announce that 4wd weighs half as much as 2wd.

Can't account for your experience this winter compared to mine, but we've found this year better; either way, my 2wd 185/50 tyred A2 never felt compromised during either.

Haldex does not give the 'quattro' factor - quattro is permanent 4wd although it has of course been abused by Audi who now tack it onto all 4wd models they produce. The rear wheels only get power when the front start to loose traction - clever, but in my experience unintuative and causes me to not have confidence in it (lack of linearity) but appreciate there will be more modern versions of Haldex

I'm 6'4", my son will likely end-up taller than me so interior space is key to us; the Yeti passes the 'me behind me' test that most cars from the Mondeo-class fail, and that's important to us. Whether it is 2wd or 4wd doesn't really matter when it's about the interior space. As for 2wd being wrong in such a car, I'd refer you back to the father of all crossovers - the Matcha Simca Rancho; it was 2wd.

My point being that in the vast case of circumstances 2wd out-performs 4wd - that doesn't mean the latter is 'wrong'...

[Trekker]

Trekker,

sorry to tell you this, but that would probably be the worst thing that Skoda could do for probably 99% of owners, simply because they wouldn't actually understand what they need.

Haldex 4 is perfectly good because it does all this for you without any thought by you:

It is economical because if you don't need 4x4 you don't have it.

It is automatic because when it senses you need drive elsewhere it puts it there.

It is permanent 4x4 when it needs to be. There are times when permanent 4x4 is dangerous and potentially mechanically damaging; would you recognise those times?

To say adding a feature to the Yeti that allowed the driver to select 2WD or 4WD manually would be the worst thing Skoda could do for 99% of owners because you believe the 99% would not know if they needed 4WD is a bit much and somewhat insulting. Of course the driver is going to know when they need a bit of 4WD and when they don't. If I am driving on a boring dry motorway, then I would have 2WD selected for economy. If the road conditions look a bit slippery or I feel a bit frisky, then I would select permanent 4WD. I, like more than 1% I suspect, don't need a computer to tell me what I need. I want consistent confidence inspiring responses from my machine. For added safety, the permanent 4WD would prevent some grip that would have the computer automatically sensing, reacting and juggling power to various wheels searching for. The difference between prevention of loss of grip and attempting to find it again once lost might equate to making round a wet corner or sitting sideways in a ditch.

Did you have any examples of when permanent four wheel drive is dangerous? I honestly can't think of any, but welcome your thoughts on this as I am currently of the belief that permanent four wheel drive is safer...

[Freshacre]

I can see what you're both saying in this discussion... However, if I am in a pickle and maybe not certain to get round that wet bend, I don't think I would have the time nor the knowledge to be flicking the four wheel drive on or off. I think I'd be much happier and safer leaving it to the system as I struggled to steer, and say my prayers!!

I feel it would be a step too far to have to take charge in a safety situation...

On the other hand, if I was burning around having a bit of fun, then I could see that it would be interesting to have that control at my disposal.

The more I improve my understanding of the various FWD systems and how they work, the more I am sincerely grateful that the Skoda engineers have set my Yeti up in the way they have, and I'm very happy to trust their judgement in that respect!

And just one other point. If, in this "ordinary" car (ie not a supercar or a racer) the system was built to allow the driver to make those decisions, some might get into difficulties by experimenting with it - or, in other words - playing silly buggers, possibly endangering themselves and others.

On balance, for all these reasons, I think I'm with Graham on this one.

I'll go get my handbag

[Bassa]

The rather unloved Alfa Romeo 33 from the 1980s/1990s produced a permanent 4WD version during its production run. This was on a road car and I believe the main reason for it was to combat the excessive torque steer under acceleration suffered by the 2WD 1.7 boxer engined car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duNB7edxXfk

[Bobdog]

Why are people on both sides of this fence getting their knickers in such a twist? There is no such thing as the perfect car. We all identify a range of preferences; be they to do with style, space, speed, roadholding, safety, brand image, budget, practicality and many more - and make our choices accordingly. Sometimes those choices might not seem rational to another, but what the hell - it's your money and your preference. I've made my choice, based on reasons peculiar to me, and I'm very happy with it. If you've made a different choice that's cool, it's no skin off my nose (said the man converting to Judaism). You're happy with what you've got, I'm happy with what I've got. Why bicker about it?

[jan25]

Skoda Auto news has an article on their recent 4x4 press day, which includes the persentage of sales for each model fitted with the 4x4 system

"15.5 percent of Octavia Combi customers selected the all-wheel version of the respective model in 2010. In case of the Superb and the Superb Combi, the figure was 5.4 percent, and 15.7 percent respectively. The Yeti recorded the highest demand for the 4x4 drive last year. 39 percent of customers chose the all-wheel version of this model during the first full production year. In markets such as the Alpine countries or Scandinavia, the percentages are even higher".

My link

TP

Just to get back to the original point - I can't remember if I entered my details on this poll. What's the easiest way to check?

Sorry - quoted the wrong post! Its the Colour, Engine and Trim Survey I refer to.

Cracked it! I don't think the site was working fully yesterday; I couldn't see the "view voters" option. Got it now, and have discovered I did not vote. Will do.

Edited 7 February, 2011 by jan25

[Trevorminor]

Why are people on both sides of this fence getting their knickers in such a twist? There is no such thing as the perfect car. We all identify a range of preferences; be they to do with style, space, speed, roadholding, safety, brand image, budget, practicality and many more - and make our choices accordingly. Sometimes those choices might not seem rational to another, but what the hell - it's your money and your preference. I've made my choice, based on reasons peculiar to me, and I'm very happy with it. If you've made a different choice that's cool, it's no skin off my nose (said the man converting to Judaism). You're happy with what you've got, I'm happy with what I've got. Why bicker about it?

Who is getting their 'knickers in a twist'. Healthy debate and discussion is bread and butter to this forum and long may it continue.

It would be pretty boring if every initial posing were to be followed up by just a series of +1, +2, +3 etc. I love a bit of contoversy and find that I learn from other's responses and they may possibly just pick up the odd thing from my postings - even if they don't always agree with it.

[bilun777]

Who is getting their 'knickers in a twist'. Healthy debate and discussion is bread and butter to this forum and long may it continue.

It would be pretty boring if every initial posing were to be followed up by just a series of +1, +2, +3 etc. I love a bit of contoversy and find that I learn from other's responses and they may possibly just pick up the odd thing from my postings - even if they don't always agree with it.

+ 1

[Llanigraham]

To say adding a feature to the Yeti that allowed the driver to select 2WD or 4WD manually would be the worst thing Skoda could do for 99% of owners because you believe the 99% would not know if they needed 4WD is a bit much and somewhat insulting. Of course the driver is going to know when they need a bit of 4WD and when they don't. If I am driving on a boring dry motorway, then I would have 2WD selected for economy. If the road conditions look a bit slippery or I feel a bit frisky, then I would select permanent 4WD. I, like more than 1% I suspect, don't need a computer to tell me what I need. I want consistent confidence inspiring responses from my machine. For added safety, the permanent 4WD would prevent some grip that would have the computer automatically sensing, reacting and juggling power to various wheels searching for. The difference between prevention of loss of grip and attempting to find it again once lost might equate to making round a wet corner or sitting sideways in a ditch.

Did you have any examples of when permanent four wheel drive is dangerous? I honestly can't think of any, but welcome your thoughts on this as I am currently of the belief that permanent four wheel drive is safer...

Trekker,

I have to ask, but what experience and training have you received in the use of 4 wheel drive, both on and off road? Also how much do you know of the Haldex 4 system fitted to the Yeti? Have you actually driven one off-road?

I have been trained and have taught off-road driving with various systems for nearly 25 years, from simple Series Land Rovers through to modern Haldex systems, as fitted to the Freelander 2. From expereince I know that many people think that 4WD is the answer to all their problems and that it means they can go anywhere and everywhere. They then are surprised that their methods end up with them getting stuck! They then have to be re-taught the "correct or better" way. Interestingly men seem to cause more problems than women when teaching!

The Haldex 4 system is TOTALLY automatic, and for the majority of the time the Yeti is a "normal" front wheel drive car. It only goes into 4 wheel drive mode when slip is detected and then gradually feeds power to the rear, AS REQUIRED. It is therfore possible to have 70% front and 30% rear, which is not practical with a switched system. During the last 2 lots of snow here I have been most impressed with the capability of the Yeti, even on the wide standard tyres. I drove a couple of hundred miles to and from work on surfaces that varied from hard packed ice to deep virgin snow and tobe honest hardly noticed the 4 wheel drive system working. It had to be severely provoked to get a noticeable response, and that was only managed in a large closed car park.

The danger of having permanent 4 wheel drive comes about with transmission wind-up, and typically and commonly occurs when people leave their vehicle in 4WD but on a hard surface where there is no slip factor. This can result in severe damage to the transmission system, but also can make steering very hard because the vehicle always want to drive in a straight line.

ADD.

Look at the number of new large 4WD vehicles, such as the BMW or Range Rover. Although these are permanent 4 wheel drive they don't allow you to choose whether you want this or not. The only variables they are allow are to take into account the type of surface or terrain you are crossing.

Edited 6 February, 2011 by Llanigraham

[Terfyn]

Who is getting their 'knickers in a twist'. Healthy debate and discussion is bread and butter to this forum and long may it continue.

It would be pretty boring if every initial posing were to be followed up by just a series of +1, +2, +3 etc. I love a bit of contoversy and find that I learn from other's responses and they may possibly just pick up the odd thing from my postings - even if they don't always agree with it.

Why have you bought a 4x4 if you live in Colchester? Surely a 2wd would suit you better.

At least I had good reason to by a four wheel drive as two of the worst winters in recent memory have proved.

[GJay]

Why have you bought a 4x4 if you live in Colchester? Surely a 2wd would suit you better.

At least I had good reason to by a four wheel drive as two of the worst winters in recent memory have proved.

I would guess because he wants to and he can? I cannot see why the OP has to justify the purchase of a 4WD to you or anybody else, it's entirely up to him or are you suggesting that we should all only buy what we can justify?

Edited 6 February, 2011 by GJay

[Yetiflute]

I would guess because he wants to and he can? I cannot see why the OP has to justify the purchase of a 4WD to you or anybody else, it's entirely up to him or are you suggesting that we should all only buy what we can justify?

Totally agreed. There is no way I can justify my Yeti170 4x4 except that I could afford it and I fancied the biggest and the best. Right now all my needs are perfectly adequately covered by our Fabia which could continue doing so indefinitely - however I still can't wait for that Yeti 170 elegance 4x4 to arrive.

[rockhopper]

I'm based in Croydon. I wanted a 4x4. Our area has been badly affected by snow these last 2 winters. Being self employed, if I don't work I can't pay the mortgage.

The hills around where I live are steep, many around 20-25%. Winter tyres help, but so does 4WD.

I also wanted an diesel automatic and the only version available was the 4x4.

I have always wanted another Range Rover, but could not justify the running expenses. Saw the SM & discounted it as it wan't available with automatic. A few months later when looking again, realised that they had launched a DSG version. Perfect.

I would have bought a Scout 2 1/2 years ago when I bought the Octavia, but it wasn't available with DSG. It now is, if you can get hold of one. Bit like a SM DSG at the moment.

Mike

[Trevorminor]

Why have you bought a 4x4 if you live in Colchester? Surely a 2wd would suit you better.

At least I had good reason to by a four wheel drive as two of the worst winters in recent memory have proved.

Because I live out in the countryside (amazingly there is quite a bit in Essex). I live in a village where the roads are not salted or cleared for 5 miles into Colchester and I then commute up to the Cambridgeshire border along a lot of B roads, that are again not treated.

At weekends we often venture up to Suffolk and then it goes properly off road. It is used quite a bit on muddy farm roads and tracks and the 4wd gives that extra bit of reassurance.

During last winter (not as harsh as this one!!!) I lost three days of work through not getting to work. This winter I have actually relished the driving and have not got stuck once but I accept that this could be largely due to using winter tyres.

Another reason for 4wd purchase however was a desire to have a 140 CRd and they are presently only available with 4 wheel drive. My Octavia had 140 hp and I wanted something with a similar amount of oomph. As also mentioned in another post, I feeel that the Yeti looks like a 4wd and therefore I personally would not want a 2wd.

4wd done properly as per Skodas and particularly the Yeti, seems to provide a car that is nice and light to drive, economical (an easy 50mpg) and nippy both on twisty country roads and the odd trip onto a dual carriageway or even a Motorway. Actually, I've just realised, it's never been on a Motorway - the nearest is 50 miles away in the wrong direction for me!!

So to summarise:

Rural Essex/Suffolk + 20 miles of ice and packed snow + 5am + 4wd SM = happy Skoda owner.

Rural Essex/Suffolk + 2wd SM = happy Skoda owner (but just in the summer and mainly if the roads are dry and mud free).

I'll go and sort the Y fronts now :p

[Trekker]

Trekker,

I have to ask, but what experience and training have you received in the use of 4 wheel drive, both on and off road? Also how much do you know of the Haldex 4 system fitted to the Yeti? Have you actually driven one off-road?

Your question regarding my experience and driver training is a bit suspicious in that it suggests that my previous posted point is not worthy unless I were some masterful driver. Perhaps you don't mean to discredit. Perhaps you just intend to gain a better picture of Trekker and if so, that's fine with me. The very first car I drove was a Land Rover S3 when I was aged 11. I was raised on a farm and I pretty much taught myself how to drive well off road with that Landy. Whilst that counts for something, I don't imagine it matches your level of training or experience. As for the Yeti 4WD system: yes, I have driven it, but not sufficiently off-road to gain a clear picture of its performance.

I imagine your point of asking about my Haldex 4 experience is related to the fast response times to losing grip - but surely it doesn't negate my point that permanent 4WD would be less likely to lose grip than part-time 4WD in the first place. The fast computer sensing loss of grip and then sending power to the rear wheels might not be much be too late if the car is already sliding on that wet bend that suddenly tightened more than anticipated. And that is my whole point about thinking permanent 4WD would prove safer than the part-time 4WD system.

The danger of having permanent 4 wheel drive comes about with transmission wind-up, and typically and commonly occurs when people leave their vehicle in 4WD but on a hard surface where there is no slip factor. This can result in severe damage to the transmission system, but also can make steering very hard because the vehicle always want to drive in a straight line.

I have to say I have not heard of this problem you say regarding permanent 4WD leading to sometimes a 'transmission wind-up' and nor have I ever experienced it in my permanent 4WD Toyota Celica GT4 or in all my years growing up with my Landy whenever it was in 4WD mode. But as you perhaps have more experience with 4WD than me, it is wise for me to accept it as fact. I must conclude though, that it is probably a small risk.

Asking for a feature where the driver can choose to switch the Yeti in permanent 4WD for various times is not too much really when you consider the cheaper Dacia Duster has this feature as standard on its 4WD versions.

Everybody has different driving preferences, styles and requirements and I think we need to respect other peoples decisions to choose a particular model. I find it quite interesting to learn how many people have chosen 4WD and why. I do think we're a lucky bunch of people having discovered the capabilities and potential of the Yeti.

[Llanigraham]

Trekker,

the question was not to discredit you, but to get a better picture. I to started with a LWB Series 3 at 18, but that was bright yellow with WIMPEY down the side! I blame being a Chainboy on the M5 contract in South Gloucestershire for my contracting LandRoveritus!

It surprised me when I first started teaching how many drivers, mainly men, who would come with the attitude of "I'm been driving for years, I don't need you to tell me". Invariably the first thing we would get them to do would be to drive down a slope that was uncomfortable to walk down. To get them to accept that it wouldn't stall as they took BOTH feet off the pedals could be surprisingly difficult!

The transision from 2WD to 4WD with the Haldex 4 is surprisingly fast and very gentle, and although I do understand what you are saying, from experience I doubt that most owners actually know it is happening. I also suspect that many wouldn't use it at the right time and potentially use it too late. I also wonder whether what you suggest is actually possible with the Haldex 4. Somehow I don't think it would.

[Trekker]

I also wonder whether what you suggest is actually possible with the Haldex 4. Somehow I don't think it would.

I had in mind what HPA provide:-

http://www.hpamotorsports.com/haldex.htm

The Haldex controller can be configured to run in permanent 4WD mode or the default automatic mode or an even more economical mode. Have a look and see what you think. I thought something like the HPA controller could be provided as standard as Dacia do with a simpler controller on their Duster car.

The speed of switching between 2WD and 4WD is fine for driving in a straight line - it was only in extreme situations like the wet bend that suddenly tightened that would have benefited the permanent 4WD mode. I used to do some track days and still appreciate sporty machines and also imagined the permanent 4WD might provide a more consistent response. But I need to test drive a car with the Haldex controller to be sure.

It all boils down to that wonderful potential factor that the Yeti has on top of its already strong features. I'm not saying I would definitely change my future Yeti, simply exchanging thoughts and views about what the Yeti has with the hope that Skoda might respond to make happier owners in their later models/versions!

[The Plumber]

Depending on manufacture depends on how much power is sent to the rear wheels under 'normal' driving conditions.

From Haldex;

"How much power goes to each wheel if I am driving straight forward with a constant speed of 100km/h?

The Haldex Coupling will constantly transfer some of the engine torque to the rear wheels. However, driving straight at about 100km/h with no major wheel slip does not require much torque transfer from a performance point of view, so instead the torque transfer can be optimized for low fuel consumption. In such a situation a normal value could be that around 10-15% of the total propulsion torque is transferred to the rear axle, but this is very dependent on the calibration of the particular vehicle model, which is done together with every customer."

TP

[Llanigraham]

Trekker,

not heard about them before, but reading the article it doesn't include the Haldex 4 system. It seems to only cover Haldex 1 and 2. Perhaps they haven't found a need of it for the later systems because they are more sophisticated.

Did you look at the prices!!!

Tim,

are you saying that in normal driving the Yeti puts 10% of power to the back all the time?

[rockhopper]

When I had Elsie put on the rolling toad recently, all 4 wheels were driving the rollers, but the 2WD cars only turned the front rollers.

Mike

[900000]

When I had Elsie put on the rolling toad recently, all 4 wheels were driving the rollers, but the 2WD cars only turned the front rollers.

Mike

Yep mine did the same and the rear wheels turned the rollers from very low speed. Though in saying that did they give any resistance? And if not enough the Haldex would have thought there was slippage and thus sent power to the back...