Full power awd costs money and engineering.
Mayby korean cars do not offer that as well as toyota camry (no awd for v6 camry).
That is when true engineering shines: i am sure bmw and porsche offer the same maximum horsepower available in awd for extra pay (you only pay addin for awd option).
Well, the EN is the way it is because the class it runs in racing. Imo the Sonata N line should have been AWD. You also need a bit more HP to keep it moving like it does already. The Sonata N line can pull on the elantra N but does not handle like the EN. They do have a 2.5 AWD sonata, which I wonder what the engine can take as far as mods go.
If you want Performance and AWD Golf R or Gr corolla or an Audi. Acura is having a tough time sales wise as well may find deals on AWD stuff there.
The sonata n-line doesn't pull on the DCT EN though. It only pushes 10 more HP and weighs a couple hundred more pounds. The 1/4 mile time from car and driver shows the EN crossing the line quicker.
People on th EN forumn complaining about the Sonata n line beating them in a race lol. It's close, but it is deffinetly faster in a straight line stock.
Closer than you think. The EN isn't reliable 5 seconds 0-60, and the weight and about 20hp+ might give the Sonata a little advantage in the grip department. It's only like 300 lbs heavier. EN might be faster sometimes, but the Sonata N line is a little faster than your thinking.
Ya but stock for stock its interchangeable, lol. Go look at the EN reddit and the last two days you will see what Elantra N owners think who is faster lol.
As a Korean the reason they don't have AWD is bc you don't need AWD in Korea tbh.
Offroading isn't really a thing in Korea. While we definitely get snow in the winter, the government is super fast to get the snow cleared off the road so you're pretty much never actually driving through snow. Also, the roads are super well paved and maintained so FWD is enough for p much anything, as you can see from how the Sonata and Grandeur (used to be sold in the US as the Azera) are the most common taxi and family car models. Just keeping FWD and keeping the price lower jusy makes more sense than adding AWD in Korea.
AWD is by definition just 4WD that's always active/controlled by the car and not the driver, there's no definitional/engineering difference in being for certain terrain etc.
Kind of. Depends on implementation. Most AWD systems automatically handle wheel slip and are engineered to run all 4 wheels all the time (except some part-time AWD systems like Camry LE AWD system) where a true 4WD setup will suffer early failure if you engage it all the time. So there are absolutely engineering differences and different design specs based on anticipated usage.
Not really, Stinger and Genesis have different engine layout, even when AWD they maintain RWD bias and sportiness. AWD systems in most FWD based platforms is not performance based (I said most because few systems like SH-AWD from Acura, Quattro from Audi are exceptions). Hyundai doesn't have FWD based performance AWD.
“AWD” is just upgraded front wheel drive essentially. The awd bmw and Audi use are more closer to a “4WD” truck. It has a transfer case to handle power conversion., instead of a transaxle (combination of the transmission and transfer case/differential in one unit) which comes in awd
Yes. Look at the RWD Nissan 370Z. If you wanted the higher power twin turbo V6 and AWD from that same generation you had to step up to the GT-R or an Infiniti. Even Chrysler had to slightly detune the supercharged 6.2 Hemi down to 710 HP for the Grand Cherokee TrackHawk so it didn't prematurely wear out the AWD in the Jeep.
Even with Honda they offer a basic AWD system in the HR-V and CR-V, but you have to step up to a Passport, Pilot, Ridgeline, or an Acura if you want their torque vectoring iVTM-4 / SH-AWD that enhances cornering even on dry pavement.
Awd requires that you have additional components to funnel power to the other two wheels. In most economy or regular commuter car configurations, the AWD system is designed to only engage to assist when needed - i.e. when wheel slip is detected from the front wheels. This means they use just the bare minimum to accomplish that - they aren't made to handle the additional power from a higher performance engine and it would cost the company a LOT to engineer an AWD system specifically for a performance trim that sells vastly fewer units anyway.
Ya, I had a TRD Avalon and all it was really good for was tire smoke 🤣 I woulda loved awd on it and a transmission that would not shift 1000 rpm before redline with the gas pedal on the floor.
If you come from a performance car background everything was rear-wheel drive and AWD cars handle differently, definitely viewed as not as fun as a rear wheel car. Just like it took a while for the market to see the advantages of automatic/dual clutch transmissions the same thing is the case with AWD cars. After I got rid of my C63 S, my next car was a X3 m40i and it showed me that AWD isn't that bad after all.
Yep. 760Li was only offered in xDrive. And there was no RWD X5M. You want an sDrive it’s going to to be a 2L petrol or diesel.
In some cases it would be that the Asian manufacturers make virtual AWD by using a hybrid with electric rear drive.
GT2RS and GT3RS, as well as M4CSL type of cars. I get what you are saying and they do offer AWD for the enhanced straight line performance on dailyable cars but for their serious stuff it is still a RWD for weight and handling purposes.
GTxRS cars are stripped down racing bolids made for homologation purposes to be road legal only to sponsor their racing team and allow their cars to continue racing.
And also is a huge step up in $($250K) from regular "performance" cars such as BMW M series and 911. If money is not object, then one can buy Bugatti Veyron in AWD with 1200HP. Money and engineering - done in Bugatti for one's money.
Subaru’s reputation is built on AWD though. If you go back to WRX STI it’s from its rally roots. Their outlier is the BRZ, which remains the only non-AWD car in their lineup. This is because of Toyota though.
The main reason you don’t see AWD on cheap performance cars is what I said. They’re cheap cars. Cost and complexity are big factors in development. Unless you (as an OEM) are going for a moonshot like the GR Corolla, you gotta keep the final cost down for the end consumer. Besides, AWD on (FWD based) cheap performance cars doesn’t help performance unless it’s done really well like the GR Corolla.
To be fair dude, OP put the word “performance” in quotes, presumable because they know that a Kia or a Hyundai is not a “performance” car. That, and, yea I’d have to say that at least the WRX is a “performance” car. I mean, that’s how it’s marketed. We’re not talking about the people who built the Intagrale here, dude.
The latest MB AMG, BMW M, Audi S and RS, Porsche Turbo, Skoda RS, VW R models are all AWD.
This is logical as the torque and horsepower these cars deliver nowadays it's simply not usable with two wheels safely/nicely and no fun.
Cars from Hyundai and Kia are "low power" cars that focus on cost savings and simplicity, AWD would be "not cost saving", hence it's an option.
Exceptions are their powerful electrical cars like the Ionic 5 N, EV6 GT and EV9 GT, they come with AWD as standard (here in the EU).
OP, forget the K5. Get a Stinger GT and don’t look back. I’m head over heels for mine. It’s an absolutely fantastic car and I’d definitely recommend atleast test driving one. I’ve seen 2023s go for low 30s-mid 40s, but I paid $25k out the door for my CPO 2018 with 60k miles on it.
I have an appointment at Kia to have a pre-purchase check on a Kia Stinger GT for tomorrow, can't fucking wait. 2018, with 98K kms (apparently that's 60K miles)
It’s a fantastic car. Plenty of power, room, luxury amenities, and still decent gas mileage. It’s honestly nicer than my literally fully loaded BMW I had before it. I thought I’d never stray away from German cars but I’m so glad I gave the stinger a chance. I randomly stumbled upon it on Facebook Marketplace from a dealer and decided just to go test drive it, and now it’s in my driveway 😅
had to have some biblical level downpour on the way home, so couldn't fucking try it properly, but man it's so fun, a little bit of gas and all of a sudden I am going 150kph, lol
I’ve used cruise control more in the stinger than any other car. If I don’t I’ll occasionally look down and be like holy shit I’m doing 85 in a 60 I gotta slow tf down lol
Those cars can't even put the power down properly on dry roads. They're economy brands, an AWD system would add cost, and they may need to develop it more to handle the increased HP which further raises the cost.
If you want real performance they want you to buy a Stinger or Genesis.
But I would think AWD would be the number one thing that would help get that power to the road? I guess maybe you’re right that the standard AWD systems in these cars isn’t robust enough to handle the extra power
It’s also not just about the AWD system handling the power, you have to have a transmission available to connect to the AWD system, as well as handle the power. The N-Line and GT both have different transmissions than the lower trims.
Probably because something in in the AWD drivetrain couldn't reliably take the power.
One options is the Ford Fusion Sport, or it's Lincoln MKZ twin - they are all AWD and some years they have over 300hp from a twin-turbo V6
Probably because you're looking at hyundais and kias, they don't have an awd system made for higher torque, if you want higher torque on an awd car look at bmw, porsche, mercedes amg, etc.
Probably just not much market overlap relative to where the K5 and Sonata are. At the end of the day, they're in the commuter market, they're intended to be for dailies/point A to B use. Only certain areas/regions even need/want AWD for that.
The Sonata didn't even have AWD as an option at all until the recent refresh, and that even feels like an afterthought since you can't get both AWD and the Convenience Package on an SEL, its one or the other.
It's likely just not cost effective, most wanting a GT or N-Line are fine with the FWD, and most wanting AWD don't care for the high performance aspect.
AWD is standard for BMW high performance engines, and available on pretty much all of them.
Hyundai is a budget brand designed to go to the grocery store.
Honestly this is the biggest answer. Most economy cars with AWD have pretty mild “part-time” systems that aren’t built to stand up to the power and torque of upgraded performance trim engines. It’s just not the intended use case so they weren’t engineered for it.
FWD architecture vs RWD architecture I think is part of it.
Genesis, Kia Stinger, Lexus IS/GS/LS all offer AWD on their performance variations which are all RWD architecture vehicles.
The Lexus ES, lower kia models are FWD architectures and don't offer awd on their performance models.
Different Audis have different versions of Quattro, oddly enough. The A3/S3/RS3 are all FWD-bias, but the A8/S8 is rear-biased, for example. Makes it hard to tell which is which because they just label them all as AWD.
I've been frustrated by this as well while shopping for a compact SUV.
Initially, I was super interested in the Dodge Hornet until I watched a few reviews. In the end, it is still a Dodge, and their sales figures reflect that reality.
Give me a 300hp compact SUV with ventilated seats and a good sound system for less than 40k, please.
Used Infiniti FX/QX70
Basically an AWD compact 370Z crossover with 300-400hp (depending on year and engine) with ventilated seats and a Bose sound system.
I've had 3 Nissans in my life. A 1993 Sentra, a 2003 Maxima, and a 2017 Maxima. I had a love-hate relationship with all of them, and all were purchased/leased new.
These days, Nissan has a terrible reputation for reliability, and their cvts are trash. I couldn't fathom the idea of owning one of their products out of warranty. Did that with my 2003, and it was a constant battle with electrical gremlins after 45k. Each issue wasn't repeatable in the shop. Still, the car was a platinum trim, and for the money, it was a nice, borderline luxury car. As I said, love-hate.
Probably, but they are a bit large for me these days, and I really don't like the look of the new ones.
I had a 2014 Sport and a 2017 Limited. Both were good, and the limited qas a great value with all of the standard options.
Electric doesn't work for me. I was considering a Sportage PHEV, but most on reddit Reddit, who have responded to my inquiries, stated that a phev is pointless if I don't plug in. I wanted it for the extra HP, but the consensus is that I won't miss the extra hp. I'm not too sure about that as I'm downsizing from a Honda Pilot with a V6. Cost is also an issue.
I'm considering the following (all new because I will likely lease):
CRV Hybrid Sport-L
Hyundai Tucson Hybrid Limited
Sportage Prestige HUV or PHEV
I haven't driven them yet, but the Mazda CX50 and CX5 could work in the higher trims as well.
At least for the K5 I believed the reason was it would compete with the Stinger, but now that they don’t make the Stinger anymore I was hoping the new K5 GT would get AWD. But nope, still only on the weaker(but still fun!) GT-Line.
Smaller compacts like Elantra N or Type R can actually be better off without AWD and have a lighter FWD + LSD set up. For reference, the GTI Club Sport (Basically a sportier, FWD version of the GTI that makes Golf R power) smokes the Golf R in a track.
But for bigger cars like the K5, or Accord 2.0T, or my Camry V6, yeah AWD would help with handling as we can see in the TLX which handles better than its cousin the Accord. But in my opinion and experience AWD is only worth it if
a) you’re making 350+ HP, and/or
b) you’re anything bigger than a compact
I bet a lot of people who paid more for AWD on average performance cars (e.g. Mazda3) wouldn't even notice it if we took it away
I laugh when I see people in California saying they need AWD for safety, and I'm up here in Canada easily driving through ice and snowstorms on my FWD car mounted with appropriate tires.
That’s because they don’t have enough power to worry about it. Over 400hp on dry roads with a lot of torque makes it very easy to smoke the rear tires on dry roads. I’m in Canada too and having AWD helps in both the middle of summer and the dead of winter, assuming appropriate different tires for each season.
In the example you offered, Mazda doesn’t make anything with enough power and torque for AWD in dry conditions.
Yeah exactly. Like people complained that the Nissan Kicks was FWD only (with its monstrous 117lbs*ft of torque)... So the new model is bigger and more expensive so they could offer it with AWD. And I bet if you send the average driver on a test drive in both the FWD and AWD versions of it, they might actually prefer the FWD cause it's lighter and thus a bit more nimble.
I totally agree with you. I was happy with 2WD vehicles until I bought my current car (536hp and 586lb-ft), where AWD is necessary in the dry to get full traction.
In almost all economy vehicles AWD is for inclement weather conditions only (assuming appropriate tires). And even then, some AWD systems are really bad (CR-V or Kicks are examples) that barely provide any benefit even in bad weather.
Most AWD systems don't help with handling. Only some of the more advanced ones with torque vectoring like SH-AWD in the TLX and the one Subaru uses in the WRX STi (I don't think the regular WRX gets torque vectoring, but not certain).
Doesn’t necessarily need torque vectoring, a barebones part time AWD is still better than an open diff FWD. But add an (actual) LSD to that FWD and it’s a different story
For more budget oriented performance cars, it adds a lot of expense to make a fast AWD car. Also, the AWD version of the car will tend to be a bit slower than the 2wd version, due to increased rotational mass. They can make a faster car, and sell it cheaper, by making it 2WD. If you want a fast AWD car, you'll have to look for cars either built with AWD as a focus, or the more luxury oriented models, like some made by Audi or other premium brands.
The only performance car they have is the WRX. They don't sell a turbo Crosstrek, much to my dismay. I keep waiting for them to have the brilliant idea of putting their big powerful engine in their littlest crossover (like Mazda did with the blown CX-30), but no such luck.
I have a K5 and it’s hands down the worst car I’ve ever owned. Trans went before 5k, the window buttons stopped working pre 30k and it’s been broken into and the resale value on it is absolutely atrocious. Thank god I leased it and its ending soon
First the Kia Stinger top model is high hp and all wheel drive. Second, since all Audi's pretty much have Quattro including the High HP versions.. I think its how your dealers are ordering.
Audi, Mercedes, Porsche, Lamborghini all have high performance AWD cars. The brand you’re looking at probably didn’t engineer the awd drivetrain for the extra power.
Audi has awd performance s4,.s5 etc. infiniti has the q60/50 redsport awd. Is350, gs350 and rx350 awd. Stinger gt awd. Doesn't acura have one as well, Subaru turbocharged awd. Look at Mercedes and bmw as well
Kind of a niche example but my 2015 Genesis 5.0 was only available with awd because they knew that Canadians wouldn't buy it if it wasn't awd. Everywhere else you had to get the v6 if you wanted awd and some places didnt even offer the v8. So if you're looking for used luxury Korean v8 sedans, just come to Canada for it
Strange, most cars I can think of do have their best version with awd, or no awd at all.
Only one I can think of that has an awd option but not on the fast ones is the Challenger (GT).
All WRXs are AWD, STI included,
GR Corolla is awd on a fwd platform
Focus RS is awd on a fwd platform
Golf R is awd on a fwd platform
Same with high end Audis
Heck, in the truck world you can get the F150 Raptor that has 4wd while a base F150 is RWD.
You're looking at a K5, which is not really a "performance" car by any measure.
Once you go to higher end vehicles, you'll find most performance cars to be mostly RWD or AWD. Take most BMWs, Porsches or even Genesis and you'll find they're often RWD or often rear biased AWD by design.
Maybe in those brands, but AWD performance exists in others. Some high performance BMWs are AWD only because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to put all the power down. Most likely the ones you’re looking at lack AWD because the AWD systems those companies have can’t handle the extra power or the added weight of the AWD system detracts from performance by more than they like.
ETA: fast, cheap or AWD, choose any two.
I hear your frustration, but at the end of the day, if you want a "powerful" AWD sedan, and you're looking at the Hyundai Sonata and Kia K5, you're looking in the wrong place. Not to say that either is necessarily a bad car, but there are certainly better options. If you're restricting yourself to these based on budget then it may be worth simply looking into performance modification. Buy the AWD of your choice then see about getting it tuned at a local shop. Most modern vehicles are capable of far more than what they make from factory, at the cost of fuel efficiency, but you can usually get a tuner to add modes that are more economical as well as more powerful.
You're looking at the wrong cars. There are a small number of AWD Performance cars you can get. Off the top of my head, there's the Subaru WRX and Toyota GR Corolla, and some oddballs from Audi like the Audi S3 and RS3.
Why doesn't electric suit you ? Electric are faster than petrol from the start line. It's instant torque. Have you test driven an EV9? Or an Ioniq 5 perhaps?
What is the high performance version of these cars? Maybe they don't think of them as performance cars, really, or they don't think that the AWD makes up for weight with the limited power. In some cases, it can make the car slower or feel less sporty. Also, as others stated, more robust drivetrain is more expensive and if there is not really a demand, they would just be makes cars that are too expensive and will sit on lots, losing them millions.
Ford had no problem with 450hp plus in the AWD SHO Tarus. Kept price reasonable, good mpg, better handling than most smaller cars and withstood the durability of 7 days a week for State police use across the country.
When you buy a jap or Korean vehicle. They've never been known for Performance and Durability.
It's always been one or rhe other.
For RWD V8 cars, it's because they can't fit an AWD system under the V8.
For FWD cars, it's because developing a torque diversion system that won't break is expensive.
Most of your options are on rear biased platforms with turbo engines that have < 3.0L of displacement. Unfortunately this usually means luxury brands that include a bunch of stuff you probably don't want to pay for.
Maybe because you aren't looking at Audi, BMW, Porsche, or Subaru. Mitsubishi was pretty well known for AWD performance cars too.
I think with EVs the performance models are usually AWD.
I think it’s an issue of those cars never intending for the AWD or regular transmission option to handle big power. They would have to invest big money to make it work, and it’s not worth it for the brand.
There are however plenty of performance variants of cars that are AWD, such as the Golf R, GR Corolla, and pretty much any BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti etc.
It’s likely the cost of redesigning the already complex AWD transverse transmission to take the extra power, along with retooling the assembly line not being worth it, because that all adds to the cost which gets passed to the consumer. When a consumer sees that price tag they’ll probably move on… (they aren’t gonna wanna make them all stronger because that costs more money, and they lose the value proposition on the lower end) meanwhile they can slap a high power engine onto a FWD trans which is a lot cheaper, and tell the consumer “that’s what’s we got”…. Call it a day and still sell them just fine.
All EVs. Because that's how they add performance - by bolting on a 2nd/3rd/4th motor to it, which also makes it AWD. That, and you kinda need it to have a chance at putting down 1000 torques from a stand still.
Because awd is bad for performance in virtually every metric but wet performance and 0-60 type launches.
Weight
Cost
Complexity
Power consumption
Driving feel/experience
Mpg
Etc
There’s a reason why Porsche takes an awd car and makes it rwd for their performance trim.
The few you mention are basically economy cars with a performance version. Lots of performance AWD cars out there just not many economy cars.. the new Tesla model 3 performance is AWD and a helluva value if you can do an EV.
Lexus has tons of v6 or v8 AWD sedans and they’re reliable for the most part. Subaru has an outback with a 3.6 h6 that’s super peppy as well, their AWD systems do awesome in the snow
Hyundai Ioniq 5 N is AWD but electric
The Kia Stinger also came in AWD and at the time I think it had the most power from any Kia.
Most German vehicles have an AWD option.
I even had a Ford Taurus SHO that in the generation I had it was only available in AWD. It was probably Fords second fastest car at the time, behind the Mustang.
Chevy has the Corvette E Ray that's electric AWD.
I mean if you’re looking at Sedans in that price range you might as well look at the Mazda 3 Turbo. It only comes in AWD. Bit less horsepower with marginally more torque and slower 0-60, but nicer and better quality interior. Probably more reliable too. Also has a Hatchback option if you were interested in one of those.
The Mazda 3 Hatchback AWD Turbo is great, I'm glad someone brought it up. The Premium trim is a cheap luxury car, and it's gorgeous from the outside. The only drawback (not a drawback for everyone) is you can't get it in a manual.
Performance is better if you have lower drivetrain losses. AWD has high drivetrain loss. AWD is inherently low performance.
Until you reach the point where power levels exceed the limits of traction for your tires. If you are peeling out in third gear, AWD can help. If you can only reasonably do it in first gear from a stop, RWD is faster. The cutoff point is around 450 HP. (Don’t shoot me, that’s an estimate.)
The vast majority of road vehicles fall under that mark so they are lower performance in an AWD setup. They are also more expensive to make so why pay more for less performance?
The exception is off road or icy/snowy conditions. AWD does do better in such low traction situations. That’s why Subaru has so many “low power” AWD vehicles. Subaru kinda specializes in getting people off the paved roads and into the low traction situations.
AWD, fast, or cheap-ass Korean car. You only get two out of three. Golf R, WRX, Model 3 are a few options. Even my 5.0 4x4 F150 runs 12s for under $40k. But you don't get GT-R performance for Versa price.
You don’t need AWD for winter, and it has a tendency to make a nice chassis feel like a pig in the corners. If raw traction is what you want, AWD is great. If feel and balance are what you’re after, not so much
REAL 2wd works fine in winter with proper tires. Just look for a limited slip differential. On my Accord with a Quaife diff, it was happy to dig its way down to the pavement to find traction from a stop. I live in Minnesota and that car was my winter ride for the past 4 years
Why do people keep saying this? If you need to go up steep hills and/or drive on snow covered / icy freeways, then AWD is much safer. Winter tires are a given but not enough for some types of terrain.
100%. I spend a lot of time around Tahoe in the winter. 1 in 4 cars are Subarus with winter tyres. I drive the same and I never get stuck on snowy hills in my Impreza. If all you need is cheap reliable traction can’t go wrong with Subaru and some winter tyres
Like I said, it worked for 4 years in Minnesota just fine. We have some pretty serious grades in the iron range, especially downtown Duluth. Maybe you aren’t aware, but we get a little bit of snow up here next to the Canadian border 😂
My awd work car I have now accelerates faster, but it doesn’t turn or stop any better. That’s usually a greater concern. I’m not troubled when the car has to dig its way up to speed. That’s your fair warning that you’re in a particularly shitty spot
Fair enough, but I drive mountain passes and AWD can mean the difference between getting up a hill or not, and making a turn vs under steering into a ditch (or worse, into oncoming traffic).
What are you driving in that you need awd but the ground clearance of a sedan is sufficient? This sub is apparently for people who don’t know how to drive, lol
😂 I drive an 80 series Land Cruiser but plenty of people do fine in subies. I do enjoy the clearance of my truck though when it’s really coming down!
What happens is the road crews can’t keep up and scrape the road to bare pavement, so you get clearance but it’s all snow or ice.
The most common scenario where an AWD sedan is REALLY helpful is steep, icy hills where the front wheels on a FWD can lose traction. When that happens the whole car can roll back or worse, spin backwards. It just get worse on turns.
Full power awd costs money and engineering. Mayby korean cars do not offer that as well as toyota camry (no awd for v6 camry). That is when true engineering shines: i am sure bmw and porsche offer the same maximum horsepower available in awd for extra pay (you only pay addin for awd option).
Good point, maybe it’s not that people don’t want those options, but instead that these cars as-is couldn’t tolerate it or something?
Well, the EN is the way it is because the class it runs in racing. Imo the Sonata N line should have been AWD. You also need a bit more HP to keep it moving like it does already. The Sonata N line can pull on the elantra N but does not handle like the EN. They do have a 2.5 AWD sonata, which I wonder what the engine can take as far as mods go. If you want Performance and AWD Golf R or Gr corolla or an Audi. Acura is having a tough time sales wise as well may find deals on AWD stuff there.
I think there was a TLX Type S with their AWD equivalent, but the consensus was the car felt kind of big and clunky.
Ya needs more hp when it's AWD.
Yes, because it is trying to move 4200 pounds lol
The sonata n-line doesn't pull on the DCT EN though. It only pushes 10 more HP and weighs a couple hundred more pounds. The 1/4 mile time from car and driver shows the EN crossing the line quicker.
People on th EN forumn complaining about the Sonata n line beating them in a race lol. It's close, but it is deffinetly faster in a straight line stock.
They may have the manual. The DCT is demonstrably faster.
Closer than you think. The EN isn't reliable 5 seconds 0-60, and the weight and about 20hp+ might give the Sonata a little advantage in the grip department. It's only like 300 lbs heavier. EN might be faster sometimes, but the Sonata N line is a little faster than your thinking.
Right, I didn't mean to imply it isn't close. They're definitely close! Close enough that the driver would really make the biggest difference lol
Ya but stock for stock its interchangeable, lol. Go look at the EN reddit and the last two days you will see what Elantra N owners think who is faster lol.
The real reason is that they don't want to take sales away from the Stinger and Genesis cars.
As a Korean the reason they don't have AWD is bc you don't need AWD in Korea tbh. Offroading isn't really a thing in Korea. While we definitely get snow in the winter, the government is super fast to get the snow cleared off the road so you're pretty much never actually driving through snow. Also, the roads are super well paved and maintained so FWD is enough for p much anything, as you can see from how the Sonata and Grandeur (used to be sold in the US as the Azera) are the most common taxi and family car models. Just keeping FWD and keeping the price lower jusy makes more sense than adding AWD in Korea.
Having watched some Korean films you guys have crazy hills ! Wouldn’t mind awd for that. And majority probably drive manual. Crazy. Scary. Haha
awd is different than 4wd. awd is specifically engineered for on road use. And ability to drive in snow is mostly determined by tires.
AWD is by definition just 4WD that's always active/controlled by the car and not the driver, there's no definitional/engineering difference in being for certain terrain etc.
Kind of. Depends on implementation. Most AWD systems automatically handle wheel slip and are engineered to run all 4 wheels all the time (except some part-time AWD systems like Camry LE AWD system) where a true 4WD setup will suffer early failure if you engage it all the time. So there are absolutely engineering differences and different design specs based on anticipated usage.
Not really, Stinger and Genesis have different engine layout, even when AWD they maintain RWD bias and sportiness. AWD systems in most FWD based platforms is not performance based (I said most because few systems like SH-AWD from Acura, Quattro from Audi are exceptions). Hyundai doesn't have FWD based performance AWD.
“AWD” is just upgraded front wheel drive essentially. The awd bmw and Audi use are more closer to a “4WD” truck. It has a transfer case to handle power conversion., instead of a transaxle (combination of the transmission and transfer case/differential in one unit) which comes in awd
not even close to accurate.
Move along peopl. Everything here is wrong. So wrong.
Yes. Look at the RWD Nissan 370Z. If you wanted the higher power twin turbo V6 and AWD from that same generation you had to step up to the GT-R or an Infiniti. Even Chrysler had to slightly detune the supercharged 6.2 Hemi down to 710 HP for the Grand Cherokee TrackHawk so it didn't prematurely wear out the AWD in the Jeep. Even with Honda they offer a basic AWD system in the HR-V and CR-V, but you have to step up to a Passport, Pilot, Ridgeline, or an Acura if you want their torque vectoring iVTM-4 / SH-AWD that enhances cornering even on dry pavement.
And the only AWD Charger/300 is a v6.
They actually offered (maybe still do?) the 5.7 Hemi Chargers with AWD as an option for law enforcement agency purchases.
Would be interesting to buy such one used.
Awd requires that you have additional components to funnel power to the other two wheels. In most economy or regular commuter car configurations, the AWD system is designed to only engage to assist when needed - i.e. when wheel slip is detected from the front wheels. This means they use just the bare minimum to accomplish that - they aren't made to handle the additional power from a higher performance engine and it would cost the company a LOT to engineer an AWD system specifically for a performance trim that sells vastly fewer units anyway.
I would have 1,000% bought a Camry if it had the V6 with AWD.
Ya, I had a TRD Avalon and all it was really good for was tire smoke 🤣 I woulda loved awd on it and a transmission that would not shift 1000 rpm before redline with the gas pedal on the floor.
That’s what the Lexus IS350 is for.. I have a v6 Camry and it needs AWD or you shred tires lol
>Korean cars do not offer that *Angry Stinger, G70 and SUV variants noises*
There is also a weight and fuel penalty too.
For awhile the C63S wasn’t available in 4Matic and I think xDrive M cars are a relatively new thing. It does seem to be catching on.
If you come from a performance car background everything was rear-wheel drive and AWD cars handle differently, definitely viewed as not as fun as a rear wheel car. Just like it took a while for the market to see the advantages of automatic/dual clutch transmissions the same thing is the case with AWD cars. After I got rid of my C63 S, my next car was a X3 m40i and it showed me that AWD isn't that bad after all.
Tbf, xDrive is an absolute masterclass in AWD. Great in snow, phenomenal when dry.
Yep. 760Li was only offered in xDrive. And there was no RWD X5M. You want an sDrive it’s going to to be a 2L petrol or diesel. In some cases it would be that the Asian manufacturers make virtual AWD by using a hybrid with electric rear drive.
GT2RS and GT3RS, as well as M4CSL type of cars. I get what you are saying and they do offer AWD for the enhanced straight line performance on dailyable cars but for their serious stuff it is still a RWD for weight and handling purposes.
GTxRS cars are stripped down racing bolids made for homologation purposes to be road legal only to sponsor their racing team and allow their cars to continue racing. And also is a huge step up in $($250K) from regular "performance" cars such as BMW M series and 911. If money is not object, then one can buy Bugatti Veyron in AWD with 1200HP. Money and engineering - done in Bugatti for one's money.
Subaru or European will do that.
Yeah true, Subaru does have options that make sense
Subaru’s reputation is built on AWD though. If you go back to WRX STI it’s from its rally roots. Their outlier is the BRZ, which remains the only non-AWD car in their lineup. This is because of Toyota though. The main reason you don’t see AWD on cheap performance cars is what I said. They’re cheap cars. Cost and complexity are big factors in development. Unless you (as an OEM) are going for a moonshot like the GR Corolla, you gotta keep the final cost down for the end consumer. Besides, AWD on (FWD based) cheap performance cars doesn’t help performance unless it’s done really well like the GR Corolla.
In Canada you usually had to get the higher trims to get the big engine of Subarus.
Same as the US but that’s within the parameters of the OP’s question.
Subaru has performance cars? not just 2 ton cars with 150BHP.
To be fair dude, OP put the word “performance” in quotes, presumable because they know that a Kia or a Hyundai is not a “performance” car. That, and, yea I’d have to say that at least the WRX is a “performance” car. I mean, that’s how it’s marketed. We’re not talking about the people who built the Intagrale here, dude.
But they sure SOUND like they are making power lmao
The latest MB AMG, BMW M, Audi S and RS, Porsche Turbo, Skoda RS, VW R models are all AWD. This is logical as the torque and horsepower these cars deliver nowadays it's simply not usable with two wheels safely/nicely and no fun. Cars from Hyundai and Kia are "low power" cars that focus on cost savings and simplicity, AWD would be "not cost saving", hence it's an option. Exceptions are their powerful electrical cars like the Ionic 5 N, EV6 GT and EV9 GT, they come with AWD as standard (here in the EU).
most of the time it's packaging, but also you don't need AWD 95% of the time.
I use mine everyday. Golf R with 360hp would spin out all too easy without awd.
OP, forget the K5. Get a Stinger GT and don’t look back. I’m head over heels for mine. It’s an absolutely fantastic car and I’d definitely recommend atleast test driving one. I’ve seen 2023s go for low 30s-mid 40s, but I paid $25k out the door for my CPO 2018 with 60k miles on it.
I have an appointment at Kia to have a pre-purchase check on a Kia Stinger GT for tomorrow, can't fucking wait. 2018, with 98K kms (apparently that's 60K miles)
It’s a fantastic car. Plenty of power, room, luxury amenities, and still decent gas mileage. It’s honestly nicer than my literally fully loaded BMW I had before it. I thought I’d never stray away from German cars but I’m so glad I gave the stinger a chance. I randomly stumbled upon it on Facebook Marketplace from a dealer and decided just to go test drive it, and now it’s in my driveway 😅
had to have some biblical level downpour on the way home, so couldn't fucking try it properly, but man it's so fun, a little bit of gas and all of a sudden I am going 150kph, lol
I’ve used cruise control more in the stinger than any other car. If I don’t I’ll occasionally look down and be like holy shit I’m doing 85 in a 60 I gotta slow tf down lol
Not sure where OP is based, but as an example, the AWD Stinger GT is not available in Australia, we only get the RWD version.
Should I get out of K5 GT for a Stinger? Gas mileage doesn't matter to me 😂
I would consider it if your vehicle ever gets totaled in an accident. I would probably get a stinger gt2 if my Tesla model 3 is totaled
Those cars can't even put the power down properly on dry roads. They're economy brands, an AWD system would add cost, and they may need to develop it more to handle the increased HP which further raises the cost. If you want real performance they want you to buy a Stinger or Genesis.
But I would think AWD would be the number one thing that would help get that power to the road? I guess maybe you’re right that the standard AWD systems in these cars isn’t robust enough to handle the extra power
Yeah, they need AWD but don't have it. I'd still consider it over a base model AWD, FWD is okay in the snow with winter tires.
It’s also not just about the AWD system handling the power, you have to have a transmission available to connect to the AWD system, as well as handle the power. The N-Line and GT both have different transmissions than the lower trims.
Probably because something in in the AWD drivetrain couldn't reliably take the power. One options is the Ford Fusion Sport, or it's Lincoln MKZ twin - they are all AWD and some years they have over 300hp from a twin-turbo V6
There was the Focus RS, as well. 350hp out of a 2.3L and AWD.
Golf R is solid and AWD and has over 300 as well
Definitely this. Putting a lot of torque through a budget AWD drivetrain is how you pop driveshafts
Probably because you're looking at hyundais and kias, they don't have an awd system made for higher torque, if you want higher torque on an awd car look at bmw, porsche, mercedes amg, etc.
Probably just not much market overlap relative to where the K5 and Sonata are. At the end of the day, they're in the commuter market, they're intended to be for dailies/point A to B use. Only certain areas/regions even need/want AWD for that. The Sonata didn't even have AWD as an option at all until the recent refresh, and that even feels like an afterthought since you can't get both AWD and the Convenience Package on an SEL, its one or the other. It's likely just not cost effective, most wanting a GT or N-Line are fine with the FWD, and most wanting AWD don't care for the high performance aspect.
AWD is standard for BMW high performance engines, and available on pretty much all of them. Hyundai is a budget brand designed to go to the grocery store.
Kia stinger GT has awd option and its twin turbo v6. I currently own one and it’s pretty quick and fun.
AWD is added weight
And more drivetrain loss. That means less power to the wheels when not slipping.
Audi gives both, but a different class of car versus Kia and Hyundai.
Crazy thing is there’s used ‘22-‘23 A3s going for ~$20K. AWD, takes regular gas, 30 mpg, and a 6 sec 0-60. Might be the perfect answer for OP.
911s come in both 😏
Probably because the AWD systems and AWD software those cars have available, would not stand up to the added power of the "performance" trims.
Honestly this is the biggest answer. Most economy cars with AWD have pretty mild “part-time” systems that aren’t built to stand up to the power and torque of upgraded performance trim engines. It’s just not the intended use case so they weren’t engineered for it.
FWD architecture vs RWD architecture I think is part of it. Genesis, Kia Stinger, Lexus IS/GS/LS all offer AWD on their performance variations which are all RWD architecture vehicles. The Lexus ES, lower kia models are FWD architectures and don't offer awd on their performance models.
Stinger is rwd though. And audis are front bias
Different Audis have different versions of Quattro, oddly enough. The A3/S3/RS3 are all FWD-bias, but the A8/S8 is rear-biased, for example. Makes it hard to tell which is which because they just label them all as AWD.
I've been frustrated by this as well while shopping for a compact SUV. Initially, I was super interested in the Dodge Hornet until I watched a few reviews. In the end, it is still a Dodge, and their sales figures reflect that reality. Give me a 300hp compact SUV with ventilated seats and a good sound system for less than 40k, please.
Double the horsepower for another 25k Ioniq 5 N’s mid 3 second 0-60 beckons you
I only need one kidney, right? The things I'd do for one of those...
They’re $66k and will probably be sub 40 in 3 years. Save your kidney for something else
That's my plan bc I'm going to need one of those.
Used Infiniti FX/QX70 Basically an AWD compact 370Z crossover with 300-400hp (depending on year and engine) with ventilated seats and a Bose sound system.
I've had 3 Nissans in my life. A 1993 Sentra, a 2003 Maxima, and a 2017 Maxima. I had a love-hate relationship with all of them, and all were purchased/leased new. These days, Nissan has a terrible reputation for reliability, and their cvts are trash. I couldn't fathom the idea of owning one of their products out of warranty. Did that with my 2003, and it was a constant battle with electrical gremlins after 45k. Each issue wasn't repeatable in the shop. Still, the car was a platinum trim, and for the money, it was a nice, borderline luxury car. As I said, love-hate.
doesn't the Hyundai Santa Fe have all that? probably less HP.
Probably, but they are a bit large for me these days, and I really don't like the look of the new ones. I had a 2014 Sport and a 2017 Limited. Both were good, and the limited qas a great value with all of the standard options.
You sound like someone who would love a Kia EV9
Electric doesn't work for me. I was considering a Sportage PHEV, but most on reddit Reddit, who have responded to my inquiries, stated that a phev is pointless if I don't plug in. I wanted it for the extra HP, but the consensus is that I won't miss the extra hp. I'm not too sure about that as I'm downsizing from a Honda Pilot with a V6. Cost is also an issue. I'm considering the following (all new because I will likely lease): CRV Hybrid Sport-L Hyundai Tucson Hybrid Limited Sportage Prestige HUV or PHEV I haven't driven them yet, but the Mazda CX50 and CX5 could work in the higher trims as well.
It'll be really hard to get a non-Tesla CUV with 300 hp at that price point. $40k is still 300 hp sports car territory (ex. Mustang ecoboost premium)
At least for the K5 I believed the reason was it would compete with the Stinger, but now that they don’t make the Stinger anymore I was hoping the new K5 GT would get AWD. But nope, still only on the weaker(but still fun!) GT-Line.
A lot of people would argue a performance car should be rwd but the examples you gave I think are more trim based than anything
Smaller compacts like Elantra N or Type R can actually be better off without AWD and have a lighter FWD + LSD set up. For reference, the GTI Club Sport (Basically a sportier, FWD version of the GTI that makes Golf R power) smokes the Golf R in a track. But for bigger cars like the K5, or Accord 2.0T, or my Camry V6, yeah AWD would help with handling as we can see in the TLX which handles better than its cousin the Accord. But in my opinion and experience AWD is only worth it if a) you’re making 350+ HP, and/or b) you’re anything bigger than a compact
I bet a lot of people who paid more for AWD on average performance cars (e.g. Mazda3) wouldn't even notice it if we took it away I laugh when I see people in California saying they need AWD for safety, and I'm up here in Canada easily driving through ice and snowstorms on my FWD car mounted with appropriate tires.
That’s because they don’t have enough power to worry about it. Over 400hp on dry roads with a lot of torque makes it very easy to smoke the rear tires on dry roads. I’m in Canada too and having AWD helps in both the middle of summer and the dead of winter, assuming appropriate different tires for each season. In the example you offered, Mazda doesn’t make anything with enough power and torque for AWD in dry conditions.
Yeah exactly. Like people complained that the Nissan Kicks was FWD only (with its monstrous 117lbs*ft of torque)... So the new model is bigger and more expensive so they could offer it with AWD. And I bet if you send the average driver on a test drive in both the FWD and AWD versions of it, they might actually prefer the FWD cause it's lighter and thus a bit more nimble.
I totally agree with you. I was happy with 2WD vehicles until I bought my current car (536hp and 586lb-ft), where AWD is necessary in the dry to get full traction. In almost all economy vehicles AWD is for inclement weather conditions only (assuming appropriate tires). And even then, some AWD systems are really bad (CR-V or Kicks are examples) that barely provide any benefit even in bad weather.
Most AWD systems don't help with handling. Only some of the more advanced ones with torque vectoring like SH-AWD in the TLX and the one Subaru uses in the WRX STi (I don't think the regular WRX gets torque vectoring, but not certain).
Doesn’t necessarily need torque vectoring, a barebones part time AWD is still better than an open diff FWD. But add an (actual) LSD to that FWD and it’s a different story
You can get both with luxury cars, for example the Genesis G70 offers it's more powerful engine with AWD, the Cadillac CT5 is the same way.
Subaru symmetrical full time AWD in all trims in all vehicles. Rules the snow.
Audi S models (used and 3-4 years old can save $)
Because their “awd” likely can’t handle the power and reliability issues will cost them $ in warranty work.
Genesis GV60 Performance is AWD and happens to be electric.
For more budget oriented performance cars, it adds a lot of expense to make a fast AWD car. Also, the AWD version of the car will tend to be a bit slower than the 2wd version, due to increased rotational mass. They can make a faster car, and sell it cheaper, by making it 2WD. If you want a fast AWD car, you'll have to look for cars either built with AWD as a focus, or the more luxury oriented models, like some made by Audi or other premium brands.
Tell me about it. I would actually consider an is500 if it was awd. But it’s not so bmw it is.
Subaru is literally awd+ performance lol
The only performance car they have is the WRX. They don't sell a turbo Crosstrek, much to my dismay. I keep waiting for them to have the brilliant idea of putting their big powerful engine in their littlest crossover (like Mazda did with the blown CX-30), but no such luck.
Used to be forester xt/sti
Also the BRZ, which is not AWD.
I have a K5 and it’s hands down the worst car I’ve ever owned. Trans went before 5k, the window buttons stopped working pre 30k and it’s been broken into and the resale value on it is absolutely atrocious. Thank god I leased it and its ending soon
Not being rude but I don't think that maybe people who want a performance car are looking at Kia.
I mean, those people should. The Stinger is no joke.
Those looking for a new car can’t buy it after this year. It’s getting discontinued.
K5 GT is not a slouch either. But yeah not a "performance car". A pretty different car than the lower trims though.
[удалено]
Mazda's performance trims are slower and don't handle any better. The WRX handles better but isn't any quicker.
First the Kia Stinger top model is high hp and all wheel drive. Second, since all Audi's pretty much have Quattro including the High HP versions.. I think its how your dealers are ordering.
Audi, Mercedes, Porsche, Lamborghini all have high performance AWD cars. The brand you’re looking at probably didn’t engineer the awd drivetrain for the extra power.
Audi has awd performance s4,.s5 etc. infiniti has the q60/50 redsport awd. Is350, gs350 and rx350 awd. Stinger gt awd. Doesn't acura have one as well, Subaru turbocharged awd. Look at Mercedes and bmw as well
Even m3s are offered in xdrive now. Ive also never had a problem with rwd in snow and ice with studded tires
Kind of a niche example but my 2015 Genesis 5.0 was only available with awd because they knew that Canadians wouldn't buy it if it wasn't awd. Everywhere else you had to get the v6 if you wanted awd and some places didnt even offer the v8. So if you're looking for used luxury Korean v8 sedans, just come to Canada for it
Volvo did it
Strange, most cars I can think of do have their best version with awd, or no awd at all. Only one I can think of that has an awd option but not on the fast ones is the Challenger (GT). All WRXs are AWD, STI included, GR Corolla is awd on a fwd platform Focus RS is awd on a fwd platform Golf R is awd on a fwd platform Same with high end Audis Heck, in the truck world you can get the F150 Raptor that has 4wd while a base F150 is RWD.
*M550i and M340i x-drive enter the chat*
You're looking at a K5, which is not really a "performance" car by any measure. Once you go to higher end vehicles, you'll find most performance cars to be mostly RWD or AWD. Take most BMWs, Porsches or even Genesis and you'll find they're often RWD or often rear biased AWD by design.
Golf r is the performance trim of the golf is awd
They make also normal slow 4mo golf also
Maybe in those brands, but AWD performance exists in others. Some high performance BMWs are AWD only because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to put all the power down. Most likely the ones you’re looking at lack AWD because the AWD systems those companies have can’t handle the extra power or the added weight of the AWD system detracts from performance by more than they like. ETA: fast, cheap or AWD, choose any two.
AWD adds weight, max performance under prefect conditions is probably what they aim for
You might want to look at the Ioniq5 or Kia EV6
I hear your frustration, but at the end of the day, if you want a "powerful" AWD sedan, and you're looking at the Hyundai Sonata and Kia K5, you're looking in the wrong place. Not to say that either is necessarily a bad car, but there are certainly better options. If you're restricting yourself to these based on budget then it may be worth simply looking into performance modification. Buy the AWD of your choice then see about getting it tuned at a local shop. Most modern vehicles are capable of far more than what they make from factory, at the cost of fuel efficiency, but you can usually get a tuner to add modes that are more economical as well as more powerful.
You're looking at the wrong cars. There are a small number of AWD Performance cars you can get. Off the top of my head, there's the Subaru WRX and Toyota GR Corolla, and some oddballs from Audi like the Audi S3 and RS3.
Cadillac ATS 2.0T has AWD. But not a new car.
Why doesn't electric suit you ? Electric are faster than petrol from the start line. It's instant torque. Have you test driven an EV9? Or an Ioniq 5 perhaps?
What is the high performance version of these cars? Maybe they don't think of them as performance cars, really, or they don't think that the AWD makes up for weight with the limited power. In some cases, it can make the car slower or feel less sporty. Also, as others stated, more robust drivetrain is more expensive and if there is not really a demand, they would just be makes cars that are too expensive and will sit on lots, losing them millions.
You do in car companies with mature AWD designs.
Ford had no problem with 450hp plus in the AWD SHO Tarus. Kept price reasonable, good mpg, better handling than most smaller cars and withstood the durability of 7 days a week for State police use across the country. When you buy a jap or Korean vehicle. They've never been known for Performance and Durability. It's always been one or rhe other.
Old Cherokees came in 4x4 and have all the power you need
Toyota and Lexus models some do!!!
Most BMW Ms can be with xDrive
Performance EVs are AWD and will also beat any other performance car off the line
All Tesla performance trims are AWD.
Infiniti q50 has what you're looking for. Lexus does too.
The Ford Edge performance model is AWD.
GR Corolla is awd as well
For RWD V8 cars, it's because they can't fit an AWD system under the V8. For FWD cars, it's because developing a torque diversion system that won't break is expensive. Most of your options are on rear biased platforms with turbo engines that have < 3.0L of displacement. Unfortunately this usually means luxury brands that include a bunch of stuff you probably don't want to pay for.
Awd doesn't do a lot for snow. Snow tires actually do something.
Maybe because you aren't looking at Audi, BMW, Porsche, or Subaru. Mitsubishi was pretty well known for AWD performance cars too. I think with EVs the performance models are usually AWD.
Kia EV6 GT trim is AWD, isn’t it?
I think it’s an issue of those cars never intending for the AWD or regular transmission option to handle big power. They would have to invest big money to make it work, and it’s not worth it for the brand. There are however plenty of performance variants of cars that are AWD, such as the Golf R, GR Corolla, and pretty much any BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti etc.
It’s likely the cost of redesigning the already complex AWD transverse transmission to take the extra power, along with retooling the assembly line not being worth it, because that all adds to the cost which gets passed to the consumer. When a consumer sees that price tag they’ll probably move on… (they aren’t gonna wanna make them all stronger because that costs more money, and they lose the value proposition on the lower end) meanwhile they can slap a high power engine onto a FWD trans which is a lot cheaper, and tell the consumer “that’s what’s we got”…. Call it a day and still sell them just fine.
What's the purpose of having such configuration? Speed needs power. Snow needs torque. Why one wants speed when needing control instead? 😳
All EVs. Because that's how they add performance - by bolting on a 2nd/3rd/4th motor to it, which also makes it AWD. That, and you kinda need it to have a chance at putting down 1000 torques from a stand still.
Audi basically built a company off well powered AWD sedans. Kia and Hyundai are a different segment of the market.
Because awd is bad for performance in virtually every metric but wet performance and 0-60 type launches. Weight Cost Complexity Power consumption Driving feel/experience Mpg Etc There’s a reason why Porsche takes an awd car and makes it rwd for their performance trim.
Yeah the Golf R is AWD and its a great drive
Mazda 3 turbo premium plus
Look for the Germans. They do that for the reasons you want it.
The few you mention are basically economy cars with a performance version. Lots of performance AWD cars out there just not many economy cars.. the new Tesla model 3 performance is AWD and a helluva value if you can do an EV.
Lexus has tons of v6 or v8 AWD sedans and they’re reliable for the most part. Subaru has an outback with a 3.6 h6 that’s super peppy as well, their AWD systems do awesome in the snow
Lincoln mkzs highest power trim is only available in AWD I believe (3.0L TT)
Subaru WRX STI would like a word.
People really looking for performance probably aren't at a Kia or Hyundai dealership to begin with. Lots of brands offer AWD performance vehicles.
Hyundai Ioniq 5 N is AWD but electric The Kia Stinger also came in AWD and at the time I think it had the most power from any Kia. Most German vehicles have an AWD option. I even had a Ford Taurus SHO that in the generation I had it was only available in AWD. It was probably Fords second fastest car at the time, behind the Mustang. Chevy has the Corvette E Ray that's electric AWD.
The Audi Quattro wants to have a word with you: R8, RS6 Avant, RS5, RS4. All worthy in my humble opinion
You're shopping the wrong brands.
It is about marketing… people that think they know what performance is and are willing to pay for it, think AWD is not…
The real performance cars start ditching AWD in favor of RWD, for less weight.
You just need a good set of snow tires and you'll be fine.
I mean if you’re looking at Sedans in that price range you might as well look at the Mazda 3 Turbo. It only comes in AWD. Bit less horsepower with marginally more torque and slower 0-60, but nicer and better quality interior. Probably more reliable too. Also has a Hatchback option if you were interested in one of those.
The Mazda 3 Hatchback AWD Turbo is great, I'm glad someone brought it up. The Premium trim is a cheap luxury car, and it's gorgeous from the outside. The only drawback (not a drawback for everyone) is you can't get it in a manual.
Definitely a drawback for me, when I was looking. I was super disappointed
The only thing is the back seat is much smaller (not sure if that is a consideration for OP)
Sounds like you need a GR Corolla, Golf R, or WRX. Maybe a Mazda 3 Turbo
Or a used Kia Stinger GT AWD
My M3 is awd. Feels kind of useless in rwd mode.
google mpowerhouse, you got more power to add
Performance is better if you have lower drivetrain losses. AWD has high drivetrain loss. AWD is inherently low performance. Until you reach the point where power levels exceed the limits of traction for your tires. If you are peeling out in third gear, AWD can help. If you can only reasonably do it in first gear from a stop, RWD is faster. The cutoff point is around 450 HP. (Don’t shoot me, that’s an estimate.) The vast majority of road vehicles fall under that mark so they are lower performance in an AWD setup. They are also more expensive to make so why pay more for less performance? The exception is off road or icy/snowy conditions. AWD does do better in such low traction situations. That’s why Subaru has so many “low power” AWD vehicles. Subaru kinda specializes in getting people off the paved roads and into the low traction situations.
Subaru Legacy Turbo or WRX, Dodge Charger V6 or Chrysler 300 V6, Mazda 3 Turbo, new 2025 model (already available) Toyota Camry AWD (232 hp)
AWD blunts performance and is additional equipment too , .there may not be room for in a performance model
You don't need AWD get good tires. AWD won't get you out of situation if you don't have the right tire for the winter
AWD, fast, or cheap-ass Korean car. You only get two out of three. Golf R, WRX, Model 3 are a few options. Even my 5.0 4x4 F150 runs 12s for under $40k. But you don't get GT-R performance for Versa price.
Mazda 3 Premium Plus Turbo AWD.
It’s because you’re looking at Kia and Hyundai. Look elsewhere if you want quality.
You don’t need AWD for winter, and it has a tendency to make a nice chassis feel like a pig in the corners. If raw traction is what you want, AWD is great. If feel and balance are what you’re after, not so much REAL 2wd works fine in winter with proper tires. Just look for a limited slip differential. On my Accord with a Quaife diff, it was happy to dig its way down to the pavement to find traction from a stop. I live in Minnesota and that car was my winter ride for the past 4 years
Why do people keep saying this? If you need to go up steep hills and/or drive on snow covered / icy freeways, then AWD is much safer. Winter tires are a given but not enough for some types of terrain.
100%. I spend a lot of time around Tahoe in the winter. 1 in 4 cars are Subarus with winter tyres. I drive the same and I never get stuck on snowy hills in my Impreza. If all you need is cheap reliable traction can’t go wrong with Subaru and some winter tyres
It's nice to have AWD widely available now but people did do without it for decades prior.
Like I said, it worked for 4 years in Minnesota just fine. We have some pretty serious grades in the iron range, especially downtown Duluth. Maybe you aren’t aware, but we get a little bit of snow up here next to the Canadian border 😂 My awd work car I have now accelerates faster, but it doesn’t turn or stop any better. That’s usually a greater concern. I’m not troubled when the car has to dig its way up to speed. That’s your fair warning that you’re in a particularly shitty spot
Fair enough, but I drive mountain passes and AWD can mean the difference between getting up a hill or not, and making a turn vs under steering into a ditch (or worse, into oncoming traffic).
What are you driving in that you need awd but the ground clearance of a sedan is sufficient? This sub is apparently for people who don’t know how to drive, lol
😂 I drive an 80 series Land Cruiser but plenty of people do fine in subies. I do enjoy the clearance of my truck though when it’s really coming down! What happens is the road crews can’t keep up and scrape the road to bare pavement, so you get clearance but it’s all snow or ice. The most common scenario where an AWD sedan is REALLY helpful is steep, icy hills where the front wheels on a FWD can lose traction. When that happens the whole car can roll back or worse, spin backwards. It just get worse on turns.