u/Heavy_Gap_5047

I see a lot of indications here that many don't really understand their AWD.

There's a great many different kinds of AWD systems. Not like old school 4WD, where you pull a lever or turn a knob to switch from 2WD to 4WD. With AWD there's a great many ways this is done.

Most are FWD based slip-n-grip, but some are RWD based slip-n-grip. Some are FWD biased always on, some are RWD biased always on. Almost none are actually 50/50.

Some are better at mud and snow, some are better at performance handling.

Some really harm MPG, some barely affect MPG.

Some are sensitive to differences in tire size, some aren't.

Some have limited slip differentials of different kinds, some just use the computer to apply brakes.

Some have extra gear and/or clutch setups to control biasing front/rear and/or left/right.

Some are stupid little electric systems that barely count. Some are great electric systems.

AWD systems are as varied as the cars they're in. And really any conversation or decision about AWD should include these differences. But manufactures have done a really poor job letting the public know about the differences instead just using marketing terms and thus it appears very few understand.

What do you understand, and what's in your AWD vehicle?

I'm a gear head, just not in the Porsche world. The Macan intrigues me, it might be a crossover for the woman that I can tolerate. I was looking at the used market for them and they're relatively cheap. Makes me wonder if that's because like some German/VW group vehicles at a certain point they just get too unreliable and expensive to repair/maintain. Or could a $20k Macan be a great value?

I'm a gear head, just not in the Porsche world. The Macan intrigues me, it might be a crossover for the woman that I can tolerate. I was looking at the used market for them and they're relatively cheap. Makes me wonder if that's because like some German/VW group vehicles at a certain point they just get too unreliable and expensive to repair/maintain. Or could a $20k Macan be a great value?

So I have a Chrysler 300, something like this:

https://preview.redd.it/hhokcz2y2hzg1.jpg?width=693&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46984348b2b28007360d168dcef9952dff812c95

And one of these little Harbor Freight trailers, minus the spare tire.

https://preview.redd.it/3bhj7p9n3hzg1.jpg?width=994&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9eb20ed44710203068f183243174213e903df695

So together they're like this, sorry no pic handy without the wood on it.

https://preview.redd.it/j95vdmt85hzg1.jpg?width=753&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1f8cb65b16f41e4cdac84df2c5590020d98adcfb

Anyway, to the question.

It really feels to me like the car is faster on the highway when pulling the empty trailer. Like it moves at speed more effortlessly, that it takes less throttle to maintain speed. Like the trailer is smoothing out the air behind the car, reducing turbulence and thus overall reducing drag despite the fact that the trailer has drag of it's own.

I haven't had a chance to do real testing to see if pulling the empty trailer improves MPG, it feels like it might. Though I might do it tomorrow.

Does this make sense and if so, what does it tell me about the aerodynamics of my car?

The transverse engine post got me thinking. Really the ideal layout for interior space is the rear flat engine layout of the 911, old VW, and the Corvair. Also it's better handling and traction wise compared to a FWD layout. And would likely be cheaper to manufacture.

So it leaves me wondering why nobody has made a modern standard sedan/coupe/hatch type car with that layout. Basically a modern VW Type 3 (notchback/fastback/squareback). VW could presumably do it rather easily using a lot of Porsche parts, but they don't. The Subaru drivetrain could probablywork as well.

Thoughts?

I've noticed in this sub that whenever the subject of AWD comes up there's a sea of basically the same comments. They pretty much always focus on snow, that all that's needed is snow tires, and that AWD isn't needed. Even if the OP never mentions snow or tires.

I think this while in a sense true it misses much of the point. Yes snow is a thing, yes tires are very important, and yes, the vast majority can get by without AWD. What it misses though is that AWD makes everything better and is useful in far more conditions than snow.

Even on dry pavement, the majority of modern non-AWD vehicles have enough power to spin the tires. On just wet roads AWD adds a significant level of stability and capability to a lot of situations. And we aren't always on pavement, we all at times drive on gravel, dirt, etc.

The ability to reliably accelerate and be sure footed in all conditions is a huge factor that I think many underestimate.