[Wanderer]

VCM maybe?

 

[Wanderer]

Have you driven the CVT in larger vehicles? It pairs way better because of their larger, higher torque engines. The new turbo 4's in some smaller vehicles are helping but I have always felt Nissan's VQ35/CVT combination was one of the best applications of a CVT. We test drove brand new Pathfinders before settling on a used car and it was nothing like driving our old Rogue.

Hmmm. My understanding is that CVTs have been limited in their application to larger vehicles because of susceptibility to wear and intolerance of high torque. Maybe a flatter torque curve from the engine is a good thing in terms of CVT performance, but designers have struggled to make CVTs tolerant of high peak torque. A broken or frayed "band" will stop a CVT dead.

Granted, technology moves on. But a feature of the new turbo 4's is a relatively broad, flat torque curve. In other words, the engine has "grunt" at relatively low rpm, unlike "peaky" normally aspirated high-revving little 4-bangers that don't wake up until about 5000 rpm.

 

[Wanderer]

I'd stay away from the Ascent for a year or so until any infotainment or other issues have been worked out for first year release. It's the same for every brand, Pilot included. The Pilot already has a few years under its belt and it's almost certain that the new model should address the complaints about the lack of volume knobs.

If we define "new model" as after the mid-cycle-refresh, which for Honda typically occurs after 3 model years, you're probably correct. But it's unclear what, if anything, will happen in the interim.

 

[Wanderer]

All good points, but be careful about "cargo volume". That's measured up to the roof, and that's not how I typically load my SUV. Roof height and slope of the rear hatch glass make a big difference in the cargo volume measurement. For instance, specs for our 3rd-gen MDX are 38 ft^3 behind 2nd row, 68 behind 1st row. 3rd-gen Pilot claims 47 ft^3 behind 2nd row, 84 behind 1st row. But cargo area floor area and cargo volume up to the bottom of the rear windows are nearly identical.

Sure, sometimes it's nice to have the extra volume, or extra height for bulky items, and if Pilot weren't such a good road-trip vehicle it wouldn't be in my stable, but for typical use that total cargo volume can be misleading. When I shop for a road-trip vehicle these days I show up at a dealer with my biggest luggage. That's a measure I trust.

Ask me about the rental Hyundai Santa Fe Sport we ended up with for a trip to Yosemite, having reserved a "Toyota 4Runner or similar". That thing got loaded to the roof, and every cubic inch. :frown:

As for the AWD system, you're preaching to the choir, but Pilot has an open diff at the front. Pilot does have electronically controlled "limited slip" capability at the rear. Some manufacturers are going toward open diffs with brake-based traction control, including some reputable German manufacturers. The devil is in the details. The electronic control system can make or break any of these modern AWD systems.

What qualifies as "Symmetrical All-wheel Drive" or "quattro" or whatever is subject to the whims of the respective manufacturers these days, and it takes some deep digging to get real specs. Apparently, most drivers don't care. Viscous couplings are old-school; they suck power and fuel, and their performance degrades over time. It will be interesting to see more detail about the AWD system in the Ascent.

 

[Wanderer]

The Pilot can send 100% of the torque to either wheel in the rear.

Sorta. Honda has some pretty talented marketeers just like Subaru. This is only true under a limited set of conditions. 3rd-gen Pilot can send most of the total engine torque to the outside rear wheel during aggressive cornering. This is because of the "overdriven" rear differential. But under most conditions, the maximum torque split front-rear will be less than 100% to the rear, because Pilot doesn't have a center differential with independent drive shafts to the front and rear. There is no way for it to "shut down" the front diff. Along with the open front diff, this does limit Pilot's off-road capabilities. It's just not designed to be a rock crawler. Nor is it designed to be a rally car. A rally car needs to have the capability of sending torque to all wheels all the time. The iVTM4/SH-AWD system is more of an "on-demand" system. That's not really a bad thing; it's what allows it to be efficient, and it's very good in the conditions for which it is designed. ( I'll probably get flamed for this heresy, but that's OK, it will liven up the discussion ).

Overdriven torque vectoring is a relatively rare capability and certainly has benefits for on-road handling dynamics. I think the control software is tuned for less aggressive response in Pilot's "iVTM4" relative to MDX's "SH-AWD", probably because of the higher center of gravity and softer suspension of Pilot. But I can feel it working in sweeping turns ( as long as I stay on the throttle ). Some manufacturers are implementing brake-based torque vectoring that brakes the inside rear wheel during cornering, supposedly giving a similar benefit to true overdriven mechanical torque vectoring. I think Subaru is one of them. The new "Sport-Hybrid SH-AWD" system in Acura NSX, RLX, and MDX Sport-Hybrid is a very interesting system with independent electric motors for each side at the rear. It can even transfer torque between rear wheels by running one motor as a generator to provide regenerative braking, and sending the juice to the other motor.

This is a frequent topic of discussion on the MDX sites. Here are some relatively brief and entertaining articles on the subject:

https://carthology.com/2015/11/20/this-vs-that-torque-vectoring-systems/

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/whats-the-diff-we-put-torque-vectoring-to-the-test-feature

 

[Wanderer]

From the pics, I think low cargo volume measurement is because of relatively low roof height and high load floor toward the front. It looks like the 2nd-row seats don't fold down very flat. But these are just guesses.

My reptilian brain lost interest when a reviewer said "not enough passing power". :frown:

 

[Wanderer]

I believe the cargo area can fit a 70 inch TV.

Well that's a relief! Spending $40,000. will save a $50 delivery charge. :grin:

Can I interest you in a pickup truck to save another $50 per year on seasonal garden mulch delivery? Great for other "stuff" too. But I did notice the splintered remains of a small piece of furniture protruding from a mangled box along the highway earlier today... :surprise:

 

[Wanderer]

Subaru has also been making a high-torque CVT for years now on the Forester XT (turbo) and the WRX.

The snorting, coughing sound you just heard was thousands of diesel engined pickup truck drivers choking on their coffee. :grin:

 

[Wanderer]

I didn't make that up. Subaru calls it their High-Torque CVT.

Gotta love marketeers. They could call it Heidi Klum, but that wouldn't make it a supermodel.

 

[Wanderer]

Totally agree about the trend toward electrification, and that may eventually render mechanical drivetrains obsolete. But not for a while, and Acura is doing something interesting with their "Sport-Hybrid": three electric motors with a DCT. Electric AWD with torque vectoring. But Acura doesn't recommend towing with their hybrid drivetrain, and that's kind of a downer for an "SUV".