Why don't other manufactures put available AWD on all their

>>16170672
because awd is a meme.

>>16170672
Who even needs awd? Unless you live in bumfuck nowhere and you get actual winters, there's no need.

I'm Canadian and I've owned awd and I prefer driving rwd year round. Most people who own awd vehicles, have no legitimate need for an awd vehicle.

>>16170772
I live in a place with actual winters and FWD manages just fine

>>16170772
by that logic, AWD is useless since by the time you have enough snow per year to justify buying it, a proper 4WD truck would handle it better.

>>16170672
Its more expensive and they don't need to
AWD is subie's USP, otherwise what would they have to offer over a civic or corolla?

>>16170672

1. Extra cost
2. Lower MPG = more CO2
3. Increased maintainance costs

>>16170672
Subaru's AWD system I'm guessing is a lot more reliable and simple to fix than a transverse AWD system. Plus, transverse AWD is a lot more complex and adds more weight.

>>16170812
I dont care for more emissions, but fuel economy would hurt!

Iirc Audi and BMW do. Unless there's something shutter than the a4 and 3 series, in which case don't tell me.

>>16171113
Well the A3 exists and it's shit. BMW has the 1 and 2 series but they're still good cars.

File: 1472237288237.jpg (268KB, 992x1200px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 992x1200px

>>16170672
Subaru does it because their whole platform is designed around it.

File: Volvo-V40-2013_01.jpg (541KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1600x1066px

>>16170672
Volvo does have an awd option for some of the smaller cars also. Like in S40, V50 and V40 Cross Country.

>>16170812
>CO2 meme
other points valid tho

>>16171594
Yeah CO2 emissions don't matter to car designers, you're right.

File: 1474409026151.png (232KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 500x380px

>>16170672
>>16171326

It's expensive if your company doesn't do that regularly except for SUVs. But with Subaru they all have AWD so it makes sense for them. I live in canadian winter hell and I've never an issue with FWD in winter and it's not worth the extra fuel consumption and extra insurance cost. Worse yet is that 2017 impreza is barely 150 HP and heavier than everyone else in the same catagory it's kinda derp. I now own a 2016 civic and I've never looked back at subaru or even toyota.

>>16170786
it manages, yeah. I was most impressed by AWD when I drove a newer buick sedan down rural highways in northern wisconsin after a blizzard. I really felt the difference as the car tracked through drifts. It was reassuring. I'm not sure I was impressed enough to take the hit on upfront and maintenance costs, but it was ncie.

File: 1453263304633.jpg (199KB, 1696x1459px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1696x1459px

>>16170772
>>16170680
>>16170786
>You don't NEED more than 3 cylinders
>You don't NEED more than 50HP
>You don't NEED a standard transmission
>You don't NEED disc brakes

>>16171694

I've driven a 99 HP Prius C. Yes you need more than that. Transmission depends on the car you want and driving preference. Drums have the braking power of soft cheese and disks are better overall.