Ski car or ski truck?

I prefer a pick up truck but I don't have the funds for one currently.  I drive a '12 Jetta.  The back seats fold down so the skis fit just fine.  I can only bring 2 buddies though.  30mpg not bad

and for days like last tuesday, I make sure my brother calls in sick as well so we can go shred and drive his f150.  It was a beast during Stella

I'm happy with my 2011 rav4. It has a lock which helps with my steep driveway. The mileage is decent for a AWD and I think more room than a CRV.

I also have a friend with an Volvo S60 and he loves it in the snow.

tom

campgottagopee wrote

like this??

That's pretty nice but what I really want is one of these things



Of course then I would need to find something to do with it - and the time yo do if of course...

IDK, But it's amazing the amount of stuff skiing takes. We had a Saturn Vue when all 4 of us were skiing. It's back area was packed when we all went. No backpacks or extra stuff, just skis on roof, boot bags, poles, coats in cargo area.

Two options: Subaru Impreza or Toyota 4Runner.

We usually end up taking the Impreza everywhere because the gas mileage is better (~34mpg) and the AWD is totally capable. Got out of the Gore Parking lot pretty easily a week ago when everyone else was struggling to move. We thought about taking the 4Runner for the increased clearance, but the Impreza managed to do just fine.

Now that back seats fold down, storage in most vehicles is pretty good. It gets more cramped in Summer when we put the bike rack on the Impreza and fill the back up with camping gear, chairs, mountain biking stuff, etc.

The 4Runner is a solid truck, Matt. I've had a lot of family members buy toyotas for years, though I never owned one. I think I'm finally gonna go for a Tacoma when I'm ready to re-up, though an F150 is very tempting. I can see the appeal of the little Subies if you're moving two or fewer skiers. Glad you didn't get stuck last week. I would have been worried about clearance issues too.

LOVED my 4runner. wasn't too impressed with the new ones so went with a 2011 taco. only regret is that i didn't hold out for the 6' bed. it can fit enough boat, bike and ski stuff but you have to get all rubics on it. family trips the outback with a thule box works great too.

Here is a contrarian idea...

As long as a vehicle will fit your gear and anyone you are bringing with you, then you are good. Don't get a vehicle specifically for skiing. Slap a set of snow tires on any car and you are good to go. Does it fit your gear? Okay, cool. Now look at all of your other needs for the rest of the year (got a steep nasty driveway, okay go for the AWD). I've never ever wanted for AWD, four snows and I'm good to go and passing AWD SUVs without snows that are in the ditch. For me, I drive a ton so if it doesn't get 40+ MPG on the highway, it ain't for me.

And of course, your mileage may vary...

riverc0il wrote

Here is a contrarian idea...

As long as a vehicle will fit your gear and anyone you are bringing with you, then you are good. Don't get a vehicle specifically for skiing. Slap a set of snow tires on any car and you are good to go. Does it fit your gear? Okay, cool. Now look at all of your other needs for the rest of the year (got a steep nasty driveway, okay go for the AWD). I've never ever wanted for AWD, four snows and I'm good to go and passing AWD SUVs without snows that are in the ditch. For me, I drive a ton so if it doesn't get 40+ MPG on the highway, it ain't for me.

And of course, your mileage may vary...

Car threads always eventually have somebody mentioning the mythical "passing AWD SUVs in a ditch without snows" to justify to themselves that they do not need AWD. Actually, you have no idea what kind of tires they have or whether they have awd or not or whether they ended up in the ditch due to somebody else, unless you actually stopped to take a survey. In fact, it could be somebody like your self - driving a front wheel drive vehicle with snows.

Brownski wrote

 



Of course then I would need to find something to do with it - and the time yo do if of course...

That's good for people moving but where the hell woould you put all your dead deer??

campgottagopee wrote

That's good for people moving but where the hell woould you put all your dead deer??

Back seat

Brownski wrote

campgottagopee wrote

That's good for people moving but where the hell woould you put all your dead deer??

Back seat

Too much work having that cover on and all. That's no deer killing machine, that's strictly a bird watching machine

campgottagopee wrote

Brownski wrote

campgottagopee wrote

That's good for people moving but where the hell woould you put all your dead deer??

Back seat

Too much work having that cover on and all. That's no deer killing machine, that's strictly a bird watching machine

You may be right. I was thinking of it as a mini cat-skiing tool

We've used that one before --- it works great

x10003q wrote

Car threads always eventually have somebody mentioning the mythical "passing AWD SUVs in a ditch without snows" to justify to themselves that they do not need AWD. Actually, you have no idea what kind of tires they have or whether they have awd or not or whether they ended up in the ditch due to somebody else, unless you actually stopped to take a survey. In fact, it could be somebody like your self - driving a front wheel drive vehicle with snows.

Don't be so pedantic. Of course I don't know the nature of every accident I pass. The point is that front wheel drive with snows trumps all wheel drive without snows when you are at speed. Too many people think "ski car = all wheel drive" and I was just stating the fact that front wheel drive with snows is safer than all wheel drive without snows, all else being equal. All wheel drive with snows trumps all but it isn't a necessity for most skiers even if many think it is. Though many folks need the AWD for steep driveways and such, then it is a necessity.

I love it when threads turn to snow tires

Sorry, but I'll take AWD with good all season radials over FWD and snows for $500, Alex

AWD and FWD have similar brakes. Therefore snows on FWD would stop better than all seasons on AWD. Unless you want to consider transmission braking ability?
 Love our 4Runner because the middle section of the back seat folds down. I can keep the skis Inside AND separate the boys.

+1 for our old trusty 07 CRV, whom we just laid to rest recently.

comfortable to drive, lots of leg room, no annoying hump in the back row like subies, lots of trunk space, and the 40-20-40 rear seat. Good quality snows on it served us well for years---in fact that was the designated car for the Mrs. during the week, for me and the kids on weekends.

having just gone through replacement exercise, we wanted to stay in same class. looked at Outback, CRV, Rav4. Was pretty bummed that none of them have the 40-20-40 rear seat at the moment. That little fold down in the middle comes in handy!

wound up with the RAV. Leg room in rear of Outback and the stupid hump killed that option.

Having been a various SUV, along with being a one time Subaru Impreza owner since I started driving (needed something to tow various boats), I added a 2016 MK7 Golf to the fleet with a set of snow tires.

And to be quiet frank I would rather drive that Golf in all but the largest storms. Its lighter weight, vastly lower center of gravity coupled with snow tires is safer than any 4WD/AWD arrangement I have used over the years.

Make no mistake, with the exception of acceleration, Snow Tires > AWD w/All Seasons.

Snow tires are designed for snow (duh).  If you're facing icy conditions, you want more surface area on the tires.

I'll take AWD and reasonable all seasons over good snows on a 2WD.  That's in part because I do mostly highway
driving.  Snows will help you stop better than an AWD (city driving).  AWD is good for handling and acceleration.