Recent comments in /f/pittsburgh

More-Adhesiveness-54 t1_j9v9zgp wrote

Re: your Chicago comparison, the terrain makes a difference imo.

I lived in Michigan for a few years and have driven around a lot in central Illinois, both of which I assume has a similar terrain as Chicago. Given a fixed amount of snow, I'm way more comfortable driving in Michigan or central Illinois than PA. Worse came to worse and I were to slide off a road, I'd likely just go into a field at a similar elevation as the road. If you slide off a road in PA, there's a chance you're dropping off of and into something. The hills themselves also make a difference in terms of impact on navigability. My SO who is from central Illinois is mildly terrified of driving around Pittsburgh in snow, so your friend isn't unique (not that it's entirely rational or justified).

1

skfoto t1_j9v8x5x wrote

AWD is not necessary. I run snow tires on my FWD car and it’s easily tackled everything I’ve tried driving through. Though if we keep having winters like this one snow tires aren’t even necessary. Damn near could get by on racing tires in this weather.

1

WhenRobLoweRobsLowes t1_j9v8u7v wrote

FYI, you can also post in r/Pennsylvania to get a better scope of answers, because Pittsburgh is in a very different climate than Tyrone.

I can say this having grown up in the Altoona area (which is down the road from Tyrone).

However, a competent driver with good winter tires will be just as functional with a FWD vehicle as AWD.

Note I said "competent driver." I rolled FWD most of my life, but as I said above, I learned how to drive in superior shitty conditions. For newcomers from the south, the two best things are AWD and staying the fuck off of the road when the ice starts to fly.

We train to drive greater distances in shittier weather on far worse roads than most of the country. Assuming everyone has that level of comfort and experience is why we're still on the roads while overconfident rookies are in the ditch.

11

moonwish22 t1_j9v8rjg wrote

If it’s in the outskirts of Tyrone in the mountains, then yes, they needed AWD. If it’s in the outskirts the other directions where you’ll be lucky to see a plow once 24 hours after the storm comes, then AWD is needed unless you want to be stuck in your lane. If they live closer toward Altoona, then you can get away without having AWD.

Short answer: it depends.

1

VietBongArmy t1_j9v8dgt wrote

I'm on my 2nd AWD vehicle. Mine only engages when the car senses it needs to. It's far from a requirement here, you'll get around fine in winter if the tires have enough tread, I don't have snow tires. What people rarely mention in this sub about AWD, is that they handle a lot better in the rain with the water on the road.

3

HomicidalHushPuppy t1_j9v8dd4 wrote

I've driven front-drive cars with all-season tires for 16 years. I've never had an issue aside from 2 times I got stuck on un-plowed hills that I knew darn well I should'nt have driven on and decided to try anyway.

AWD definitely isn't necessary. The thing people forget about AWD too is that it's not all-wheel-stop - people think they're driving a small tank that'll do whatever they want and then end up in more trouble because they overestimated what AWD can do for you.

The biggest thing is just use common sense. If it's so bad that FWD can't make it, chances are AWD won't do much better.

2

lift_heavy64 t1_j9v7r2x wrote

And don't listen to the yinzers saying "it's normal and happens everywhere." I've lived in multiple states and cities over the past ~15 years and it only happened with any regularity when I was in pittsburgh. The infrastructure in pittsburgh is embarrassing.

3

ballsonthewall t1_j9v7gd2 wrote

In Pittsburgh proper? ehhh, decent tires and FWD will do you 99% of the time. In Tyrone? Little snowier and colder and more back roads that might not be maintained. Definitely a smart move, but tires do make a bigger impact that AWD in most regular driving cases.

4

Aggressive-Mud6856 t1_j9v7bgt wrote

I agree with you in principle. However, I think it's tough given the historical nature that we approach taxes with to be able to set aside buckets for certain improvements. If we were like other states that had specific ballot initiatives to vote on and people actually did then I think that would work. The issue, as I find it in my community is that many people would vote against any form of tax increase for schools based off of either political considerations or simply because they feel that if they don't have kids in the schools, they shouldn't have to pay any property tax.

Personally, I would much rather go to a tax initiative system as opposed to a general tax but that's not what we've done historically and would require a fairly significant mental change. But that's just my opinion.

Sorry for the rambling sentences, I'm using text to speech and it doesn't pick up that it should put a comma in 😉

2