When you factor in selling price and reliability, a Ford Crown Vic or Mercury Grand Marquis wins out easily. I would recommend getting an extra wheel and putting winter tires on the rear. Due to the demographics, these cars are often low-mileage. A poor second choice would be a minivan–I hear that they are sold with a free castration. I had a 2003 Avalon–also a great car with a big back seat. All the old Avalons have surprisingly big back seats.
" I would recommend getting an extra wheel and putting winter tires on the rear."
Modern winter tires need to be mounted in sets of FOUR.
Why is that, for a rear-wheel drive car?
^
Assuming that you own a car made in the last 80 years or so, it has brakes on all 4 wheels.
One of the major advantages of winter tires is that they allow you to stop in a far shorter distance on slippery winter road surfaces…IF you place them on all 4 wheels. If you place your winter tires on just the rear wheels, you lose most of that advantage.
Additionally, having more turning traction on the front wheels of a RWD car is also a safety factor.
Did you really think that winter tires were just to give you more traction for forward movement in a straight line?
- Better braking traction on the front makes you far more likely to fishtail on ice or snow.
Better traction on the rear makes it more likely to keep in a straight line. - Better traction on the front, for steering, again makes it likely to oversteer, which is more dangerous than understeering on a slipperly surface.
Get all 4 or put them on the rear.
The Lacrosse was first made in 2005. NADA shows the cheapest 2005 still having a retail value of $7150 with 100,000 miles. If you can find a Buick Lacrosse for under $4500 it’s going to have a ton of miles on it.
Good luck.
With all due respect, putting winter tires only on the rear wheels of a rwd car does not necessarily put the best traction on rear…in rain or on dry pavement. If you look at traction tests on winter tires, they handle worse as a group on dry, brake worse on dry and many are worse rain tires. That means in those conditions, you would have significantly WORSE traction on the rear resulting in a spin out. The on,y exceptions are be very low speed driving where on some rwd cars they recomend chans only on the rear…again, at very low speeds. The advice si sound. Equal traction on all four wheels, that means same tread and similar tread depth, there are no exceptions anymore for rwd cars. I got away with it for years but I stopped straight but poorly compared to snows on all four and slid right through intersections. Snow tires on the rear are of minimal braking help even if you stop straight. That gives you the worse of both worlds. The ability to go fast but corner and stop poorly with snow tires only on the rear.
Coworker put winter tires on the back. Hit the bus in front of them three times on the way to work. Luckily it had a cushion bumper.
I would never use just two winter tires. I never had a problem with four.
“1. Better braking traction on the front makes you far more likely to fishtail on ice or snow.
Better traction on the rear makes it more likely to keep in a straight line.
2. Better traction on the front, for steering, again makes it likely to oversteer, which is more dangerous than understeering on a slipperly surface.”
Well, I have to admit that you have a…unique…way of thinking, melott.
I never before heard of anybody claiming that less traction would increase one’s safety on the road.
It’s the ratio of rear traction to front traction.
I guess ratio is a unique concept.
I understand now that this ratio may reverse on snowy versus dry roads, which is apparently the basis for concern on testers.
For winter tires, I worry mostly about snow/ice. Otherwise, why have them?
Being practical, is this discussion relevant to someone looking for a $4500 car?
Would such a person want to spend out on 4 extra tires and wheels? Probably not.
Given that, I would favor the FWD Avalon, the generation 2000 to 2004. 03 and 04 are better because of the so-called “sludge” issue.
I found that these cars cost more than the OP wants to pay in MN, unless you go to 200k miles.
If you go to $8000, I find…
http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/625546322/overview/
http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/617205691/overview/
and, in my view the best bet:
http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/622186854/overview/
Now: There’s a lot of Grand Marquis. Monster trunk, not as good in snow:
http://www.cars.com/for-sale/searchresults.action?stkTyp=U&tracktype=usedcc&mkId=20074&AmbMkId=20074&AmbMkNm=Mercury&make=Mercury&AmbMdNm=Grand%20Marquis&model=Grand%20Marquis&mdId=21223&AmbMdId=21223&prMx=5000&rd=150&zc=56601&searchSource=QUICK_FORM&enableSeo=1
I’ve been using all-weather tires on snow for 40 years—no problem.
“It’s the ratio of rear traction to front traction.
I guess ratio is a unique concept.”
No, it’s your application of it to traction that is…unique.
If you think that what I have said is incorrect, you will need to argue with Transport Canada…among other agencies:
@melott
Though I get why putting snow tires on the rear helps you stop straight, I am bewildered as to why you would think that not having them on front would be as protest too considering most of the stopping power in a car is done at the front wheels. I have driven rwd, fwd amd 4 wd cas in the snow belt with snow tires on cars in all different combinations and having snow tires on front is very important on the rear in a rwd car. Where do you drive in the winter to think that it is not ?
Trying to stop with snow tires on the rear only, simply means you "slide " straight. Your arguments seem to compare having snow tires on front vs snow tires on the rear…That is not the discussion. It’s about having snow tires on the rear vs having them on all wheels. Check Tire Rack out on this issue.
Versus not having them at all. Please make recommendations for a person with a $30,000 a year income and a family.
Vs not having them at all ? I would argue I in favor of not having them at all then. Snow tires on the rear can easily have worse traction in rain which can result in a spin out. Best traction in rear often only applies to snow and ice. When OP can afford a new set of tires for a big old rwd car, I would look at All Terrain tires if they possible fit on all fours. Otherwise, I would recommend staying with the highest rated all season on all four wheels. Have driven in northern NE winters for over 50 years. I would never put snow tires on just one axle on any car, then drive down a rain soaked highway at 65 plus mph.
I agree that 4 snow tires is best. However, I don’t think snows only on the rear of a rear wheel drive car is that bad if you know how to drive. Before front wheel drive became popular, somehow we survived with snows on the rear.
Of couse we did survive. But there was no choice. And, a rwd car if set properly with weight in the back can be quite good taking off. Few people who are now owners get that. IMHO, they are beter off with four or none.
“But there was no choice.”
We could have chosen four snow tires…
I meant there was no choice of drive trains. There is another choice. All terrain tires which are good in snow and can be run year round. On large rwd cars, you could possibly find the right size. I am a total proponent of matching trires and wear on all four tires on family cars…no exceptions. Your handling depends on it in all conditions. People were did not know then and many had accidents they should not have had with different tires on the front then back. Snow tires give you less traction on the rear except for those they were specifically designed for. Tire distributors fortunately have gotten around to recognizing it in most places.
Winter tires alone on the rear do not help you enough in winter conditions to warrant the poor handling in all other conditions with the car’s unequal traction.
Amazingly, I drove a Fiat 128 (FWD) with snows on the front wheels only through 6 winters. I could go anywhere when it snowed. But then, I know how to drive.
You could check Craigslist and local want ads to see if anything you might be interested in comes up in your area. If you can find a good car being sold by an individual you’ll probably get a better deal than from a dealer. If you can stand about 25 mpg, I think the Grand Marquis/Crown Victoria is an excellent choice. My mom has a '99 Grand Marquis, it will get 27-28 mpg on the highway at 65-70 mph. I drove mom’s on a trip a few years ago, with the c/c set at 55 mph on the highway I got almost 31.5 mpg.