The Mazda CX-5 claims its AWD system utilizes 27 different sensors to adjust the AWD based on wheel slippage, incline, steering angle, gear position, outside temp, and a whole host of other things.
Since none of us here particularly care about fuel economy when driving an AWD barge, I was thinking about how one could fool these sensors into activating AWD permanently. For instance, the incline sensor. Could it be as simple as taking the sensor out, turning it 90°s so he car thinks you're driving up the worlds steepest hill?
I know the wheel speed and throttle position can't be changed (due to how they report to the ecu) but imagine if it was that easy! And then when you want your fwd back, you adjust the sensor(s) back into oem position (like for dealer warranty issues.)
Because a lot of them rely on wet clutches for power transfer, you'd probably end up burning up the system that way by having it drag the clutches around turns, etc. constantly.
Here is a good explanation on how the Evo X's AWD wizardry works.
https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Mitsubishi-Evolution-X-all-wheel-drive-system-work
I'm not familiar at all with Mazda's system but I wouldn't be surprised if there are some similarities.
Trackmouse wrote:
Since none of us here particularly care about fuel economy when driving an AWD barge
Speak for yourself. I rather enjoy getting the most fuel economy out of my cars. I'm rather proud of the time I got 29mpg driving a bridge ported RX-7 
, I was thinking about how one could fool these sensors into activating AWD permanently. For instance, the incline sensor. Could it be as simple as taking the sensor out, turning it 90°s so he car thinks you're driving up the worlds steepest hill?
Direct 12v application to the clutch motor usually does the trick.
Personally, an overly tight AWD drives like crap to me. All of the downsides of rear drive and all of the downsides of front drive.
I could probably ask one of the Mazda R&D guys. It's an interesting system, and I think Knurled is right.
But...why? Of all the AWD systems I've driven in that class, the Mazda one was the most transparent and seemed to spend more time enabling you to do what you wanted to do instead of throwing the nanny flag. It's a bit spooky.
Knurled wrote:
Personally, an overly tight AWD drives like crap to me. All of the downsides of rear drive and all of the downsides of front drive.
After rallycrossing the Jeep with no center diff, I'll agree. The only time it works well is at speed on dirt, where it ends up being very stable (and you can bring the tail back in line with the throttle at any point). But in tight stuff or when you have too much grip, it's a headache.
Just a thought. Mazda was the only one to have a somewhat good explanation of its system. I just wish the 90's were alive again. You know, when AWD actually meant it.
