explainer

everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-four-wheel-steering

Everything you ever wanted to know about four-wheel steering


With roots in early 20th-century trucks, 4WS is not widely understood.

A GMC Sierra EV with rear wheel steering

The GMC Sierra EV is one of a number of new electric trucks to use rear-wheel steering. Credit: GMC

The GMC Sierra EV is one of a number of new electric trucks to use rear-wheel steering. Credit: GMC

Like any big industry, the automotive business has several dumpsters filled with products and ideas that should have remained conceptual. From modern climate controls buried within successive infotainment menus that neither Lawrence of Arabia nor Columbo could find to the old and unlamented Chrysler TC by Maserati with its atrocious build quality and a terrible cylinder head (the Maserati part), the collective car circus has spawned no shortage of bad ideas.

However, there are a few good ideas buried under the weight of poor execution, lousy technology, dreadful marketing, steep pricing, or just merely something being ahead of its time. Several of these morsels deserved a better launch and a second chance. One of them is four-wheel steering.

Four-wheel steering, in concept

The idea of steering a two-axle vehicle’s front and rear wheels isn’t new. Very early American 4×4 trucks from the dawn of the 20th century sported four-wheel-steering systems (4WS), including the Cotta Cottamobile, the American ¾-ton to 10-ton trucks, and Jeffery/Nash Quad Lorry 3-ton trucks.

By the early 1980s, a more modern iteration of active 4WS systems was found as a feature on concept (show) cars. However, since that breed of machine rarely had to prove itself, these are more display pieces than working technology.

Active 4WS systems do two physical things. First, they impart opposite-phase steering angles to the rear wheels from those applied to the fronts. When the fronts turn right, the rears turn left at a fraction of the front’s steering angles. This effectively diminishes the vehicle’s turning circle or radius, making it more maneuverable in tight spaces like parking lots.

An illustration showing how rear wheel steering systems work

Credit: Honda

Depending on the system’s engineering, opposite-phase steering takes place only below a certain vehicle speed or with lots of steering lock applied (generally, more than three-quarters of a turn of the steering wheel or about 270 degrees of lock from center). It also never occurs above a trotting pace. Inducing opposite-phase steering above 30 or 40 mph could cause drastic instability at speed, creating a very rapid yaw moment that would likely cause an unrecoverable skid.

The second action of active 4WS is same-phase steering angle input to the rear wheels. Turn the wheel right, and the rear wheels also turn slightly to the right. However, that rear angle is even shallower than the opposite-phase angles in the above scenario. This improves higher-speed stability, like when a driver changes lanes or corners rapidly through fun twisties or on a racetrack. Rear steering angles vary anywhere from 2.5 degrees to 10 degrees, depending on vehicle design and purpose.

Four-wheel steering, in hard parts

In real nuts, bolts, and notoriety, Honda first brought 4WS to modern production in the 1988 Prelude Si as an option. Nissan followed suit with its HICAS system, and Mazda had a system with extremely limited production, but Honda made the biggest splash.

The Honda system was entirely mechanical. It used a shaft connecting the front steering rack to a planetary gear. That gear created the phase (direction) and degree of rear steering indexed to steering wheel input. This shaft led to a sliding rod that acted like the rack of a rack and pinion steering gear, carrying that input to the rear wheels.

At small steering angles, the rear wheels turned a maximum of 1.5 degrees in phase (in the same direction) as the fronts. At larger steering wheel angles above roughly 270 degrees from center, the rear wheels steered as much as 5.3 degrees out-of-phase with the fronts, tightening the turning circle about 10 percent.

The results in those 1980s and ’90s Preludes were impressive. Some auto critics, like that most cerebral of British scribes, L.J.K. Setright of Car Magazine, cited that the third and fourth-generation Honda Preludes with 4WS exuded the finest steering in the history of history. Weight, feel, accuracy, and telepathic information all sent the auto critic into automotive euphoria.

Four-wheel steering, digitally rendered

As Honda engineers toiled away on their system outside Tokyo, about 37 km away, Nissan worked on its HICAS (“High Capacity Actively Controlled Steering”) variants. Only active above roughly 90 km/h (55 mph) and below 200 km/h (125 mph), it used a computer-controlled hydraulic actuator to move the rear lower lateral links. A computer signaled a rear steering rack, allowing toe changes of plus or minus one degree, depending on speed and front steering angle.

The rear wheels of Nissan’s system would initially (and briefly) steer out of phase with the fronts to improve turn-in response. It then switched phasing for greater stability. This enabled excellent slalom performance with rapid directional changes, which Nissan considered important in contemporary vehicle reviews and tests of sporty vehicles at the time.

However, this early HICAS system had no rear steering at low speeds. The Nissan system also differed from Honda’s in that it relied on a variety of sensors to instruct operation, whereas Honda’s was entirely analog.

Other manufacturers had been working on 4WS at roughly the same time, and others even launched production cars with the system before Honda. Mazda’s MX-02 concept car in 1983 showed a real working system, reaching production in the 1988 626 Turbo. Mitsubishi had a system in the Galant VR-4 in 1987 that only steered with same-phase angles above 50 km/h (30 mph). But none made as big an impact as Honda’s.

However, 4WS did not take the world by storm in the marketplace. The complexity of sporty cars coming out of Japan in the 1980s grew enormously. Coupled with the Japanese Yen’s dramatic rise in value against the US dollar and after the Plaza Accord agreement in September 1985 between major industrial countries, the cost of Japanese cars in overseas markets skyrocketed. In the US, the 1984 Nissan 300ZX Turbo cost around $16,000. By 1990, the 300ZX Turbo’s MSRP was $33,260, more than doubling in just six years.

The bigger meaning for us in 2025 is that, conceptually, today’s 4WS systems essentially do the same thing. Slow-speed opposite-phase inputs tighten maneuverability. Same-phase steering at high speed improves directional changes like lane shifting with generally small steering angles at the rear.

Trucks

Even though the 4WS concept dates back to the early 20th-century trucks, GM is the only manufacturer that has produced a 4WS pickup in the modern era. (Ford has tested systems, though.) The initial Quadrasteer system of the 2000s used a set of trailing tie rods (behind the axle), leading to a steering rack, the pinion of which was an electric motor. This motor dialed a maximum of 15 degrees of steering angle out-of-phase with the front wheels, but only below 45 mph. Where a normal GM pickup had a turning circle of 47 feet, a Quadrasteer truck required only 37 feet, a giant 22 percent improvement.

The Quadrasteer’s in-phase rear-steering topped out at 5 degrees to improve highway stability at higher speeds. More importantly, since this was on a pickup truck, towing had to be considered, too. Therefore, GM limited the low-speed, opposite-phase steering angle in towing mode to 12 degrees. This prevented drastic angles from binding up a trailer while turning.

However, GM’s Quadrasteer system fell flat because of its high price. It didn’t cost the moon to produce, but GM priced it at $5,600. The company also made it optional only on the top trim levels of the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra.

GM also faced resistance among truck buyers because more complex mechanicals could mean a threat to durability. And if nothing else, pickup buyers want durability from their trucks, especially work trucks.

Modern-modern day

Today, 4WS is still not commonplace, but many luxury cars and SUVs use it for the same reasons that existed nearly 50 years ago when Honda, Nissan, and Mazda began their studies in the mid-1970s. Mercedes offers it today on several vehicles like the electric EQS, plus S-Class and E-Class models. And it is showing up on some large GM EVs, like the new Silverado and Hummer.

GMC offers a system on pickup trucks that aids low-speed maneuverability and allows the vehicle to crabwalk, changing direction with no yaw. Some high-powered Porsche models and top-level Audis use 4WS with slight variations, but all for the same fundamental reasons as in the 1970s and 1980s. Despite other developments in suspension design, computer aids, and active driving assists, which didn’t exist in the 1980s, the fundamental benefits of four-wheel steering—improved maneuverability at low speed and improved high-speed turning stability—still exist nearly 50 years after the concept first saw the light of day.

Photo of Jim Resnick

A veteran of journalism, product planning and communications in the automotive and music space, Jim reports, critiques and lectures on autos, music and culture.

Everything you ever wanted to know about four-wheel steering Read More »

it’s-a-new-year,-and-these-are-now-the-only-evs-that-get-a-tax-credit

It’s a new year, and these are now the only EVs that get a tax credit

lease instead of buy —

Strict rules about battery components from China make most plug-ins ineligible.

concept of ev tax credit

Getty Images

It’s a new year, and while few of us still have the headache of needing to remember to write the new year on checks, 2024 brings a new annoyance of sorts. As of yesterday, tough new US Treasury Department rules concerning the sourcing of electric vehicle batteries went into effect; as a result, most of the battery and plug-in hybrid EVs that were eligible for the Internal Revenue Service’s clean vehicle tax credit until Sunday have now lost that eligibility.

Under the federal government’s previous program to incentivize the adoption of plug-in vehicles, it offered a tax credit, up to $7,500, based on the battery capacity of a BEV or PHEV, and once a car maker sold more than 200,000 plug-in vehicles, it lost eligibility for the tax credit—Only Tesla and General Motors reached this threshold.

Changes came as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and went into effect at the start of 2023. Thanks to heavy industry lobbying, credits linked to union-made EVs went by the wayside, with US Senator Joe Manchin acting as point man for companies like Toyota that sought to slow down the EV transition.

As we’ve detailed in the past, the new rules allow for a tax credit of up to $7,500 for the purchase of a new EV. But there are plenty of conditions. Final assembly must take place in North America. There are income caps for the buyer and a price cap for the vehicle—no more than $55,000 for a sedan or $80,000 for an SUV, truck, or minivan. Half of the tax credit is tied to a certain amount of domestically refined or processed minerals in the battery pack, the other half to a certain value of the pack having been assembled domestically.

While that includes countries that have free trade agreements with the United States, it significantly limited the number of new EVs that were eligible for the tax credit. (However, the IRS chose to read the law in such a way as to still allow the full $7,500 tax credit for clean vehicles that were leased, even if not assembled in North America.)

The list of eligible cars changed throughout the year as the rules were implemented in stages, and as automakers refined their supply chains as required. But toward the end of 2023, the Treasury published another new guideline. Now, any car with a battery that contains material from or made by a “foreign entity of concern”—which means Russia, Iran, North Korea, or China—cannot be eligible for the tax credit.

While the first three nations on that list are not particularly far down the road of EV battery making, the same isn’t true for China, which dominates the field, particularly in terms of processing the critical minerals used in lithium-ion batteries. The FEOC rule also applies to batteries made by Chinese-owned companies even if the cells are produced here in the US.

Consequently, the list of BEVs and PHEVs that are still eligible for the new clean vehicle tax credit now looks rather meagre. The following clean vehicles still qualify for the full $7,500, although we should note that the first two on the list (the Chevrolet Bolts) have ceased production now:

  • 2022-2023 Chevrolet Bolt EV
  • 2022-2023 Chevrolet Bolt EUV
  • 2022-2024 Chrysler Pacifica PHEV
  • 2022-2024 Ford F-150 Lightning extended range battery
  • 2022-2024 Ford F-150 Lightning standard range battery
  • 2023-2024 Tesla Model 3 Performance
  • 2023-2024 Tesla Model X Long Rage
  • 2023-2024 Tesla Model Y All-Wheel Drive
  • 2023-2024 Tesla Model Y Performance
  • 2023-2024 Tesla Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive

Additionally, the following vehicles qualify for a $3,750 tax credit:

  • 2022-2024 Ford Escape Plug-In Hybrid
  • 2022-2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee PHEV 4xe
  • 2022-2024 Jeep Wrangler PHEV 4xe
  • 2022-2024 Lincoln Corsair Grand Touring
  • 2023-2024 Rivian R1S Dual Large
  • 2023-2024 Rivian R1S Quad Large
  • 2023-2024 Rivian R1T Dual Large
  • 2023-2024 Rivian R1T Dual Max
  • 2023-2024 Rivian R1T Quad Large

But there is one bright piece of news concerning the clean vehicle tax credit in 2024. From January 1, dealers are now able to pass the entire credit on to the buyer at the point of purchase. This applies to both new and used EVs, even in cases where the buyer may not have a large enough tax liability at the end of the year to claim the full credit the old-fashioned way.

It’s a new year, and these are now the only EVs that get a tax credit Read More »

here’s-how-the-epa-calculates-how-far-an-ev-can-go-on-a-full-charge

Here’s how the EPA calculates how far an EV can go on a full charge

Here’s how the EPA calculates how far an EV can go on a full charge

Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

How does the US Environmental Protection Agency decide how far an electric vehicle can go on a single charge? The simple explanation is that an EV is driven until the battery runs flat, providing the number that goes on the window sticker. In practice, it’s a lot more complicated than that, with varying test cycles, real-world simulations, and more variables than a book of Mad Libs, all in an effort to give you a number that you can count on to be consistent and comparable with other vehicles on the road.

The start of EPA mileage testing

The EPA started testing vehicle fuel economy in 1971, and that initial testing still plays a major role in how modern cars are measured.

The year before, President Richard Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (followed by the Clean Air Act of 1970) and established the EPA with a mandate that included lowering motor vehicle emissions. Part of the EPA’s plan to reduce emissions was to let buyers know just how much fuel a car would use so they could cross-shop cars effectively.

Testing started with a route called the Federal Test Procedure. The EPA adopted an 11-mile (18-km) route that was originally done on real roads in Los Angeles. The route had an average speed of 21 miles per hour (34 km/h) and a top speed of 56 mph (90 km/h). Tailpipe emissions were measured, fuel economy was calculated, and the “city” fuel economy rating was born.

By the time the 10-mile (16-km) Highway Fuel Economy Test was added in 1974, the tests were performed in a lab on a dynamometer. Running tests on the dyno made them more consistent and easier to repeat, though it wasn’t perfect.

Small changes and tweaks were made over the years, with the biggest change announced in 2005. That year, the EPA announced changes to the test to meet new highway speeds, account for heating and air conditioning use, and make the test more relevant to real-world driving. Drivers weren’t able to hit the published numbers, and the EPA wanted to fix that. The system was introduced for the 2008 model year and is largely the one we use today.

Modern range testing

Today, automakers have two different test options for EVs. The automaker can decide that it wants to perform a “single cycle” test. On that test, the car drives the EPA city cycle over and over again until the charge runs out, then does the same on the highway cycle, starting with a full charge. The process is repeated for reliability. The alternative is that the automaker can perform a multi-cycle test that has completed four city cycles, two highway cycles, and two constant speed cycles.

Getty Images

The test cycles

The city cycle

The EPA’s Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule is the official “city cycle” test loop. It is a complicated graph of time, vehicle speed, and allowable acceleration. The total test time is 1,369 seconds, the distance simulated is 7.45 miles (12 km), and the average speed is 19.59 mph (32.11 km/h). As with all of the tests, the exact speed required at each second of the test is laid out in a spreadsheet.

The highest speed reached on the test is 56.7 mph (91.25 km/h), and there are several periods where the vehicle sits stationary. Stationary seconds of the test made more sense when it was designed to measure a gas vehicle’s idle emissions and consumption, but it does still have some relevance today when it comes to climate control use and energy required to accelerate the vehicle.

The highway cycle

For higher speeds, vehicles complete the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (HFEDS). This test has a top speed of 59.9 mph (96.4 km/h) and an average of 48.3 mph (77.73 km/h), and it takes 765 seconds to complete.

Only the UDDS and HFEDS tests are required to certify an EV. But a top speed of 59.9 mph is a much lower highway speed than most drivers will experience.

Driving more quickly or using climate control can greatly impact range. More tests were introduced to help give a more realistic range, and they’re part of the 5-cycle test covered below.

Here’s how the EPA calculates how far an EV can go on a full charge Read More »