Unfortunately, this suggestion should not be given as a blanket statement. There are situations where the opposite is true, that is, a two-wheel-drive vehicle (or, in slippery conditions, these would actually only be one-wheel-drive vehicles) with four winter tires is no substitute for an all-wheel-drive vehicle with all-season tires. Several years ago a car magazine did a comparison test with several vehicles at a ski hill: one FWD, one RWD (both with winter tires), and several AWD vehicles (some even shod with high-performance all-season tires). Both 2WD vehicles went about 10 metres along the flat leading to the uphill of the ski slope, whereas ALL of the AWD vehicles drove without difficulty to the top of the ski run. My own personal experience with both FWD and RWD vehicles with winter tires, versus an AWD with all-season tires parallels this comparison test: traction under acceleration and especially up slippery roads is superior with the AWD, all-season tire vehicle. Where the 2WD vehicle with winter tires has the advantage is cornering in snowy conditions, and braking in icy conditions, but in these cases, it would simply be up to the AWD driver to maintain a speed appropriate for the conditions, the vehicle, and tires that they are driving. If I knew that I would have to drive up a steep, slippery hill — which many people would on any given outing — I would choose (and have chosen, with success) an AWD vehicle.

Perhaps if a vehicle is FWD with a very heavy engine (that is, a lot of weight over the drive wheels) and a very good traction control system (or a very good limited-slip differential, making it a ‘true’ 2WD vehicle) would the suggestion in this article then be valid. However, it most certainly would not be true in all circumstances.