Outer Limits 4x4 Board

hey guys,

I want your suggestions for fuel efficient mid-sized 4x4s and utes.. I currently have a pretty efficient efi vitara.. but its only a 2 door and I need more room so ive been thinking about slightly larger 4x4s, just trying to find one thats relatively fuel efficient... suggestions?


Paul

If you want fuel efficiency go diesel!

a 5 door vitara..? will be hard to settle on 1. diesel is awesome but initial buy price dear, gas is good but availability and set up costs, know of 2 people who beleive their v6 triton and v6 rodeo loooove a drink. my dad has a 2wd diesel d-max for work and always comments about how good it is on fuel , cant comment on the 4wd but dad is no stranger to driving hard so it must be good.

yeah.. im considering the bigger grand vitara,

also considering the xtrail or rav4 (yeah I know they arent as hardcore offroad but i mainly do sand driving)

diesel cars are a possibility, but unless its a significant economy boost (like less than 8L/100kms) then I'd prefer to stick with petrol due to the performance

the newer vitaras have a diesel now as do the xtrail IIRC. The Mrs has a new rav 4 4cyl auto and it uses nearly as much fuel as the 2wd ford territory we just sold and the road noise is shocking in it. friends had a v6 grand vitara and driven normally was good on fuel but if given a bit around town stopping and starting it was a bit thirsty but the car itself they loved. IIRC the vitara has a low range as well.

if you drive one of the newer diesels you may be surprised as they go well. my dad hated diesels until he drove one and then he bought it.

Isn't the 3.5 paj around 10l/100km? That's not too bad.

hey Purplebus..

Yeah a mate of mine has a new mitsubishi triton turbo diesel which goes well, and is prob ok on fuel but is prob a bit above my price range.. so yeah some diesels are good.. but most of them are in pretty heavy cars and not so good on fuel

chimpboy wrote:Isn't the 3.5 paj around 10l/100km? That's not too bad.

No. My mates 3.5 DOHC sucks 14L per 100km at best and its 98 Octane only.

LPG = WIN.

Kia Sorento 2.5 TD

Mid 20's now to buy, proven engine (no service issues), 8.5-10l/100km, build quality quite acceptable, good 5 seater, will need springs/shocks sorted (many kits around mow), automatic and low range available.

Essentially Triton part time 4wd and Mitsubishi underpinnings (first vehicle built under Hyundai ownership of Kia, with Mitsubishi being the long time technology donor to Hyundai)

DAMKIA wrote:Kia Sorento 2.5 TD

Mid 20's now to buy, proven engine (no service issues), 8.5-10l/100km, build quality quite acceptable, good 5 seater, will need springs/shocks sorted (many kits around mow), automatic and low range available.

Essentially Triton part time 4wd and Mitsubishi underpinnings (first vehicle built under Hyundai ownership of Kia, with Mitsubishi being the long time technology donor to Hyundai)

I know a guy with a manual sorento, he gets 7.5l/100km on a trip. A manual tdi car will better 5l/100km on a trip and blow petrols away for performance.
For those concerned, the engine is not an old idi mitsubishi.

frankly any modern turbo diesel will out perform a 1.6 vitara. most of the midsize wagons and utes will be using around 10l/100

the new mitsubishi diesels for example put out 140kw.

I don't know how much power you think you want, but if economy is a concern then you will likely not be using all of what's available on any wagon or ute, wether it's petrol or diesel.

Also remember that a vitara has low range. IF you mainly do sand driving then a rav4 and possibly the xtrail doesn't have low range

KJ jeep cherokee Diesel int bad

Does a tiguan count as a 4x4? It's a golf on stilts but the economy is excellent.

I've had a V6 and I4 RAV4 as a company car. They both go really well on sand. Fuel economy can get really bad in the V6 tho. The I4 has more than enough power.
I had the V6 in some really rough terrain the down hill accent works tops!

what kind of $$ are we talking here ?

4X4 WAGONS - SMALL NISSAN XTRAIL DIESEL
MED - TOYOTA PRADO D4D DIESEL

4X4 UTE
NISSAN NAVARA DIESEL AND TOYOTA HILUX DIESEL

Tumtum wrote:4X4 WAGONS - SMALL NISSAN XTRAIL DIESEL

No. Be serious. This isn't Gen Chit Chat.

Tumtum wrote:MED - TOYOTA PRADO D4D DIESEL

Yes. Also have a look at the latest td Challenger.

Tumtum wrote:4X4 UTE
NISSAN NAVARA DIESEL

Yes.

Tumtum wrote:AND TOYOTA HILUX DIESEL

Economy - yes. Offroading - no. Toyota lost the plot with the latest Hilux.

If you want a dual cab, have a look at the Triton.

We are lovin our JK diesel 4 door Jeep. average 10.5 and cool. Factory rear locker, really impressed off road with 2 1/2 lift and 33 muds. More character than a Paj, live axles for ground clearance.

Joel

PGS 4WD wrote:More character than a Paj, live axles for ground clearance.

Joel

Translation:

PGS 4WD wrote:It's not as comfortable as a Paj, but it has old-skool cred.

Joel

my budget is 8 - 14k
thanks for the suggestion of the kia, might be worth looking into..


I'm hoping to find a car that uses 10L/100kms or less..
also hoping for less that 150,000kms


the navara, hilux and triton petrol models seem to use 13L / 100kms or more.. not sure about the diesels, but i get the impression they would be slow vehicles.. i tried driving my mate's navara/rodeo (same diff) in the sand and my vitara had a much much better power to weight ratio..

the power to weight ratio on the xtrail is INCREDIBLE! - which means low-range is not so important..

132KW @1440KGS = 9.17 power/weight ratio
the xtrail is sounding good to me, but im still open to suggestions.. combined fuel economy 10.1l / 100kms

dont go NEAR a softroader like xtrail or rav4.... i once took my mum's rav4 cruiser (2003 model i think?) to the beach and it SUCKED... it just dug in everywhere... we also tried it on some rutted tracks and it scraped its belly on anything bigger than a 20c coin. Aside from that the gearing was terrible and once you take it offroad the fuel economy plummets severely.

by comparison my sierra gets better economy when im driving offroad. go figure!

drifta wrote:the power to weight ratio on the xtrail is INCREDIBLE! - which means low-range is not so important..

Fail.

-Scott- wrote:

drifta wrote:the power to weight ratio on the xtrail is INCREDIBLE! - which means low-range is not so important..

Fail.

If sand is his thing, an X trail may do the job. ( I should hilight the MAY bit)

For that sort of $$ I would look at a Paj on gas .. mine running LPG is significantly cheaper to run than the camry I had previosly, Has plenty of go, quite comfy as well.

love_mud wrote:

-Scott- wrote:

drifta wrote:the power to weight ratio on the xtrail is INCREDIBLE! - which means low-range is not so important..

Fail.

If sand is his thing, an X trail may do the job. ( I should hilight the MAY bit)

For that sort of $$ I would look at a Paj on gas .. mine running LPG is significantly cheaper to run than the camry I had previosly, Has plenty of go, quite comfy as well.

hey thanks for the tip.. What year/model Paj did you go for?

the tricky thing about gas is that only 1 in 10 cars have had the conversion done so they are a bit hard to find

Alien - thanks for the tip about the rav4... i have a mate who had a zook and now regularly takes his xtrail to lancelin/wedge and seems happy with it.. i think the xtrail has some sort of slip sensing device which might help


"Scott", if all you can add to the conversation is "fail" - go join another forum mate, you are in the wrong place for that kind of lameness.

I have only ever seen xtrails stopped on the beach................ to let the 4wd overheating warning to reset.

I used to own a 2004 5 door grand vitarra. Awsome fun to drive. 2.5L V6 had a heap of power and was light enough to be a hoot in the sand. We still own a 2008 GV and it too is a heap of fun to drive but the economy is at about 12L/100km. The 2008 has a heap of room inside and handles on-road like a dream. The 2004 was more fun in the sand but had a tiny boot, it got replaces by a land crusier.

IMO, if you love the high revving suzi engines then a diesel is not for you.

mike

Thought of something older to save on the initial purchase price?

That way you can chuck the savings into a high interest saving account and accrue a little interest. Then spend it on mods(if thats you thing) or on fuel and servicing. I really dont think you can go past the NL Pajero(3.5 petrol) in that price range, they are tough cars and would surprise you the places they go, sure they might use a little more fuel than the other cars mentioned here but they also wont depreciate as much.

10L/100km
20,000kms a year
$1.20 ULP
= $2,400 a year in fuel

15L/100km
20,000kms a year
$1.20 ULP
= $3,600 a year in fuel

So thats $1,200 a year you are paying in extra fuel in that comparison give it in 4 years you will have racked up almost $5k in extra fuel but if you saved on the initial purchase that money would have been yours for alot of that time, not in your depreciating economical car.

---Off topic---
When you look at the maths of it all it makes more sense... just like filling up on the cheap days every day does not save you $1,000s as the masses believe. A 10 cent fluctuation is less than 10% of savings!

Dexter wrote:Thought of something older to save on the initial purchase price?

That way you can chuck the savings into a high interest saving account and accrue a little interest. Then spend it on mods(if thats you thing) or on fuel and servicing. I really dont think you can go past the NL Pajero(3.5 petrol) in that price range, they are tough cars and would surprise you the places they go, sure they might use a little more fuel than the other cars mentioned here but they also wont depreciate as much.

10L/100km
20,000kms a year
$1.20 ULP
= $2,400 a year in fuel

15L/100km
20,000kms a year
$1.20 ULP
= $3,600 a year in fuel

So thats $1,200 a year you are paying in extra fuel in that comparison give it in 4 years you will have racked up almost $5k in extra fuel but if you saved on the initial purchase that money would have been yours for alot of that time, not in your depreciating economical car.

---Off topic---
When you look at the maths of it all it makes more sense... just like filling up on the cheap days every day does not save you $1,000s as the masses believe. A 10 cent fluctuation is less than 10% of savings!

yeah, I appreciate your input there mate and those thoughts make sense... but buying a car with 80 - 160kms on it you are also going to have a lot less money spent on mechanical wear and tear..

also a car that uses more fuel is worse for the environment, not just the pocketbook.. plus a newer car looks better for my business and i prefer lighter weight cars....


good food for thought though, thanks for that.

Any time, was just some general thoughts I had in that area as I have gone through the same process a number of times.

drifta wrote:"Scott", if all you can add to the conversation is "fail" - go join another forum mate, you are in the wrong place for that kind of lameness.

Thanks for the tip.

Coming from somebody who obviously has NFI what a low range is for (I'll give you a tip - it has NOTHING to do with power), I won't be too concerned about what you think this forum is for.

If you're going to come to a tech forum and offer advice on topics of which you clearly have an inadequate knowledge don't get upset when you get called on it.

Lameness? Coming from username "drifta"? Did you come up with that response yourself, or copy it from another forum where it was directed at you?

I'm not the one in the wrong place.

You want a tip? If you're talking 4x4 and fuel economy, don't talk petrol Pajeros. Anybody who tells you otherwise is dreaming.

Even the pre-DiD diesels are not particularly fuel efficient. In your price range, if you seriously want fuel efficiency without going small, look at the LandRover Tdi - Disco or Defender.