Stock 4x4 comparison
 

I've been working on a way to predict the off-road performance of a vehicle based on its specs, like approach angles, torque, gearing, weight, dimensions, etc.

Without getting into all the details, I came up with this ranking for extreme off-road performance. The models are either the current model or their last model year. They all have 4-lo except the Murano (which a friend was curious about).

I know you lose a lot when you don't take suspension and parts quality into account, but is the ranking basically in the ballpark?

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

I know ... I have waaaaaay too much time on my hands :D

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

bwahaahahahahahhahah

that has to be the most hilarious thing I've seen on here in a while

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

no, I think the problem is that you have way too much dumb in your head

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

for curiosities sake, what was the rating system?

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

apparently, chicken feathers

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

LMAO!!!!

This thread reminds me of that time Alec's AE did a poll for "Best Elcova Offroader" Alec won that poll.:D

Thanks to the ***Cough***AE***Cough****Votes***Cough***.:D :D :D

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

well, i hope you had fun with the project.

one thing you really have to do if attempting something like that is go measure some actual clearance. clearance spec's and clearance realities don't necessarily go hand-in-hand.

The Touareg is a prime-time example of that, as are toyotas. On the other side of the spectrum, the H3 has (on one i measured in the dealers lot just for kicks a couple months ago) nothing as close to the ground as 9.1", more like 9.5.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Thanks for your feedback. Yeah, it's been fun and I've learned a lot.

For the record, this isn't about which SUV is the best. I'm trying to write a software application that will evaluate vehicle performance offroad, based on your own measured specs. The factory specs on HP, torque, wheel size, and such were just a place to start.

The software would display the benefits (or problems) of new gearing, extra weight or bigger tires and compare it to your original vehicle before you actually cut, weld or spend a dime. You can evaluate mods you've already made and compare them to stock specs. Or you can build completely custom rigs "virtually" and evaluate the specs before you pull the trigger.

I'll post some of my evaluation criteria at lunch.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

What is the H3 Advent 3700 and H3 Advent 3500???

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

oh yeah, it's the H3 Adventure package with 3.5L or 3.7L engine.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

That's what I thought, Thanks:D

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

I'm tracking 3 kinds of data - Power, Agility and Utility.

'Power' contains max HP@rpm, max torque@rpm, curb weight, GVWR, 1st gear ratio, xfer case ratio, axle ratio, and tire diameter as the raw data.

To account for weight and gearing in each SUV, I calculated geared crawl rates (ft/s or s/ft) and worked out the formulas to compare their ability to climb different grades in 1st gear-low, based on the vehicle's weight and a standard weight for crew and cargo.

'Agility' includes ground clearance, approach/breakover/departure angles, turn diameter (curb to curb), size, wheelbase and track width. I also included full-time AWD, locking diff(s), traction control, stability control, hill start assist, and descent control.

'Utility' lists fuel economy, fuel capacity, payload, cargo volume, and tow capacity. It can also calculate towing acceleration based on a given tow weight (plus curb weight + ?? lbs crew and cargo) to compare vehicle acceleration on a boat ramp and from a stop.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Then I created 5 profiles - Rock Crawling, Offroad Trips, Highway Trips, People Mover and Towing - that contain the data points that seem to apply. These profiles (I'm hoping) will show the suitability of the specific vehicles to an intended purpose.

The best scoring method I found was to take a % of the highest data value. For example, the highest ground clearance on my list is 16" (2006 H1 Alpha). The lowest value is 6.7" (2003 Ford Explorer Sport). I divide each data value by the highest in the list and get 1.00 for the H1 and .42 for the Explorer.

For a final score in each profile, I add up the % scores for each data category and divide by the highest value (H1 - 18.1 points). For example, in Rock Crawling, the H3 3.7L (manual) scored 18.17 points and the H3 3.5L (manual) got 17.88. Dividing by the highest value (H1 - 18.1 points), this means a final score of H3 3.7 - .95 and H3 3.5 - .92.
__________

Anyway I wanted to validate my data points and calculations before I start building the software. I've learned a lot from this forum and I appreciate your expertise and feedback.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

ok

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

is any specific category weighted over the other. Does categories cross, as in, does a category, such as traction control cross on another vehicle when it is called or labeled something else, etc. etc on an on until your little spreadsheet looks like a 2 year old's dirty diaper.

Do you say "look ma! no brain" when you try something like this?

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Wow, analysis paralysis for determining the best 4x4.:(

S.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

now I have psoriasis

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

that too.:eek: ! ?

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

yes:confused:

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Well, the superior position you have assigned to all of the Rubis over the H2 seems to conflict with my recollection of OldHiker:
1- lining up behind the Rubi on the Blue-3 rated trail at Paragon this April (it had been hopelessly stuck there for three hours);
2-- winching it out from behind over several obstacles it could not get over on its own (even with it's front and rear lockers); and then
3- driving right over the same obstacles with no problem.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

And nobody with a video camera?:( :D

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

At this point, I haven't weighted any category over another within a profile. But not every feature is in every profile. "Rock Crawling" ignores gas mileage. "People Mover" ignores low range".

Since everyone has a different name and feature set for their traction systems, I ignored the trademark name and divided the functionality into feature sets. So if a vehicle has a system to control understeer or oversteer, I gave it credit for "stability control". A system that brakes one wheel to send power to the other side over an open diff got credit for "traction control". I did the same for hill-start assist and downhill assist.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

You should add a Driver ability column.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Absolutely nothing. Fuel economy is not in the Rock Crawling profile. It's part of Road Trips and People Mover.


My software will eventually let you specify the strengths you want offroad, like hill climbing and boulder-hopping, but it's not there yet. Creating profiles is my first attempt at comparing vehicles by situation. When I designed Rock Crawling, it contained factors that favor small vehicles like tight turns (which is something I may change). I absolutely did not mean that the Liberty is better than the H1 in all respects. If there's enough room for it, the H1 would always kick its ass.


I'm making no assumptions about which vehicle is better. But I know many of my initial criteria are off. I just want to validate and improve my early results. Thank you all for your feedback.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

No kidding ... between wheel placement and finesse, a good driver can make all the difference.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

What the hell you do all day man, sheet cut and paste some charts?
too much .... too much

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

dummy;)

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Well, just two pennies from an unimportant guy, and if into obloquy i am to be driven for saying this, then so be it. I mean nobody offense.

But what has this post harmed? If somebody wants to spend their time dreaming of 4wds in what ways they can, it certainly won't cause me to lose much sleep, even if my truck got rated lower than i think it deserves. At times it seems that anything even involving hummers or offroading has to eventually wind up drenched in negativity. bling -vs- no bling, the mileage thing, and whatever else. If i have contributed to that at times, apologies, and i shall submit to a flogging on white knuckle hill. That is if any of the hummer gangs let my jeep come along with my H2, which seems to be a bit of an impasse.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

Then what's the point.

If you post something and just want to have "yes" people post just for the helluvit..... tis not the place. If someone wants to waste their time on something as futile as this was, so-be-it. Post it in a forum such as this and expect to be ridiculed for it. Such is life. And such as life should be.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

fair enough.

to offer a view from the other side of the park, is there some passage of manliness in hummer foruming that bans constructive criticism?

:D

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

nothing that bans it, such as how I was able to get away with my constructive criticism of your post;) :D :D

It's just all in fun. Some things are taken way too seriously.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

There is this ONE thing you can do to get by here........

post pics of your wife's bewbies

sorry, old forum joke

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

i'm not sure what effect that would have... :cool:

My basic take on things is mostly live and let live, and as a general rule that doesn't seem to shorten life spans.

Re: Stock 4x4 comparison
 

mine is when something enters your field of vision, fire upon it until no more movement is detected

or something like what you said.;)