Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
John LeBlanc For CanWest News Service Friday, October 20, 2006 Tired of so-called sport utility vehicles that are nothing more than tall station wagons with faux aluminum plastic cladding posing as skid plates? Weary of blandly styled cute-utes that pretend to be all Swiss Army-like in their sales pitches: It's an SUV! It's a sports car! It's a minivan! Well, here are three in-yer-face, honest-to-gawd, fourby-four off-roaders that aren't afraid of getting their wellies wet or crawling over the occasional boulder. We'll also tell you what these truck-based mid-sized SUVs are like to drive in the environment on which most owners will travel -- the paved road: THIRD: 2006 Hummer H3 1SA The littlest Hummer is based on the antediluvian mechanicals of the Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon pickups. The H3's cabin has nicer details and finishes than the Nissan, and when it's time to turn the steering wheel, there's a surprising amount of feel. But it also has excessive nose dive under braking, woolly handling, relentless body roll while cornering and what seems like unlimited understeer. Drive the H3 like a real car and you'd better get used to the blinking stability control light. Although it's not as bad as the Toyota, the Hummer's chopped-top styling limits visibility, and the front seats force residents to squat. Hummer wannabes are flocking to the H3 because of its (relatively) superior gas mileage; unfortunately, the result is not enough cojones under the hood. When was the last time you drove a $40,000 vehicle that took more than 10 seconds to get up to highway speeds? Soccer-parent alternative: 2006 Chevy Equinox LS AWD, $28,770. Bottom line: This is the heaviest, least powerful, poorest-handling and most expensive off-roader here. Except for excellent feedback at the helm and a nice cockpit, the H3 is best left in the woods; or wait for the 2007 H3 with 22 additional ponies. SECOND: 2007 Toyota FJ Cruiser/Package B Essentially a $10,000-cheaper two-door 4Runner, the FJ's 4.0-litre V-6 has less power than the Xterra's similarly configured mill. But it also weighs less, so performance is comparable, with both reaching 100 km/h from rest in around eight seconds. Of this trio, the FJ's cockpit is the best screwed together, but visibility is poor. The huge C-pillar means those elephant-ear side rear-view mirrors will become your friends fast, making the optional B package with its backup sensor a must. The FJ's steering is quite numb compared with the rest of the group's. And the lack of on-centre feel requires constant corrections at highway speeds. However, like the donor 4Runner's chassis, the FJ cruises at highway speeds with a nice, refined ride. But it ain't no Celica GTS when the road turns, mainly due to an invasive stability control system that equals plenty of ploughing-in turns. Soccer-parent alternative: 2006 Toyota RAV4, $29,300. Bottom line: With competitive pricing and the nicest interior, the FJ rivals the Xterra in straight-line performance. But being able to see only what's in front of you is a real driving concern. FIRST: 2006 Nissan Xterra Off-road Despite the generous ground clearance and balloon tires, Nissan's off-roader still has a comfortable ride. Halfway between the excellent H3's and the mediocre FJ's, the Xterra's steering is just fine. The big difference is the predictability of its handling. Even on twisty two-lanes, the Xterra felt planted and balanced, never tipsy like the other two. There are a lot of rough plastic surfaces inside the cockpit, but the driving position is bang-on, with the biggest advantage being excellent visibility. There's none of that hat-pulled-down feeling you get in the Hummer or FJ. Just as fast as the FJ in acceleration, the Xterra is the least compromising of this trio in everyday driving. Soccer-parent alternative: 2006 Nissan X-Trail XE AWD, $27,648. Bottom line: It doesn't have the extroverted looks of the Hummer or the Toyota, but Nissan gives you plenty of on-road performance and handling in a vehicle that can still play in the mud on the weekends. |
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Someone please hide this from Shaggy
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
H3 ranked last because it wasn't rated on offroad ability.:perfect10s:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Author LeBlank is another Street orienter Jap loving douche bag on the payroll of Japan Inc.
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Quote:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Bahhh, just a rehash of the Motortrend article from a year ago. :lame: :yawn:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Quote:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Quote:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Quote:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Quote:
:iagree: :rant: |
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Seriously, someone must be out there to rise above this bias. Give the H3 its due its a great machine! H3 is great on or off road...:clapping:
|
Re: Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement
Roadie criteria again being used in a simulated offroad test.
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:33 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.