Best/most economical auto for the mountains?

Life Cars & Motorcycles
41

Sorry, The absolute mind-warping crap i have put a Landcruiser through in years of field work in Australian deserts and mountains has made me a lifetime convert. That, and the fact that they are so easy to work on, and easy to find parts in Australia, and reliable and well designed to begin with, and capable with diff locks, smart gearboxes, massive load capacity (we used to run with close to 1500 kg), etc…

No good for Taiwan though.

My favourite vehicle for Taiwan has to be the bicycle, though that’s probably not the answer you wanted…

42

[quote=“Ducked”]One of my night class students gave me a lift in her Mitsubishi Outlander this afternoon. Not a “serious off-roader”, I’d guess, too much overhang and too many electronic gadgets, but selectable 4WD, and she said you could select manual gearchange too, though she’d never used it (I dunno how this works but I’d guess its a manual hold-down on the autotrans, so maybe doesn’t offer any fuel economy advantage).

Seemed like it might be a reasonable compromise, though. Fairly roomy but easy enough to park. Couldn’t really guage performance but she has a very large collection of speeding tickets. Like most owners she had no idea what her fuel consumption was.

Zace waggon too old? Roomy, fairly rugged, low tax bracket engines (1500 or 1800), but apparently quite heavy on fuel and rather “industrial” in character. Probably do badly in a crash too, since its an old design.

There’s a rather similar but rarer and slightly more rounded waggon called IIRC, a “Panther”, which I don’t think I’ve ever seen any mention of on here. THINK its an IZUZU.

Anything known?[/quote]

Outlanders are too new and are therefore out of our price range.

As for MPV’s (Zace, Surf, Freeca, Panther) the new models are the Toyota Innova and Mitsubishi Zinger. Same idea (2WD, truck chassis, roomy interior, available 5-speed) but newer engine technology (MIVEC, VVT-i etc) and more passenger-oriented as far as I can tell. We are looking at both of those models as a possibility, especially the Innova. Although the tax bracket is higher, I’ve always heard the Toyota 2.7L is a really great engine.

43

[quote=“urodacus”]Sorry, The absolute mind-warping crap I have put a Landcruiser through in years of field work in Australian deserts and mountains has made me a lifetime convert. That, and the fact that they are so easy to work on, and easy to find parts in Australia, and reliable and well designed to begin with, and capable with diff locks, smart gearboxes, massive load capacity (we used to run with close to 1500 kg), etc…

No good for Taiwan though.

My favourite vehicle for Taiwan has to be the bicycle, though that’s probably not the answer you wanted…[/quote]

For sure. The 70 Series Cruisers make me wet! And while that would be a bit much for Taiwan, I’d love to have a Prado 2.7 petrol or 3.0 TD here. And yes I dig the Pajeros too (indeed, commonly reffered to as the “Poor Man’s Land Cruiser”). Too bad the 2.8L TD isnt available in the 'wan. I’d be all over that. Also a fan of Defender 110’s (of course) and Nissan Patrol/Safari. Not going to own any of those models in Taiwan, unfortunately.

44

The Innova Vs the Zinger is no competition in my mind. The Toyota was designed and built by Toyota and the Zinger was made by a man with a hammer and some glue. Or simply put, the Zinger is a Taiwan only model and isn’t as well put together than the Toyota.
Perhaps some might call it an MPV, although I’d rather call it a commercial passenger van. It has a truck chassis and is amongst the most basic of design. Having said that, its the best truck chassis ride on the road and I’m told by drivers of them that its not that thirsty considering its large engine capacity. Some people do like to put an illegal third row seat in it. Even without the extra seat though, the boot is enormous!
Still, van, truck, MPV or whatever one wants to call it, a vehicle for the mountain roads it is not. Well at least that’s if its expected to go over mud, loose terrain and bumpy stuff. No four wheel drive and not even a limited slip rear diff.

45

The Innova Vs the Zinger is no competition in my mind. Perhaps some might call it an MPV, although I’d rather call it a commercial passenger van. It has a truck chassis and is amongst the most basic of design. Having said that, its the best truck chassis ride on the road and I’m told by drivers of them that its not that thirsty considering its large engine capacity.

Still, van, truck, MPV or whatever one wants to call it, a vehicle for the mountain roads it is not. Well at least that’s if its expected to go over mud, loose terrain and bumpy stuff. No four wheel drive and not even a limited slip rear diff.[/quote]

Yeh, but if you remember, you aren’t that convinced that 4WD is necessary (see above). As for LSD…think this is where I came in, (as we used to say when cinema’s had continuous performances).

Edit:Wickipedia seems to think the 2.7L engine only comes with an autobox, though they arent talking about Taiwan specifically.

46

[quote=“Ducked”]Yeh, but if you remember, you aren’t that convinced that 4WD is necessary (see above). As for LSD…think this is where I came in, (as we used to say when cinema’s had continuous performances).

Edit:Wickipedia seems to think the 2.7L engine only comes with an autobox, though they arent talking about Taiwan specifically.[/quote]

Wiki may be wrong in this case. There is a manual box available in Taiwan.

Two wheel drive, yes. Certainly not at the rear wheels though if it were my choice. I think those with any experience of the two will understand. Its far easier to steer in slippery situations with front wheel drive. Its generally much easier to control traction too.

47

So you’re not convinced the handbrake trick works?

Its not just a bee in MY bonnet, after all, its quite widely accepted.

My dad used to describe seeing an old doll that used to drive ambulances during the war, swanning up an icy hill in Lanark that had defeated all comers. Windows open so she could hear the wheelspin, keeping her Morris Traveller balanced on the apex of the road camber. Allways made him smile.

48

A decent offroader, yes. … a Scoob would be better overall.[/quote]

. … Next time you see one on the street, take a look and you will see that the owners only put a snorkel, a front bumper and a shovel in the back. Those are just cosmetics.
[/quote]

I recently had a blind date with a girl who had a cosmetics shovel. Never did find out what she looked like. :frowning:

49

[quote=“sulavaca”][quote=“Ducked”]Yeh, but if you remember, you aren’t that convinced that 4WD is necessary (see above)…

Two wheel drive, yes. Certainly not at the rear wheels though if it were my choice. I think those with any experience of the two will understand. Its far easier to steer in slippery situations with front wheel drive. Its generally much easier to control traction too.[/quote][/quote]

Well, you’d be wrong in my case. I’ve got some experience of the two, and I don’t understand.

I started driving relatively late in life, and have only owned 13 vehicles, 5 FWD and 8 RWD, roughly alternating up to the present. Admittedly I’m not very expert and I havn’t driven in slippery conditions beyond what one generally encounters in a Scottish winter.

I could see, theoretically and maybe practically, that steering might be easier with FWD, because the wheels are pulling you the way you want to go. OTOH having the same wheels doing the steering and the pulling seems more likely to exceed the limits of adhesion.

Traction is often stated to be better in a FWD because the weight is over the driven wheels, but I think this uneven weight distribution is a very mixed blessing. The only two times I’ve lost control of a 4-wheeled vehicle were in a FWD entering a slippery descending turn in gear. I THINK what happened was that as I lifted off, the engine braking transferred even more of the weight forward, and the already light rear end came unstuck. In the first case, in the UK, the Metro spun 180 degrees, mounted a bank and went through a hedge backwards, probably the best way to go through a hedge. In the second case, here, the rear of the Skywing swung out into the busy opposite lane but I was able to pull it back in line without hitting anything. I can’t be sure this wouldn’t have happened with RWD, but it never has, to me, and I’ve done more miles on RWD.

In any case, even if traction is superior on FWD (and I find that intuitively a little hard to believe for a steep hill climb, for example), traction control is a separate issue. I can’t see any way to control the traction on a normal FWD, because, when they start to slip, there is no traction to control. On RWD some control is available via the conventional handbrake.

If “smart” traction control systems are fitted, then that will obscure this difference, and maybe FWD will come out ahead, but, for the basic systems, my limited experience is that RWD is superior in slippery conditions.

50

I’m pretty sure front wheel drive is a disadvantage in certain conditions. For instance, I was watching “World’s Toughest Roads” on Nat Geo a few weeks ago. The host was in South Africa or Botswana and the rear something (differential I think?) on his Defender 110 broke, effectively making it a FWD. When he encountered a steep, loose hill climb he actually turned the truck around and did it in reverse. He said it was dangerous and difficult on the narrow road but it was the only way he could make it up. I think it had to do with the front wheels digging into the loose terrain if he went up FWD.

Not sure if this is applicable to all FWD’s or if it was just because the Defender is a heavy duty 4x4 and losing the rear diff changed the handling characteristics (which it undoubtedly did to some degree). Anyway I found it interesting and what you just posted reminded me of that clip.

51

I was thinking “intuitively” that on a steep hill climb, due to the geometry, the weight is transferred to the rear of the vehicle, good if its RWD and bad if its FWD.

If that’s correct , that might explain the problem with the Defender front paws. I dunno though, havn’t seen any documentation on it.

52

In terms of traction, the biggest difference is made with tyres. In terms of unpredictability rear wheel drive is far less predictable than front wheel drive and so makes them more treacherous on mountain roads.

And yes, Scottish winters cause all the BMWs and Mercs to sit at the bottom of the hill. In fact we were there, at the Welcome to Scotland sign one winter ago. We (in a Civic) and a Golf were the only ones which made it up. Every single rear wheel drive was at the bottom of the hill, or stuck half way up. That’s my dad giving the “look no hands” signal :laughing:
I was joking at the time that I was disappointed that so many northerners had become rich enough from their property boom that they had gone out and purchased cars which any Scotsman knows never goes anywhere in the winter time. There was literally a lay-by full of all the big German brands at the bottom of the hill. Hilarious!

Another great advantage with front wheel drive is that the driven wheels can be immediately adjusted if in loose or slippery terrain in order to find grip immediately adjacent to the slippery part of the road. You can also see in the picture below that this is what I was doing to make it up the final stretch. You can’t do that with a rear wheel drive as the wheels have a much narrower turning circle. Adjusting the angle of drive is a huge added advantage.

53

[quote=“sulavaca”]In terms of traction, the biggest difference is made with tyres. In terms of unpredictability rear wheel drive is far less predictable than front wheel drive and so makes them more treacherous on mountain roads.

And yes, Scottish winters cause all the BMWs and Mercs to sit at the bottom of the hill. In fact we were there, at the Welcome to Scotland sign one winter ago. We (in a Civic) and a Golf were the only ones which made it up. Every single rear wheel drive was at the bottom of the hill, or stuck half way up. That’s my dad giving the “look no hands” signal :laughing:
I was joking at the time that I was disappointed that so many northerners had become rich enough from their property boom that they had gone out and purchased cars which any Scotsman knows never goes anywhere in the winter time. There was literally a lay-by full of all the big German brands at the bottom of the hill. Hilarious!

Another great advantage with front wheel drive is that the driven wheels can be immediately adjusted if in loose or slippery terrain in order to find grip immediately adjacent to the slippery part of the road. You can also see in the picture below that this is what I was doing to make it up the final stretch. You can’t do that with a rear wheel drive as the wheels have a much narrower turning circle. Adjusting the angle of drive is a huge added advantage.

[/quote]

Seems we are all talking about different kinds of traction situations in different places now. Interesting stuff though.

Back to Taiwan/sourcing, however. Do you think a front wheel drive CRV or X-Trail would be adequate for us? Like you say, they would be easier to source in our price range than a 4WD.

Also, would getting a Jeep Wrangler as people have suggested in earlier posts be some kind of Ultra-Dangerous Proposition and make us Very Bad Parents?

A Jeep would be ever so fun for exploring, especially in the summer. I’m sure its extremely difficult to source a good one though.

54

I’m trying not to be mean here, but have you ever considered that things like this happen not because of the drive configuration but because you insist on owning really awful cars?

55

:popcorn:

56

[quote=“PaddyB”]Seems we are all talking about different kinds of traction situations in different places now. Interesting stuff though.

Back to Taiwan/sourcing, however. Do you think a front wheel drive CRV or X-Trail would be adequate for us? Like you say, they would be easier to source in our price range than a 4WD.

Also, would getting a Jeep Wrangler as people have suggested in earlier posts be some kind of Ultra-Dangerous Proposition and make us Very Bad Parents?

A Jeep would be ever so fun for exploring, especially in the summer. I’m sure its extremely difficult to source a good one though.[/quote]

Good luck with a Jeep, that’s all I will say. There are primarily two ways to get a vehicle. Get a cheap one which you can spend all your money fuelling and fixing, or get a higher budget one which saves time, money and fuel. Getting a Jeep Wrangler wouldn’t make you bad parents, unless you think there is a better choice for your children’s benefit.

If its only ride height you require and not off-road capability then a two wheel drive Honda CRV would be what I recommend. I really see almost no need for a four wheel drive for most people. As I say, I used to service those that landowners would purchase back home, but I rarely ever came across a situation as a normal driver, even one who travelled dirt roads (I lived in a forest area) when a four wheel drive was even close to necessary. The one time I did need a four wheel drive was to pull my Morris Marina out of a ditch which it had slid into at 90 degrees because it was rear wheel drive and completely uncontrollable at times.

I know of two Jeep Wranglers for sale. They would be one of my last recommendations however.

57

After all this discussion I’m almost more confused than before! A Subaru Forester is the only gold option I’ve seen so far. But if I cant find one, I’m at a loss as far as what else to choose. Do i get -

  1. a RWD truck with lots of space and better ground clearance but less traction control (Innova)?

  2. an AWD XUV (car) with better traction control and less ground clearance (CRV, X-Trail)?

  3. a 4x4 truck that can go on any road but with higher operating costs (Challenger, Wrangler)?

  4. save some money, maintenance costs and opt for a FWD XUV (CRV, X-Trail)?

1 and 4 seem like the most economical and cost effective options. But is a RWD that safe in the mountains? And is a FWD XUV really that much better than a saloon car on bad roads?

58

I’m trying not to be mean here, but have you ever considered that things like this happen not because of the drive configuration but because you insist on owning really awful cars?[/quote]

I’m not trying to be more logical here, Its just unavoidable.

This is a comparison between FWD and RWD.

My insistence on owning awful cars can be assumed to apply equally to the two. (In support of this assumption, I can cite ownership of both a Mk1 Lada AND an 1800 Marina). It is therefore what we logical types call a controlled variable. This means it doesn’t affect the comparison.

Likewise, my crap driving applies equally to both types of vehicle, so it isn’t a variable in this comparison. Its possible, even likely, that a more skilled driver could extract relatively better/safer performance from a FWD vehicle, but for me, (and perhaps for similarly crap drivers, there must be a few) my experience is that FWD has a gotcha that isn’t inherent in RWD.

59

I think you have already mentioned experience of scraping along in a saloon car, so you can answer that one yourself. Just depends on how often you think you’ll be doing it.

Ride height and entry/exit angles are pretty easily measurable. The RWD v. FWD argument is more complex, but given that expert opinion seems to favor FWD, I guess thats the way to go.

[Edit: Of course I’m not personally entirely convinced, but I’m no expert and I’m probably unduly influenced by experience of Scottish conditions and manual transmission, neither of which are very relevant here.]

Something else that might be worth considering is the vulnerability of underside componenets like brake and fuel lines, exhaust, and sump (which I think varies a lot) and how easy it would be to get (or make/have made) and mount things like sump guards, to improve it.

60

[quote=“iix23”]I would go with Sulavacas idea. Since he is selling you a service that he has to stand by and give you a warranty. Not the most exciting choices but the safes ones.

On the other hand My idea is to buy a cheaper vehicle fix it for 50k$ and still have 250k$ to modify it the way you like it for your budget.

Keys in hand with warranty?? the choice is simple. Go for Sulavaca.

Boring but safe and good after service. I only hear good things about him.[/quote]

Yes, whichever vehicle any purchaser wishes to go for, always allow a chunk of change in order to bring a vehicle up to spec. That should go down as one of the major rules of car buying. Never stretch yourself to the budget top on a car as you will almost always realise that there are at least a few things extra which require more money.