Thread: Hairdresser 4x4

Looking at getting a vehicle for the troops to learn to drive in and nothing we have already would really be suitable. Thinking something along the lines of a Rav4 or Escudo may be a good option. What are they like for fuel economy, servicing and driving? I'd be looking for a manual so a nice gearbox and reasonably light clutch would be in order.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Looking at getting a vehicle for the troops to learn to drive in and nothing we have already would really be suitable. Thinking something along the lines of a Rav4 or Escudo may be a good option. What are they like for fuel economy, servicing and driving? I'd be looking for a manual so a nice gearbox and reasonably light clutch would be in order.

Escudo has hi/low 4wd lever

Rav only has high range

The Escudo is held in high regard with those that own them and they go places that will amaze you. The 2 ltr version is not as highly regarded as the 1.6. @Mintie what do you have to say?

Rav's suck gas something horrible

Originally Posted by hotbarrels

Rav's suck gas something horrible

As they are permanent 4wd

I never thought I'd say this but I've been really impressed with my friend's CRV. It's a first gen, I think it's a 2000.

Cheap to buy, cheap to run, makes better use of interior space than an equivalent rav4, visibility is very good, the bottom of the boot comes out and turns into a table for convenient glamping with the whanau, and the 4wd system actually seems to work. It's 2wd (front) until it gets some slip then automatically engages the 4wd, at which point it seems to act like an LSD centre. No idea how it actually works, but that's how it behaves. In the words of my mate "I thought it would be shit, but it isn't." It's easy to drive. Drives like a car.

Theirs has 250k on it and everything works great with little maintenance. It was virtually ignored from 100k to 220k until my mate got together with the owner and it started seeing maintenance again. He did the head gasket a little while ago due to an overheating incident that came from it running the coolant low. Measured the head/block flatness and it was perfect, and everything else was in great condition so seems to be a good little motor.

It's pretty boxy so at highway speeds it's a bit noisy.

Originally Posted by 7mmsaum

As they are permanent 4wd

The boss's van is like that. Hard on gas and tyres.

I've got a older 92 vitara 5 door 1.6 auto.have also owned a early 90s 5 speed aswell as a newer 2001 2litre 4 cylinder auto. The newer one was much nicer on the open road compared to the earlier ones. The manual 1.6 went just as well as the auto I reckon.
Mines not to bad on fuel it all depends how you drive it.
Servicing it easy as and parts are easy to get.
I use mine as a shooting and fishing wagon and it's not a daily driver.
I say go for one they are a great little 4x4

Also the manual 1.6 really easy manual to drive clutch and gearbox wise.
One thing with the 1.6 suzuki is the original exhaust manifold is crap and can cause them to over heat and crack heads.
Aftermarket extractors fixes this issue and quite a lot of them have had them fitted.

I've just picked up a little SWB Vitara a month or so ago and I rate it. Yet to take it anywhere hard core but for a hunting truck it seems to be the dogs danglies. The 1.6 engine has enough get up for the open road, will happily sit at 100 but not at risk of too many speeding fines. Mine has a 2" body lift and mud tires so not exactly designed for good cornering but other than that the manual gearbox is smooth, motor runs well and I reckon it'd be a great little wagon to learn in. On top of that they are common as so parts are easy to get, another reason I went with the zuk is I have heard they are pretty simple mechanically - I don't know bugger all about cars but plan on doing all my own repairs and maintenance when I break it.

I have an escudo 4 doors 2004. I believe that was the last year they made it with a transfer box 2wd/ 4wdh/4wdL. The next generation might be full time 4wd or at the push of a button but no low and high.
Mine is 2 litre petrol manual. Just awesome. The 2 litre diesel with the psa ( Peugeot ) diesel can be good as well but make sure the came belt is done. And you might have to get the injectors redone at some stage but other wise it is bullet proof engine.

A mate has a 300000 km crv Honda and that thing keeps on going. 2l auto.

Not sure how much a low range would get used and I'll have the hunting wagon for that. Autos are good round town, on the open road and in the rough but I think a manual would be good for them to learn in so that they know how to work one, even though they are becoming rarer. Definitely keen on petrol to save on rego and RUC which really kills any advantage diesel would normally have.

I had a manual 1995 Rav4, on average did between 10 and 11 liter per 100km.
First gear was really low so never needed low range, I didn't do anything extreme offroad, but was a lot more than 99% or Rav4 will ever do.

Before that I was driving a diesel Suzuki Escudo (96 I think), the Rav4 felt like a Rolls Royce in comfort was a lot better ride and had similar fuel economy.
Saying that, the ride was pretty rubbish and had terrible road noise. I now have a 1998 diesel Landrover Discovery, which rides better, less road noise, a lot more comfortable, tows a million times better and uses less fuel.

The gear box on the Rav wasn't the best, but being so low in 1st was almost like a diesel in that didn't need any throttle to get going.

Had a drive of a daihatsu trieos for a while, surprising large interior space being a high ceiling, wee 1.3 that moves it along being nice and light. Centre diff lock and reasonable clearance. Full time 4wd though

+1 for the Escudo