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

Originally Posted by 7mmsaum

As they are permanent 4wd

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

Originally Posted by 7mmsaum

As they are permanent 4wd

No they are on demand...permanently or at least that is the extent of my googling as a great part of my motivation to get one was to stop bloody modifying things and just put fuel in and drive it.

Having owned both an Escudo and Rav I would say there is little to no difference in their offroad ability as they roll off of the showroom floor,however the Escudo does have far more potential to be easily and relatively cheaply (maybe 3xpurchase price) to be turned into a real off roader....thats not really an option with the rav.

Suzies are disproportionately expensive now due to the fact that autos can be put transfer case in neutral and towed on an "A" frame behind a motorhome.... the one we struggeled to get 3k for a few years ago in mint cond now go for 3-8k with another 100tho km on them.

The major difference is on road tho, the suzi suffers directional instability badly at relatively modest speeds it struggles to achieve... It is definitely NOT a good learners vehicle in the older variants,engines must be mercilessly raped to maintain any sort of open road momentum and they shit heads alarminly reguarly.

The Rav on the other hand has plenty of power for a small vehicle with the 2l and altho it looks like it is just waiting to swap ends or roll over for a belly rub it actually goes/handels/stops remarkably well,Same era Suzuki is not even in the same league.

Fuel economy the rav will be worse of course 2l verses 1600 but its splitting hairs they will both be driven flat to the floor most of the time.

DO NOT BUY A 2L V6 Suzi if you buy one get the 1600 4cyl the v6 is a dog, even worse directional stability and cam chain tensioner issues that are pretty much engine out jobs to fix.


The fact that the Rav looks as gay as a handbag full of rainbows couldnt put me off either

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

No they are on demand...permanently or at least that is the extent of my googling as a great part of my motivation to get one was to stop bloody modifying things and just put fuel in and drive it.

Having owned both an Escudo and Rav I would say there is little to no difference in their offroad ability as they roll off of the showroom floor,however the Escudo does have far more potential to be easily and relatively cheaply (maybe 3xpurchase price) to be turned into a real off roader....thats not really an option with the rav.

Suzies are disproportionately expensive now due to the fact that autos can be put transfer case in neutral and towed on an "A" frame behind a motorhome.... the one we struggeled to get 3k for a few years ago in mint cond now go for 3-8k with another 100tho km on them.

The major difference is on road tho, the suzi suffers directional instability badly at relatively modest speeds it struggles to achieve... It is definitely NOT a good learners vehicle in the older variants,engines must be mercilessly raped to maintain any sort of open road momentum and they shit heads alarminly reguarly.

The Rav on the other hand has plenty of power for a small vehicle with the 2l and altho it looks like it is just waiting to swap ends or roll over for a belly rub it actually goes/handels/stops remarkably well,Same era Suzuki is not even in the same league.

Fuel economy the rav will be worse of course 2l verses 1600 but its splitting hairs they will both be driven flat to the floor most of the time.

DO NOT BUY A 2L V6 Suzi if you buy one get the 1600 4cyl the v6 is a dog, even worse directional stability and cam chain tensioner issues that are pretty much engine out jobs to fix.


The fact that the Rav looks as gay as a handbag full of rainbows couldnt put me off either

That's the sort of info I'm after. Yours auto or manual?

I wouldn't be interested in modifying whatever I get for off road use. After something that will be mainly on the road but could get a few people to the start of a track for tramping or hunting.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

That's the sort of info I'm after. Yours auto or manual?

I wouldn't be interested in modifying whatever I get for off road use. After something that will be mainly on the road but could get a few people to the start of a track for tramping or hunting.

Mines an auto tho I much prefer manuals I have found autos help stop me from doing stupid shit and breaking stuff

But mainly it came up at the right price and an auto is advantageous for backing stuff up my drive.

My rav gets used to tow a heavy tandem trailer and a boat on trailer regularly , it does not embarrass itself,yes it is working but that's what the right foot is for and if planted on the firewall it will surprise most even towing a load.

While I certainly wouldn't recommend it as a tow vehicle it does it without complaint and never feels anything but solid on the road, the Suzuki never felt solid on the road unladen and I wouldnt feel safe towing the same loads at the same speeds.

I have not driven a manual one but a workmates missus had one and he reconed it was really low geared...like over 3000rpm @100??, the auto is doing more like 2200 with the torque converter locked up but I am usually overdrive off anyway.

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.

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.