Downloadable Destination Guides..
You asked for it, so here it is: access to the first 12 months of all our popular Australian getaway...
On location, hunting for dinosaurs! While waiting for a massive Sauropod to wander across the barren...
Vehicle Tests > Little Wonders
Little Wonders
Issue: November 2005
Words by Fraser Stronach
Australia's ever-increasing compact 4WD market has just got a whole lot more competitive with the launch of the all-new Suzuki Grand Vitara. Aside from carriedover engines, the new Grand Vitara is a clean sheet design that owes next to nothing to the previous model.
In this comparison test we have lined the new Grand Vitara up against the established class champ, the Nissan X-Trail and two new aspirants to the throne, Hyundai's Tucson and the recently revamped Mitsubishi Outlander. In fact this is the first chance we have had to run the Tucson and the new Outlander against the X-Trail, let alone the new Suzuki. All four of the test vehicles are automatics.
Nuts and bolts
Despite being similar in many ways, all four manufacturers represented here have chosen different design paths with their compact 4WDs, particularly so Suzuki. The Grand Vitara is the only vehicle here with dual-range transmission and the only one with its engine mounted north-south. The Grand Vitara's 2.7-litre V6 produces a claimed 135kW/250Nm, drives through a five-speed auto (also unique here) to a full-time, dual-range 4WD system with a torque-sensing centre differential that can be driver locked in high range and locks automatically in low range. Both front and rear differentials are open.
Unlike all previous Vitaras, the new Grand also features monocoque construction and fully independent suspension. Brakes are a disc/drum combination with ABS. The Tucson's east-west mounted 2.7-litre V6 produces a claimed 129kW/241Nm and drives through a four-speed auto and an on-demand 4WD system with a driver lockable (up to 40km/h) centre differential, switchable electronic traction control, an open front diff and a limited-slip rear diff. The Tucson is also a monocoque design with fully independent suspension and has ABS equipped disc breaks all round. The X-Trail's 2.5-litre four-cylinder engine makes a claimed 132kW/245Nm and drives through a four-speed automatic.
Nissan's 'All-Mode' 4WD system allows the driver to select 2WD, auto 4WD or to lock the centre diff. The All-Mode system is essentially an on-demand system and the centre diff lock is only operational at up to 30km/h. Both front and rear diffs are open. The X-Trail is also a monocoque design with fully independent suspension and ABS equipped all-wheel discs. With a claimed 120kW/220Nm the Outlander's 2.4-litre four-cylinder is the least power on paper. It drives through a four-speed auto and full-time 4WD system where the centre diff's viscous coupling provides an auto proportioning and auto locking function. Both front and rear diffs are open.
The Outlander is also a monocoque design with all-independent suspension and ABS-equipped all-wheel disc brakes. Note that the VR-X (as tested here) has a more 'sporty' suspension tune than the lower-spec Outlander models.
Drivetrains
Looking at all the factory power and torque figures you would assume that the two bigger V6s would have the edge on the two smaller fours when it comes to performance. But there are a few complicating factors here, not the least being the fact that the kerb weights range from 1435kg for the X-Trail, up to 1575kg for the Outlander, 1627kg for the Tucson, and 1640kg for the Suzuki. Another complication is the fact that the Suzuki has a five-speed gearbox, the rest have four-speeders.
Our side-by-side testing showed that the relatively lightweight X-Trail is the performance king, followed (surprisingly) by the Outlander, then the Grand Vitara, with the Tucson bringing up the rear. As is often the case, the test average fuel consumption figures mirrored the on-road performance with the Nissan in front at 11.6L/100km, followed by the Mitsubishi at 13.1L/100km, the Suzuki at 13.4L/100km and the Hyundai starting to get thirsty at 14.1L/100km.
On the road all four engines have more than adequate - but certainly not exciting - performance. And, unless you test them side by side you'd be hard pressed to notice the outright performance differences.
What you do notice however is that both the V6s need to rev harder to get the job done as they lack mid-range power compared to the more torquey, punchy fours. But both fours are also loud and somewhat coarse at high revs (especially the Mitsubishi's) while the two sixes are generally smoother right through the rev range. The Suzuki's engine is still not as smooth or sweet as you'd expect of a small capacity V6 and certainly not as unobtrusive as the Tucson's six. There's also a fair difference in the type of gearboxes. The Suzuki's box not only enjoys the benefits of an extra ratio but it has the most intuitive, slickest changes. Similar to late-model Toyota and Subaru autos it has a dogleg gate which helps with manual gear selection. This, however, is not as fluid as it could be and, strangely, there aren't individual slots for first and second gears with the gate configured with D - 4 - 3 - L.
The Outlander has the next-best box. In its full auto mode it does the right thing just about all of the time and there's a 'manual tip-shift' function that will hold manually selected gears at both redline and under throttle pressure. The Outlander's dash-mounted shifter is also nicely positioned.
The Nissan has a conventional straight-gate shifter (with an overdrive lockout) but otherwise the gearbox isn't too bad, even though it isn't the best either. Perhaps the fact the Nissan's engine has the strongest bottom-end and mid-range power helps here as autos always seem happier with torquey rather than peaky engines. Certainly there's nothing special about the gearbox itself, it's just that it mates relatively well to the engine.
The least decisive, indeed the least impressive gearbox is the Hyundai's. In give-and-take conditions it can easily lose its way in full auto mode, hunting back and forth between adjacent gears. At least it offers smooth changes and has a 'manual' tip-shifter for more accurate control.
Chassis dynamics
Compared to bigger, more serious 4WDs, all these compacts steer and handle well. In fact, compared to the real heavyweights they feel like nimble sports cars. Least impressive of the four in terms of its on-road dynamics is the Tucson. It's not a badly balanced car and the ride is quiet and supple, but the steering is vague and the suspension control ordinary. As a driver's car it's the least inspiring here although NVH refinement is a notable strong point and certainly better than Outlander or X-Trail.
read on below advertisement
As ever, the Nissan is understeer-happy through tight corners and the steering is not as sharp as it could be. At higher speeds its balance is better, and the ride quality is also impressive on crook roads and the NVH levels aren't too bad. The Outlander is the nosiest on a gravel road and the ride a tad sharper and less forgiving compared to the others. The 17-inch wheels and relatively low profile rubber wouldn't help here. The upside is sharp steering and impressive handling. It's the sportiest drive here.
The Suzuki, however, is the best allrounder in terms of its ride/handling/NVH trade-off. Its steering is sharp and the overall dynamics close to the Outlander. At the same time it rides well, particularly on the bigger bumps, and its NVH control is close to the Hyundai's. On rough roads the Suzuki also feels more solid and better built than the others.
Tough stuff
The compact 4WD market is currently dominated by the so-called soft-roaders. Witnessed by the X-Trail, Tucson, and Outlander we have assembled here. The Suzuki? Well, it's a little different. It's not only the dual-range gearing that makes a big difference here, it's the fact that it also has a proper full-time 4WD system with a mechanical lockable centre diff (that doesn't rely on a viscous coupling). Check out the underpinning and you'll also find that the Suzuki looks far more sturdily built and has a clean underside. Good wheel travel as well, especially from the rear multi-link arrangement. The Grand Vitara also has sensible 70-series rubber on 16-inch rims, the only vehicle here with this combination.
On the downside, both front and rear diffs are open and while the approach and departure angles are good, the clearance is only average.
So the Suzuki has enough features to miss being qualified as a soft-roader, but without some sort of electronic traction control (as available on some up-spec overseas models), or even a rear limited-slipper, its not all that fair dinkum either. But it is a more serious offroad prospect than the other three here.
The Hyundai, courtesy of its electronic traction control is the pick of the rest. It also has front and rear recovery points and underbody protection. However, on the down side it has relatively light underpinnings (front and rear struts), an on-demand 4WD system, and a toolow driving position.
The Nissan X-Trail has a better driving position, good clearance, and approach and departure angles and a clean, protected underside, but has a viscous-coupling-based on-demand 4WD system, open diffs all round and isn't as solidly built underneath as the Suzuki.
The Outlander has full-time 4WD which is a bonus but the drive position isn't great and it's the only one without proper rear recovery hooks (it does have two rear tiedown hooks). If you were thinking of an Outlander and were looking at some light offroading, one of the 16-inch wheeled models would also be a better bet than the 17-inch equipped VR-X. The VR-X was the only vehicle that scored a puncture on this test.
Despite the lack of any serious offroad credentials here, especially from the three 'softies', all of these vehicles are easily capable of extended travel on dirt roads and exploring easy firetrails and the like. Just as their manufacturers intended.
Accommodation
There were no serious complaints about the general comfort of any of the vehicles from any of our testers, but the Nissan received praise for being a tad more comfortable than the other three, despite the fact that it's the only one without a height-adjustable seat. As ever, the Nissan's centre mounted instrument console was criticised as was the Mitsubishi's fiddly after-market radio and confused interior styling - an old-world analogue clock right in the middle of a faux carbonfibre panel? The Outlander's fit and finish isn't the best either.
The Hyundai is nicely finished but the placement of some of the switchgear doesn't follow any logic at all.
Praise all round for the Suzuki's dash - it's clear, logical and even classy. The Suzuki's interior is also well finished.
Our back-seat space and comfort test (for three adults) went to the Outlander, followed by the Suzuki, the Nissan and then the Tucson.
The verdict
All four 4WDs present a compelling 'buy me' argument, at least from one point of view. It all depends on your priorities. The Tucson offers near unbelievable equipment for the money you pay (see breakout) and surprising refinement and build quality. But its engine is thirsty and uninspiring and the chassis dynamics are the least impressive here.
The Outlander has a great chassis and a punchy engine, a great driver's car. But it lacks refinement, and the fit and finish and general build quality could be better. The X-Trail's strength lies in its torquey engine, strong performance and economy, and the fact that it does most other things reasonably well. The X-Trail has always been our pick in this class and even against these newer competitors it still holds up well.
But the pick of the bunch - the new class champ - has to be the Suzuki Grand Vitara. It has the best trade-off between on-road finesse and offroad toughness, is solidly built, has the best gearbox and interior, and is refined and polished. In terms of cost verses equipment it also betters its Japanese rivals here, even if it does fall short of the Tucson.
All four of our testers picked the Grand Vitara as their choice of a 'drive away and own' car at the end of the test. And consensus like that is a rare thing with these comparisons.
Words by Fraser Stronach
Australia's ever-increasing compact 4WD market has just got a whole lot more competitive with the launch of the all-new Suzuki Grand Vitara. Aside from carriedover engines, the new Grand Vitara is a clean sheet design that owes next to nothing to the previous model.
In this comparison test we have lined the new Grand Vitara up against the established class champ, the Nissan X-Trail and two new aspirants to the throne, Hyundai's Tucson and the recently revamped Mitsubishi Outlander. In fact this is the first chance we have had to run the Tucson and the new Outlander against the X-Trail, let alone the new Suzuki. All four of the test vehicles are automatics.
Nuts and bolts
Despite being similar in many ways, all four manufacturers represented here have chosen different design paths with their compact 4WDs, particularly so Suzuki. The Grand Vitara is the only vehicle here with dual-range transmission and the only one with its engine mounted north-south. The Grand Vitara's 2.7-litre V6 produces a claimed 135kW/250Nm, drives through a five-speed auto (also unique here) to a full-time, dual-range 4WD system with a torque-sensing centre differential that can be driver locked in high range and locks automatically in low range. Both front and rear differentials are open.
Unlike all previous Vitaras, the new Grand also features monocoque construction and fully independent suspension. Brakes are a disc/drum combination with ABS. The Tucson's east-west mounted 2.7-litre V6 produces a claimed 129kW/241Nm and drives through a four-speed auto and an on-demand 4WD system with a driver lockable (up to 40km/h) centre differential, switchable electronic traction control, an open front diff and a limited-slip rear diff. The Tucson is also a monocoque design with fully independent suspension and has ABS equipped disc breaks all round. The X-Trail's 2.5-litre four-cylinder engine makes a claimed 132kW/245Nm and drives through a four-speed automatic.
Nissan's 'All-Mode' 4WD system allows the driver to select 2WD, auto 4WD or to lock the centre diff. The All-Mode system is essentially an on-demand system and the centre diff lock is only operational at up to 30km/h. Both front and rear diffs are open. The X-Trail is also a monocoque design with fully independent suspension and ABS equipped all-wheel discs. With a claimed 120kW/220Nm the Outlander's 2.4-litre four-cylinder is the least power on paper. It drives through a four-speed auto and full-time 4WD system where the centre diff's viscous coupling provides an auto proportioning and auto locking function. Both front and rear diffs are open.
The Outlander is also a monocoque design with all-independent suspension and ABS-equipped all-wheel disc brakes. Note that the VR-X (as tested here) has a more 'sporty' suspension tune than the lower-spec Outlander models.
Drivetrains
Looking at all the factory power and torque figures you would assume that the two bigger V6s would have the edge on the two smaller fours when it comes to performance. But there are a few complicating factors here, not the least being the fact that the kerb weights range from 1435kg for the X-Trail, up to 1575kg for the Outlander, 1627kg for the Tucson, and 1640kg for the Suzuki. Another complication is the fact that the Suzuki has a five-speed gearbox, the rest have four-speeders.
Our side-by-side testing showed that the relatively lightweight X-Trail is the performance king, followed (surprisingly) by the Outlander, then the Grand Vitara, with the Tucson bringing up the rear. As is often the case, the test average fuel consumption figures mirrored the on-road performance with the Nissan in front at 11.6L/100km, followed by the Mitsubishi at 13.1L/100km, the Suzuki at 13.4L/100km and the Hyundai starting to get thirsty at 14.1L/100km.
On the road all four engines have more than adequate - but certainly not exciting - performance. And, unless you test them side by side you'd be hard pressed to notice the outright performance differences.
What you do notice however is that both the V6s need to rev harder to get the job done as they lack mid-range power compared to the more torquey, punchy fours. But both fours are also loud and somewhat coarse at high revs (especially the Mitsubishi's) while the two sixes are generally smoother right through the rev range. The Suzuki's engine is still not as smooth or sweet as you'd expect of a small capacity V6 and certainly not as unobtrusive as the Tucson's six. There's also a fair difference in the type of gearboxes. The Suzuki's box not only enjoys the benefits of an extra ratio but it has the most intuitive, slickest changes. Similar to late-model Toyota and Subaru autos it has a dogleg gate which helps with manual gear selection. This, however, is not as fluid as it could be and, strangely, there aren't individual slots for first and second gears with the gate configured with D - 4 - 3 - L.
The Outlander has the next-best box. In its full auto mode it does the right thing just about all of the time and there's a 'manual tip-shift' function that will hold manually selected gears at both redline and under throttle pressure. The Outlander's dash-mounted shifter is also nicely positioned.
The Nissan has a conventional straight-gate shifter (with an overdrive lockout) but otherwise the gearbox isn't too bad, even though it isn't the best either. Perhaps the fact the Nissan's engine has the strongest bottom-end and mid-range power helps here as autos always seem happier with torquey rather than peaky engines. Certainly there's nothing special about the gearbox itself, it's just that it mates relatively well to the engine.
The least decisive, indeed the least impressive gearbox is the Hyundai's. In give-and-take conditions it can easily lose its way in full auto mode, hunting back and forth between adjacent gears. At least it offers smooth changes and has a 'manual' tip-shifter for more accurate control.
Chassis dynamics
Compared to bigger, more serious 4WDs, all these compacts steer and handle well. In fact, compared to the real heavyweights they feel like nimble sports cars. Least impressive of the four in terms of its on-road dynamics is the Tucson. It's not a badly balanced car and the ride is quiet and supple, but the steering is vague and the suspension control ordinary. As a driver's car it's the least inspiring here although NVH refinement is a notable strong point and certainly better than Outlander or X-Trail.
read on below advertisement
As ever, the Nissan is understeer-happy through tight corners and the steering is not as sharp as it could be. At higher speeds its balance is better, and the ride quality is also impressive on crook roads and the NVH levels aren't too bad. The Outlander is the nosiest on a gravel road and the ride a tad sharper and less forgiving compared to the others. The 17-inch wheels and relatively low profile rubber wouldn't help here. The upside is sharp steering and impressive handling. It's the sportiest drive here.
The Suzuki, however, is the best allrounder in terms of its ride/handling/NVH trade-off. Its steering is sharp and the overall dynamics close to the Outlander. At the same time it rides well, particularly on the bigger bumps, and its NVH control is close to the Hyundai's. On rough roads the Suzuki also feels more solid and better built than the others.
Tough stuff
The compact 4WD market is currently dominated by the so-called soft-roaders. Witnessed by the X-Trail, Tucson, and Outlander we have assembled here. The Suzuki? Well, it's a little different. It's not only the dual-range gearing that makes a big difference here, it's the fact that it also has a proper full-time 4WD system with a mechanical lockable centre diff (that doesn't rely on a viscous coupling). Check out the underpinning and you'll also find that the Suzuki looks far more sturdily built and has a clean underside. Good wheel travel as well, especially from the rear multi-link arrangement. The Grand Vitara also has sensible 70-series rubber on 16-inch rims, the only vehicle here with this combination.
On the downside, both front and rear diffs are open and while the approach and departure angles are good, the clearance is only average.
So the Suzuki has enough features to miss being qualified as a soft-roader, but without some sort of electronic traction control (as available on some up-spec overseas models), or even a rear limited-slipper, its not all that fair dinkum either. But it is a more serious offroad prospect than the other three here.
The Hyundai, courtesy of its electronic traction control is the pick of the rest. It also has front and rear recovery points and underbody protection. However, on the down side it has relatively light underpinnings (front and rear struts), an on-demand 4WD system, and a toolow driving position.
The Nissan X-Trail has a better driving position, good clearance, and approach and departure angles and a clean, protected underside, but has a viscous-coupling-based on-demand 4WD system, open diffs all round and isn't as solidly built underneath as the Suzuki.
The Outlander has full-time 4WD which is a bonus but the drive position isn't great and it's the only one without proper rear recovery hooks (it does have two rear tiedown hooks). If you were thinking of an Outlander and were looking at some light offroading, one of the 16-inch wheeled models would also be a better bet than the 17-inch equipped VR-X. The VR-X was the only vehicle that scored a puncture on this test.
Despite the lack of any serious offroad credentials here, especially from the three 'softies', all of these vehicles are easily capable of extended travel on dirt roads and exploring easy firetrails and the like. Just as their manufacturers intended.
Accommodation
There were no serious complaints about the general comfort of any of the vehicles from any of our testers, but the Nissan received praise for being a tad more comfortable than the other three, despite the fact that it's the only one without a height-adjustable seat. As ever, the Nissan's centre mounted instrument console was criticised as was the Mitsubishi's fiddly after-market radio and confused interior styling - an old-world analogue clock right in the middle of a faux carbonfibre panel? The Outlander's fit and finish isn't the best either.
The Hyundai is nicely finished but the placement of some of the switchgear doesn't follow any logic at all.
Praise all round for the Suzuki's dash - it's clear, logical and even classy. The Suzuki's interior is also well finished.
Our back-seat space and comfort test (for three adults) went to the Outlander, followed by the Suzuki, the Nissan and then the Tucson.
The verdict
All four 4WDs present a compelling 'buy me' argument, at least from one point of view. It all depends on your priorities. The Tucson offers near unbelievable equipment for the money you pay (see breakout) and surprising refinement and build quality. But its engine is thirsty and uninspiring and the chassis dynamics are the least impressive here.
The Outlander has a great chassis and a punchy engine, a great driver's car. But it lacks refinement, and the fit and finish and general build quality could be better. The X-Trail's strength lies in its torquey engine, strong performance and economy, and the fact that it does most other things reasonably well. The X-Trail has always been our pick in this class and even against these newer competitors it still holds up well.
But the pick of the bunch - the new class champ - has to be the Suzuki Grand Vitara. It has the best trade-off between on-road finesse and offroad toughness, is solidly built, has the best gearbox and interior, and is refined and polished. In terms of cost verses equipment it also betters its Japanese rivals here, even if it does fall short of the Tucson.
All four of our testers picked the Grand Vitara as their choice of a 'drive away and own' car at the end of the test. And consensus like that is a rare thing with these comparisons.
