Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavement

[Hart 1]

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.

[PARAGON]

Someone please hide this from Shaggy

[KenP]

H3 ranked last because it wasn't rated on offroad ability.

[wpage]

Author LeBlank is another Street orienter Jap loving douche bag on the payroll of Japan Inc.

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by wpage

Author LeBlank is another Street orienter Jap loving douche bag on the payroll of Japan Inc.

could you write that in Canadian, please?

[Sewie]

Bahhh, just a rehash of the Motortrend article from a year ago.

[Boar-Ral]

Originally Posted by Hart 1

Trio of SUVs fit for mud or pavementHalfway 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.

Thank God. Because I bought my Hummer for twisty two-lanes. For an on-road/off-road comparison, he seems to put a lot of stress on the on-road aspect.

[Boar-Ral]

Originally Posted by PARAGON

could you write that in Canadian, please?

John LeBlanc sucks Nissan's c*ck.

[SDH3]

Originally Posted by Boar-Ral

John LeBlanc sucks Nissan's c*ck.

Hahahaha

[DDWH]

Originally Posted by Boar-Ral

John LeBlanc sucks Nissan's c*ck.

[wpage]

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...

Roadie criteria again being used in a simulated offroad test.