Is 4x4 making a comeback? Can it?

"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch) 11/13/2014 at 18:39 • Filed to: Truck Yeah, hhfp

4

9

Rugged SUV’s these days, if I can crib a little from Jim Gaffagan, are a lot like waterbed stores; they used to be everywhere and now they are just weird. The SUV boom happened because people discovered that vehicles that were meant to do real work could also be used to see over lesser people in traffic and in light of cheap gas their biggest drawbacks seemed minimal in comparison to this amazing new trick. Though like many new and bold ideas it was eventually diluted and watered down to cater to the fat....part of the curve who were buying these thing up like Starbucks and at the same time demanding they be more like the cars they were so eager to ditch; Thus the crossover. There is some ambiguity locked up in these terms so allow me to clarify as best I can.

SUV - Sport (not sports, i.e. sportscar) Utility Vehicle. Sport = For sport, sportsman, running gear is required to take you off the beaten path. Utility = Meant for work, payload or towing. Vehicle = duh.

Crossover - A taller, sometimes all wheel drive wagon.

Don’t get me wrong, I have no personal beef with the crossover as they certainly fill a niche and have found a home, but its not the same animal it was when it was called an SUV, not even close. During that transition period as companies scrambled to make their vehicles more car like the spirit of the SUV was lost, and in that a major market was orphaned as one by one the driver who wanted to take his gear and friends off road were faced with fewer and fewer capable offerings.

I can already hear you say “But who does that anymore? Who ever did that? They were always mall crawlers.” Maybe, the truth is that its hard to know. Yeah, that pathfinder in the parking lot may never have found that path, or the trailblazer likely blazed no trails...or the 4Runner never...uh...

Anyway, the truth is that you can’t tell from first glance. I’m sure I get a lot of ire in my land cruiser, especially when its clean, but I can tell you personally that I’m out there every chance I can get. The truth is that they are good vehicles because you CAN daily drive them and when the opportunity arises, do the other thing.

There is something about turning off the pavement that’s liberating, like driving a Disneyland car off its tracks. Off road driving is addicting, but in spite of what the TV would have you believe, this isn’t something crossovers do particularly well (or at all). Then there is the added utility that an SUV provides that crossovers typically can’t; higher towing ratings for example. Plus even if you don’t do MOAAABBB as often as you’d like, its nice to know that dropping in low range and hitching a chain up to a stubborn rose bush is a capability that’s on tap.

Playing devils advocate its easy to see why the golden days of the off-road vehicle are behind us; more and more of our world is paved and car accessible or at least crossover accessible. Even the most avid adventurer spends most of their time on the road and there a quite ride and high MPG’s are more important than suspension articulation and torque multiplication. Crossovers advantages are typically; better fuel consumption, better ride and better use of interior space. If you have driven a lambda crossover (Traverse, Acadia and Enclave) back to back with a Tahoe you’ll know what I mean.

The explorer and pathfinder are essentially dead, Isuzu and Mitsubishi are gone or all but gone, even the FJ Cruiser is dead.

But...rising from that ashes! No I’m kidding, that’s lame, but whats not lame at least in my mind is the recent re-interest or, shall I say, reemergence of the niche enthusiast who’s grown tired of carward slide of the suv-cum-crossover and are ready to get back out there.

The crossover rules and will continue to rule the lions share of the market for several reasons, least of which is the fact that people need car like attributes but not truck like utility. Other key reasons include:Interior space, Refinement and good (relative) mileage. Looking at each of these factors is it possible to get the same from a vehicle that actually makes use of its size and height? Interior packaging is hard to solve, body on frame vehicles use space pretty badly, but does it have to be body on frame? The unibody Jeeps and range rovers seem to work pretty well offroad and interior space, though not as good as low floor height crossovers, is pretty good. As far as refinement, take a ride in a new ram, or Cherokee (Grand or plebeian), or even a Tacoma TRD for that matter...they are getting very good in terms of ironing out the bumps while still maintaining decent driving dynamics as well as capability. That leaves us with mpg. This is the easy one, at least in my eyes: diesel.

A diesel engine was pretty much designed for off-road use. Rugged, with low end torque and decent consumption in a vehicle that has the space and character to fit well with the size and personality of the diesel combustion cycle, not to mention there are no spark wires, coil packs or distributors to drown in water. Jeep is the only light duty off road diesel vehicle in the US and they are eagerly awaiting to see if its a hit like the ecoboost trucks and TDI cars and i suspect it will be. The Ram truck sales are promising and GM even is starting to get in on the action. Would a smooth riding, well packaged 22-26 mpg vehicle be enough to get you to stop thinking mall ready and start thinking trail ready again? I know it would work for me, but I’m in the minority that is willing to sacrifice a few comforts already for capability.

So, we come back to the first question:

Is off-road making a comeback?

What would get you to consider an capable SUV over a crossover?

*I wrote this article about a year ago before the Jeep Renegade, Ram Ecodiesel or GM canyorado twins were a real thing. I re-wrote it here because Andrew’s Ford Everest article got me thinking about it again.

TheHondaBro > HammerheadFistpunch 11/13/2014 at 18:49

1

If Land Cruiser.

Because Land Cruiser.

Land Cruiser.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > HammerheadFistpunch 11/13/2014 at 18:51

0

The new 4Runner, with the all but confirmed Cummins the Tundra is getting would be better than a Ferrari in my eyes. Or if we are being slightly serious, the 4-cylinder Cummins that the Frontier is getting, that the Tacoma should get if the Tundra gets the big guns.

HammerheadFistpunch > TheHondaBro 11/13/2014 at 18:53

1

do you know what I wish, more than any other of my car wishes? That Toyota would spin off the Land Cruiser brand. It would have

1. 70 troppie

2. 70 wagon

3. 70 quad ute

4. 70 2 door softtop (doesn't exist)

5. 200 series

6. some bs sport version

HammerheadFistpunch > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 11/13/2014 at 18:55

0

I'd be happy with a federalized 1KD-FTE

TheHondaBro > HammerheadFistpunch 11/13/2014 at 18:55

1

I shall name you King Jalopnik and you shall rule all the Land Cruisers forever.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > HammerheadFistpunch 11/13/2014 at 19:16

0

Yeah, but if the Cummins 4 cylinder is already federalized, and they have access to it, it would be the smarter choice. Plus, it makes a bit more power.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HammerheadFistpunch 11/13/2014 at 19:18

0

In order to consider a capable SUV over a crossover, it would have to be as refined, spacious, comfortable, economical, and cheap as a crossover. I love many SUVs, but if I bought them, it would be out of desire, not necessity. I don't go off-road, and unless you have a) access to an off-road location, b) the skill necessary, and c) a vehicle you don't mind damaging or can afford to fix, you never will. Nobody in the modern U.S. really needs to go off-road, it's purely a hobby. And you aren't going to convince most Americans to make sacrifices in the things I listed above just so that they can maybe take up a hobby in a vehicle that they can't afford to fix when it gets damaged.

BaconSandwich is tasty. > HammerheadFistpunch 11/14/2014 at 10:18

0

Honestly, I think I see a lot of small trucks filling the niche of the true SUV. Something like the new Ford Ranger with the diesel in it would almost be perfect for the job. Yes, they are longer and they don't have quite the same interior space, but a box cover can solve part of that problem. They seem well built and capable off-road, so that's not a problem. Fuel economy is probably similar to what a person gets with a current body-on-frame SUV.

HammerheadFistpunch > BaconSandwich is tasty. 11/14/2014 at 10:34

0

I think a small diesel truck fits this niche well too.