New car time ... confused

[Tannin]

Looks like Kristi is having the little blue Barina and I'm buying a new one. But what?

For me, the Barina is just about perfect in all bar a couple of cruical details. First the things I like about it, and also the things that are OK but not great.

• $15,000 brand new with all the usual trimmings: CD player, air, alloys, and so on.
• Fanastic fuel economy. My 13,000k trip last year returmed an average of 42MPG (that's real gallons, not those whimpy American ones), carrying two months' worth of gear - say, the rough equivalent of 2 or 3 passengers - and including a lot of gravel, quite a few twist bits, and several thousand k in the Teritory where there are no speed limits so you sit on a nice, conservative 130 or so.
• Comfortable ride.
• Big enough for everything I need to take. Easy to reach everything (I love being able to wind up the passener window without taking my seat belt off), brilliantly easy to park, great visibility.
• Fast enough for anything I need to do.
• Decently quiet. I can hear the stereo at 110k without turning it up loud, and arrive relaxed and fresh after a 500k drive.
• Excellent brakes.
• Decent on-road behaviour. It's no sports car, and rolls like a pig, but I'm not out to set any speed records, so that's OK.
• Although the tank is only 43 litres, that's enough to take me 600k with safety. Touring range is a big plus in the outback.

On the down side:

• It copes surprisingly well with the gravel, but I want to go places where there just ain't any bitumen at all and the corrugations will shake the poor little thing to bits eventually. I need something built for bad roads.
• Several little things that don't really phaze me. Indicator stalk is on the wrong side, no courtesy light in the back, glove box is too small. Stuff like that I can ignore.

Anyway, the obvious answer is one of those toy 4WDs. I've taken a couple for a drive lately, and ... well ... they are pretty crude. Certainly the Holden Cruze I tried first sufered from wind noise (and has a pitiful 40 litre fuel tank).

At the place down the road, the Daihatsu Terios I tried next was much better. Possibly a fraction smaller on the road, looked much more capable off-road, better ground clearance and nothing underneath that looked certain to break on the first rock you hit. Excellent space efficiency inside: they really worked out the way the back seats fold down and all that stuff properly. And priced well too: $19,000 if you don't mind having an 03 model-year one. (Exactly the same as the current model, so no problem there.)

Alas, on the road it is just too crude. The tiny 1.3 litre engine is astonishingly capable, even with the airco running flat out (it is, after all, the same Toyota engine that goes into Toyota's Barina equivalent) but a good deal of that is, in reality, a product of the low gearing. The little thing gets really buzzy at 100 to 110k, working hard, and the wind noise was a good deal worse than the Cruze. (Which itself is worse than the Barina.) Hmmm .... I know I want to be able to go outback, but the reality is that 80 to 90% of the time I'll be on bitumen at 110k, and the Terios just doesn't cut it.

I guess it's a reasonable asumption that any of the other $20k bracket 4WDs will be much the same. Next step is to destroy the credit card and go upmarket a bit. The obvious choice is a Toyota RAV 4.

What are you guys driving, and do you think I'd be happy with a RAV?

It's really more than I want to spend, but if it gives me car-like noise and comfort levels on the bitumen, plus the ability to cope with Australia's very bad outback roads, then I'll pay the price. (A Rav will cost around $30,000.)

 

[Bender]

Tannin,

Have you considered a Subaru? The base model Impreza GX Hatch is listed as $26,440. I'm sure you can bargain that price down. Its all wheel drive although it probably will not climb steep hills. Since its Japanese made, you don't have the indicator stalk on the wrong side.

Cheers.

 

[Pradeep]

Back in the days when you could get a Land Rover or Land Cruiser for $30,000, I would have said to get one of those. However the LandCruiser now starts at something unbelievable like $60 grand. And the LandRover isn't much better.

The US 2004 RAV4 has stability control etc standard, which should keep you on the gravel nicely. Tho I don't think it's got the same rock solid reliability of a Landy on corrugations. Hell I used to thrash my trusty '89 Corolla over corrugations all the time, never any probs - except when I got bogged in sand dunes on an Army training range

If you're going way out bush you prob want a winch to get you out of trouble as well.

 

[Tannin]

Funny you should say that, Bender. Just this afternoon I started to wonder about Subarus. I'd always regarded them as too damn expensive, but if I have gone so far as to consider a $30,000 Toyota, then a $30,000 Subaru is equally in the ballpark. I mentioned them to a friend who is well-up on cars and he says they are very pleasant indeed to drive.

They have a good reputation for reliability too. And finally, I've sold several computers to the main man at the local Subaru dealership, get on well with him (though I never expected to want to speak to him in his professional capacity - hadn't occured to me that I'd ever want to buy a Subaru)

The one that takes my eye is the Forester. 2.5 litre (bit bigger than I really want), wagon (either hatchback or wagon is fine, sedans are useless for my needs - can't get the camera into them), 200mm ground clearance. (For comparison, the Impreza is 150mm, the Cruze 180mm, and a Land Cruiser is 230mm.)

I wasn't really aware of the Impreza - I don't try to keep up with cars these days, just vaguely knew there were 4 or 5 different ones.

Round figures, the Impreza lists at $24,000, the Forester at $31,500. For everyday use, the Impreza would do me fine. (Hell, the Barina does everything I need except that on corrugated gravel the ride is terrible and I worry about hammering the poor little thing into the ground.)

On the other hand .... one assumes that the extra 50mm of clearance would be a real boon down rough bush tracks (not that important, but nice to have), and the real attraction is that I expect the Forester would cope better with the hammering a car gets on corrugated gravel. (Do you have that sort of road in the States, guys? I'm talking about gravel shaped like an iron roof only cross-ways, and it goes for hundreds of kilometres sometimes. You can only drive down those roads if you don't mind having all your tooth fillings fall out.)

But maybe that last expectation isn't reasonable.

Land Rover prices? Hell, I could borrow a new Land Rover and go up the outback - oh, the back blocks of Queesland, say - start somewhere and drive till I ran out of fuel. Then, for the same amount of money, I could either buy the Land Rover, or buy all the land I'd seen out the window since the last time I filled the tank up. Well, almost.

Winch. Yeah. I should do something about a winch. I probably should join the local 4WD club. I'm sure that those guys woud have a heap of stuff they could tell me. But I never get time for these things.

 

[CougTek]

Subaru cars, at least the models sold here, are relatively thirsty compared to cars from the competition with a comparable engine. The Impreza, last time I checked, bust 10L/100Km with a 4 cylinders engine. That's equal to a Honda Accord with the new 240 horses V6. I doubt it'll do 600K on one tank and if it does, certainly not at the same cost than your Barina would.

Barina isn't sold here. It's probably just another name for a car we can have, but I don't know which one.

Although I generally despise that kind of vehicule, the new Chevy Colorado pick-up is said to be quite fuel-efficient by an auto magazine I highly consider. It drinks around 11.5L/100Km with a 5 in-line cylinders 225 horses engine. Its off-road capabilities are pretty good and it has an acceptable road handling, always according to what read (the reviewer normally hates 4x4 and SUVs because they tend not to stick too well to flat roads). It's also available with a 175 horses 4 cylinders engine that should bring the fuel consumption down to about 10L/100Km. Price should turn around 27000$ to 30000$ in your currency. It might be sold under the "Holden" brand in your country. I don't know.

And if you're really out of cash, there's always the Kia Sportage that could...huh, nevermind.

 

[Howell]

Before I bought my Jetta (couple weeks ago) I was considering buying a 2000ish Imprezza wagon and adding a lift kit to it. Then it would have as much ground clearance as a C-series Chevy pickup.

You are not going to easily find "washboard" roads in the states. You would have to get off of a triniary road to get to it. You would not travel these roads at more than 25 MPH. Much more likely to find gravel roads out west in the desert.

I still kinda want the Subie.

 

[P5-133XL]

Get yourself a Hummer II and never see good gas milage again (close to perfection off road) or 4 Barina's.

 

[Buck]

Ask Dr. Karl - get yourself a C304.

 

[ddrueding]

You are not going to easily find "washboard" roads in the states. You would have to get off of a triniary road to get to it. You would not travel these roads at more than 25 MPH. Much more likely to find gravel roads out west in the desert.

I drive about 10mi a week on washboard roads, to/from client sites out in the middle of nowhere. My Golf handles them quite well, the ride smoothes out at around 45mph. And I get about 40mpg on our "puny" US gallons

 

[bahngeist]

The recommendation for the Subaru's, particularly the Forester, is a fairly solid one -- particularly given your needs Tannin. Subaru's are almost as common as bellybuttons up here in the Alaska Panhandle, and everyone I know who owns one loves their stability in adverse weather conditions.

I myself have a Jeep Wrangler, and am fairly happy with it. However, they are trickier to handle due to their high center of gravity, narrow wheel base and lightness in back. Their fuel economy isn't that great either -- mind, mine has a four litre engine. But they are otherwise great off-road; are fairly nimble in urban areas; and can be shifted to two wheel (rear) drive when 4W drive isn't necessary.

How common are used Jeep Cherokees down under? They may well suit your needs quite well, and are fairly rugged. I myself wouldn't recommend a half-ton (pick-up) truck, since they share some of the instability issues that Wranglers have -- i.e., weight needs to be placed over the rear axles to make them more stable.

 

[Buck]

Some information from Consumer Reports

Subaru Impreza

One of the better small cars, the Impreza serves up a supple ride and well-balanced handling. The WRX's turbocharged 227-hp engine provides quick and effortless acceleration, especially at mid-rpm, and its well-tuned suspension offers agile, enjoyable handling along with a compliant ride. The RS sedan, TS wagon, and SUV-influenced Outback Sport make do with a 2.5-liter, 165-hp engine. The wagon's cargo volume is small. The Outback Sport rides stiffly and doesn't handle as well as other Imprezas. A score of Good in an IIHS offset-crash test is a plus. The ferociously quick 300-hp WRX STi model is a performance bargain.
Fuel economy
CU's overall mileage, mpg 21
CU's city/highway, mpg 15/28
CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 25

Subaru Forrester:

"The Forester is our top-rated small SUV. This car-based SUV/wagon rides compliantly and handles well, with good steering feel. Braking is very good. The engine provides adequate acceleration, and the optional automatic transmission shifts responsively. Standard AWD helps in slippery road conditions and on the occasional dirt trail. The front seats are firm and well shaped, and the rear has been improved slightly. The square cargo space is very usable. The 2.5 X is an excellent value at $21,000. Crash-test results are impressive. A new turbo model with 210 hp is available, adding more thrust."
Fuel economy
CU's overall mileage, mpg 21
CU's city/highway, mpg 15/28
CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 25

Subaru Legacy/Outback

This versatile, good-performing car offers fairly nimble routine handling, with precise and communicative steering feel and response. The ride is supple, but acceleration and interior ambience fall a bit short. The SUV-like Outback is a wagon with added ground clearance and more-rugged styling elements. A 3.0-liter horizontal six-cylinder accelerates better than the four-cylinder. The 3.0 VDC model has a stability-control system that marginally improves the otherwise twitchy emergency handling. A redesigned 2005 Legacy goes on sale this spring with much improved interior trim.
Fuel economy
CU's overall mileage, mpg 21
CU's city/highway, mpg 14/30
CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 26

Toyota RAV4

The RAV4 is one of our highest-rated small SUVs. The flexible, well-designed interior includes a rear seat you can fold and remove in halves. The noisy and slightly underpowered 2.0-liter engine was replaced with a smoother, stronger, and more pleasant 2.4-liter. The engine and automatic transmission work well together, and the AWD system does its job efficiently and unobtrusively on slippery pavement and limited off-road situations. Access and loading are very easy. Nimble handling and good fuel economy also add to the RAV4's appeal. ABS and stability control are standard for 2004.
Fuel economy
CU's overall mileage, mpg 22
CU's city/highway, mpg 16/27
CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 26

 

[timwhit]

Please, don't buy a Wrangler. I owned one for a year and the things are utterly unreliable. Plus 12mpg in the city is not very desirable. They are so loud on the highway that a normal conversation with a passenger is not possible.

I think the Subaru would probably suit your needs just fine.

 

[Buck]

Jeep Wrangler

Consider the Wrangler a vehicle for off-road use rather than highway travel. While its off-pavement credentials are impeccable, this smallest and crudest Jeep is perhaps a bit too true to its roots. The ride is noisy and uncomfortable, with nearly every pavement flaw eliciting snappy, rubbery kicks. The steering is vague and imprecise. The driving position is unpleasant, and outward visibility is poor, particularly for shorter drivers. The cramped rear seat is better suited to carrying cargo than passengers, but the longer wheelbase in the Unlimited alleviates that problem. A four-speed automatic arrived in 2003. Reliability recently has improved to average.

 

[Buck]

Honda CR-V

This is one of the better car-based SUVs on the market today. The ride is supple and controlled. The steering feel is good, but the tires' sideways grip compromises handling a bit. The 2.4-liter Four is more energetic, refined, and economical than the V6s of some competitors. The automatic transmission is very smooth and responsive. The rear seat is roomy, but road noise is a bit pronounced. The console-mounted parking-brake lever can be difficult to disengage. As in the previous model the rear cargo floor folds out to double as a picnic table. Impressive crash-test results round out this sensible and competitively priced choice.
Fuel economy
CU's overall mileage, mpg 21
CU's city/highway, mpg 15/27
CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 24

 

[bahngeist]

Please, don't buy a Wrangler. I owned one for a year and the things are utterly unreliable. Plus 12mpg in the city is not very desirable. They are so loud on the highway that a normal conversation with a passenger is not possible.

I think the Subaru would probably suit your needs just fine.

Just because I own a Wrangler doesn't necessarily mean that I would recommend one particularly since I lost an argument with a guard rail this past winter (a month after I bought my Wrangler I misread the road, spun out on black ice, and inadvertently oversteered when trying to recover. I've since learned that Wranglers require the sort of touch one would use when handling a responsive but high-spirited/nervous horse). And I am not looking forward to using it to tour the Yukon and Northern B.C. this summer, since Wranglers do suffer from road noise that would likely lead to fatigue fairly quickly. As the 'Consumer Report passage points out the Wrangler remains close to its roots, which is basically a 4WD light utility 1/4 ton truck (which is how the U.S. Army typified it originally).

Something that may be worth checking-out is the VW Jetta wagon -- particularly if it's available in all-wheel drive (up to last year this option was only available in EU -- at least, this is what the dealer told me when I was checking things out last year). Jettas as a whole are fairly reliable, handle very well, and have v. good fuel economy. If I weren't living in AK, the Jetta sedan would be my vehicle of choice personally (it's basically a Golf with a deep truck -- I amazed people with what I could pack into the '90 Jetta I had). Only problem with them is that they are somewhat underpowered and don't handle steep grades that well.

 

[Pradeep]

On the other hand .... one assumes that the extra 50mm of clearance would be a real boon down rough bush tracks (not that important, but nice to have), and the real attraction is that I expect the Forester would cope better with the hammering a car gets on corrugated gravel. (Do you have that sort of road in the States, guys? I'm talking about gravel shaped like an iron roof only cross-ways, and it goes for hundreds of kilometres sometimes. You can only drive down those roads if you don't mind having all your tooth fillings fall out.)

A friend of mine in Aus bought a second hand short wheel base LandCruiser. The springs on it were so hard then when on corrugated roads you could easily break kidney-stones without going to the hospital. Still plenty on room for all our gear when we went rock climbing.

 

[Tannin]

Wow! Great feedback here. Thanks guys!

Subaru sounds like the way to go. I'll go talk to the local Subaru man a little later this week (today is hopeless: too much else I have to do). But I should still have a closer look at the Rav also, I guess. And consider the Impreza as well as the Forester. Those lift kits look like a possibility, though I doubt I'd need one with the Forester.

Jeeps over here are specialised at the high end of the market. They are vast, fuel-hungry things with electric everything, and make Land Cruisers look like cheap runabouts. You practically never see one in the outback, they are the ultimate Toorak Tractor. (Toorak: posh suburb in Melbourne. For Sydney, read Vacluse. For Brisbane, read Paddington. For your own city, substitute as appropriate.) I don't think they bother with the value end, possibly because they are making a very tidy dollar selling to stock brokers in Toorak already, and why mess with a good thing?

 

[Pradeep]

Ask Dr. Karl - get yourself a C304.

Funnily enough I remember listening to that episode on Triple J, where he was talking about the smoothness of the road where only the road trains go.

 

[Tea]

Exceptionally good review here: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_0551/article.html

 

[bahngeist]

... Those lift kits look like a possibility, though I doubt I'd need one with the Forester.

I wouldn't recommend that a lift kit be installed on a Forester; reasons being: 200 mm. is likely sufficient clearance for what your travel plans entail (unless deep/steep washouts are a potential problem); such kits basically enable the use of larger tires, they don't lift the frame per se; installing lifts more often that not also entails installing heavier duty springs and shocks, which will generally make the vehicle ride harder. Having a kit installed would also likely put you back a $1000 AUS easily, not including the probable need to buy a whole new set of tires and rims.

Jeeps over here are specialised at the high end of the market. They are vast, fuel-hungry things with electric everything, and make Land Cruisers look like cheap runabouts ...

Here in AK it is very easy to find a bare bones model, whcih is what I would have preferred ($16K new). Mine , however, was the local Jeep dealer's wife's car and it is fairly well loaded. The only extra that sold the car to me was that it has ABS brakes, and the fact that it was exceptionally well-cared for and came at an excellent price. Whenever I move back down south, all those extras will enable me to sell it to some Yuppie for far more than I paid for it

 

[EdwardK]

Hi Tony,

Maybe the Forester is the way to go. A friend of mine had the base model Impreza GX and he complained that it does not have enough "oomph" in the engine to overtake caravans on the highways/freeways. Mind you, he had his wife and 2 daughters and everything save the kitchen sink in the the car :lol: Other than that, he say that he likes his Subaru.

Cheers,
Edward

 

[timwhit]

T-

Get a Subaru WRX wagon, plenty of power and room for your gear. Probably a pretty steep price tag though. I drove a sedan and it was damn fast.

 

[e_dawg]

Hey, a car party and I wasn't invited? Well, I can't add much to what has already been said, but to say that Subaru immediately came to mind when I read your requirements. Yes, it uses more gas than some of its wimpy small displacement 4-cylinder competitors, but you're getting the wonderful 2.5 L boxer engine! Smooth and a shitload of torque. Reliable. Capable on-road and off. AWD. Good value. Relatively decent fuel economy (for its level of torque and off-road capabilities). Rallye proven. Exactly what the doctor ordered.

Forrester or Impreza wagon... you can't go wrong with either.

 

[e_dawg]

Something that may be worth checking-out is the VW Jetta wagon -- particularly if it's available in all-wheel drive

I don't know about that recommendation for Tony's needs... even in AWD form (I don't know if they sell a Bora Variant in Aus), the Jetta would be hopeless off-road.

 

[bahngeist]

Something that may be worth checking-out is the VW Jetta wagon -- particularly if it's available in all-wheel drive

I don't know about that recommendation for Tony's needs... even in AWD form (I don't know if they sell a Bora Variant in Aus), the Jetta would be hopeless off-road.

Just throwing the thought out for consideration since 'ya never know. Trouble with Jettas as I mentioned before is that they are relatively underpowered, but they otherwise have a lot going for them also.

A Forester likely has better clearance anyway, but in most (if not more) respects it is likewise primarily designed for all-weather driving on relatively smooth/regularly maintained road surfaces. And if Tony wanted to install a winch, where would he install it -- particularly one with enough jam to be worth the hassle -- since the front end can hardly be described as utilitarian? Trouble is there isn't much else comparable out there that is would fit that bill without moving into the LandRover/Land Cruiser/etc. circle. Tony would just have to make sure not to get himself into a situation where he would hazard the need for a winch or tow chain -- and we know he is smart enough not to get into that sort of pickle :wink:

 

[e_dawg]

Heh, I can see it now: Tony placing his cricket bat under one of his wheels in a futile attempt to climb out of a bog of some sort

 

[Buck]

Rallye proven. Exactly what the doctor ordered.

Just as a side note, my W123 car was Rally proven, but I know my 300D wouldn't last long off-road (I can already hear a tie-rod bending). I would take that sort of data with a grain of salt. Probably a better testament to a cars capability would be real world use with the actual automobile you'll be purchasing -- my old clunker was used as a taxi for a long time in European countries, that says a lot for me.