Hikers Dream Car

[kmorgan]

I've been pretty happy with my '03 VW Passat Wagon. Not going to do any off roading with it, but for driving long distances from Long Island to go hiking the 32 MPG is nice.

Ground clearance sucks, and generally I'm not a big fan of turbo charged engines because of the lag which can get you into trouble if you're trying to beat traffic across a road (jam the accelerator and nothing for a couple of seconds -- will really put a stain on the driver side seat!) but in the mountains I always have plenty of power.

I was seriously considering and Outback wagon for my next car once I've worn this one out.

 

[Rick]

I drive a VW Golf Diesel for work 90 Miles R/T and keep a Dodge Dakota Quad Cab for weekends with wife kids dogs and stuff.

I hang out a lot over on some diesel forums. I am a diesel aficionado, having owned 3 VW TDI's over the years (49MPG) and have no desire to consider any kind of hybrid or gasoline powered vehicle unless forced by lack of consumer choice (hence.. the Dakota)..

My most desired vehicle is not available in the US - It would be a Ford Ranger X-Cab 4 Wheel Drive 4 or 6 Cyl turbo-diesel with a fiberglass cap on the back. I have e-mailed FMC several times asking about availability of smaller diesels pick-ups in the US, with no response to date. I'd also like a locking Glove Box (Which most do not seem to have anymore).


Both Toyota and Honda may have Diesel powered CUTs mid 2008 (They are in other countries now). Honda is talking of a CRV Diesel, which I would consider. VW is launching the Tiguan - a New breed diesel CUV - Another great choice based on my experience with VW diesel reliability, but I would really rather just have a small diesel 4x4 truck that gets 30+ mpg

Drove my old Ford Ranger for almost a decade and the cap on the back made sleeping at a trail-head or roadside very easy. Especially at the TH sorting out gear in a pouring rain or mosquito storm both pre and post trip.

 

[MichaelJ]

To fill in your table, 2003 Outbacks have ground clearances of 7.4" or 7.9" depending on model. A quick search shows that apparently Subaru added an inch around 2006.

 

[trailbiscuit]

My Honda Civic Hybrid...in the hopes that the forest will still be there in a few years.

 

[Rick]

After reading other posts, I realized that the terms may be being used synonmously - I hope this isn't too anal......, but I Found a link that briefly explains the differences :4WD or AWD ???

FWIW, When I say 4x4, I think of a truck (with wrist thick axles as opposed to a CUV with axles the size of a finger), part time 4-wheel drive with rear limited slip differential.

Here is the text as well:
4WD and AWD systems explained

A word of caution first. Manufacturers tend to obscure the true nature of their 4WD/AWD systems behind phantasy names like "Active 4WD", "Quadra-Drive", etc. - others might call their automatic AWD "Real Time 4WD".

There is plenty of confusion about what is what. Does it matter? Can't you just call "four wheel drive" "all wheel drive"? Yes you could. If all eight wheels of your big truck are driven, isn't it all wheel drive? Yes it is.
However, there are so many different 4WD systems on the market now that it is important to be precise and specific. It is important to call AWD when it is AWD and full time 4WD when it is full time 4WD. Just to say 4x4 is not sufficient any longer.
Wrong terms lead to misinformation - intentional or not. Wrong terms might make you buy something you neither want nor need! Do your homework before buying a 4WD - to get what you really need. If necessary, ask me.

There is no sanctioning body who ever established the definition of terms regarding 4x4. The terms I use below are the ones used internationally by engineers and competent magazines.

4WD has been invented a very long time ago and various concepts have been tried. Here is a simplified synopsis of what is what. Links within this page provide detailed insight.

#1 Part time 4WD is a system that can only be used part of the time in four wheel drive.
This 4WD system was created to provide a vehicle with more traction to either carry higher loads and/or to travel in adverse terrain conditions. Clearly purpose built to do hard work. It can only be used for adverse terrain conditions - not for dry pavement.
Typical lever settings are 2WD, 4WD Hi, 4WD Lo.
Very good off-road. Most competent when combined with axle differential locks.
• 2WD setting must be used on dry pavement.
• If 4WD is selected, all 4 wheels are permanently powered.
Prominent examples: 1942 Willys, Jeep Wrangler.


#2 Full time 4WD - also called permanent 4WD, can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement.
Full time 4WD was created to provide a vehicle with more traction and to make 4WD more useful for everyday life. The additional feature of a differential incorporated into the transfer case makes it possible to use 4WD all the time.
2WD is no longer available. Can still be a strong workhorse. Some rough terrain competence is retained - the priority is added stability as a safety gain for everyday driving.
Typical lever or switch settings are 4WD Hi, 4WD Lo. Very good off-road when center diff is lockable. Even better when combined with axle differential locks.
• All 4 wheels are permanently powered.
Prominent examples: pre 2006 Mercedes M-Class, Mercedes G500, LandRover, RangeRover, Toyota Prado, Lexus GX470.


#3 Full time symmetric AWD is similar to full time 4WD - only it lacks the slow speed torque enhancing low range feature. Can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement.
Symmetric AWD was created as a safety feature for modern day vehicles. Not designed for hard work. Clearly a safer, more comfortable vehicle. Rough terrain competence has almost vanished - focus is on added stability and performance.
Limited use for off-road.
• All 4 wheels are permanently powered.
Prominent examples: 2006 Mercedes M-Class, Audi Quattro, most Subaru, pre 2006 RAV4


#4 Automatic asymmetric AWD was created solely as a stability enhancing system. Auto AWD can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement. AWD only briefly activates automatically when stability threatening conditions arise. Essentially a 2WD car with 2WD handling characteristics. Absolutely no adverse terrain capabilities. Clearly built for added road stability and safety.
Not recommended for off-road beyond graded dirt roads.
• 2 wheels are powered most of the time
• 4 wheels are only temporarily powered.
Prominent examples: Volvo AWD, 2006 RAV4, Honda CRV.

A more detailed explanation of the differences between 4WD and AWD.

So, is "real time 4WD" really 4WD? No, it is a sophisticated 2WD car with automatic asymmetric AWD. There is no commonly accepted standard how to name the different 4WD systems - companies and especially their PR departments use terms for 4WD systems very loosely - transparent consumer information is not their priority.

Many vehicles are offered with a combination of 4WD systems outlined above. Very confusing for consumers.

Here is more about why part time 4WD should not be used on pavement

 

[Grumpy]

During the 1990s and up to a year ago my choice of vehicle was a Chevy Astro or GMC Safari van with rear-wheel drive only. Lots of room inside. Excellent maneuverability -- and not just "for its size." And the clincher was its high ground clearance.

The latter would allow the vans to go nearly anywhere I could take the full size and smaller S-10 size Blazers and GMC equivalents I drove during the 1970s and 1980s.

The Blazers all were equipped with 4WD, which I seldom locked up for max effect. Four WD allowed me to go a few places I would not take the vans -- where traction might be a real issue. But that was rare for my purposes. High ground clearance and short turn radius always were more significant to my needs.

The Chrysler mini van I now drive is low to the ground and less maneuverable than its GM predecessors, and not as good a "hiker's vehicle," IMO.

G.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I've been very happy with my Toyota Tacoma (extended version) with a fiberglass cap. It has functioned as the Hotel Toyota on many occasions. It's a manual, with Hi & Lo range, and have used Lo on several occasions. There are some situations where it's the ONLY way you can move. It's also been cross-country 3 or 4 times. It has 165K+ on it, and expect many more. The only repair it has needed (besides a brake job and new battery) is the replacement of a cracked exhaust manifold.

I like the looks/specs of the FJ Cruiser (and plus it's a Toyota). A friend bought one, and like Maddy, just raves about it. But - there are times when I need a real truck, so will stick with the Tacoma.

In the past couple of years the Tacoma has now grown to a mid-size truck, so don't know whether it will get fat and bloated like many of the other trucks on the road. Part of it's charm is that it doesn't take up two spaces when you pull into Home Depot.

 

[injektilo]

In the past couple of years the Tacoma has now grown to a mid-size truck, so don't know whether it will get flat and bloated like many of the other trucks on the road. Part of it's charm is that it doesn't take up two spaces when you pull into Home Depot.

I looked at the new Tacoma when I needed to trade my old Tacoma in on something with an automatic. They are huge.. almost the size of the older Toyota Tundra.

I ended up with a 4wd Ford Ranger. Sweet little truck that will go just about anywhere I point it. We also have an Outback. Both vehicles are excellent for outdoor pursuits.

 

[pudgy_groundhog]

I really like our Honda Element. Easy to sleep in, no carpet so don't care about the dirt, mud, etc, and quite roomy (passengers in the backseat always comment on the space).

 

[Motabobo]

OK OK I'll take a look at some trucks now

 

[marty]

Another enthusiastic vote for the older Toyota Tacomas. I have a 4 door model and absolutely love it! It has excellent ground clearance, room for two in the back seat and solid reliability. The newer Tacomas, which started in 2004 or 2005, are much bigger (as Kevin stated).

If I had to buy another truck, I would opt for a used 2002 or 2003 Tacoma with reasonably low mileage.

Marty

 

[giggy]

Another enthusiastic vote for the older Toyota Tacomas. I have a 4 door model and absolutely love it! It has excellent ground clearance, room for two in the back seat and solid reliability. The newer Tacomas, which started in 2004 or 2005, are much bigger (as Kevin stated).

If I had to buy another truck, I would opt for a used 2002 or 2003 Tacoma with reasonably low mileage.

Marty

Kevin/Marty - yes, I have a 2000 Tacoma that has 60K on it. Its basically my "up north" vehicle. pretty much only gets used up north. I love it much more than tnhe newer ones. AND - at the time, it was the only 4WD pick-up that was a 4 cyn engine. have had very miminal problems with this truck as well. hate to say it, but you can't go wrong with toyota's -

I don't like the newer ones either. too big.

 

[Rob S]

... hate to say it, but you can't go wrong with toyota's

It's sad, but true .... the Japanese vehicles seem to run forever. Thread drift altert - - - I've owned a Ford Mustang, Chevy Monte Carlo, GMC Jimmy, and a Ford Explorer ...... and had many minor mechanical problems with all of them. But I've also owned a Mazda B2200 pickup, Toyota Camry, Mistubishi Montero, and now a Nissan X-Terra and Subaru Forester (wife's car) and have only had to bring the vehicles in for routine maintenance.

Back to the thread - - -
Motabobo, the Nissan X-Terra is now $35k (CN)? Seems high priced. Not trying to influence your decision, but I only paid $22,300 (US) for mine, tho I did negotiate by obtaining the "real" invoice from Consumer Reports. (And you can save money by not adding on all the dealer extras, in most cases it's cheaper to add them after you buy the vehicle).

 

[chipc]

another subaru fan

We've had good success with Subaru wagons. I had a '92 Legacy (front wheel drive only) that rusted out a couple of years back at 175K. I am currently driving a '95 AWD legacy wagon that has 265 K. My wife has a 2005 Outback wagon. For us they meet most of our needs most of the time. They handle well in the ice and snow, 3 wet labs can ride in the back, get about 28-30 mpg, can hold a large roof box, and can carry 4 passengers if needed. And they have been incredibly reliable for play or work.

I wish Subaru would come out with a hybrid - I'd be at the front of the line.


Full disclosure: we also have an 2001 Explorer that is equipped with 3 dog crates. It has been quite reliable too, but because it gets only 20 mpg we use only for dog events.

 

[Jay H]

To fill in your table, 2003 Outbacks have ground clearances of 7.4" or 7.9" depending on model. A quick search shows that apparently Subaru added an inch around 2006.

The 3rd generation Outbacks have 8.5" of clearance which is pretty much comparable to a Jeep Grand Cherokee... the base Cherokee 4.0 is the much better off-roader anyway. The subaru's lack of a low range is an obvious drawback for true off-road capability.. The first 3rd generation outback is a 2005 model, not the 2006.

Jay

 

[rocket21]

In the past couple of years the Tacoma has now grown to a mid-size truck, so don't know whether it will get fat and bloated like many of the other trucks on the road. Part of it's charm is that it doesn't take up two spaces when you pull into Home Depot.

The Tacomas have certainly changed with the 2005 model year (that's what I have)...I have the Off Road Package Access Cab version, which is between the size of a Ranger and an F150. If I bought a cap and some real tires, it'd be the perfect hiking vehicle. 6 cyl, 6 spd, low 20's MPG, 4WD, rear differetial locker, bed mounted AC power outlet, towing kit, etc. Much more reasonably priced than Fords.

 

[Maddy]

Kevin/Marty - yes, I have a 2000 Tacoma that has 60K on it. Its basically my "up north" vehicle. pretty much only gets used up north. I love it much more than tnhe newer ones. AND - at the time, it was the only 4WD pick-up that was a 4 cyn engine. have had very miminal problems with this truck as well. hate to say it, but you can't go wrong with toyota's -

.

Ditto's! Have had 3 Tacoma's. Traded one in at 160K/no problems.
Next one at 170K and I still had the original rear brakes. In five years time, basic maintenance and one starter. Replaced battery "just in case" that last year. Traded in #3 at 80K for the FJ. The power steering motor went on it and Toyota paid for most of it because it was such an "unusual problem". The warranty had run out. In 12.5 years, I never once had to call a tow truck
Now my Ford (Found On the Road Dead, Fix Or Repair Daily), and Jeep Wrangler were another story. They both disintegrated at 50,001 miles. The warranty was expired, so I got to pay megabucks for all the repairs.

I knew the state police between Worcester and Ludlow by name and I just kept on repairing it thinking "nothing else could possibly happen". BIG MISTAKE!!!
Finally...off to Toyota and have never looked back.
I also had an old "Datsun B210" which served me very well, even got me through the blizzard of "78" in the the wee hours. No one could believe I drove 50 miles home from work-Boston to Marlboro. (i was on a mission...dogs home alone). I put a little more money into the Brat but it never did break down on the side of the road.
I would love to get better gas mileage but I need a rugged, dependable truck or SUV.
I don't mind supporting the American economy but I draw the line with needing to own stock in the towing companies.

 

[marchowes]

Forget all these trucks My Corolla has always got me where I needed to go, even on logging roads, all you need to do is know how to effectively drive on those roads and as long as there isn't a giant rock, or a missing bridge you'll be fine (I've driven it through some pretty mean mud that I know some people who actually drive Tacomas won't drive though (not cause of the truck, but cause they are babies )) The seats aren't bad for sleeping either and it gets 42mpg!!!!!!!!!!

 

[albee]

95% of the people on this board don't need an exceptionally rugged vehicle to get them to trailheads. Safely driving through the snow is usually the limiting factor. For those of us that live over 2 hours from our favorite trailheads, having a car that gets good MPG is essential - for the environment as well as for our wallets.

I'm thinking that the best vehicle would be something that gets over 30 MPG, has full-time AWD, won't roll over, decent ground clearance, hatch-back for gear or dogs, and won't break the bank to purchase or maintain. Preferably also painted camoflage so I never have to wash it. Does that make me a red-neck?

 

[Bobby]

I'm thinking that the best vehicle would be something that gets over 30 MPG, has full-time AWD, won't roll over, decent ground clearance, hatch-back for gear or dogs, and won't break the bank to purchase or maintain. Preferably also painted camoflage so I never have to wash it. Does that make me a red-neck?

It does.

My dream vehicle, something with less that 154,000 miles on it.