REAL Off-road built like a tank that doesn't break the bank?

[J4x4K]

K7900 said:

O.K it's a Touareg but practically identical so I'll just leave this here -

1. That is barely a little country road there. You can see how serious off roading he is doing by looking at his "tires".

2. I never said the Cayenne was not capable of any off roading. Any 4x4 out there can do some. Are you impressed just because a wheel is in the air in that picture? I'm sure the Cayenne and Touareg can do some. Although Patrol they are not. But I said it is a Chelsea Tractor and it is. Do you know the definition of a Chelsea Tractor? On top of that I don't like how it looks and it offers nothing over a Patrol as far as I can see.

3. You are exactly right. If I wanted to go that road I would just get a Touareg. Same thing but cheaper. Unless I had the need to pose as a Porsche owner.

[J4x4K]

nitrodave said:

mk2 shogun/pajero

Had one for a year and took it off roading every weekend and still used it through the week for commuting.

Never missed a bit and I rolled it on it's side, dunked it 5 feet in water regualrly and grounded it out over boulders often

This is actually a sensible suggestion. Meaning the real Pajero, the full sized one. Although the Pajero doesn't have the off roading capabilities of the Patrol, on the road it beats it hands down in ride quality, speed, performance and fuel economy. While not being bad at all on off roading and still better than 90% of what is currently out there. Probably very, very few places a Patrol would go that a Pajero wouldn't. I also like how it looks much more than any of the Toyotas. And they seem to be cheaper than the Toyotas and Patrol.

I guess I never took a serious look at it because I had a very bad experience with a Mitsubishi model years ago. Although it was back at the time of the Chrysler partnership and i think it was like half Chrysler. But it left a mark even though I know Mitsubishis are very reliable.

Maybe I should look into it before writing it totally off.

[HustleRussell]

Just buy what you want OP. You've made it quite obvious that you've made your mind up, a ladder chassis truck brought to market nearly 20 years ago is the safest vehicle on the road today. Modern vehicle design and construction, passive and active safety features and occupant protection technologies have been going in the wrong direction for decades, those silly, silly automotive engineers with their utter disregard for occupant and pedestrian safety

Edited by HustleRussell on Wednesday 3rd June 03:33

[J4x4K]

HustleRussell said:

Just buy what you want OP. You've made it quite obvious that you've made your mind up, a ladder chassis truck brought to market nearly 20 years ago is the safest vehicle on the road today. Modern vehicle design and construction, passive and active safety features and occupant protection technologies have been going in the wrong direction for decades, those silly, silly automotive engineers with their utter disregard for occupant and pedestrian safety

Edited by HustleRussell on Wednesday 3rd June 03:33

Did you read my long reply above concerning the safety thing? If you did not take the time I think you should not be replying as it's looking like you are off the loop.The reason I took the time to write that is that the safety conversation was going around and around and not going anywhere.For me, the safety conversation is done now. I never said it was the safest and I never said modern technology is unwelcome and...well, I'm not going to say everything I took the time to write above again. If you don't want to read it then don't bother replying. No point really.

Edit: Matter of fact I had to check you because I was sure you drove a Chelsea Tractor. Your no sense reply looking like you didn't read could maybe be that you were just offended that I put down the Chelsea Tractors. But I went and looked at your garage link and you don't even own a 4x4 off road? Why are you replying? Unless your Evoque is not listed in your garage?

Edited by J4x4K on Wednesday 3rd June 08:38

[HustleRussell]

I did read it, twice in fact. I’ve just read it a third time to check if I missed anything- I didn’t.

Out of curiosity, who is your ‘expert’?

Not only is it full of inaccuracies it also describes a series of circumstances which you have expressly said aren’t relevant to your brief- crashes of your vehicle into other objects.

You told us that you wanted to be protected from injuries such as those unfortunately sustained by your relative in a rear end impact? Perhaps for the sake of confirmation you’d like to tell us what the nature of those injuries were and why they were sustained?

You’ve derided plastic bumpers and low profile road biased tyres but guess what? They both contribute to safety.

You’ve dismissed anything with a monocoque chassis but guess what?

It sounds to me that you’re confusing the picture, if you want your car to be as safe as possible, buy the safest possible car. If you want a car to do heavy duty off-roading, do so- but accept you are doing so to the detriment of safety.

You’re correct, I don’t own a 4x4 or crossover of any kind.

[SHutchinson]

Was it a month ago I predicted you'd buy a Citroen Xsara Picasso? Have you started looking at them yet or are you still just fantasising about driving around the Australian Outback in a 20 year old Nissan?

[HustleRussell]

The latter, I'd say...

J4x4K said:

If you research online you will find several reports of Y60 and Y61 hitting all sorts of things like cars, cows, kangaroos and smaller trees at speeds like 100 and coming off unharmed and being able to drive home because their car didn't crumble to the ground.

[J4x4K]

HustleRussell said:

I did read it, twice in fact. I’ve just read it a third time to check if I missed anything- I didn’t.

It looks like you did. You brought up points that were already addressed.

HustleRussell said:

Out of curiosity, who is your ‘expert’?

If you want a name I will obviously not disclose it. He works with insurance companies and is also involved with safety and crash tests/studies.

Not only is it full of inaccuracies it also describes a series of circumstances which you have expressly said aren’t relevant to your brief- crashes of your vehicle into other objects.

I never said that. Just because I described the accident with the family member doesn't mean I want to be protected just in that one situation, if this is what you are implying.

HustleRussell said:

You told us that you wanted to be protected from injuries such as those unfortunately sustained by your relative in a rear end impact? Perhaps for the sake of confirmation you’d like to tell us what the nature of those injuries were and why they were sustained?

Like I said, it was a rear ending. They were stopped at a red light and some drunk hit them on the rear. But it wasn't like a 60 or even 40 hit. It was quite light and all the other occupants came out just fine. But this one person had a neck injure and is now in a forced coma. It was 2012 Audi they were in. If it was a heavier car the impact would most likely not be enough to move the car as much as it did with the small Audi. Also if it was a higher Patrol, specially that whatever I get I will lift it above stock form and put bigger tires, it would have been even better. I got this confirmed by the person I spoke to as well. Now if it was a high speed crash on the rear it would make no difference and crumble zones or not chances are all occupants would have had neck injures.

HustleRussell said:

You’ve derided plastic bumpers and low profile road biased tyres but guess what? They both contribute to safety.

No! Absolutely no! This is what makes me think people are not reading. I did mention steel bumpers yes. But have you noticed that I settled on a Y61 Patrol and they have plastic bumper covers? My grip is with useless plastic stuff just to look cool and slick.

Low profile tires do not help in crashes. I actually rather be in a truck with fat tires in that case and also lifted. It does help in handling obviously. But if you notice, my safety concerns regard mainly other people driving hitting me rather than me hitting other things or being unable to handle my vehicle. I have never had a crash because of that, I do not drink at all, no alcohol and I have a very clean driving record. It's the idiots driving 60 in a parking lot who I'm worried about. Those idiots who think they own the roads. Every time I see those idiots I wish I had a monster truck to just drive over the suckers. Why can't they just drive like people?

HustleRussell said:

You’ve dismissed anything with a monocoque chassis but guess what?

Really? Did I? Did you not read my reply to nitrodave who suggested the Pajero, where I said I will look into it? Last time I checked the Pajero was not frame on chassis. See why I'm saying you are not reading? Or English is not your first language?

HustleRussell said:

It sounds to me that you’re confusing the picture, if you want your car to be as safe as possible, buy the safest possible car. If you want a car to do heavy duty off-roading, do so- but accept you are doing so to the detriment of safety.

I'm not and I thought I had painted the picture pretty clear. But maybe not. In that case here it is again. What I want is a car which would be safer than what I have now, but also larger, tougher, 4x4, and a real off roader. ALL of the above. ALL OF THE ABOVE. Can I emphasize it more?

The other thing is it has to fit the budget I gave. This leaves a few options out.

Then I must like how it looks like. In that other, pre-requisites, fit budget, like how it looks like.

And please. I have made up my mind about the safety issue. I have spoken with an expert and I have made my decision of what type of vehicle I want to pay my money for. Let's close this line of discussion and focus on suggestions of models that could fit the bill, as apparently by nitro's suggestion, there are still some I have not considered or thought of. But it would be great to have suggestions from people who actually own an off road or at least off roads.

Also, sometimes I have the impression that in these threads people always just suggest what they currently own regardless of if it fits what the OP is asking. Then they get offended when their suggestion gets dismissed.

[J4x4K]

SHutchinson said:

Was it a month ago I predicted you'd buy a Citroen Xsara Picasso? Have you started looking at them yet or are you still just fantasising about driving around the Australian Outback in a 20 year old Nissan?

You are trying to be funny but you are really not. Don't quit your day job for stand up comedy.

I also told you a month ago that I absolutely hate minivans. Never gonna happen! Did you not read that reply? How can I not think people are just not reading?

And the Y61 is not 20 years old. I gather that you are exaggerating for the sake of desperately trying to be funnier but comedy is an art and you don't have it.

Keep your off topic unfunny jokes to yourself.

[S10GTA]

In the nicest way possible, I couldn't car less which car you buy but earlier you dismissed the XC90 as a posers car.

I've just spent 10 seconds on google researching crash test ratings. I know Volvos are safe, which is one of the reasons I own one.

The Volvo XC90 gets 5*

http://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/volvo/xc90/...

The Patrol gets 3*

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/nissan/pat...

[J4x4K]

S10GTA said:

In the nicest way possible, I couldn't car less which car you buy but earlier you dismissed the XC90 as a posers car.

I've just spent 10 seconds on google researching crash test ratings. I know Volvos are safe, which is one of the reasons I own one.

The Volvo XC90 gets 5*

http://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/volvo/xc90/...

The Patrol gets 3*

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/nissan/pat...

I said it is a poser off roader and it is. It's a luxury car. 4x4 does not a real off roader make.

For test scores read my long reply about safety to see how they work. The Patrol will also lose points because it will cause more damage to the other vehicle, even if the Patrol occupants are safer in the type of crash. They also basically test only for stationary crashes, not vehicle vs vehicle. In this case the volvo will of course be safer. But this is not the whole picture.

But believe me, that volvo is a poser. It will get stuck the first serious mud it encounters.

[skyrover]

this is true...

When the IIHS introduced the small overlap crash test not long ago, the xc90 was one of the few vehicles at the time which passed with flying colours.

Nearly every other vehicle failed spectacularly.

XC90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPL0Vi_8fiI

Prius

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoN8bSKMHog

[hman]

argumentative isnt he.

[S10GTA]

J4x4K said:

S10GTA said:

In the nicest way possible, I couldn't car less which car you buy but earlier you dismissed the XC90 as a posers car.

I've just spent 10 seconds on google researching crash test ratings. I know Volvos are safe, which is one of the reasons I own one.

The Volvo XC90 gets 5*

http://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/volvo/xc90/...

The Patrol gets 3*

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/nissan/pat...

I said it is a poser off roader and it is. It's a luxury car. 4x4 does not a real off roader make.

For test scores read my long reply about safety to see how they work. The Patrol will also lose points because it will cause more damage to the other vehicle, even if the Patrol occupants are safer in the type of crash. They also basically test only for stationary crashes, not vehicle vs vehicle. In this case the volvo will of course be safer. But this is not the whole picture.

But believe me, that volvo is a poser. It will get stuck the first serious mud it encounters.

You've made up your mind already, but its not getting stuck here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK5roZBqRec

How off road are you really going to go?

Personally I'd make a compromise and get the safest car I could and forgo the real extreme off road that you seem to need.

Edited by S10GTA on Wednesday 3rd June 12:17

[TurboHatchback]

If you want to buy a Patrol (which you clearly do) then buy a Patrol. You're not going to convince the internet that a lifted Patrol on off-road tyres is the safest vehicle on the road as all the scientific, statistical and anecdotal evidence suggests it is not so I wouldn't waste your time trying. It's a bit pointless coming on the internet to ask advice and then ignoring it and trying to convince said advisors that they are wrong. If you're trying to win the argument so you can convince your wife that a gigantic off-roader is the safest choice (because you want one) then man up and just buy one anyway.

The best course of action at the end of the day to improve your safety is to improve your defensive driving skills and avoid accidents altogether.

[Impasse]

It's like trying to explain to your Nan why her old black and white telly no longer works.

[IroningMan]

I'm guessing that the OP has bought the 'One Life' stickers, hi-viz trousers and DPM jacket first, and is now looking for the vehicle to go with them.

Either that or I missed the bit where he said he lives in a part of the world where they still consider wriggly tin to be a sensible building material.

Where's that Espace IV vs Discovery 2 video when you need it?

[J4x4K]

IroningMan said:

I'm guessing that the OP has bought the 'One Life' stickers, hi-viz trousers and DPM jacket first, and is now looking for the vehicle to go with them.

No idea what you are talking about. Must be a UK only thing.

IroningMan said:

Either that or I missed the bit where he said he lives in a part of the world where they still consider wriggly tin to be a sensible building material.

Where's that Espace IV vs Discovery 2 video when you need it?

Don't bother, I've seen it like a month ago.

[J4x4K]

S10GTA said:

J4x4K said:

S10GTA said:

In the nicest way possible, I couldn't car less which car you buy but earlier you dismissed the XC90 as a posers car.

I've just spent 10 seconds on google researching crash test ratings. I know Volvos are safe, which is one of the reasons I own one.

The Volvo XC90 gets 5*

http://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/volvo/xc90/...

The Patrol gets 3*

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/nissan/pat...

I said it is a poser off roader and it is. It's a luxury car. 4x4 does not a real off roader make.

For test scores read my long reply about safety to see how they work. The Patrol will also lose points because it will cause more damage to the other vehicle, even if the Patrol occupants are safer in the type of crash. They also basically test only for stationary crashes, not vehicle vs vehicle. In this case the volvo will of course be safer. But this is not the whole picture.

But believe me, that volvo is a poser. It will get stuck the first serious mud it encounters.

You've made up your mind already, but its not getting stuck here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK5roZBqRec

Honestly, that is merely a little country road with a few puddles. There were only like a couple which looked any deep but he dodged them and went around. Probably because he knows better.

On a different note, doesn't that Volvo look out of place in that scenario? I think the only thing that would look more out of place would be a Bentley. This is not a dig, I really mean it, regardless of our other argument. I guess it's because it kind of looks like a station wagon.

S10GTA said:

How off road are you really going to go?

More like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7ZJ_1R0Glc

S10GTA said:

Personally I'd make a compromise and get the safest car I could and forgo the real extreme off road that you seem to need.

Look, I really appreciate your concern. But the Volvo is really not for me for the same reason I wouldn't get an Audi Q, BMW X or Mercedes M. But thanks for your suggestion just the same.

[J4x4K]

TurboHatchback said:

If you want to buy a Patrol (which you clearly do) then buy a Patrol.

Like I said a few pages back, I'm actively looking for one. But they seem to be a rare animal around here. Since I started paying attention I have not seen a single Y61 driving out on the streets. I saw a beat up 2-doors Y60. That's it. That is since I started this thread. I have been able to test drive only one Patrol, which was too rusty and too high mileage. Couldn't find anything within less than a hour or so drive and I'm just in the middle of re-modeling so travelling to look at cars will have to wait a bit. On the other hand, after the Pajero suggestion I already saw two on the road today. They seem to be way more readily available around here and seem to go for cheaper than Patrols. Maybe because they are less rare.

TurboHatchback said:

You're not going to convince the internet that a lifted Patrol on off-road tyres is the safest vehicle on the road as all the scientific, statistical and anecdotal evidence suggests it is not so I wouldn't waste your time trying.

This is funny to read. I'm not saying it's the safest and I'm not trying to convince anybody. I already pointed out the situations where it would be the least safe for example. So I don't know what you are on about. I'm merely replying to people going over and over about it. I had actually not replied to the thread in a while but people kept bringing the safety topic up. Like I said it's funny that you say that I'm trying to convince people because to me it looks like the other way around. I already said the Patrol is safe enough FOR ME but people are still trying to convince me I'm wrong.

TurboHatchback said:

It's a bit pointless coming on the internet to ask advice and then ignoring it and trying to convince said advisors that they are wrong.

It's not pointless. An opinion is just that. It's not a sacred law that must be obeyed at all costs whether you agree or not. And I did listen to people here. If you remember I came here thinking of a Cherokee or Defender. The Patrol was not even in my radar. I changed to the Patrol after some here convinced me it was a better buy and after some research. So if I listened to suggestions and changed my opinion, how am I not taking the advice into consideration? Thinking of it, weren't you one of the people who suggested the Patrol and changed my mind about it?

But it's silly to think one has to blindly accept any opinion he is given.

TurboHatchback said:

If you're trying to win the argument so you can convince your wife that a gigantic off-roader is the safest choice (because you want one) then man up and just buy one anyway.

The funny part about that is that she agreed the moment I told here I wanted to get a SUV. She always liked big cars. Not a problem there for me. But nice try in ridiculing somebody who you don't even know for the sake of winning an argument. But fail.

TurboHatchback said:

The best course of action at the end of the day to improve your safety is to improve your defensive driving skills and avoid accidents altogether.

This is what I've been saying from the beginning. I have a clean driving record. I have never had an accident. I actually did a 4 days defensive driving course years ago. I'm not worried about my skills. Again, I'm worried about the idiots who drive 60K/H on a parking lot. I'm starting to sound like a broken record, because it looks like people are just not reading.