4x4 + decent MPG does it exist

[JakesterUK]

My wife is a district nurse and as we live in a semi-rural area often has to go to houses via farm tracks.

As such she could really do with a 4x4 as her current car (52 plate mondeo) isn't really up to the job.

We've owned various 4x4's over the years (mainly 4.0L Jeeps) but with fuel costs these aren't an option.

I have a purchase budget of 2k max, it needs to be able to return 30's+ MPG and have 4 seats.

I was looking at diesel mid '90's Cherokees but everyone is advising to avoid, so my current thoughts are:

Suzuki Jimny (might be a bit small)
Discovery 300 (not sure that MPG is achievable)
Cherokee diesel (people say avoid)

Any other suggestions or advice re the 3 possible options?

Thanks

[roachcoach]

Our rav4 is pretty excellent. Maybe not heavy duty enough for you, but on a good motorway run its in the 50's and heavy urban use sees just under 40 (i.e. 39.x) .

Edit: Just noticed budget so will add ours is an 07, so I can't comment on older ones for the budget quoted.

[George H]

Fiat Panda 4x4?

[jbi]

200 or 300tdi disco will achieve good economy (better than the newer models) but watch for rust

Will get about 32mpg on a run and 25mpg mixed

[jbi]

George H said:

Fiat Panda 4x4?

will fall apart on rough farm tracks

[HellDiver]

Freelander 2. They're good for the high 30s mpg.

[V88Dicky]

One of these. A proper, ladder-chassis 4x4 with a low ratio box and everything


http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

Fuel consumption (urban) 28.2 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 41.5 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 35.3 mpg



Either that, or a Terios, or possibly a RAV4.

[jbi]

The Crack Fox said:

HellDiver said:

Freelander 2. They're good for the high 30s mpg.

Reliability ?

they get good economy because they have no heavy frame and are not really a work horse

And of course you have the legendary land rover reliability.

At least with the older discos you can bolt them back together yourself when they fall to bits.

[HellDiver]

The Crack Fox said:

Reliability ?

Infinitely better than the Disco you suggested.

[jbi]

HellDiver said:

The Crack Fox said:

Reliability ?

Infinitely better than the Disco you suggested.

... wrong

[Mark Benson]

Nissan Terrano would be a good, reliable buy for that money if you can get over the hideousness of it.

[Tyson1980]

maybe Rav4??

[richardxjr]

Our 2000 CR-V is hugely capable on the std Bridgestone Dueler AT tyres (I've had 2 Rangies before to compare with), utterly reliable, and being a 2.0 petrol and on demand 4wd is pretty economical as it's fwd most of the time.

Certainly over 30mpg out of town.

Bigger inside than a 4.0 Cherokee too. ES comes with leather & aircon std. We chose one over a Freelander because of the reliability.

[300bhp/ton]

JakesterUK said:

My wife is a district nurse and as we live in a semi-rural area often has to go to houses via farm tracks.

As such she could really do with a 4x4 as her current car (52 plate mondeo) isn't really up to the job.

We've owned various 4x4's over the years (mainly 4.0L Jeeps) but with fuel costs these aren't an option.

I have a purchase budget of 2k max, it needs to be able to return 30's+ MPG and have 4 seats.

I was looking at diesel mid '90's Cherokees but everyone is advising to avoid, so my current thoughts are:

Suzuki Jimny (might be a bit small)
Discovery 300 (not sure that MPG is achievable)
Cherokee diesel (people say avoid)

Any other suggestions or advice re the 3 possible options?

Thanks

The Jeep TD is ok, but is known for HG issues. When running however they are as good as anything else.

One thing though, the 2.5TD Cherokee, doesn't use the same transfer box as the 4.0, think it's called Selecttrac rather than Commandtrac. The main difference is it doesn't have a centre diff, so it's either 2wd, or proper 4wd. This means you can't run about on the road in AWD mode and it'll be down to the driver to know when and how to use the 4wd option.

This is also true of the Jimny and most other Jap 4x4's.

Jimny's are pretty funky and can be cheap on tax. The little 1.3 works quite well in them. But mpg isn't their strongest suit. Although it's motorway work they really suck at due to low gearing and poor aero. That said Parkers rate them at 36mpg, so I'd have thought 28-32mpg average should be pretty easy to attain, and maybe even as much as the claimed figures.

The Jimny does only have a tiny boot though and rear seats aren't big and not all that great access to them either.


I'd also be tempted to look at Freelanders. These are full time AWD vehicles, so will require the driver to do nothing to configure the vehicle for the conditions. The 2.0d L Series is a stout motor and rated at 38mpg while the latter BMW sourced TD4 is rated at just over 36mpg but with better performance. Make sure you get one with TCS though, as it transforms the vehicles abilities.


Tdi Disco is again full time AWD, although in slippery conditions you'll want to use diff lock. I think 25-28mpg is far more realistic though from them. Although they will run on Veg oil fine.

[Chrisw666]

jbi said:

George H said:

Fiat Panda 4x4?

will fall apart on rough farm tracks

You've never been to Italy have you?

OP does she need ground clearance?

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2010...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

or these might give a little more than a car while not being a full on 4x4

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

[SB10]

richardxjr said:

Our 2000 CR-V is hugely capable on the std Bridgestone Dueler AT tyres (I've had 2 Rangies before to compare with), utterly reliable, and being a 2.0 petrol and on demand 4wd is pretty economical as it's fwd most of the time.

Certainly over 30mpg out of town.

Bigger inside than a 4.0 Cherokee too. ES comes with leather & aircon std. We chose one over a Freelander because of the reliability.

Another +1 for Honda CRV on the bridgestones... Our one is a 2000 W plate MK1. Just hit 99k and had not one reliabilty issue with it appart from the usual wear and tear items.

[sawman]

I ran a petrol rav4 for 5 years, it did about 30mpg average over that time. permanent awd but no low ratio option. so pretty useful in all but the worst conditions. not sure how much of a rav you would get for 2 k though they seem to hold value well.

Currently have a 2003 forester 2.0 petrol (non turbo) it seems to hover around the 30 mpg mark if driven sedately (the best ive had being 34mpg). its permanent AWD with a low ratio option so would probably do what your wife needs and also be tidy on tarmac too

We also have a 3.7l cherokee, i woulnt recommend it if fuel use is an issue. These days it mostly pootles about town and averages less than 20mpg but you can pick them up fairly cheaply, whether you can get one for 2k is another matter. you could probably get an XJ cherokee with lpg though

Edited by sawman on Thursday 1st September 10:29

[V88Dicky]

Leftfield option?




http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...

Fuel consumption (urban) 20.7 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 39 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 29.5 mpg
0 - 62 mph 7.9 seconds
Top speed 140 mph
Cylinders 6
Valves 24 v
Engine power 194 bhp
Engine torque 180 lbs/ft

[jbi]

put some 30" mud tyres on it and your all set

[Jefftav]

Another vote for the Subaru Forester.