From the April 1996 issue of Car and Driver.Mobility. That’s the promise of cars. Go anywhere, anytime. And the most mobile of the cars are, uh, trucks. Well, technically speaking, these sport-utility vehicles are categorized as trucks for emissions, safety, and CAFE regulations, and for the auto luxury tax (trucks with a gross vehicle weight over 6000 pounds are tax-exempt). They certainly have trucky parts under the skin, too. But you be the judge. Six of the seven sport-utes collected here have dual airbags, leather seats, and adjustable lumbar supports for the driver; five have CD players; four have sunroofs; three have electric seat heaters. Does that sound like a trucky bunch to you? Not to us either. In fact, Americans are buying SUVs instead of sedans and wagons these days, as substitutes for luxury cars. They like the Marlboro Man look of ruggedness. They like stepping off the price-equals-prestige escalator (“Yeah, I coulda bought a Mercedes, but that fancy-label stuff isn’t me”). They like four-wheel drive’s promise of go-anywhere traction, although many settle for a two-wheel-drive version to lower the price. They like the see-over-traffic view that comes with a tall vehicle. And they like the feeling of safety that comes from a brawny, high-riding truck. What could be more luxurious than a safe, roomy, go-anywhere machine, that others see as high-fashion? No wonder Ford’s Explorer outsold every “car” in the country last year (395,227 Explorers compared with 366,266 Tauruses, the top-selling sedan). The marketplace’s overwhelming approval of the Explorer makes it a sport-ute benchmark. The Jeep Grand Cherokee has earned benchmark status too, by being voted the top choice in our last two comparison tests. Against these two stalwarts, we’ve matched the market’s four newest vehicles—the Acura SLX, the Nissan Pathfinder, the Oldsmobile Bravada, and the Toyota 4Runner plus the Land Rover Discovery, which had yet to appear in a C/D comparison.To keep prices below the lottery-winner-only category, we’ve deliberately ruled out the precious Range Rover, the Lexus LX450, and the Toyota Land Cruiser. Still, these vehicles are an expensive bunch, and the option loads on a few members of our group have pushed their as-tested price into the stratosphere over $35,000. More Off-Road SUV Comparos From the ArchiveWhat should you expect for such a princely sum? A lot, we think. Sport-utes promise no-excuses capability—go anywhere, haul anything, and be comfortable, too. So they get our toughest battery of tests—all of our normal track evaluations, extensive measurements of cargo capacity, hundreds of miles on both Interstate and secondary roads, and some serious bushwacking in terrain that would kill a car. We convoyed up past 7000 feet on several trails left by gold miners in California’s Panamint Mountains, not far from Charles Manson’s hangout. The Panamint Range forms the west side of Death Valley. Off-roaders designate these particular routes as More Difficult, an intermediate category, definitely not for cars. Apart from three flat tires, all seven of our test subjects survived unmarked. They definitely live up to the promise of sport-utility vehicles. But that’s only part of the story. Which ones glide over the rocks? Which are comfi-cruisers on the interstates? Which are best for Home Depot hauling? Let us explain.7th Place: Oldsmobile Bravada Although the Bravada is reasonably capable off-road, its fine-lug tires and lack of a high-low transfer case suggest an on-road emphasis, where its full-time four-wheel drive, with a viscous coupling to apportion torque between the front and rear wheels, is state of the art. The general impression is old-style Detroiter: The body is flexy, and the doors move in their openings. The interior trim is tentatively attached. And the controls, particularly the steering, feel remote from the job. If you can separate the clattery interior sound and feel from the actual motions of the car, the ride is quite good, both on-road and off. HIGHS: Merciful price, good space-to-bulk ratio, easy rider in the boonies. LOWS: Bucket-of-pudding seats, poorly attached interior panels, flexy structure gives low-quality feel. VERDICT: More capable than endearing.Also like old-style Detroiters, the front buckets try for a plush feel rather than all-day supportiveness. Our staffer with the chronic slipped disc reviewed them harshly.Bravada Compared!In length, the 180.9-inch Bravada ranks as an intermediate in this group; in width, it ties with the 4Runner as narrowest. Space inside for long cargo is exceptionally good considering the moderate length. It will also carry the ever-important four-by-eight sheet of plywood, riding atop the wheelhouses and hanging out the tailgate.This is the only one of the group to have a fold-down tailgate—take note, ball-game party types. The rear seats completely fold out of cargo’s way in a single motion, a brilliant arrangement. Also interesting is the shade to hide cargo—it extends across the space from a retractor in the side panel. Advantage: No need to dismount the retractor when hauling long objects. Disadvantage: The permanently installed retractor intrudes somewhat into the cargo space.We think everyone already knows this Oldsmobile is a Chevrolet Blazer gussied up with gold-tone logos on the tailgate and a garish red “SmartTrak” on the dash. If they don’t, one glance at the coarse-grained plastic dash will remind them. At $30,329, the window sticker’s bottom line is the second-smallest of this group, $769 above the Explorer. It’s a tough spot. 1996 Oldsmobile Bravada190-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 4280 lbBase/as-tested price: $29,995/$30,329DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 107.0 inLength/Width/Height: 180.9/66.5/63.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/45 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 74/37 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 10.3 sec1/4 mile: 17.8 sec @ 76 mph100 mph: n/a secBraking, 70-0 mph: 222 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.74 g C/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 15 mpg6th Place: Land Rover Discovery SDLand Rover North America plans to “boost business by promoting the off-road lifestyle.” Expect success. Some folks, even a few staffers of this magazine, behold the safari swagger of this Discovery and go all weak in the knees. HIGHS: High-fashion jerrycan styling (according to some); great view out; seats for seven, willing or not.LOWS: Crude jerrycan styling (according to some), gear noise, tire noise, wind noise, rude interior fitments.VERDICT: Army surplus style with a designer label.What you see is what you get. From its quirky steering response to the rudimentary seals around the doors to the wide gaps around its exterior panels, the Discovery is as unpretentious as a folding shovel. Its proportions are peculiar. The roof is higher than the Grand Cherokee’s by a foot; the wheelbase is shorter than the others by at least five inches (which aids both maneuverability and clearance off-road). Full-time four-wheel drive, high-low range with manual center differential locking, and a live front axle complete the list of go-anywhere equipment. Demonstrations by Land Rover personnel have convinced us of the Discovery’s exceptional capability in the boondocks. Nonetheless, on our Death Valley trails, we found no advantages over the leaders in this group. For more normal usage, apart from providing the loftiest viewpoint, the Discovery falls behind the others. It has the weakest acceleration and ties with the Acura and the Ford for poorest gas mileage on our trip. Inside, you hear a symphony of tire and gear and wind noises. Cargo space is smallest by a substantial margin, both for beer boxes and for plywood sheets. After unloading, making the rear seat passenger-ready again requires a contortionist’s reach to bring the seatbelts back into place. Back-seat passengers have more than headroom—they have antler room—but shin clearance against the front seatback is marginal. Jump seats, one on each side, fold down out of the wall just forward of the tailgate; headroom there is inadequate for adults. Moreover, passengers bouncing around back there are dangerously close to the upturned steel hooks provided to catch the cargoconcealing shade. The one-piece, side-hinged rear door consumes a lot of real estate as it swings open, too.But this is about “the off-road lifestyle,” and lifestylers searching for a costume of intermediate price—say, halfway between an AM General Hummer and a new pair of Timberlands—will find authentic details galore in this Discovery. 1996 Land Rover Discover SD182-hp V-8, 4-speed automatic, 4500 lbBase/as-tested price: $30,575/$35,353DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 100.0 inLength/Width/Height: 178.7/70.6/77.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 49/49 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 70/46 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 11.1 sec1/4 mile: 18.3 sec @ 76 mph100 mph: 42.3 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 216 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.69 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 13 mpg5th Place: Acura SLX This Acura-badged version of the Isuzu Trooper promises a distinct driving experience as you climb into its highchair seat. And it delivers. You sit way up there, in the dining-table position, with your lower legs extending nearly straight down to work the pedals. The tilt column will give you as much Greyhound angle on the wheel as you want. The windshield is huge, offering a commanding view of the road. Completely un-carlike, this cockpit—and all of us found it to be fun. From the thunk of its closing doors to the click of its switches to its expensive-feeling upholstery, this sport-ute encapsulates you in a quality mood. Outside, the Acura has the narrowest panel gaps around the hood and doors of this group. Yes, the $38,862 sticker is highest of this fleet, but the SLX feels worth the dough. HIGHS: Cleanly chiseled shape, rich interior detail, big view ahead, big opening in back for cargo loading. LOWS: Part-time four-wheel drive, kazoo sound from A-pillars at high speed, suspension bottoms too easily off-road. VERDICT: More fashion-ute than sport-ute.It feels big, too. And it is, punching a serious hole in the air—1.5 inches wider and 3.5 inches taller than any other (save the towering Land Rover). Overall length is second only to the Explorer’s (which is five inches longer). At 4460 pounds, it weighs 40 pounds less than the Explorer and the Land Rover. In hauling capacity, the SLX specializes in wide loads. Its rear opening is the largest of the bunch, and the cargo space is two inches wider than that of the next-widest Land Rover and Toyota (tie). The rear opening has two doors—two-thirds on the left, one-third on the right—that swing open to the sides. Most loading will be done through just the left door, which opens first. If you’re planning to tow a trailer, you should pay extra attention to SUV rear doors, because some styles may not clear the tongue-jack mechanism of your trailer; four of the seven here have top-hinged doors that swing up minivan style, but there’s no guarantee they will clear the idiosyncrasies of your particular hitch, either. This Acura’s suspension tuning has obviously been biased toward cushy cruising and away from the taut control so helpful in evasive maneuvering. It has the low-frequency ride motions that come from soft springs; it rides well off-road, too, until you hit something big enough to bottom the suspension, which happened too often in our drive. For those who stay on pavement, especially at metro speeds, the Acura feel is unmistakably luxurious. 1996 Acura SLX190-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 4460 lbBase/as-tested price: $34,352/$38,862DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 108.7 inLength/Width/Height: 183.5/72.4/72.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/49 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 85/44 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 10.7 sec1/4 mile: 18.2 sec @ 75 mph100 mph: 46.9 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 203 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.69 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 13 mpg4th Place: Ford Explorer XLT At last, a V-8. That’s the big news from the Explorer this year. At 9.5 seconds zero-to-60, the 4.9-liter can’t quite keep up with the Jeep’s 5.2, and it can’t get away from the 3.4-liter V-6 Toyota, but it’s a big improvement—1.2 seconds quicker to 60—over last year’s 4.0 V-6. Naturally, such rushing about is accompanied by the muted rumble of the traditional American V-8.The 4500-pound Explorer ties with the Land Rover as heaviest of the group. This is a big guy on a long wheelbase—at 111.5 inches, it’s about five inches longer than the test average. The suspension is well damped. On the highway, you get the feeling of comfort and stability—it knows how to go straight down the road. Yet the steering is quite responsive. Wind noise is higher than it should be, and the body has more quivers and shakes than a contemporary passenger car. HIGHS: Low, low pricing; stable cruiser on the interstate; capacious cargo hold. LOWS: Wind noises louder than the philharmonic, bulky exterior, plodding moves off-road.VERDICT: A suburban shuttle dressed up like the Marlboro Man.More Explorer Content From the ArchiveOff-road, the extra length compromises agility. On tight switchbacks, we often had to make three-point turns in the Explorer where in the others we could simply crank the wheel and drive around. The lack of a high-low transfer case tells us that Ford is not serious about off-roading. On-road, though, the full-time four-wheel drive with a viscous coupling is top-level equipment. Inside, this is the only one of the group without leather, which explains in part its lower price (a fully loaded Explorer Limited tops $37,000). The interior trim is nicely styled, and you see a lot of it. The Explorer’s relatively small glass area trades the scenic view that’s so enjoyable in some of the others—particularly the Land Rover, the Acura, and the Jeep—for what one tester described as a “sitting in the bathtub” feel. It’s a big bathtub, though, as you discover when it’s time to load up. The Explorer topped the ranking for beer-case room and tied with the Acura for hauling the longest piece of pipe (130 inches, when placed diagonally). Rear passengers will find they sit high on the cushion, unlike the bathtub feel of the front. The rear seat also folds easily into a flat load floor. To those with lingering questions about the Explorer’s intended purpose, please note the tissue dispenser designed into the front side of the center console. This sport-ute is not about roughing it. 1996 Ford Explorer XLT210-hp V-8, 4-speed automatic, 4500 lbBase/as-tested price: $26,210/$29,560DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 111.5 inLength/Width/Height: 188.5/70.2/66.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 56/48 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 82/43 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.5 sec1/4 mile: 17.3 sec @ 79 mph100 mph: 40.0 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 214 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.67 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 13 mpg3rd Place: Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited This Jeep makes great numbers in the hands of testers: best acceleration (9.1 seconds to 60 mph), best skidpad grip (0.77 g), best speed through the emergency lane change (at 64.2 mph, almost 2 mph quicker than the next-best Toyota), and a 112-mph top end (governed), just 1 mph shy of the Explorer. Moreover, the Grand Cherokee is nimble off-road: the suspension allows long wheel excursions, the steering is quick, and the machine turns tightly in the switchbacks. All of these virtues are accompanied by quick-acting, light-to-the-touch controls that give a great feeling of willingness. HIGHS: Quick, capable, and painless on all surfaces; spare external dimensions enhance agility. LOWS: Foamy support of the seats, plasti-wood interior trim, inside spare eats too much cargo room. VERDICT: Born to run, and leave the cargo hauling to UPS.The pleasures, however, dim somewhat in routine driving. The steering response is nebulous; the body (a unit body) flexes and quivers; the front buckets provide Reddiwip support; and some interior details seem in questionable taste (okay, we know that Detroit dash wood is usually plastic, but molding it with raised letters is too in-your-face cynical for the over-$30,000 class). Still, the ride quality is agreeable, both on-road and off. And there’s always that endearing willingness. Despite our complaints, we place the Jeep (along with the Nissan and the Toyota) at the top of our fun-to-drive ranking. In roominess, though, the compact Jeep falls behind all but the Land Rover. The spare tire, stowed upright along the left side behind the rear seat, both blocks tailgate access and eats cargo space. Although the back seat has sufficient room for two or three adults, it has the least kneeroom, and passengers’ toes must battle with the seat track for space under the front seat.More Grand Cherokee From the ArchiveThe Jeep has arguably the best drivetrain of the bunch, certainly closest to the sport-utility ideal. The V-8 gives the quickest acceleration to 60 mph, yet fuel economy during our test trip was not the worst: 14 mpg for the Jeep compared to 13 mpg for the Ford, the Acura, and the Land Rover (mileage is the dirty little secret of SUVs; compared to sedans of equal roominess, they’re guzzlers). Moreover, the Jeep has both full-time four-wheel drive and high-low capability with a lockable center differential. We’re not too enthusiastic about the live front axle and its contribution to the numb steering, but it does bring ground-clearance benefits in certain circumstances. For the first time since its intro, the Grand Cherokee didn’t top our comparison, but it remains Detroit’s best SUV shot. 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited220-hp V-8, 4-speed automatic, 4140 lbBase/as-tested price: $33,406/$36,435DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 105.9 inLength/Width/Height: 177.1/70.9/64.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/45 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 79/41 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.1 sec1/4 mile: 16.9 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 36.3 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 193 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.77 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 14 mpg2nd Place: Nissan Pathfinder LE The combination of solid structure (it’s a unit body) and supple suspension gives the Pathfinder a creamy-smooth off-road ride. It’s amazing. It’s fantastic. No other sport-ute in the group comes close. There’s a balance of virtue here that’s both surprising and wonderful. This is an LE, the luxury version, which suggests it has less off-road capability than the sporting SE. That notion is reinforced by the relatively small, 235/70SR-15 tires with fine-lug tread. Moreover, this is by far the ground hugger of the SUVs, with a step-in height about two inches lower than the average of this group and a full five inches under the Toyota’s. Yet the Pathfinder strides over the rough stuff with unmatched aplomb and seems to have plenty of dynamic rock clearance. How is this possible? We think a shrewdly designed unit body has a lot to do with it. And as a bonus, the Pathfinder has fewer quivers and rattles than any of the others, with the possible exception of the Toyota. HIGHS: Creamy off-road ride, easy step-up to enter, quiet interior, high-quality feel. LOWS: Part-time four-wheel drive, decorated rather than styled on the outside, weak power.VERDICT: Most carlike of the sport-utes.More Pathfinder Reviews From the ArchiveLike the other Japanese brands here, the Pathfinder has a high-low transfer case but lacks full-time four-wheel drive. As a substitute, you can manually shift from two-wheel-drive high to four-wheel drive on the move. The 3.3 V-6 is tuned more for torque than power, which reduces performance on-road (its 0 to 60 ranked sixth out of seven, at 11.0 seconds) but adds great flexibility when maneuvering off-road. At all times the Pathfinder’s drivetrain was exceptionally quiet and smooth.Dimensionally, the Pathfinder is similar to the Grand Cherokee and the 4Runner, the compacts of this group. Yet the Pathfinder outscores the Jeep in every test of capacity, both for passengers and for cargo. Extra comfort and headroom are offered to rear passengers by the adjustable-angle backrests (Acura has them, too). However, folding the rear seat flat, and readying it again for passengers, is not quite as handy as in the Detroiters. The Pathfinder is the happy surprise of the bunch—a calm, relatively refined, low-slung station wagon that takes its pleasure among the rocks and rills. 1996 Nissan Pathfinder LE168-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 4180 lbBase/as-tested price: $32,534/$33,763DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 106.3 inLength/Width/Height: 178.3/68.7/67.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/39 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 85/38 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 11.0 sec1/4 mile: 18.2 sec @ 74 mph100 mph: 48.1 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 226 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.68 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 14 mpg1st Place: Toyota 4Runner SR5This completely redesigned 4Runner is so new that our test SR5 was still a preproduction sample. Yet it easily lives up to Toyota’s reputation for deft engineering. Mechanical elegance is everywhere: in the gliding, short-travel door latches; in the low-friction steering; in the powertrain’s amazing blend of performance and fuel economy; in the generous cargo capacity enclosed within compact exterior dimensions. The new 4Runner is a slick piece of work.HIGHS: Great room inside for its exterior size, strong V-6, Toyota slickness everywhere you look. LOWS: Part-time four-wheel drive, stiff-legged ride off-road, huge step-up to climb aboard, seat cushion not shaped for editorial butts. VERDICT: A hard-muscled athlete that always remembers its manners.More 4Runner Reviews From the ArchiveThis Toyota takes a big step toward eliminating our fuel-economy misgivings about sport-utes. Performance is excellent—when you weigh all the acceleration times, you find the 4Runner sandwiched into the tight gap between the Jeep and the Explorer—yet fuel economy was 16 mpg over the test route, 2 and 3 mpg better respectively than those V-8s and best of the group. Credit shrewd weight watching here—only 3900 pounds for the Toyota, 240 less than the Jeep, 600 less than the Explorer. Credit shrewd dimensioning, too. Overall length is about the midpoint of the four-inch range encompassing the Jeep, the Nissan, the Rover, and the Olds. Width matches the narrowest (Olds) of that group, yet the 4Runner generally ranks best or nearly so in each of our measure of capacity, with notably few unwanted intrusions into the cargo hold. Rear-passenger space is generous, too. Step-up height, though, is a trouble spot, nearly three inches higher than that of the next-best Acura and Explorer. Getting rid of the test car’s optional 265/70SR-16 Dunlops in favor of the standard-equipment 225/75R-15s would lower the sills 2.2 inches, still leaving the highest step of the group. This is a sport-ute with two distinctly different personalities. On-road, it’s a smooth rider with pleasing, refined control responses, a silky-shifting automatic, and a commendably rigid body. Off-road, it turns into a hard-muscled jock eager for punishment—and it can punish the passengers with an aggressively firm and ultra-sporting ride. We have the sense it will go anywhere, at high speeds too, and with minimum rattles, though maybe you wouldn’t want to. As SUVs go, this new 4Runner earns top marks in the S column and solid scores for U. Add in its sterling fuel economy and you have the new king of the mobilizers. 1996 Toyota 4Runner SR5183-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 3900 lbBase/as-tested price: $34,416/$26,468DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 105.3 inLength/Width/Height: 178.7/66.5/68.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/42 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 80/45 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.5 sec1/4 mile: 17.3 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 35.9 secBraking, 70-0 mph: 190 ftRoadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.72 gC/D fuel economy, 700-mile trip: 16 mpg More
