[pete_79]

They say you should learn something new every day, this one came as a big surprise to me, I'm sure some of you will find it interesting too.

Offroad vehicle classifications

Suzuki have made an interesting decision applying different classifications for the Jimny and the GV.

[Gwagensteve]

It's not a decision, it's a calculation based on clearance and angles. In the case of a Range Rover, I bet at maximum height it's an MC but at default height it's MA

It's entirely arbitrary.

[pete_79]

They do need to meet the criteria, but manufacturers still have to choice to apply or not.
It appears those that offer both 2wd and 4wd variants have chosen to only go for one classification for all models (obviously to suit the 2wd version).

Arbitrary or not, it still means in the eyes of the law a NGV is no different to a falcon or commodore. Maximum 15mm bigger tyres and no lift allowed.
I seriously had no idea this was the case.

[BertZook]

Quote:

“The Ford Everest was certified to a MA vehicle category for Australia due the product strategy, keeping all variants under the same ADR compliance plate approval. MA allows a 4×4 and 4×2, however a MC only allows 4×4 variants.”

as the GV is offered in 2wd they cant apply for the MC

and although I know the NGV is a bit of a "low rider", I recon it still has better approach/departure angles than most stock big 4wds out there, specially the short wheel base one. Not sure about the ramp over angle.

and about the clearance, well according to Suzuki website a NGV has 200mm for the SWB and 188mm for the LWB and the Jimny 190mm. PRetty much same-ish figures than any other brand. Prado says 220mm

dont know about suspension/diff clearance. The rear arms of a NGV are pretty low

angles for approach/ramp/departure are 29/20/36 for SWB and 28/18/26 LWB, more than they ask for

[got_bar_work]

The ford everest has this problem

[Marck]

The NGV has changed classification at some point. My 2006 is classed MC. I have checked this on the compliance plate