[ConorD]

Heu guys I'm in a position to buy an auto 2006 grand vitara with just over 200,000kms on it.

Just wondering how they go off-road and if there anything I should be looking out for?

Cheers,
Conor

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Gwagensteve]

The experience I have of them in Victorian conditions on easy to medium tracks is that they're low, have very limited flex and the traction control is super loose (as in it requires lots of wheelspeed before it engages) leading to lots of pucker moments and wheelspin. If you left foot brake them to slow them down it disables the traction control.

Underbody protection is required.
If you lift them to improve clearance they flex even less.

They seem quite well made and make decent road cars , and at least have low range, so they're better than the other vehicles in their class which rely on converter slip and electronics to fake a low range, but they're no great shakes. You haven't specified your use, so I can only comment on what I've seen in my local conditions.

A rear locker would transform the car because then you could left foot brake the car to slow it down without loosing all traction, and push the front underbody protection over things it's caught on. Piranha adapt an airlocker to the back of these buts it's expensive (something like $2.5k)

[Gwagensteve]

I should point out I have driven a 3.2 auto, and been on trips where I've observed/spotted/advised diesels and a manual j24 SWB.

[ConorD]

Cheers, Gwagen

I might just stick with my 2002 GV then if that's the case.

From the sounds of things the newer model grand vitara (2006) is a big step backwards compared to the 1998-2005 era

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Gwagensteve]

In off road capability alone I'd say yes.
I'd probably rather drive a NGV in every other situsation, but there's no way it's a better off road car.

[fordem]

Steve is pretty much spot on with his assessment - the ground clearance is the limiting factor.

The front suspension design is similar to that used on many front wheel drive sedans and the rear bush on the control arm has a relatively short life on the rough stuff if the vehicle is at stock height, and even shorter if lifted - they can be replaced with polyurethane from Superpro, but I'm not certain on the longevity of the replacements. At the rear the rear arms and exhaust hang down and drag in the dirt.

[Gwagensteve]

My biggest problem is the traction control calibration. It's hopelessly slack. Put a wheel in the air and between the torque converter slackness and TC calibration it's almost impossible to make smooth progress. Car stops moving forward, driver applies throttle, nothing.... nothing ... nothing then BAM! TC grabs a brake and the car rears up and pinballs off the obstacle.

The contrast between the TC calibration on the NGV and my Defender is incredible. They're chalk and cheese.

[Marck]

My 2006 auto has no traction control I don't think it was implemented until something like 2009. Apart from that one comment I agree with what has been said. You need bash plates and a tow bar to protect the squishy bits under the car. The amount of times the back,of mine would have been mashed if I didn't have the tow bar to drag along the ground.

[Chop]

Yep the rear is definitely a spot to damage as Marck says, the muffler in its east-west layout also in a spot to get hit and hung up on. I've deleted it on mine recently, and you could fit a small extra fuel tank in that space for sure!

[ZUZUKI]

You don't say what engine it has - was the J20 even available as an auto, or were all autos H27A?
200,000km is getting close to needing to do timing chains in either engine, not a fun job, especially on the V6.
Like as been said, there is nothing better off road in that size of car, at that age, but that's not saying much.
'Light' off roading (fire trails) is fine with care, but they struggle compared to a'98-'05 GV.
Wheel opening will take a 245/75R16 without too much effort, which helps with the clearance underneath.
30mm suspension lift is about the max. before it turns into a rough riding shopping trolley, and expect to replace that rear bush on the front control arm often, but as stated, any lift is at the expense of droop.
Piranha have done a couple of lockers for them, the last one was years ago & it's actively discouraged, as in not sure they want to do another one.
They do do a rear bar with swing away for spare tyre & a jerry can - not cheap, but offers a better departure angle than stock, by a fair margin. Accompanying towbar is only 1000kg though.
Rgs, Michael

[fordem]

Two points - the J20 was available with an auto, and the timing chains on both engines are "life time" items - if they are not rattling don't touch them.

[Marck]

Hey Chop do you have any pictures / details of that muffler delete? Much change in noise ?

[Chop]

Marck wrote:

Hey Chop do you have any pictures / details of that muffler delete? Much change in noise ?

I'll try and upload some, plenty of room for an auxiliary tank now that the muffler is gone. Although that would be expensive to have one made. Mine is diesel and the noise has not changed one iota! The DPF is the silencer on the diesel.

[Chop]

Attachment:

20170819_161341-580x1031.jpg

Attachment:

20170819_161305-580x1031.jpg

[Slug]

Mine is over the diff 2016 GV3 lots of twists to get it though all mandrel bends the original resonator is now up behind the CAT tucked up and protected by bash plates and a short resonator forward of where the old one was as its flater and sits up higher
Also removed the spring loaded pipe joints to remove the slop just a bit more fiddling to tuck the exhaust in front of the diff a little higher, fuel consumption has improved now getting 9.3-10.5/100 couldn't get better than 11.8-13/100 but do have roof rack, basker, side and rear awing so not the best at 100k
Not a good shot it's wetter than a swimming pool around here at the moment so will try to get some when I can get on the ground
James

[ZUZUKI]

Might be room to fit an Aux. tank, but finding substantial mounting points for it could be more of a challenge & then you've got to fill it.
Rgs, Michael

[BertZook]

one question I have always had in my mind and since you guys are talking about the NGV

how low are they actually are?.

I mean when I read on the Suzuki website they say that the ground clearance is 200mm for the 3 door version..... is that diff clearance? or body clearance? or from where?. Because every time I drive behind one I see how low the IRS arms are and I cant believe its the same clearance as the jimny. Shown in their site as 190mm clearance (I suppose is the diff?). I know they come with bigger tires, but still the rear arms look soo low in my eyes.

like I have my jimny with 235's (2" bigger than stock). So if I upsize the tyres on a NGV by the same amount, ( 30" which is the biggest size they take), I should ahve same clearance as I currently do on my jimny?

Im thinking to sell the jimny as its getting pretty old, but I though to might get a 3 door NVG instead of a jimny for the extra space and road manners. And since at the moment I only do 90% beach driving, Im not really looking for rock climbing flex/clearance...... but I know the Jimny lowest point is the diff and everything else is bit higher. But what about in the NGV?, because one thing is to drag the tip of the diff on a deep track in the sand with a stock jimny, and another to drag the whole underbelly of a stock NGV. Thats why I ask about the NGV clearance

and yeah Im a bit aware of the ESP/TC thing that kicks in after Xkm/h thing on them which makes them horrible for sand. But the new face lift Jimnys have them too. I would save that question for bit latter (if not might jsut get the first vvt jimny pre-facelift), for now my first concern is whats the real ground clearance vs a Jimny. Compared in both having stock tyres or both with the same size up bigger

[MrRocky]

The good thing about the ngv is 245/75r16 (30.7) fit with no real issues where in a jim takes alot more effort to fit that size. Also being ifs a40mm susp lift increases underbody clearance by 40mm. Even with the esp not being ideal in sand id still say there better than the jims on the beach mine was never lacking power but flex is non existant although tc makes up for it a bit.

[BertZook]

MrRocky wrote:

The good thing about the ngv is 245/75r16 (30.7) fit with no real issues where in a jim takes alot more effort to fit that size. Also being ifs a40mm susp lift increases underbody clearance by 40mm. Even with the esp not being ideal in sand id still say there better than the jims on the beach mine was never lacking power but flex is non existant although tc makes up for it a bit.

yeah I know that, but that size is roughly 2" bigger than what they come stock. And on a Jimny the 235/75/r15 is roughly 2" bigger than what they come stock...... rougly like both are a tinny bit over 50mm, something like 60mm for a NVG and like 65mm in the case of a Jimny as far as I remember when I calculate them to see how far I was from staying on the legal side of things (50mm max)


so if both says the come with the same-ish ground clearance from factory, fitting the same increase of bigger tyres would give same clearance which is cool as I know my Jimny and what it can do.

but my question still remains on the "where is the NGV clearance numbres from?" because on the Jimny is the diff clearance, but on the NGV is the diff too?, which if its then it would mean that the rear lower arms would be far lower and I would be dragging those along the way all the time..... or that 200mm clearance is reffering to that point?, which in my eyes seems to be the lowest point under the car

[MrRocky]

Ngv has more clearance as there isnt really a big diff pumpkin hanging down. You will likely find however most quoted clearance figures are from the sill.

[Gwagensteve]

I'm not sure how you figure that, but anyways,

There is little truth in any quoted ground clearance figure regardless of vehicle unless its specified where it's taken. It's common practice to measure ground clearance on live axle vehicles to the bottom of the pumpkin as that's the lowest obvious point. But note with interest that some vehicles have rear shock mounts that are lower than the pumpkin, although they aren't normally considered a problem because they're close to the tyre.

On an IFS/IRS vehicle, ground clearance is generally measured at the lowest suspended point of the underside of the vehicle. This discounts arms which obviously move but are also lower than the lowest suspended part of the car, especially as you move towards the wheel.

Which vehicle has superior functional ground clearance is a bit more complex.

On IFS/IRS vehicles, the minimum figure quoted isn't generally one (or two) discrete points - there may be a large area of the vehicle which is at or near the quoted ground clearance. The best example of this is a HMMWV - it has 17" of ground clearance pretty much for the whole underside of the car.



And/however, that point is variable - suspension movement might see this 17" drop to, maybe 13" depending on load or use.

Obviously, all that surface area in contact with the ground is going to make for a VERY stuck vehicle if it bellies out on a surface with yield.

Compare this to a live axle vehicle, where the minimum figure is typically measured at the bottom of the diff pumpkin, and that figure isn't connected to suspension movement - the (say) 200mm will stay at 200mm regardless of what the chassis or suspension is doing. in most cases (but perhaps not a stock jimny) the rest of the vehicle is considerably higher than the lowest point of the diff centre, so you can be reasonably that on many obstacles if you pass the obstacle with the front diff, you'll get the car past. This isn't the case with an IFS (or IFS/IRS) vehicle.

[MrRocky]

For predominately sand driving i think your thinking about it way to much. Either car is going to do what you want with a tyre 2" over stock. Difference being the vitara wont need gaurd chop/susp mods to fit and the gearing is more flexable than the jimny to accomodate the larger tyre with the added bonus of having far more room, better onroad manners and the ability to hold top gear up a slight incline.

[Gwagensteve]

I agree that either vehicle will do the job for sand, but as this thread is likely to be read by others who drive on terrain other than sand there are real differences between what those figures mean.

I also agree that for sand and on road I would choose the NGV every time.

[BertZook]

Thanks Steve, thats waht I figure those numbers were. As I cant really approach a parked NGV on the road to meassure, it seemed weird that the number reffered to the lowest point in the car which for me seems to be the rear arms, instead of their diff or any other part of the underbelly of it which seems to be all pretty similar. So yeah seems they do a re pretty low rider then in comparison with a Jimny

And yeah Rocky, those are some of the points I have in my head as to why jump into a NGV 2 door, same as more space in the back once Ir emove the back seats as I do. Whats the width of the floor between the wheel arches? like the shortes width you have in your 2 door one?, t see if a set of drawers would fit in there or not, as Im a few cm too short in my jimny

. Having say that I run the 235's in my current Jimny with just 45mm lift with no guard chop, although in full flex they do hit a tinny bit, but its not an extreme modification to fix. But, if I go with a newer VVT jimny I could get transfer reduction gears, Keep my current tyres and CSA beautiful wheels (which they are hard/impossible to find), and also keep the snorkel I never fit, plus I would be on a platform Im already used to and I know up and down

I understand driving on sand doesnt require much, but I wasnt talking about driving on the low tide hard stuff. I was more into the soft part of it. Like most of Fraser Island is drivable pretty eassy, but theres couple of tracks that gets pretty deep in the wheel track. Or for example I do most of my driving at DI point, and since I calculate my trip to be able to drive the 40km beach back on low tide at the end of the day, it means I have to drive the soft stuff in high tide on the morning from the camp site till the point. Either wake up too early for me to function, or waste half of a day for a low tide. So mroe ofthen than not I end up following others people tracks in the soft sand. Never had an issue tho

But thats why my question as to I rather drag the tip of a diff vs the underbelly of a Vitara. But even if never gets THAT deep, then wouldnt I be dragging the suspension arms? specially the rear ones??... I know bigger tyres would help, but still


I still thinking about the whole deal, as I need to put money together first, so Im just getting familiar with the options. Same as to get failiar with what the ESP/TC thing does to the new jimny and NGV

[MrRocky]

Mine had 245/75r16 (30.7) bighorns and was better than jims regarding high speed soft sand beachwork even if the esp was annoying. That size tyre does fit with stock susp

[Marck]

I have hit hook pint at high tide and we ran up the beach to eurong. I tractored through the softest hot sand. Low range and 4000 rpm but nothing stoped it. I did stop twice because the coolant temp touched 110c and I wasn't sure if that was a problem. I polished the front of the bash plates and the control arms a little. That's with 40mm suspension lift and 245 70 16 rubber. The biggest downside is I burnt 20 is litres of unleaded in that short distance.