A Prado, an Everest and a Grand Vitara, which is best?

Dear Baraza,

I’d like to know how the Ford Everest (you rarely talk about it, why?), Suzuki Grand Vitara, and Prado compare with regard to:

(a) Fuel consumption (please don’t bash me, I’m so keen on this!).

(b) Performance on rough and tarmac roads.

(c) Durability.

(d) Availability of spare parts.

(e) General maintenance costs.

(f) Other important factors, such as cost, resale value, speed, comfort, etc.

Which of the vehicles would you prefer?

Sammy

Fuel consumption: If they are all diesel or all petrol, the Suzuki will give the best economy, but the Prado and the Everest will go a long way further on a full tank before needing a refill.

Rough road performance: the Prado is king, closely followed by the Everest. Their superior ground clearance means they can go anywhere, at almost any speed.

The Everest is not that comfortable though. On tarmac, the cross-over Vitara feels best, then the Everest. The Prado is too bouncy to be taken seriously, but it hits back with outright speed; it is the fastest one here.

Durability: All three will last forever, but from driving feel, one could say the Everest will bury the other two when they die from natural causes. It feels like it was hewn out of granite.

Spares: Toyota Kenya for the Prado and CMC Motors for the other two.

Maintenance: This is hard to tell as it depends on what goes wrong, but I presume the Prado will cost the most to fix when broken, then Everest, then Vitara.

Resale: Prado is the best bet here.

Comfort: If you like a wobbly roller-coaster ride, the Prado is your car, if you are married to a chiropractor (or plan to marry one), the Everest is here for you, while the Vitara is the most “normal” of the three.

Of the three I would buy the Prado — it is capable, fast, and the turbodiesel has a certain deep thrum derived from the insane torque coming out of the exhaust and a subtle turbo whine coming from under the bonnet that announces to the whole world you are driving a serious vehicle.

The Everest sounds underwhelming in comparison, but is no less capable and might even be more practical in terms of space.

I wouldn’t bother with the Suzuki; in my world, people who buy cross-overs are declaring to the world that they wanted an SUV but couldn’t quite stretch their budgets that far. Malta Guinness versus the real stout, in other words….

Hi,

I bought a Suzuki Swift Sport sometime back. This car is absolutely amazing; the acceleration is superb, the handling good and fuel economy is good as well.

NVH (noise, vibration and harshness) is poor, but I can live with that since it is a sports car and not a luxury ride.

My only problem is that it is way lower than the standard model, so low that when it came with its original 195/50/15 tyres, I would literally scrape pebbles off the ground.

I installed a sump guard and replaced the tyres with 195/55/15.

Now the car is at a reasonable height but on dips, if I don’t slow down significantly, the tyres touch the wheel housing. I am afraid that the wheel housing will get ripped out over time.

What options do I have on this? Some people have recommended installing spacers, but I have taken this with a grain of salt.

Apart from that, are Suzuki spares readily available?

Also, I am considering supercharging the little beast. What are the disadvantages of this? (The advantages are obvious; blistering acceleration and speed!)

Mike

You say you wanted a sports car, now you want to raise it, and this will compromise its sportiness (and safety).

Try changing the springs and shocks for stiffer ones to reduce the stroke room and travel of the suspension.

The other option is to learn to live with the challenges of living in a country non-conducive to sporty vehicles. And the third option is to install spacers and roll over at the first right-hander you come across.

As far as maintenance is concerned, talk to CMC and find out if they can manage the car. The disadvantages of supercharging are poor fuel consumption and, if done unprofessionally, shortened engine life.

Hi,

I am looking to buy my first car. Now, my options are limited by cost but I would love to buy a Honda Civic. So far, from my calculations, a Honda Fit, Nissan Bluebird, Mazda Demio and a Honda Aria are within budget (though I am not keen on a Nissan).

What would you advise, especially when taking spare parts availability and cost, and resale value into consideration?

Hannah

If you love the Civic, just buy one — it cannot be that much more expensive than the stuff you mention there. But do a DIY import, it is cheaper than going through a car dealer.

Spares availability and costs depend on the shops selling them, but none of these cars will keep you on a waiting list, or a wailing list for that matter.

Resale, right now, goes the Demio and Bluebird way, but my crystal ball says the Fit/Aria is going to become the new Toyota Starlet (the car had amazing resale value and still changed hands very easily and really fast even after three or four previous owners).

Hi Baraza,

I recently bought a BMW 525 E34 with an M20 engine (6-cylinder, 2500cc). Is it a pocket-friendly car? How is it when it comes to consumption?

I also have an 1800cc BMW 316i, which, from Nairobi to Embu and back, consumes about Sh3,000 in fuel. Can compare the two BMWs in terms of consumption?

No, it is not pocket-friendly. It is a 6-cylinder BMW, the preserve of executive types. The consumption should vary between 5 kpl and 10-11 kpl, with an average of around 7 or 8 kpl.

The 5-Series and the 3-series cannot be compared — the 3-Series is a small compact saloon with a small 4-cylinder engine (good economy), while the E34 is a large, heavy, executive saloon with a 2.5-litre straight six made from iron; none of these characteristics promotes fuel economy.

Hi Baraza,

1. What’s the difference between the Legacy, the Outback and the Brighton?

2. What do these acronyms in Subarus mean: GT, TS-R, TX and LX?

3. What’s the meaning of E-TUNE in Subarus?

4. When is your DRIVE magazine going to hit the streets?

Ken

1. The difference between Legacy and Outback is that the Outback uses a 6-cylinder (H6) larger capacity engine while the Legacy uses a 4-cylinder (H4) smaller capacity unit.

The Outback is biased for slightly more off-road ability than the Legacy (increased ground clearance, plastic mouldings around lower half of the car) and usually (not always) has two-tone paint.

Available (optionally) on the Legacy and not on the Outback are a manual gearbox and a turbocharger (or two). Brighton is just a Legacy with a fancy tag, just like the Forester LL Bean edition.

2. GT, TS-R, TX and LX are the various spec levels within the Legacy range. While I care little about the TX and LX, I know the GT and TS-R are turbocharged, with the GT having two turbos and developing some 280 hp.

3. E-tune is yet another spec level within a spec level: it is a type of Legacy GT with clear lenses all round rather than the amber turn signals and red brake lights.

4. From the current outlook, never; but before you start panicking take a look at the April edition of Destination magazine and all forthcoming issues of Motor Trader magazine (starting with the March edition). My work features heavily, especially in the latter.

Baraza,

I own a new model Premio. In the morning, while trying to shift the automatic gear lever from Parking to Drive or Reverse, the lever does not move easily, you have to force it.

What could be the problem? I recently (two weeks ago) changed the ATF but the problem persists, more so when the car is parked for two or more days.

Nike

The problem may be with the linkage, which is the mechanical connection between the gear selector lever and the gear box, the connection that transmits the lever movement from driver action into gear position selection within the gearbox.

If the lever is hard to move, then the linkage is jamming somewhere; either a cable or shaft is snagged or a joint/knuckle needs lubrication…. This is one of those things that one has to see to know exactly where the problem lies.

Hi Baraza,

1. I have driven a number of Carina Si (1800cc) and Carina Ti (1500cc) vehicles and have noticed that the Si consumes less fuel by approximately 2kpl, all other factors held constant. What could be the reason for this?

2. It is alleged that some insurance companies do not insure vehicles fitted with spacers, is it true? Why?

3. What are the merits and demerits of replacing size 13 tyres with size 14s on a car?

4. What is the relationship between sound — as produced by racing cars — and fuel consumption? How does the exhaust system, including the size of the exhaust pipe or dual exhaust pipes, affect the performance of a vehicle?

1. It is because an 1800cc doesn’t need caning to behave appropriately, especially on the highway. The effect can be magnified by expanding the parameters: drive a 2500cc Mark II at 120 km/h, then try a 1000cc Vitz or Nissan March at 120 km/h. One will be strained, guess which?

2. I cannot speak for all of them, but I know that in the UK, installation of spacers or nitrous injection voids one’s insurance.

3. Merits: The car will have higher ground clearance, and a higher top speed. Demerits: Low gear acceleration is compromised. But seeing how the difference is one inch, you will not notice any of these things (but they will be there).

4. A Lexus LS600 at 3,000rpm is quieter than a diesel tractor at 1,200rpm, but it is burning a lot more fuel. Sound has no direct correlation with fuel consumption among different cars, though it must be said that on the same car, more noise means more fuel is being consumed, whether by increasing rpm or by a leaking/broken exhaust (energy is wasted mechanically as sound).

The diameter (and number) of exhaust pipes affects performance as follows: bigger (or more) exhausts provide a free-flowing pathway for the exhaust gases, allowing the car to breathe easier and rev higher.

However, other factors such as combustion chamber shape, injector and plug placement, valve timing and emissions control will determine whether or not it makes sense to expand the exhaust system of your car. In some cases, it may prove counter-productive.

Dear Baraza,

I have observed that a lot of questions from your readers dwell so much on fuel economy and cost of spares.

Most vehicle manufacturers publish a fuel consumption figure for their cars, however, there is always a big disparity between the published figures and the actual consumption on the road.

A lady motorist recently sued Honda Motor Company in the USA for what she stated as the cost difference between her car’s actual fuel consumption and the manufacturers quoted figures.

She said that no matter how she drove, she could not achieve the fuel economy figures quoted by the manufacturer.

Back home, how come people never ask about the cost of insurance? I think a Kenyan motorist spends more on insurance premiums than fuel cost and spares combined.

Moses

Thanks a lot Moses. Maybe I should sign you up as my sidekick.

I read about the Honda case, and it made me unhappy about the direction society is taking. Pretty soon, we will sue our butchers for selling us meat that does not quite come out in the saucepan like it did in the recipe cookbook (and whose fault is that?).

One of my fears is that I might end up in the same hotpot as Honda: “Baraza said a Platz can do 22 kpl but try as I might, I’ve only got to 14 kpl. I will sue the bastard for that!”

The obsession with money is the biggest issue. More people are concerned about fuel consumption and cost of spares rather than whether or not the vehicle is appropriate or enjoyable and stress free to own.

The spares might be cheap and readily available, but where is the fun in that if you are buying the (cheap) spares every three days?

Comments

comments

Leave a Reply