20 cars that think they’re 4x4s

Rover Streetwise Rover kicked off the whole modern urban on-roader craze with the decidedly dodgy Streetwise. Launched in 2003, its life was terminated early when MG Rover imploded in 2005. But the Streetwise has since enjoyed a second life in China, badged as the MG 3SW. It’s even had some success in the Chinese Rally Championship!

MG3 Xross We’re not sure exactly how you pronounce it, but the Xross is the car that will finally replace the MG3 SW/Streetwise (it’s due to reach the market in 2012). Based on the all-new MG3, it also has an increased ride height, standard roof bars and plastic body side cladding.

Matra Rancho Forget the Rover Streetwise, the Matra Rancho was the world’s first-ever 4×4 wannabe. This chunkily styled front-wheel-drive estate was way ahead of its time when it debuted in 1977. Trouble was, it was way behind in every other area: poorly built, unreliable and dynamically outdated. Some 56,700 Ranchos were built between 1977 and 1984.

Fiat Palio Adventure If you have no idea what a Fiat Palio is, we don’t blame you. It’s Fiat’s cheapest car, designed for developing markets. It was also voted the worst car on sale in Italy in 2000. But in 1999, it became historic (in a way) when the Adventure version premiered the off-road look in a front-drive car not intended for off-road use – beating the Rover Streetwise. The current-model Adventure is pictured.

Fiat Doblo Adventure This almost unknown Fiat was the first car in the world after the Streetwise to get the false 4×4 look. September 2003 was the date that Fiat launched its Fiat Doblo Adventure in Brazil, featuring bigger bumpers, side mouldings, a spare wheel on the tailgate and a 60mm higher ride height. Despite its looks, it was strictly a 4×2.

Volkswagen Polo Dune Volkswagen launched its first Streetwise-like car with the Polo Fun at the end of 2003. However, it took until 2006 to arrive in the UK, where it was rebadged the Polo Dune. In Germany, it was a marketing sensation, with one out of every 10 Polos sold in 2007 being a Fun. UK buyers never had the same enthusiasm, which explains why the new-generation Polo Cross isn’t sold here.

Citroen C3 XTR After VW, Citroen was the next company to leap on the Streetwise bandwagon. It gave the regular C3 hatchback a host of black plastic cladding (bumpers, grille, wheel arches and sills) and hey presto, it looked like an off-roader. Like most of its ilk, though, mechanically it was totally unaltered. One clever idea was standard roof rails that could also be mounted transversely to carry bikes or skis.

Volkswagen Cross Fox What’s a Cross Fox? Something to keep well away from the chickens – boom boom! But it’s also a version of the Brazilian-built VW Fox sold in Latin America from 2005 (though we never got it in the UK). The main changes were chunkier tyres, raised suspension and a spare wheel mounted on the boot lid, which looked butch but was utterly impractical.

Volkswagen Cross Golf Sounding like a nightmare round with Tiger Woods, VW’s Cross Golf was launched in 2006 across Europe. In the UK it was rebadged as the Golf Plus Dune, which was more accurate, since it was based on the ‘bloated pig’ Golf Plus MPV. It was the usual scenario: a 20mm taller ride height, matt plastic wheel arches, chunky new front and rear bumpers, roof rails and side rubbing strips. On the whole, buyers preferred the Golf-based Tiguan.

Volkswagen Cross Touran Completing the full flush of VW ‘Cross’ models, the Cross Touran arrived in December 2006 throughout Europe – but never in the UK, where buyers really didn’t ‘get’ the Cross idea. This was easily the least appealing of all VW’s Cross models, with half-hearted add-ons that really didn’t add anything to the Touran.

Ford Fiesta Trail Brazilians love the false 4×4 thing. The Ford Fiesta Trail is a good example: chunky bumpers, running boards, stick-on side strips, a big roof rack and even neoprene-lined front seats – yum. Initially launched as an accessory kit in 2005, its popularity (50% of buyers went for the Trail package) quickly saw it become a standalone model built by the factory.

Peugeot 207 SW Outdoor The off-road look arrived on the Peugeot 207 SW in 2007 with the Outdoor. The naff name was basically a stick-on package of grey plastic styling add-ons, increased ride height and unique alloy wheels. Are you feeling bored yet?

Peugeot Partner Escapade Possibly the world’s dullest car ever, the Peugeot Partner got some semblance of interest when, in 2005, the French carmaker launched the Escapade version. It claimed it offered ‘rugged styling’ but buyers weren’t impressed and the Escapade escaped the market in 2008. Fiat Idea Adventure Was the 2006 Idea Adventure the world’s first-ever mini-MPV crossover? Frankly, who cares? Revised suspension, chunky Pirelli tyres on unique alloys and an obligatory body kit do not a great car make. Another ‘sensational’ first came in 2008, when it became the world’s first front-wheel-drive car ever to get a locking differential (in the intriguingly badged Idea Adventure Locker).

Ford Ka Trail If you don’t recognise this Ford Ka, it’s little surprise: this is the Brazilian Ka, based on the platform of the old Ka, and which shares nothing in common at all with the European one. The Ka Trail has the usual addenda: roof rack, bumper appliques, running boards, rubbing strips and extended wheel arches.

Chery Riich X1 When it was first seen in 2009, the oddly named Chery Riich X1 was described as the first domestic mini-SUV made in China. It was definitely ‘mini’ but despite appearances, it certainly wasn’t an SUV, with a weedy 1.3-litre engine driving the front wheels only.

Great Wall Florid Cross Don’t you just love Chinese names? What rich fantasies of angry wall-flowers this creates in the mind. But in reality the Florid Cross is a rather dull bodykitted hatchback that resembles the Toyota-designed Scion xA rather too closely for comfort. That plastic front bumper guard looks as if it wouldn’t protect against stray flies, let alone rocks in the road.

Geely GX2 Geely may well be the first Chinese brand to land in the UK when it arrives in late 2012. Will UK buyers be offered the GX2, we wonder? Probably not. It’s one of the world’s smallest crossover-style cars, about the size of a Toyota Yaris. Based on the Geely Panda, it’s powered by 1.3- or 1.5-litre engines.

Dongfeng H30 Cross Any guesses what platform lies underneath this rather anonymous Chinese crossover? We can’t quite believe it ourselves, but it’s the Citroen ZX. That’s right, a car that first saw the light of day way back in 1991, and has been going strong in China since 2002, made by Dongfeng. Funny old world.

Ford EcoSport The Ford Fusion has to go down in history as one of the blue oval’s greatest disappointments: it was bland, tinny and unpleasant to drive. Despite this, the Brazilians really took to the Fusion and, in 2005, made something better out of it: the faux-4×4 EcoSport, which is now in its third generation.

Our guide to the best off-road cars, SUVs and 4x4s.

Budget buy: Skoda Yeti Skoda enters the SUV-crossover fray with the roomy, likeable Yeti. We like: interior quality, punchy diesel, wide choice of versions. We don’t like: high sills at boot and doors, engine noise, pricing is optimistic.

Affordable buy: Range Rover Evoque The Range Rover Evoque is almost as good in action as it is to look at. A genuine groundbreaker that deserves the iconic status it may soon command. We like: promise of incredible looks is realised on the road, interior finish, practicality, cohesiveness. We don’t like: steering and auto gearbox so-so compared to the rest of it, quickly becomes expensive.

Premium buy: BMW X5 BMW has been hard at work making the BMW X5 drive better than ever. Its body stylists have had a much easier time: will this mean its impressive new driving talents will pass unnoticed? We like: excellent performance, fuel economy, improved steering, agile handling. We don’t like: familiar looks may not turn heads, interior lacks sparkle of rivals.

Used: Suzuki Jimny Jimny is an able on- and off-road performer with strong residual values: 66% after three years. We like: sturdy build quality, useful 4×4, good economy given the drivetrain, nippy in town, compact dimensions, good all-round visibility, snappy design. We don’t like: overblown stories of scary handling when driven beyond its limits (don’t drive like an idiot, then), high resale prices and low numbers of private sellers.

Used: Mitsubishi Outlander Comfortable family 4×4 that is capable off road and quiet and civilised on. Sharp exterior marks a discerning choice: vets seem to like them. We like: recent facelift, respectable 4×4 motorway economy with sensible 165 g/km emissions for a surprisingly affordable price. We don’t like: sporty ride may be too much for some, cramped third row of seats, entry-level models short on spec.

Used: Range Rover TDV8 Range Rover has always had the chassis for a decent turbodiesel engine. In 2007, it finally got one: 3.6 litres of twin-turbo zeitgeist, with 200kW and 640Nm of torque. We like: owners report 6.5l/100km over thousands of reliable kms: great all-round average for this whacking great dollop of bi-turbo oil burner. The best brand in 4x4dom: Landcruisers lust after that luscious badge. We don’t like: not yet old enough to fit journalists’ meagre car buying budgets, no seven seat version.

Ford has finally come good with its promise of a diesel-powered Territory, but is it too little, too late? We test it against Kia’s excellent Sorento to find out.

It’s been a long time coming, but the diesel Territory is finally here. In fact, it’s taken Ford seven years from when the Territory first appeared in 2004 to introduce the diesel variant. But, sadly, it comes at a time when the future of both the Falcon and the Territory is unclear, given Ford’s global move to reduce the number of vehicle platforms it produces.

Our test vehicle is the premium Titanium-spec all-wheel drive diesel Territory – not that the spec level is all that important here; it’s the mechanical package that’s of interest. And we chose the Kia Sorento as a worthy opponent to Ford’s newcomer. Why a Sorento? We reckon it’s the current pick of the crop in the mid-to-large diesel softroader market. Like the Territory, the Sorento has a six-speed automatic gearbox, seats up to seven and is built on a monocoque platform with independent suspension at both ends.

Four or six?

The Ford’s diesel engine may be new for the Territory, but it’s not new globally – it was used in the Land Rover’s Discovery 3 and serves in the base-model D4. It saw service in the Range Rover Sport for some time, all thanks to Ford’s ownership of Land Rover from 2000 to 2008. The engine, developed jointly by Ford and Peugeot, is a 2.7-litre V6 turbo-diesel that makes a claimed 140kW at 4000rpm and 440Nm at 1900rpm. The gearbox, a six-speed automatic ZF unit, might be more familiar, because it’s been used not just in the Land Rovers listed, but in the Territory (and the Falcon), and in BMW’s X5 from 2004 to 2010.

The Kia’s powertrain is much newer and only saw the light of day in 2009. It combines a 2.2-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel with a six-speed automatic and, despite being more than half a litre (521cc to be exact) smaller, than the Ford unit, it claims similar power and torque figures with 145kW at 3800rpm and 436Nm from 1800 to 2500rpm.

While one engine is a V6 and the other a smaller four, both have similar turbo-diesel tech, including Bosch common-rail injection, fast-switching piezo injectors and a variable-vane turbocharger.

On the road, both engines provide effortless performance, even in demanding conditions, and plenty of overtaking power. The secret, of course, is the fact that both are typical turbo-diesels in making good power at modest engine speeds – they don’t need high revs to give their best.

On paper, the Sorento, with a whisker more peak power, some 200kg less weight to haul, and slightly shorter gearing, should shade the Territory, but that’s not the case. The truth is that the two are close to line-ball in on-road performance and, if anything, the Territory is a tad punchier. Countering this, the Sorento uses a little less fuel. During our test the Sorento’s 10.1L/100km bettered the 10.4L/100km of the Territory. This is not a significant difference and much closer than the official ADR figures (7.4L/100km for the Kia and 9.0L/100km for the Ford) would suggest. Either way they have similar fuel ranges as the Territory has a 75-litre tank, while the Sorento measures 70 litres.

Both vehicles offer first-class engine refinement and noise control, and gearboxes extremely well matched to their engine characteristics. But, again, the Ford just shades the Kia here, even if there’s not much in it.

A dynamic story

Given that both of these vehicles have fully independent suspension and monocoque construction, it’s not surprising both have an on-road feel more akin to a conventional passenger car than a traditional 4X4.

Both cover rough secondary roads – sealed or unsealed – with a great deal of confidence and comfort, even at speed. Of the two, however, the Territory strikes a better balance between suspension comfort and suspension control. Not that there’s anything wrong with the Sorento here, it’s just that Ford’s engineers have done a brilliant job of calibrating the suspension for Australian conditions.

The Territory has a wonderfully soft and comfortable ride yet, at the same time, manages to steer and handle with great precision and accuracy.

For its part, the Sorento also strikes a fine balance between comfort and control, but the suspension isn’t quite as supple as the Ford’s, nor is the general handling quite as tidy.

Getting dirty

Neither Sorento nor Territory can claim any sort of serious 4X4 ability but, of the two, the Sorento is clearly ahead. To be fair, the Territory is clearly marketed as an all-wheel drive vehicle and not a 4X4, so there’s no shame in the fact that it’s very limited in anything approaching off-road conditions. Aside from not having low-range, the Territory’s limitations stem from its lack of clearance and the relatively long front and rear overhangs.

What’s more, it has a full-time 4X4 system with three open diffs and relies solely on its electronic traction control to limit both cross-axle and inter-axle wheel spin. It’s the same system used by the now-defunct Holden Adventra and early BMW X5s. However, BMW soon realised the limitations of the set-up and, in 2004 (four years after the X5 debuted), added a self-proportioning and self-locking centre diff, which makes a huge difference when traction is at a premium.

The Sorento’s single-range 4X4 system is completely different, in that it’s an on-demand system that operates via a self-proportioning electronic clutch (that serves as a centre diff) which automatically transfers drive to the rear wheels should the front wheels lose traction. The driver can also manually lock this ‘centre diff’, which splits the drive 50:50 front to rear.

The Sorento also has more clearance than the Territory and better approach and departure angles. While nothing approaching a serious 4X4, the Sorento still has far more off-road ability than most people would give it credit for and, either way, is well ahead of the Territory in this regard.

Accommodation

Both Sorento and Territory offer spacious, comfortable and well-finished cabins, although the Territory’s front seats are slightly more comfortable, even if the driver’s seat adjustment is a mixture of electric and manual, including on the top-spec model. By contrast, even the mid-spec Sorento has full electric adjustment. Both have tilt and reach steering wheel adjustment; and both have manual adjustment for the front passenger seat.

The second-row seat is a squeeze for three adults in both vehicles. The Territory offers more shoulder room, even if the leg and head room is similar.

The Sorento seats seven as standard, and the Territory is either a five- or seven-seater. The Titanium model, as tested here, comes standard with seven seats, but it can be ordered with five if you want more luggage volume. Both third rows are more suitable for children than adults.

Running the numbers

The Territory comes with either 235/60R17 or 235/55R18 wheels/tyres; and, whichever you choose, you get a 235/60R17 spare. The Sorento has slightly more practical (higher-profile) rubber with either 235/65R17s or 235/60R18s and a spare that is a full match for the road wheels.

For those interested in towing, the Sorento has a maximum (braked) capacity of 2000kg with a maximum towball download of 150kg. As standard, the Territory can tow up to 1600kg (braked) with a 160kg towball download, but the optional heavy-duty tow pack sees AWD models uprated to a handier 2700kg with a 270kg towball download.

Bottom line

Putting aside the question of price, there’s no doubt Ford has done an excellent job with the diesel Territory. The powertrain and the chassis are extremely well sorted and work in complete harmony to produce what has to be the best all-roads touring vehicle – bar none – ever produced by an Australian manufacturer.

But the Territory doesn’t like anything much beyond an easy fire trail.

For its part, the Sorento makes a fine back-roads tourer, yet can go much further more happily than the Territory when the going gets rough.

More telling still is the pricing. The extremely well-equipped top-spec Sorento is around the same price as the base-model AWD Territory diesel, which makes the Sorento hard to go past in this contest, even if the Territory is a great drive.

Jeep’s new Grand Cherokee is almost too cheap to be true, but does it compare to the king of the class, Toyota’s Prado, and the budget Land Rover D4?

The Grand Cherokee struggled, slowed and almost came to a stop. It was having trouble keeping all four wheels on the ground so there was little effective traction to be had. But just when all seemed lost, it regained its composure and edged forward towards and then up and over the crest. I guess that was the rear electronic locker chiming in and doing its thing.

Moments before, it was the Discovery’s turn. Despite putting on more of a show than the Jeep, with wheels flailing madly in the air, it was able to maintain more consistent momentum and never felt like it wouldn’t make the climb.

But neither the Discovery, nor the Grand Cherokee, could match the fuss-free, almost effortless display by the Prado. While the electronic traction control came into play on several occasions, the Prado barely lifted a wheel and just walked up the climb as it if it wasn’t a climb at all and the deep ruts simply didn’t exist.

For that, you can thank its rear live axle and supple long-travel suspension. But that same suspension that is so effective off-road does the Prado no favours on-road. And, that’s just one of the swings and roundabouts of this contest.

Toyota has tweaked its ever-popular Hilux but will the changes be sufficient to see off new challengers from Ford and Mazda?

Rear coil springs with five-link suspension courtesy of Prado? Nup, ’fraid not.

Full-time 4X4 system; again dropped in from the Prado? Don’t be silly.

Sequential-style self-shifter to rival many wagons? Nope, no sign of that.

Six-speed manual to combat rival utes? Nowhere in sight, sorry!

A new diesel engine, or at least an upgrade of the existing diesel power plant? You’ve gotta be kidding!

This ‘new’ HiLux is, I’m afraid, nothing but a facelift in an attempt to maintain its market leadership, which it’s held for almost a decade.

But hang on a minute, it’s not all doom and gloom for Toyota. Although this facelifted range may not deliver anything extraordinarily new in the form of power, suspension or driveline developments, it still represents one of the finest utes available in the Australian marketplace.

Having belted a few of these new utes around Townsville’s backblocks for two days, I can assure you, this HiLux is still well and truly in the hunt. With just shy of 200kg loaded into the ute tray, plus two – and sometimes up to four – burly fellas in the cabin, the HiLux confirmed its reputation as a do-it-all ute with consummate ease.

During our time behind the wheel, we tackled a range of rock-strewn, bone-jarring tracks, steep billy-goat climbs, plus long-distance gravel and bitumen roads that varied in condition from brilliant to ordinary. Of particular note on those higher speed jaunts, the often-hit, unavoidable potholes and road irregularities saw the good old leaf-spring rear end combined with front upper and lower wishbones handle the lot with aplomb.

Overtaking mining trucks and tackling the long winding roads was stress-free and as comfortable as any ute has the right to be. At no time was I desperate for anything more up-to-date with regards to suspension, steering or even power – this is a work/family ute, remember.

Sure, more power would be nice, but even given that the ‘on-paper’ output figures of the D-4D diesel engine are far from class-leading, the way I see it is there really is no substitute for real-life testing. Yep, the ‘old’ HiLux engine may lack the numbers, but you know what – it’s a great drive for tourers, around-towners, families and workers alike; it gobbles up the miles and affords both driver and passengers a fair degree of comfort. In fact, my stint in the back seat was better than expected, with adequate leg- and head-room for my six-foot frame.

The low-range gearing and tractability of the larger (than most competitors) engine, especially with the auto gearbox, allowed for easy four-wheel driving.

The suspension’s articulation, while sufficient, is nothing spectacular and was found wanting with the non-traction control models we had on hand while climbing steep, badly rutted tracks. Tackling the same obstacles with both traction and non-traction models showed the advantage of ticking that option box come purchase time.

WHAT’S NEW?

Toyota is offering a long line-up of HiLux variants – now up to 35 (17 4X2s and 18 4X4s), along with a plethora of options.

The HiLux comes with the choice of three cabins – single, extra and double cab; two styles – pick-up and cab-chassis; three equipment grades – WorkMate, SR and SR5; three engines – 2.7-litre four-cylinder petrol, 4.0-litre V6 petrol and a 3.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel; the choice of two-wheel drive and four-wheel drive; and manual or automatic transmissions.

Double cab SR5 variants have 17-inch rims with 265/65R17 rubber as standard, while extra cabs only have 15s. As standard, the SR and WorkMate cop 16-inch wheels, but SR models have 17-inch sizing as an option (albeit with steel rims, not alloys). Both auto and manual gearboxes are offered across the range. Towing capacities on all 4X4s are increased to 2500kg.

While many of the upgrades to the 2011 HiLux range are purely cosmetic, we do get a few more important ‘upgraded’ features across the range, plus a few that are optional – but should perhaps be standard fare. Anti-lock brakes are standard across the range. Cruise control is standard on SR and SR5 models, as well as on the auto WorkMate models.

Electronic stability control, traction control, and brake-force distribution, as well as brake assist are standard on 4X4 SR5 double cabs, but optional on SR double cabs as a safety package. But the HiLux still has no lap-sash belt for the rear centre seat passenger of the double cabs!

Side and curtain-shield airbags and sports-style front seats have been fitted to all 4X4 SR5 and SR variants, while the WorkMate gets a limited-slip differential as standard equipment.

New sheet metal abounds from the A-pillar forwards and the bonnet, radiator grille, headlights and front bumper bar are all new. There are also newly designed wheel arch flares, door mirrors (with integrated turn signals) and updated rims.

A host of cosmetic upgrades feature in the dash, as well as the inclusion of new audio systems on all variants. Depending on the grade, it features voice recognition, touch screen, radio text, 3D graphics for the satellite navigation and safety warning alerts for school zones and speed and red-light cameras.

Across the range, the biggest improvement in value comes with the 4X4 SR5 turbo-diesel extra cab. The added spec includes satellite navigation, dusk-sensing headlamps, steering wheel-mounted telephone controls, redesigned alloy wheels, sports-style front seats with side airbags, curtain-shield airbags and auto control for the airconditioning.

The entry-level price for a 4X4 turbo-diesel HiLux has come down $6150, or 16.1 percent, to $31,990 with the introduction of a WorkMate single cab variant fitted with a manual transmission.

HiLux 4X4 extra and double cabs can be claimed from under $40,000 – with options taking you well above that.

IS THE KING DEAD?

Not by a long shot! The official answer, from Toyota head honchos, to all those aforementioned questions as to when we’ll get any of the major upgrades was: “No pledges, but the new-generation HiLux should see the implementation of many passive and active safety features.”

As for a major diesel engine upgrade? “We won’t even speculate on that…”

Who takes top spot as Australia’s best selling dual-range 4×4 of 2013?

Whatever way you look at it, 2013 was the year of the ute. The combined sales of Toyota’s 4×4 and 4×2 Hilux placed it as Australia’s third best-selling new vehicle behind the Toyota Corolla and the Mazda 3. And Mitsubishi’s Triton, Nissan’s Navara and Ford’s Ranger all made the overall top ten with combined 4×4 and 4×2 sales.

In terms of dual-range 4×4 vehicles, the ute’s dominance was even more significant with seven of the top-ten best sellers being utes. And just missing out on the top ten were Toyota’s 79-Series LandCruiser ute and Volkswagen’s Amarok.

Aside from their obvious practicality and functionality, today’s dual-cab utes offer a winning combination of refinement, safety, comfort, equipment and performance. Of all ute variants, dual cab 4x4s are the most popular. In terms of dual-range 4×4 wagons, the Prado is struggling to remain number one and in the second half of the year it was outsold by Jeep’s recently revamped Grand Cherokee. It still pipped the Jeep on the full year sales but it’s been a long time since Toyota didn’t own the number-one spot of the 4×4 wagons.

Diesels also completely dominated as the preferred engine type. Of all the top ten 4×4 utes, only the Hilux is offered with a petrol engine but it commands only one per cent of sales. It’s pretty much the same story with Toyota’s 4×4 wagons with only two per cent of 200 Series and three per cent of Prado sold being petrol powered. Only the Grand Cherokee has a significant petrol take-up with 42 per cent being petrol powered.

What are Australia’s best selling dual-range 4×4 of 2013?

1. Totoya Hilux – 29,344 sold

2. Nissan Navara – 21,758 sold

3. Mitsubishi Triton – 20,549 sold

4. Ford Ranger – 16,913 sold

5. Toyota Prado – 14,548 sold

6. Holden Colorado – 13,947 sold

7. Jeep Grand Cheroke – 12,931 sold

8. Mazda BT-50 – 9,005 sold

9. Isuzu D-Max – 8,488 sold

10. Toyota Landcruiser – 8,125 sold

You chose them, and in the March 2014 issue of 4×4 Australia we review them. Australia’s top ten best selling dual-range 4x4s go under the microscope.

Click here to see the Top 10 list for 2015!

Click here to see the Top 10 list for 2014!

Get the latest info on all things 4X4 Australia by signing up to our newsletter.

How would you respond if you were told you had just won a $35,000 camper? Find out from our winner.

Who doesn’t love a giveaway? Especially when the prize is your very own camper trailer? We think Rob Kemp from Balhannah, SA, will agree after editor Emma Ryan from our sister publication Camper Trailer Australia contacted him to tell him he’d won our major prize.

Rob is an outdoors enthusiast who recently renewed his subscription to 4X4 Australia magazine. While renewing his subscription he was automatically entered into our competition to win a Complete Campsite soft floor camper trailer, valued at a cool $35,000. His magazine subscription gave him 100 entries towards the prize — and it turns out his were the lucky numbers.

Understandably, Rob was almost speechless when Emma called him with the good news. “I don’t know what to say,” he said.

“My recommendation would be to knock off work early and head to the pub to celebrate,” responded Emma, adding that he’d better call his wife.

The Complete Campsite soft floor camper trailer giveaway attracted more than 50,000 entries. The prize, presented by Bauer Trader, featured across our RV magazines, including Caravan World, 4X4 Australia, Camper Trailer Australia, Motorhome and Caravan Trader (along with their respective websites).

Six new concept vehicles developed by Jeep and Mopar have been revealed.

The annual Easter Jeep Safari is at it again, revealing six new concept vehicles developed by Jeep and Mopar. The 48th Annual Moab Easter Jeep Safari will be held on April 12 to 30 in Moab, Utah. Jeep and Mopar teamed up to create these serious off roaders using production and prototype Jeep Performance Parts.

Here’s what you need to know

Jeep Wrangler Level Red: With a two-inch lift kit, Dana 44 crate axles, Rock-Trac transfer case, and a 3.6-litre engine with six-speed manual it has everything you need to tackle the most challenging off road tracks. With an attractive pitch black exterior and a red graphic stripe, how could you go wrong?

Jeep Wrangler MOJO: Featuring similar off road gear to the Level Red, the main difference in the Mojo is its 59:1 crawl ration, compared to the Level Red’s 73:1. You’ll stand out in the crowd with this one featuring a bright orange exterior, which is exactly what the “OJ” stands – Orange Jeep. Prototype LED headlamps and fog lamps, and soft top – this Jeep is all about giving you freedom on the road.

Jeep Wrangler Maximum Performance: For those seeking a bit more of a thrill, this blue Jeep will steal your affection. It’s Jeep Performance Parts-exclusive push-button electric-looking Dana 60 axles are matched with 4.88 gearing and 4:1 Rock-Trac transfer case. Highly protected, it will battle any hurdle you throw it at.

Jeep Cherokee Adventurer: The ten exterior of this car makes it a little less understated than its prototype sisters, but don’t underestimate the Adventurer which boasts Trailhawk 4×4 capabilities. 48:1 crawl ratio, utility and cargo convenience; this is the explorer’s dream. Rock rails, skid plates to the underbody, front suspension, oil tank and fuel tank, it’s well protected.

Jeep Cherokee Dakar: In one word, this vehicle is extreme. Its silver steel satin gloss exterior with flame red graphics will be love at first sight. Trailhawk 17-inch polished sating clear coat wheels feature two large red pockets, teamed with the seven-slot grille, prototype lower fascia trim, and 33-inch BF Goodrich Mud Terrain tyres. With extra approach and departure angles, you can’t go wrong.

Jeep Cherokee EcoDiesel Trail Warrior: The ultimate diesel Jeep, this SUV features a range of performance parts and accessories. A Quadra-Lift air suspension, roof basket for extra storage, 20-inch cast aluminium wheels on All-Terrain BFGoodrich tyres match the sand exterior dress with satin black flourishes throughout.

The development of traction control over the past two decades has had a huge impact on four-wheel driving.

Electronic traction aids have become more complex and effective over the years, but they are essentially designed to perform one simple task – to prevent wheel spin by applying braking pressure to wheels without traction, thereby directing engine power to the wheels with grip.

Electronic traction control was originally developed as a by-product of ABS braking systems, but well before the advent of wheel-speed sensors, ABS brakes, engine control units (ECU) and even electronic fuel injection, there were a number of mechanical traction aids available to four-wheel drivers.

EARLY DAYS

Back when small 4X4s were in their infancy, starting with the Willys Jeep in WWII, most had live axles front and rear with long-travel leaf springs designed to offer as much axle articulation as possible to keep all four wheels on the ground over undulating terrain. The advantage of a live-axle set-up in off-road conditions is that, as one wheel is pushed upwards by the terrain, the wheel on the other side of the axle is forced downwards so, until full suspension travel has been exceeded, all four wheels remain in contact with the ground.

Early four-wheel drives had open differentials front and rear, because the wheels on each side of a vehicle need to turn at different speeds when the vehicle is cornering on hard surfaces. But off-road, keeping the wheels in contact with the ground is vital because if a wheel on one side of the axle were to lose traction, engine power would be directed to that wheel through the open diff resulting in useless wheel spin, while the wheel with grip would not turn at all.

One method to overcome this problem was for the driver to apply brake pressure. This would stop the wheel in the air from spinning uselessly and would direct engine power across the axle to the wheel with grip, hopefully driving the vehicle far enough forwards or backwards that it would overcome the obstacle and all four wheels would be back in contact with the ground. In effect, this was the first form of traction control.

Of course, one method to limit wheel spin was to provide more wheel travel, achieved partly by fitting longer travel springs to a vehicle, along with redesigned suspension geometry. Land Rover’s solution was to fit long-travel coil springs to the first Range Rover, introduced in 1970; this proved extremely effective off the road, because with more wheel travel there was less likelihood that a wheel would lift off the ground and lose traction, but the downside was that it resulted in excessive body roll when cornering on the road.

The solution was to fit sway bars, but this in turn limited wheel travel. One solution was to fit manual sway-bar disconnects for off-road use – drive on the road with the sway bars connected to limit body roll and then get out of the vehicle and disconnect them for off-road driving when maximum wheel travel is required. Some vehicles, such as the Nissan GQ Patrol as sold in some markets, were offered with remote sway bar disconnects that could be operated from within the vehicle via a switch on the dash.

Limited-slip differentials (LSDs) were fitted to many vehicles in order to (as their name suggests) limit the slip to the wheels with the least amount of grip, therefore directing more engine power to the wheels with grip. Some LSDs worked better than others, but they all worked better than open diffs in limiting wheel spin. LSDs, however, could only be fitted to the rear axle, as they would impact the steering characteristics of a vehicle if fitted to the front axle.

SAME DIFF

Before the advent of electronics, the best traction aid available to four-wheel drivers was the diff lock, which is still used in many applications today. Manually operated diff locks allow complete differential action (like an open diff) until the diff lock is engaged when needed off-road.

This means that handling on the road is not affected, so diff locks can be fitted to front and rear axles. Again, as its name suggests, a diff lock totally eliminates the differential action across the axle so both wheels turn at the same speed when the diff lock is engaged. This essentially means that, so long as one wheel on an axle has grip, it should be able to drive the vehicle forward as it receives all of the available engine power to do so, because none is being wasted to useless wheel spin across the other side of the axle.

The problem with manually operated diff locks is that they need to be engaged by the driver, and an inexperienced driver might not engage the diff locks when required, so the vehicle could become hopelessly stuck. Conversely, an inexperienced driver may engage both of the diff locks when not required, affecting the vehicle’s handling and ability to steer to the point that the driver could lose control.

ABS IN REVERSE

There had to be a better way and, according to vehicle manufacturers, electronics held the answer. Electronic anti-lock braking systems (ABS) have been used in automobiles since the 1970s. In modern ABS systems, the vehicle’s ECU analyses information from individual sensors at each wheel. If, under braking, there is an anomaly in wheel speeds, the ECU actuates the ABS modulator, which rapidly turns braking valves on and off to prevent the wheel from locking, hence the pulsating feeling through the brake pedal when the ABS is actuated.

Electronic traction control (ETC) systems are essentially ABS in reverse. By using the wheel-speed sensors to detect anomalies in wheel speed under acceleration, the ECU can rapidly provide braking pressure to individual wheels via the braking valves to automatically eliminate wheel spin. Again, by rapidly turning the braking valves on and off, you get that same pulsating sensation when the ETC is activated as you do when the ABS is activated.

The first four-wheel drive to be fitted with any form of ETC was the 1992 Range Rover, and it only operated on the rear axle. This system was again fitted to the then-new P38A Range Rover, launched in Australia in 1995.

By this time, BMW was the owner of Land Rover, and the Freelander soft-roader was under development. In addition to ABS brakes and four-wheel electronic traction control, the 1997 Freelander was fitted with an innovative new system called Hill Descent Control (HDC). As the Freelander wasn’t equipped with low-range gearing, HDC was designed to limit vehicle speed on steep descents by using the electronic ABS and traction control systems.

Although quite effective, this first incarnation of HDC was criticised because the target speed on descents was considered too fast for very steep descents. However, as the Freelander was a softroader, it should never have really been driven in locations where the terrain was excessively steep in the first place.

In 1998, Land Rover equipped its Discovery II with electronic ABS, four-wheel ETC and HDC, combining these traction aids with genuine low-range gearing. This meant that the Discovery had open diffs front and rear for optimum on-road performance, and it relied entirely on its electronic traction aids to prevent wheel spin in off-road conditions.

Land Rover was so confident in the electronics package that it even discarded the Discovery’s centre diff lock, relying on the ETC to prevent wheel-speed discrepancies between the front and rear axles. This last step proved one too far for the electronic traction aids and when the Discovery was face-lifted in 2002, the centre diff lock made a welcome return. Now equipped with live axles front and rear, long-travel coil spring suspension, good low-range gearing, a centre diff lock, ETC and HDC, the Disco II was one of the most capable out-of-the-box off-road vehicles on the market.

Other manufacturers saw the benefits of ETC and soon introduced them to their off-road models. One was Mitsubishi with its Pajero, which benefited greatly from being equipped with ETC because it had limited wheel travel due to its fully independent suspension design.

Other electronic traction aids were soon introduced, such as electronic stability control. By using the ETC’s existing wheel-speed and steering-wheel angle sensors – and adding acceleration, roll and yaw sensors, along with complex software – stability control automatically cuts or adds power, or applies braking pressure to individual wheels, to prevent the vehicle losing control on the road.

For off-road vehicles, the ability to disable the stability control system for off-road use is paramount, because a cut to engine power when a vehicle slides around off-road is often the last thing you want when you’re trying to maintain forward progress in slippery conditions such as mud or sand.

GETTING A GRIP

It was again Land Rover who introduced the latest trend in electronic driver aids, this time under the moniker Terrain Response, fitted to the 2004 Discovery 3. In its fully optioned guise, Terrain Response works like other ETC systems, but it adds vehicle height control, automatic electronically engaging and disengaging front, centre and rear diff locks, and five selectable programs tailored to suit different driving conditions, which are for general driving; grass, gravel, snow; mud and ruts; sand; and rock crawl.

The different programs offered by Terrain Response adjust many of the vehicle’s parameters, including suspension ride height, engine management, throttle mapping, transfer case ranges, transmission settings, ETC, stability control and HDC. They also affect the operation of the electronically controlled diff locks.

The result of all of the technology packed into Terrain Response, combined with the right chassis hardware and Land Rover’s innate knowledge of off-road requirements, was that the Discovery once again set the benchmark in traction control. Other manufacturers, including Mercedes-Benz, Toyota and Jeep have developed their own versions of Terrain Response, but none have yet come close to the effectiveness of the Land Rover system for off-road use.

There is no doubt that traction control has made off-road vehicles more capable than ever before and, more importantly, it has made off-road driving simpler and safer than ever before. Where will the next development in electronic driver aids come from? No one yet knows but, if history is anything to go by, there’s probably a Pommie chap in green overalls somewhere in Land Rover’s complex at Solihull who’s just had a great idea.

The new Ford Ranger and Mazda BT-50 share much in common, but are they really the same?

To the casual observer, the Ford Ranger and Mazda BT-50 share nothing but a market segment: they are both dual-cab utes, that much is obvious, but inside and out they look completely different. The Ford is a bluff, squared-off truck in the Ford F-150 mould; the Mazda wears the swept back, bulbous guards, corporate-Mazda look.

But drill down further, and their shared DNA is revealed; these utes are twins born after a shared gestation period and with an identical gene pool. Both were engineered by Ford Australia and use identical powertrains, chassis and suspension. Nature provided the identical genes; Ford and Mazda engineers nurtured them to become slightly different, as we will see.

We tested the six-speed automatic mid-spec dual cabs, and compared and contrasted what should have been simple variations of a theme. While much was as we expected, some was not. The results may surprise you…

To read the full story, check out the April 2012 issue of 4X4 Australia.