# X-Trail vs Grand Vitara 2006



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

www.mphmagazineonline.com/web/prtranslated/0049
www.06grandvitara.com

I'm glad I held off a serious search for an X-Trail LE with VDC, as Suzuki is starting to announce the 2006 Grand Vitara. It's very comparable to the X-Trail, with some important differences. One is that it has a low range. Second is that VDC, side airbags, and a mileage readout are standard on all versions.

However, it's quite a bit heavier, which translates into significantly worse mileage. This is not a good time to introduce suv's with mediocre mileage. I calculated that given our mileage per year and present gas prices, that translates to less than $200 per year more than using an X-Trail. Which is less than the interest on the $6000 extra you have to spend to get an X-Trail with VDC compared to the base X-Trail. Not to mention the $6000 itself. People who put lots of mileage on their vehicles would be affected more by this difference.

Canadian pricing is unknown at this point, but probably will favour the Vitara. Maybe by quite a bit. Probably it won't be available for another month in Canada. There is a 4-cyl engine that won't be offered in the US, but may be available in Canada. But I suspect if so, it won't be allowed on the 4x4. And also unfortunately, no diesel. If you want an automatic, it's a 5-speed vs the X-Trail's 4-spd.

Yes, the X-Trail's automatic can make up for a low range when climbing. But I know from experience that creeping down 4000' descents on wrecked logging roads, with an automatic, makes for a lot of brake jobs. Acutally, 1st gear in that 5-speed automatic should provide pretty good engine braking.

There's an interesting 2-door version of the new Grand Vitara. Word is that the replacement for the XL7 will be issued later, and will be a completely different vehicle from the Grand Vitara, whereas the present XL7 is a stretched Grand Vitara.

Here's a list of some differences/similarities to the X-Trail, and their degree of appeal or disappointment for me.

+++ low range
+++ standard VDC/TC on all models
++ standard side air bags on all models
+ standard mileage readout on all models
+ dimensions almost identical to X-Trail
+ same clearance/approach/departure angles as X-Trail
+? pricing

- - mileage is 22/26.5 vs 26/35 mpg cdn. 
- unproven new model
- vestigal roof rack like X-Trail's
- outside spare
- rear door, not hatch
- 400lb heavier
- 4wd can't be used in 2wd

As for the styling, it's ok with me. It hangs together. The side view of the X-Trail is a work of genius, but the front, side and tail end look like they belong to three different vehicles.

I had been considering the Hyundai Tucson, but was turned off by the crude V-6, lack of low range and cargo space compared to the X-Trail. Unless some show-stopper comes along, unfortunately due largely to Nissan's marketing decisions, I'll have to opt for the Vitara. I know you folks don't want to hear that, but we do need the off-road superiority, and we won't be hurt much by the poor mileage. I need VDC and a low range more than a poser roof rack.


----------



## Gforce99 (May 3, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> www.mphmagazineonline.com/web/prtranslated/0049
> www.06grandvitara.com
> 
> I'm glad I held off a serious search for an X-Trail LE with VDC, as Suzuki is starting to announce the 2006 Grand Vitara. It's very comparable to the X-Trail, with some important differences. One is that it has a low range. Second is that VDC, side airbags, and a mileage readout are standard on all versions.
> ...



Choices are plenty in the small-ute market... but i'm confused when you say you don't need off-road superiority... but then say you need vdc and a low range.... a bit contradictory. Also, you don't have to get the "pooser roof rack".. it's an option package, not a standard feature. I am really glad i choose to buy a 2005 VDC LE instead of waiting for a 2006, especially since the interest rates are 3 times higher than the rate i got with my 2005. I searched and tried out the CRV and RAV4 and neither matched the X-Trail for standard features and AWD capability. I don't regret my choice for one second, it's extremely fuel efficient(8.3 litres per 100kms highway on our vacation trip) and constantly achieves 10-10.5 litres per 100kms around town, which is a bit better than my co-workers 2004 CRV. 

Congrats on your decision... definately not an easy choice. Let us know how it works out. Personally, i don't care much for Suzuki's.. but to each his own.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Gforce99 said:


> Choices are plenty in the small-ute market... but i'm confused when you say you don't need off-road superiority... but then say you need vdc and a low range.... a bit contradictory. Also, you don't have to get the "pooser roof rack".. it's an option package, not a standard feature. I am really glad i choose to buy a 2005 VDC LE instead of waiting for a 2006, especially since the interest rates are 3 times higher than the rate i got with my 2005. I searched and tried out the CRV and RAV4 and neither matched the X-Trail for standard features and AWD capability. I don't regret my choice for one second, it's extremely fuel efficient(8.3 litres per 100kms highway on our vacation trip) and constantly achieves 10-10.5 litres per 100kms around town, which is a bit better than my co-workers 2004 CRV.
> 
> Congrats on your decision... definately not an easy choice. Let us know how it works out. Personally, i don't care much for Suzuki's.. but to each his own.



I'm pretty sure I said we DO need "off-road" superiority. 

True, the fancy roof rack is an option on the X-Trail. My point was that Nissan's big innovation for 2006 was to offer this ... rack, instead of doing something I see as more sensible, like making VDC standard. I guess we'll see who's reading the market better.

As for mileage, we deliberately don't drive a lot, and wouldn't be using the suv for city driving. There are too many other ways to easily get around in cities, and we have a small car.

Like you, I rejected the RAV 4 and CRV some time ago. 

Part of my reason for posting this comparison was for people to expose problems with the choice, so I thank you and hope others try to find issues I haven't considered.


----------



## XTrail1 (Feb 24, 2005)

How badly do we need VDC/ESP/TCS etc? Some mfgs are offering this standard on their models, but let's wait and see how long before these things start acting up or stop working all together. $$$


----------



## Avery Slickride (Jan 6, 2005)

XTrail1 said:


> How badly do we need VDC/ESP/TCS etc? Some mfgs are offering this standard on their models, but let's wait and see how long before these things start acting up or stop working all together. $$$


Good point, XTrail1. The Tucson stability system was faulty right out of the box.
As for Suzuki, if this new Grand Vitara came out seven months sooner, I would have given it a long, hard look. I've owned three Zuki vehicles (two of them 4x4s), and all have been tough and reliable. But although I spend a great deal of time on logging roads and back in the bush, I'm not an off-road enthusiast and rarely needed the low range in my Sidekick and Vitara. The comfort, space and mileage of the XTrail won me over, and it has all the off-road chops I'll ever need.
Still, the new Suzuki is well worth a look.


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

I concur. The vehicle our now week-old X-Trail replaced was a '96, 2-door Geo Tracker - essentialy a Suzuki Sidekick. We still have the Tracker and will drive it until it dies. 
We too were waiting for the new Vitara for serious consideration, but decided on the X-trail for a few reasons:

- attractive '05 interest rates.
- relatively poor mileage in the new Vitara.
- don't go on logging roads and the like so have no need for a "real" 4x4.
- being a brand new vehicle often poses many teething problems.
- Nissan name/resale is better than Suzuki's (arguable maybe)


----------



## XTrail1 (Feb 24, 2005)

Rockford said:


> I concur. The vehicle our now week-old X-Trail replaced was a '96, 2-door Geo Tracker - essentialy a Suzuki Sidekick. We still have the Tracker and will drive it until it dies.
> We too were waiting for the new Vitara for serious consideration, but decided on the X-trail for a few reasons:
> 
> - attractive '05 interest rates.
> ...



_- Nissan name/resale is better than Suzuki's (arguable maybe)_
At the rate Suzuki dealerships are closing, I think not.


----------



## ViperZ (Feb 9, 2005)

I have to say that Vitara looks really nice.

I seen a few at the Suzuki dealers lot as I was driving by. They really caught my eye.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

XTrail1 said:


> How badly do we need VDC/ESP/TCS etc? Some mfgs are offering this standard on their models, but let's wait and see how long before these things start acting up or stop working all together. $$$


My main interest was traction control. Our part of Canada combined with our chosen recreation has a peculiar situation where we need to get up disused logging roads that have had deep ditches dug across them. Often the ditches are either dug diagonally, or they are too deep to take straight-on and have to be taken diagonally. This is an achilles heel of more basic 4x4 systems - unloading two diagonally opposite wheels. Because these ditches tend to be dug on steep inclines, the problem is even worse. Our PF is ok up to the point where the traction differences overcome the rear posi diff. Locking center and rear differentials are one solution, but I also want an AWD setup for winter highway driving. So I've wanted something with TC for a long time. 

Most newer TC systems come as part of VDC systems. If you do some Internet research, you'll find as I did that VDC is being found to be very valuable in avoiding circumstances that result in accidents and rollovers. It will also be very handy for getting up and down those same logging roads when they are covered with ice and snow.

I suspect Nissan's VDC/TC system would be superior to Suzuki's. I hadn't heard of problems with the Hyundai system, so that's worthwhile to know about.

These systems may turn out to be maintenance headaches, but so far I'm not aware of that being the case. Modern vehicles have very many systems cars didn't have 30 years ago, and yet I'm under the impression they are also far more reliable. We all know they start more reliably.

It all comes down to each person's blend of vehicle uses. We need more off-road capability than the X-Trail offers, but not enough to warrant the mileage penalty of an Xterra. For others, an AWD X-Trail is overkill. Then there's expense. As we approach retirement, we get more interested in what we may want or need money for other than putting it into a vehicle. For me, the new Vitara looks like the best combination of all these considerations.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

ViperZ said:


> I have to say that Vitara looks really nice.
> 
> I seen a few at the Suzuki dealers lot as I was driving by. They really caught my eye.


They are for sale now? Suzuki Canada's website doesn't even mention the 2006 Vitara. Nor do any of the dealer's websites I checked.

Does anyone know where the best discussion forum is for stock Suzuki suv's?


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

Nice addition to the market. I doubt it will be cheaper than X-Trail


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

I saw some Canadian pricing somewhere on the Internet today, perhaps CanadianDriver or whatever. It looked lower. In my case, I don't want to have to buy the most costly version to get VDC, so that translates in to a much lower price for my situation. Pricing for an X-Trail with VDC is easy - $34,800 msrp.

Without seeing details on the cost of option packages on the Vitara, I'd guess there will be about a $6000 saving for a cheaper Vitara with VDC vs the cheapest X-Trail with it. 

Do I want to work an extra few months so I can have leather seats? No, I don't even like them. And I get a low range in the bargain. And a mileage readout.


----------



## ViperZ (Feb 9, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> They are for sale now? Suzuki Canada's website doesn't even mention the 2006 Vitara. Nor do any of the dealer's websites I checked.


Apperently so, Our dealer in town, Saskatoon Suzuki has a few on the lot.


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

When I was looking a few weeks ago, nobody knew anything about when they might be coming. I knew they weren't out yet but went into my local dealer "just to get a brochure". They didn't even have that. I asked the guy to call me when he got some. He left me a message about a week ago saying he had the actual vehicles in now. By then I had my new X-Trail. Even still the Suzuki was a very dark horse for us. I just wanted to check it out mainly. Funny how the new X-Trail has made me forget about it. I haven't been by to check it out now that it's a complete non-starter (bad pun intended, sorry).
I agree about the looks though. Pretty sharp.

Ryan


----------



## ERBell (Aug 7, 2005)

I have never driven a suzuki but I was in a vitara that rolled over 3 times, and we weren't going that fast. I have never even given them a second look, besides, Suzuki makes ugly cars.


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

I actually like the looks of the new Vitara and I can see that for some people the VDC is very important. But I don't believe I can get a better car for 27K that has 4x4, manual transmission, good gas mileage and enough room for sleeping that I got in X-Trail.
Everyone has got different priorities.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

ERBell said:


> I have never driven a suzuki but I was in a vitara that rolled over 3 times, and we weren't going that fast. I have never even given them a second look, besides, Suzuki makes ugly cars.


Yes, I recall someone I knew rolling one of the original Samauri's during a test drive. She went straight to the Toyota dealer.

The 2006 Vitara's dimensions compared to the X-Trail:

wheelbase... 104/103.3
length ........176/175.4
height ........66.7/66
track width. 60x61/60.2
clearance ...7.9/7.9

To me, this suggests at least similar rollover characteristics. VDC, which will be on all 2006 Vitaras, and probably is on less than one in thirty X-Trails, is proving to reduce suv rollovers by about 50%.

That extra 400lb in the Vitara likely is mostly in the chassis, which would be below the center of gravity, and would therefore suggest greater rollover resistance than the X-Trail.

I was thinking that the X-Trail is now a 4-5 year old design, and probably is not basically as advanced as the new Vitara. But then the original Nissan pickup/Pathfinder was designed so well it remained competitive in the marketplace until it finally came to an end this year with the 1st generation Xterra. So maybe the X-Trail is a similarly exceptional design that will be around for a long time.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

X-Traction said:


> I saw some Canadian pricing somewhere on the Internet today, perhaps CanadianDriver or whatever.


http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/news,view.spy?artid=47762&pg=1


----------



## driftking (Aug 7, 2005)

*Hhmmm not quite right...*



X-Traction said:


> Yes, I recall someone I knew rolling one of the original Samauri's during a test drive. She went straight to the Toyota dealer.
> 
> The 2006 Vitara's dimensions compared to the X-Trail:
> 
> ...


In my opinion the new vitara is only looks.

Its a 2.7 V6, more cilinders mean more Fuel consumption. Look at its rating(EPA) 18/23mpg.

I doubt about the roll over rating, remember the xtrail uses mcpherson alluminium struts at the front (the vitara doesnt specifies). Also offroad, it doesnt matters if it has 4l or not, the main limitation with this kind of vehicle is wheel travel....in the case of the x-trail it sucks big time, but the less travel in the wheels the less roll over prone vehicle you have.

Also a monocode chassis like the xtrail has a lower center of gravity than a separate ladder like in the vitara(again, I could be wrong).

Also, the x-trail is already proven, first model years suck, big time (it happend to me, new xtrail dic. 2001).

the extra 400lbs of weight will make it a slug. thats for sure.


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

X-Traction said:


> http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/news,view.spy?artid=47762&pg=1


Those prices look better than I expected. Too bad you can only get the better 4WD on the luxury model. At 24.5K I would consider it.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

driftking said:


> In my opinion the new vitara is only looks.
> 
> Its a 2.7 V6, more cilinders mean more Fuel consumption. Look at its rating(EPA) 18/23mpg.
> 
> ...



I acknowledged the mileage disadvantage right off the bat. A traction control system reduces the need for long suspension travel. Or is sometimes used to compensate for it, like the first Mercedes M-class. In fact, less suspension travel could mean less chance of damaging the body by not allowing the wheels to go 'way up into the wheelwells.

The new Vitara is a combined unibody with frame rails, whereas the older Vitara was body-on-frame as you described. More steel in the drivetrain, for a low range and the reinforcement to handle the stresses, should be below the center of gravity, which would decrease rollover tendency.

The new Vitara has hp/torque specs (185/184 vs 165?) above the X-Trail, so it should balance out the greater weight - except for the mileage, naturally.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

mike dockal said:


> Those prices look better than I expected. Too bad you can only get the better 4WD on the luxury model. At 24.5K I would consider it.


I'm hoping the price outline was a simplified version. Suzuki USA states quite clearly that various features such as the better 4wd system and alloy wheels are options on the cheaper models. They made a point to state that their goal was to allow buyers to option out their chosen base models as desired. The better 4wd system happens to be standard on the luxury model only. Even if I have to get the fancy version, it's still quite a bit cheaper than an X-Trail LE/VDC.


----------



## driftking (Aug 7, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> I acknowledged the mileage disadvantage right off the bat. A traction control system reduces the need for long suspension travel. Or is sometimes used to compensate for it, like the first Mercedes M-class. In fact, less suspension travel could mean less chance of damaging the body by not allowing the wheels to go 'way up into the wheelwells.
> 
> The new Vitara is a combined unibody with frame rails, whereas the older Vitara was body-on-frame as you described. More steel in the drivetrain, for a low range and the reinforcement to handle the stresses, should be below the center of gravity, which would decrease rollover tendency.
> 
> The new Vitara has hp/torque specs (185/184 vs 165?) above the X-Trail, so it should balance out the greater weight - except for the mileage, naturally.


I mostly agree with you, but remember that less wheel travel means also less stability offroad, why? because you are always bouncing the vehicle everytime there are 2 wheels in the air, and I woulndt like to be in the bush when an ABS sensor dislodges(Happened to my X, on corrugation quick fix BTW.).

Also, X= 180HP/180TQ in all over the world, except europe/canada.

And, remember that first year cars are problematic, the new vitara does looks Sleek, I like it, but Since I already have owned an xtrail and it has coped with the beating that I give her (going over bumps at 140kph, revving to redline, etc.) I wouldnt recommend the vitara over the X.... :thumbup: .

La x-trail simple y llanamente es una MAQUINASA!!!!!!!!!


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Fair enough. We don't drive our vehicles on bad roads hard enough to bottom out the suspension or get them flying. We're using the 4x4's to get somewhere, rather than for the sake of off-roading itself. If it's bad enough to require slamming the vehicle around, we'll walk or go somewhere else. We do extensive bottom scraping and denting however, and I haven't heard any mention of skid plates for the new Vitara. 

I know about the problems with new models, like the '96 Pathfinder, but due to the degree to which it meets my requirements, I'll take the risk to get this vehicle soon rather than go with the X-Trail or wait another year. 

I also want to thank the participants here for receiving news of, and discussing the Vitara with level-headed and thoughtful comments.


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> I also want to thank the participants here for receiving news of, and discussing the Vitara with level-headed and thoughtful comments.


Ya, ya, sure. Now piss off you turn-coat!  
Just kidding. Seriously, keep us posted. I'd be interested to hear how it all works out for you.

Good luck.

Ryan


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Rockford said:


> Ya, ya, sure. Now piss off you turn-coat!
> Just kidding. Seriously, keep us posted. I'd be interested to hear how it all works out for you.
> 
> Good luck.
> ...


Well...., sorry  I really tried. I considered and rejected everything else but the X-Trail, most recently the Tuscon, and spared no one my complaints about VDC being restricted to the LE. 

A few pieces have to fall into place before I go shopping, but I hope to have one by the end of the month. Not sure what I'll be able to say since I may not even test drive an X-Trail, and any problems with the Vitara may not show up for a while. I have noted that the present Grand Vitara apparently did not suffer from first-model-year problems, but it wasn't as different a vehicle from the predecessor as the '06 is. 

Who knows, the X-Trail is due for a major redesign within a few years, so maybe there will be a true off-road version.


----------



## Avery Slickride (Jan 6, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> I have noted that the present Grand Vitara apparently did not suffer from first-model-year problems, but it wasn't as different a vehicle from the predecessor as the '06 is.
> 
> Who knows, the X-Trail is due for a major redesign within a few years, so maybe there will be a true off-road version.


X-Traction: I owned Suzuki 4x4s of both previous generations. My '97 Sidekick was absolutely bulletproof: four years, 100,000K and no problems whatever. I also had a first-year Vitara, a 1999, and the only problem was a tail-light fuse, fixed under warranty. (Plus a couple of fender-benders, thanks to my son and his girlfriend, but you can't blame the car for that.)
The new GV looks very good to me, but I'm very happy with my X-Trail, which is perfectly capable of handling the roughest terrain I'll ever tackle. There's a road leading to my shack in the bush that I can't even use for most of the year with my regular car. Even in midsummer I have to back up and take a hard run to surmount a rocky, gravel-covered hump. The X-Trail, in 4WD Auto, crawls up and over without a hint of strain or wheelspin. It's not an offroader, but neither am I, so it gets me anywhere I want to go. :cheers:


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Thanks, Avery, for your experiences with the Suzuki's. 

While automatics can substitue to some extent for slowly climbing steep grades, in our case it might mean crawling steeply uphill for an hour. Up things that are too steep for the same vehicles with standard transmissions and no low range. First gear isn't low enough, and we've been up hills where the Pathfinder's first gear in low range needed almost putting the gas pedal to the floor to get up.

This sort of regular use wouldn't do the X-Trail's automatic transmission any good, or the brakes going down the same lengthy, steep and rough grades. With a low range, such stuff is almost effortless, so there's far less wear and tear on the vehicle. As you say, our "needs" vary, and we try to match our vehicles as closely to those needs as we can.

I've been looking farther into the '06 Vitara's heritage, and it really is somewhat the same vehicle as the Saturn Vue and the Chevrolet Equinox. But they are very different from each other. The Vue has plastic body panels. The Equinox is bigger. Both have rear hatches as opposed to the Vitara's rear door. Neither has the external spare as does the Vitara. The engines are different. And only the Vitara has a low range and ladder subframe. I was under the impression the Vitara was made in Japan, but now it looks like it's made in Ontario.


----------



## Avery Slickride (Jan 6, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> I was under the impression the Vitara was made in Japan, but now it looks like it's made in Ontario.


Yes, I heard they're using the Ingersol plant that built my Sidekick. It wasn't the most luxurious vehicle ever made, but it was a quality unit -- very well assembled, very tough and reliable, quite squeak- and rattle-free. I didn't pamper mine, just kept it clean and waxed, and after four years it still looked like a brand-new car. I really liked that boxy little jalopy. :thumbup:


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

BTW - if you are thinking about this kind of off-road use then Nissan has a solution - it's called X-Terra


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

mike dockal said:


> BTW - if you are thinking about this kind of off-road use then Nissan has a solution - it's called X-Terra


A valid point. I wasn't keen on the first generation Xterra, because it's basically the same vehicle as our first generation Pathfinder. Although a fine design to last 20 years in the market, I don't want to put up with its shortcomings for the next 10 years that we'd own it. Traction control, side air bags, awd and a mileage readout are not available on it.

As for the 2006 Xterra, it comes down to a balance of our needs, and it's just a bit too much for us. I was disappointed that Nissan upsized both it and the new Pathfinder. Without a doubt it would be much better off-road than the new Vitara. But our balance of needs is such that we almost got an X-Trail. Probably the mileage is close to what the '06 Vitara gets, but I would expect Nissan did the same marketing nonsense as with the X-Trail, and allows you to get VDC/TC only on the most expensive model. That would make it much more expensive than a comparable Vitara.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

*'06 Grand Vitara JLX-L Review Link*

I know this is an X-Trail discussion site, but I was asked to post my impressions after getting a new Grand Vitara. The X-Trail was at the top of our list until the GV came out.

I'll compromise by posting only a link to another site where I put my review. Those interested in pricing will find elsewhere in the linked topic, that with the Suzuki rebates, CarCostCanada pricing, and using MSRP for the X-Trail, the top-of-the-line GV was about $6000 cheaper than an X-Trail LE with VDC.

http://www.cartalkcanada.com/forum/index.php/topic,40003.225.html

One last thing, it has no rattles or squeaks.


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

Thanks for the update. On the strength of our '96 Tracker I almost waited for the new GV too. Its mileage scared me off though. That and the fact that it's an all-new vehicle. I always worry about 1st year vehicles and the bugs that usually come with.
Sounds like you're good in that department.
For what it's worth, we have about 10,000km's on the LE now with no real complaints. In fact the only real problem I have with it is its mileage. It's still pretty good, I was just expecting better is all. At least I know I made the right choice for us by not waiting for the GV though. Getting worse mileage than what we're getting now would be tough to swallow.


----------



## AlenaInch (Jun 25, 2019)

*where to buy cars online*

Hello. I tried to find a reliable dealer for a long time. And I've finally done it. This is ottofact.com. There is a big database of cars. I found my favorite car there (Nissan Rogue S AWD). 
I hope this information will be useful.


----------

