[Dan. S]

Hi Everyone my names Dan,

I have been a member for a while but never posted and want to say thanks for the excellent and down to earth forum.

I have enjoyed reading about all the great options and possibilities with Suzuki 4X4.

I am in the market to replace my 2000 Pajero IO and really like Suzuki in particular the 2.4 petrol AWD models.

However I am wanting to ask if this model can have manual free wheeling hubs fitted so as to gain a bit more on road fuel economy but mostly so I can have RWD as I do enjoy sliding / drifting around on private dirt roads in 2wd as much if not more than off-roading.

The fun thing with Mitsubishi's Super select 4WD system I have in the Pajero IO is that it can be 2WD, 4WDH, 4WDL and lock.

I have searched a few times but no luck finding this info for the later 2.4 petrol models, plenty of info on free wheel hubs to remove the pneumatic set up on the generation before it though.

My apologies if it has been done already and much appreciated if someone with experience could point me in the right direction.

I am looking at 2011 3 door Grand Vitara 2.4 litre at the moment but wanted to ask these questions first.

Thanks in advance
Dan

[fordem]

No - the 2011GV is designed to be an AWD vehicle, there is no 2WD position in the transfer case as there is with the iO, and the second gen GVs. Also, due to the design of the front suspension, the CV axle shaft supports the weight of the vehicle, and this does not permit an easy disconnect, the way it can be done on the second gen GVs.

[Dan. S]

Thanks for your information, much appreciated.

Its ashame no 2WD. There really isn't anything in the small to medium size range that has proper low range and 2wd. Oh well.

[303zuke]

Dan. S wrote:

There really isn't anything in the small to medium size range that has proper low range and 2wd. Oh well.

Suzuki Jimny?

[fordem]

Dan. S wrote:

Thanks for your information, much appreciated.

Its ashame no 2WD. There really isn't anything in the small to medium size range that has proper low range and 2wd. Oh well.

Personally I see no reason at all to lament the lack of 2WD - AWD makes for a markedly more predictable vehicle - I should point out however that I learned to drive back when RWD was the norm and have long outgrown the need to drift sideways around every turn.

For what it's worth, I own a four door Pajero iO (which is in 4H more often than not) a 2005 GV with the 4 mode 4WD and a 98 GV with part time 4WD. SWB (short wheel base) RWD vehicles can be quite a handful for those who are not accustomed to them.

[bob_oz]

Dan. S wrote:

Hi Everyone my names Dan,
I have been a member for a while but never posted and want to say thanks for the excellent and down to earth forum.
I have enjoyed reading about all the great options and possibilities with Suzuki 4X4.
I am in the market to replace my 2000 Pajero IO and really like Suzuki in particular the 2.4 petrol AWD models.
However I am wanting to ask if this model can have manual free wheeling hubs fitted so as to gain a bit more on road fuel economy but mostly so I can have RWD as I do enjoy sliding / drifting around on private dirt roads in 2wd as much if not more than off-roading.
Dan

Hi Dan,

Last year I upgraded my 2000 SWB 2.0L Pajero io to a 2012 SWB facelift 2.4 Grand Vitara.
My io was lifted, 225/75-16 tyres, rear locker and ultra-low low range (plus strut braces 4 wheel disks twin pot front calipers etc etc etc) and was a joy to drive offroad, fast (really fast)
The first thing I did to my SGV was replace the 225/70's with much larger 245/75-16" tyres (52mm increase) to maintain a good footprint for bitumen grip.
Even with this mod the power is great, the handling is great and the fuel economy is better! Low range is lower than a standard io (equal to my lower mod) hill climbing with the trac control is just about equal to the rear air locker i had in my io.

My io at 110km/h would average around 10.5L/km - my SGV averages 9.8L/100km and goes harder, faster, better.

The handling is different, and it was initially not as fun BUT adjusting the rear alignment has fixed this dramatically,

AWD isn't an issue, it still can be tail-happy off road and has amazing power when you plant it solidly around corners in the gravel, minimal under steer and a whole lot of over-steer when you get the balance right.
In contrast it is sharper in AWD than the io - and while tight doughnuts are more challenging (you need a mild hack to disable the traction and stability) I do not for one instant miss the twitchy tail 180's my io would perform on bitumen in the wet.

Definitely consider the SWB SGV - the shorter wheel base and weight saving maximizes the 2.4 performance

Just make sure as hell its not the old 2010 block in it!!!!!

[llama_au]

They're amazing handlers once you replace the crappy factory suspension with a lift. My 5-door 3.2L V6 (the biggest, heaviest, most powerful one) is so much fun to throw around twisties and gravel roads. The handling is predictable and when you're starting to creep towards it's limits it very gently lets you know.

They're slightly rear-biased without the centre diff locked you'll be pleased to know.

[Gwagensteve]

Really? The transfer case is torque biasing? I had no idea.

[llama_au]

Rear-wheel biased AWD, yes. It's great (I chirp the tyres with a spirited take-off).

[llama_au]

I had to Google because I couldn't remember the exact split; 47:53

[Gwagensteve]

47:53? That would be undetectable from 50:50. I had an STi Impreza with adjustable torque split and even big changes were fairly hard to detect. Closer to 50:50 improved turn in but when it’s hard to transfer weight rearwards under power (which takes a LOT of power, the STi certainly didn’t have enough) how much torque is going to the back isn’t really relevant.

That car gave me a pathological hate of what AWD does to handling. It was goddawful. Even with sticky tyres and front and rear LSD’s it was a blunt instrument. Everything else I’ve owned with AWD hasn’t been perfomance inclined but they’ve all also handles like poo.

Drive an MX5 or e30-e90 three series BMW and you’ll appreciate how bad AWD handling is.

[Gwagensteve]

PS I bet it’s the front tyres that chirp on takeoff.

[llama_au]

You're assuming my car history.

I've owned, in order; a FWD Pulsar with 196kwatw, two R31 Skylines (RWD), an R34 25GT-T Skyline (RWD), a Cube (FWD), a BRZ (RWD), a WRX (AWD) and now the Grand Vitara (AWD). For a few years I assisted with vehicle tests and probably drove around ~50 different cars. Before I got into 4x4s I was regularly competing in motorsport.

The WRX was a blob eye and the handling was a bit woeful, but I don't tarnish all AWDs with that brush. The Grand Vitara, once you do away with the stock suspension and chuck in a lift in handles great.

You might say in theory it's undetectable, but my butt dyno will tell you it feels more RWD than AWD most of the time. I'm reasonably qualified to tell you what my car feels like.

[llama_au]

Gwagensteve wrote:

Drive an MX5 or e30-e90 three series BMW and you’ll appreciate how bad AWD handling is.

#controversialopinion

I wasn't that thrilled with the handling of the most recent MX-5. My BRZ was a better handler.

[Gwagensteve]

Not controversial at all - the GT86/BRZ has excellent handing.

My comment didn't presuppose anything about your experience, my point is that AWD is a handling impediment, not an advantage. Poor handing car won't be improved by the addition of AWD, great handling cars have been knobbled by the addition of AWD. Advances in driveline electronic control have allowed manufacturers to make AWD feel more transparent which is (now) helping.

I read an interesting piece on the handling of the various AWD turbo Japanese sedans one of the conclusions was the 4WD versions handled better than the FWD mostly due to the additional weight of the driveshaft, diff etc balancing the weight distribution.

I suspect some of the improvement in the NGV's handling once a lift is installed will be due to the raised roll centres making the car feel more progressive. It's also inherently RWD in configuration (i.e longitudinal motor etc) so they should be reasonably balanced.

[llama_au]

The body roll and understeer on stock suspension is horrible, the lift appears to get rid of that.

And yes that is true, AWD does not make a poor handler a good one. The JB/JT is very predictable once you put better springs and shocks in it. I can throw it around more predictably than I could my WRX, which regularly felt like the back wanted to overtake the front. I've also kept up with an 86 through the hills easily in my GV. I've taken the GV around Phillip Island Grand Prix Circuit on muddies at speed for shits and giggles. I didn't end up off the track

[Dan. S]

Hi Everyone
I didn’t realise there was so much responses built up on my thread.
Thanks to everyone for your information.
I think I will go ahead with getting a NGV and because I am now wanting automatic the LWB with 3.2 V6 looks like the one to get.
From my research on fuelly and reading on the forum the 2.4 and 3.2 are very close in fuel economy when auto.
I guess I can grow up and stop drifting around the farm back roads when I go home on holidays.
My family car is a 120 Prado that I fitted EFS lift kit back in 2013 and still no leaks and going strong after 140 000km and comfortable too.
Does anyone know someone with EFS lift kit fitted to the NGV. I believe they give about 25mm and with larger tyres I could see it raised by 40-45mm.
I have read through the forum on Dobinsons and Ironman and OME but no EFS.
Again thanks for sharing your information.

[llama_au]

Dan. S wrote:

Hi Everyone
I didn’t realise there was so much responses built up on my thread.
Thanks to everyone for your information.
I think I will go ahead with getting a NGV and because I am now wanting automatic the LWB with 3.2 V6 looks like the one to get.
From my research on fuelly and reading on the forum the 2.4 and 3.2 are very close in fuel economy when auto.
I guess I can grow up and stop drifting around the farm back roads when I go home on holidays.
My family car is a 120 Prado that I fitted EFS lift kit back in 2013 and still no leaks and going strong after 140 000km and comfortable too.
Does anyone know someone with EFS lift kit fitted to the NGV. I believe they give about 25mm and with larger tyres I could see it raised by 40-45mm.
I have read through the forum on Dobinsons and Ironman and OME but no EFS.
Again thanks for sharing your information.

Definitely go a 3.2L V6. I know there's not many around, but it's worth it. I'm not aware of EFS doing a lift for them; Dobinsons, Ironman and OME (in order of highest to lowest) are your choices.

[Slug]

Strange thing with my new GV3, it where’s out rear tyres 2 to 1set fronts and the left rear faster than the right
And yes the wheel aliment is fine. Might be my big right foot (country Ks ) only 2 lights in Ararat
First set rears lasted 10,000 but did have a load on it, out back trip
Now done 45,000 second full set looking soon for a new set
Only ever got 10,000 out of tyres when living in the north WA out back on dirt on my 4x4 and the Nat park 4x4 didn’t mater what brand

[Gwagensteve]

LHS tyres always wear quicker than RHS due to road camber.

[Dan. S]

llama_au wrote:

Dan. S wrote:

Hi Everyone
I didn’t realise there was so much responses built up on my thread.
Thanks to everyone for your information.
I think I will go ahead with getting a NGV and because I am now wanting automatic the LWB with 3.2 V6 looks like the one to get.
From my research on fuelly and reading on the forum the 2.4 and 3.2 are very close in fuel economy when auto.
I guess I can grow up and stop drifting around the farm back roads when I go home on holidays.
My family car is a 120 Prado that I fitted EFS lift kit back in 2013 and still no leaks and going strong after 140 000km and comfortable too.
Does anyone know someone with EFS lift kit fitted to the NGV. I believe they give about 25mm and with larger tyres I could see it raised by 40-45mm.
I have read through the forum on Dobinsons and Ironman and OME but no EFS.
Again thanks for sharing your information.

Definitely go a 3.2L V6. I know there's not many around, but it's worth it. I'm not aware of EFS doing a lift for them; Dobinsons, Ironman and OME (in order of highest to lowest) are your choices.

Hi llama au can you please share what your fuel economy with the 3.2 V6 was before and after your mods. I mostly do highway and beach driving and will mostly keep mods to a small lift and 22 75 16 tyres snorkel and nudge bar undecided on steel bullbar yet.

Does yours have a transmission oil cooler or do find no problems overheating in the sand on the beach on hot days? I normally spend most of the day in the sand when I go.

Thanks I have really enjoyed reading your thread and like your set up and updates of your trips.

[llama_au]

Dan. S wrote:

Hi llama au can you please share what your fuel economy with the 3.2 V6 was before and after your mods. I mostly do highway and beach driving and will mostly keep mods to a small lift and 22 75 16 tyres snorkel and nudge bar undecided on steel bullbar yet.

Does yours have a transmission oil cooler or do find no problems overheating in the sand on the beach on hot days? I normally spend most of the day in the sand when I go.

Thanks I have really enjoyed reading your thread and like your set up and updates of your trips.

Hey Dan, thanks for the kind words. No trips for the foreseeable future with COVID but as soon as I'm allowed I'll be out again

So before mods, which admittedly wasn't very long, I was getting low 9L/100km pure freeway driving and around 11.0-11.5L/100km around town. With mods (245/70/16 all terrains, Ironman steel bullbar, Ironman underbody protection, recovery points, lift, UHF, snorkel, roof racks, roof tray, towbar and other small things) I still can get low-mid 9L/100km pure freeway driving (provided I don't put the foot down for overtakes) but around town it's shot up to an average of 14L/100km.

225/75/16 is a good size tyre choice, I had it before and I'd go back to it.

I've had no overheating of the transmission, transfer case or engine with summer beach driving and I do all of my beach driving in low range (even the high speed stuff). I haven't added an external trans cooler as there's been no need.

[fordem]

I'd recommend anyone running an automatic transmission equipped vehicle in sand to fit, at the very least, a transmission temperature gauge - it's the only way to know what the transmission temperatures are. Once you know what's happening, you can determine if your particular usage requires a cooler.

[Gwagensteve]

That's exactly what I was going to say. iamb_au, are you using an OBDII reader or similar to pull trans temp from the ECU? How have you determined the transmission hasn't overheated? I recommend anyone driving an auto offroad, towing or with non-standard tyres have a gauge.

Using low range will be beneficial for transmission heat in sand.

[llama_au]

It doesn't slip, the trans fluid is a normal colour and smell therefore I'm not concerned. Feel free to fit one but I haven't felt the need.

[Gwagensteve]

Each to their own but by the time the fluid is cooked so is the transmission. Likewise if it starts to slip. Prevention is better than the cure.