High ground clearance, ~30 MPG, 5-6 seats, new/reliable used $20-35k?

[EliteRetard]

Maybe something with easily upgradeable wheels? Seems like one easy way to add an extra inch (or more) of clearance. Is there another really common size above 16" that isn't drastically expensive?

Is there any such vehicle, at about $20k? A large wagon/hatch (Outback maybe?) or some car based SUV? My sister is just finishing schooling and will be some head honcho construction person (but not crazy high pay). That means lots of driving between sites, and lots of extremely trashed, rocky, ripped up, thick muddy terrain. There's a chance she'll risk a higher budget right at the start, maybe $30-35k. Figured I could help do some preliminary looking to try to determine whats available at the various price points.

She is currently driving an old Ford Focus and is now thrashing it hard at 160k miles and it's not liking that at all. She just recently drove off a large ledge to drop onto soggy mud, almost got stuck, and practically scraped the bottom of the car off. She really needs to get something with much better ground clearance, but still wants decent MPG. She needs room for coworkers, a big dog, and needs to be able to hide/lockup tools/equipment. She has absolutely no use/want for a truck, far to many downsides with no useful positive for her (not hauling construction material).

 

[heymrdj]

Nothing.

With that out of the way, willing to settle for 20-25mpg, your taller SUV like 4Runner and of course your basic V6 4x4 pickups will fit this. You can get a base model 3.3L v6 4x4 F-150 right around 23K brand new.

Outbacks have good clearance, but overheat the center diffs when pushed hard in rough terrain. On top of that they still don’t get great mileage. Jeep Patriots are really good for clearance and you’ll get 25-28mpg depending on the engine transmission combo. They can be had for stupid cheap (like loaded to the gills 15k miles for 17-20K). Slow as molasses but pretty rock solid with a good 4x4/AWD System.

 

[EliteRetard]

Nothing.

With that out of the way, willing to settle for 20-25mpg, your taller SUV like 4Runner and of course your basic V6 4x4 pickups will fit this. You can get a base model 3.3L v6 4x4 F-150 right around 23K brand new.

Outbacks have good clearance, but overheat the center diffs when pushed hard in rough terrain. On top of that they still don’t get great mileage. Jeep Patriots are really good for clearance and you’ll get 25-28mpg depending on the engine transmission combo. They can be had for stupid cheap (like loaded to the gills 15k miles for 17-20K). Slow as molasses but pretty rock solid with a good 4x4/AWD System.

The Outback is listed at 32MPG, though I didn't know about the diff issue. I'm not sure if she'll be "pushing it hard", but is that an issue than can be resolved (modded, or different oil)? Whats the difference between Outback and Forester?

28 MPG is ~30 MPG (~ = about). So that Jeep may indeed be an option.
Not interested in any truck options, at all.

I thought it may be hard to find the right thing...but I'm surprised that there aren't a lot more options.

 

[heymrdj]

The Outback is listed at 32MPG, though I didn't know about the diff issue. I'm not sure if she'll be "pushing it hard", but is that an issue than can be resolved (modded, or different oil)? Whats the difference between Outback and Forester?

28 MPG is ~30 MPG (~ = about). So that Jeep may indeed be an option.
Not interested in any truck options, at all.

I thought it may be hard to find the right thing...but I'm surprised that there aren't a lot more options.

Ground clearance means air going under the car, and air under the car means drag, and it rapidly drags down fuel economy. It’s why every CUV is basically a like for like of its sedan based sibling, but gets 5-10mpg worse.

The Subaru issue can’t be modified easily, but lots of data on the Subaru Outback forums. The Forester does a good job I believe. I can say check fuelly. Most of these SUV will get several mpg less real world. Their drag when speeding and weight when starting and stopping multiplies the spread between real world and epa testing. Most non hybrid cars of any descent size struggle to stay near 32mpg, all the SUVs are worse.

 

[jlee]

$8-25k Lexus GX470/GX460 and spend the savings on fuel.

 

[EliteRetard]

$8-25k Lexus GX470/GX460 and spend the savings on fuel.

Yikes! I don't think she needs to off-road like that.

Yeah, EPA estimates are always high...that's why I'm looking for something that's rated around 30MPG.

Lets say she does 22k miles/year. Keeps the car between 5-10yrs (lets say 7). Avg fuel cost at $3.5/gal (it's only going up). That Lexus will cost like $12k+ more than a 25MPG combined vehicle (or $150/month!).

 

[jlee]

Yikes! I don't think she needs to off-road like that.

Yeah, EPA estimates are always high...that's why I'm looking for something that's rated around 30MPG.

Lets say she does 22k miles/year. Keeps the car between 5-10yrs (lets say 7). Avg fuel cost at $3.5/gal (it's only going up). That Lexus will cost like $12k+ more than a 25MPG combined vehicle (or $150/month!).

Yup, but you can save $12k right out of the gate.

Other than that though I don't really have any suggestions - I'd think something like an Outback/Crosstrek but I am not familiar with newer Subarus.

 

[drnickriviera]

Avg 28-33mpg on our 16' outback. IIRC the outback/legacy are on a separate bigger/nicer chassis that forester. I believe everything else is based on the impreza chassis. Forester bit shorter and taller than outback. I've had no problems on gravel mountain and forest roads. I have to wonder how hard the center diff is pushed on an automatic. Isn't the distribution like 80/20? Heck for 28-29k you can get a new premium model outback with eyesight (which i would strongly recommend). or save a few k w/o eyesight

 

[PricklyPete]

Outback.

 

[mindless1]

Maybe something with easily upgradeable wheels? Seems like one easy way to add an extra inch (or more) of clearance. Is there another really common size above 16" that isn't drastically expensive?

Often new wheels aren't necessary, rather you just buy higher profile (larger diameter) all terrain tires which you'd want anyway. The stock street tires on SUV/etc these days aren't very good in mud. Unfortunately they will reduce road handling performance some (arguably not as important on an SUV, which should be driven like... it's an SUV), add road noise and loss of 1-2MPG to whatever extent they're better in mud.

Larger diameter wheels whether it be through larger rims or just tires will make the speedometer read low. Sometimes it's a programming fix and other times a speedo gear fix (or just live with it including all calculations for MPG, otherwise taller A/T tires make MPG seem even worse than it is).

 

[Herr Kutz]

Avg 28-33mpg on our 16' outback. IIRC the outback/legacy are on a separate bigger/nicer chassis that forester. I believe everything else is based on the impreza chassis. Forester bit shorter and taller than outback. I've had no problems on gravel mountain and forest roads. I have to wonder how hard the center diff is pushed on an automatic. Isn't the distribution like 80/20? Heck for 28-29k you can get a new premium model outback with eyesight (which i would strongly recommend). or save a few k w/o eyesight

What is the average of your average?

 

[wirelessenabled]

Getting just under 29 MPG on my 2014 Outback. Get over 31 MPG on the freeway at 70 MPH. My daily commute is only 4 miles each way and that with the startup and idle cuts mileage down to just under 25 MPG when I do it without any freeway trips.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Ground clearance means air going under the car, and air under the car means drag, and it rapidly drags down fuel economy. It’s why every CUV is basically a like for like of its sedan based sibling, but gets 5-10mpg worse.

The Subaru issue can’t be modified easily, but lots of data on the Subaru Outback forums. The Forester does a good job I believe. I can say check fuelly. Most of these SUV will get several mpg less real world. Their drag when speeding and weight when starting and stopping multiplies the spread between real world and epa testing. Most non hybrid cars of any descent size struggle to stay near 32mpg, all the SUVs are worse.

The Outback is listed at 32MPG, though I didn't know about the diff issue. I'm not sure if she'll be "pushing it hard", but is that an issue than can be resolved (modded, or different oil)? Whats the difference between Outback and Forester?

28 MPG is ~30 MPG (~ = about). So that Jeep may indeed be an option.
Not interested in any truck options, at all.

I thought it may be hard to find the right thing...but I'm surprised that there aren't a lot more options.

For the US lineup, the Outback is based on the Legacy, while the Forester and Crosstrek are based on the Impreza. Outback is simply a larger vehicle, a "mid-size crossover" according to Subaru, while the Forester is a Compact Crossover. The Crosstrek is a Sub-compact Crossover. I personally haven't heard many problems regarding the Center Dif since the Gen 2 Transmissions. If this is just a site run-about, an Crosstrek has about the same ground clearance as an Outback without the long wheelbase that can high center. With capable tires, it should be able to handle most places just fine.

If she's looking for a big upgrade on room, the Subaru Forester is pretty much the definitive "dog-owners" crossover. I recommend she take a look at all of them. With the exception of the Outback, you can get a pretty much maxed configuration variant of either of the first 2 CUVs within that price range.

 

[NutBucket]

Right. Anything will have more ground clearance than her Focus. Subaru likes to brag as their cars to tend to have more than most but either way should be plenty for hopping curbs and such.

I think the Forester is a "dog car" mostly because the cargo area has a lot of ceiling height and big windows so it's not claustrophobic. I really dislike the trend of small windows for practical cars. Save that stuff for sports cars.

 

[heymrdj]

It's my understanding that the heating issue is at both the transmission and the multi-plate clutch pack. When moving through terrain that causes individual wheels to rapidly lose all grip and suddenly regain it, as you would on a construction site where you'd typically lock in 4Hi, it causes the clutch pack that shifts torque to heat up. In the same sense, the transmissions still overheat. As I was discussing with a friend that works at the Lafayette plant, Subaru has year over year de-rated the Outback's towing capability to keep the system (both transmission and clutch issues reported) from occurring. For 2014-16 it was 3000lbs for a 3.6R. Then it was 2700lbs in 2017. Now in 2018 it's 2700lbs BUT (from the owners manual) When towing a trailer on a long uphill grade continuously for over 5 miles (8 km) with an outside temperature of 104F (40C) or above, it's 1350 for the 2.5 and 1500 for the 3.6.

That all being said, lots on the Outback forums take them to some pretty extreme off road locations and they survive fine, though most are modded (even the current Gen 5's).

Ford Focus sits at about 5.5-6in of ground clearance; both the Outback and Forester sit at 8.7". A noticeable improvement. A Jeep Patriot sits at 9.1" (there's also a 2" lift kit for them if that's not enough, I believe there's a 2" kit made by ADF for the Crosstrek/Forester/Outbac, and a 4" in development). All of them I think will be excellent choices, but with cash being mentioned, you won't find much better value than the Patriot.

 

[fralexandr]

2017 Kia Niro has 6.3" ground clearance and ~50MPG. the 2018 has less at 5.9".
went to look at one, and the door handles feel kind of cheap, though everything else about it seems pretty good.

consumer reports says it's the most reliable KIA and KIA's generally above average, but i don't particularly trust their reliability measurements.

fyi, changing the wheel diameter may affect turning radius and handling.

 

[NutBucket]

5.9" is not much....probably about the same as your average sedan. I certainly wouldn't want to hop a curb in that. Plus, the Niro isn't AWD so that doesn't help either. A RAV4 hybrid would be more appropriate if you insist on a hybrid.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Grand Cherokee Laredo 4x4 with Pentastar V6 - TrueCar is showing$4,655 discount for ~ $31K

Chevy Colorado is another great choice - especially with the Diesel option but pickup truck.

Isn't she able to bill her mileage at the Fed Rate of 55-cents a mile?

 

[IEC]

5.9" is not much....probably about the same as your average sedan. I certainly wouldn't want to hop a curb in that. Plus, the Niro isn't AWD so that doesn't help either. A RAV4 hybrid would be more appropriate if you insist on a hybrid.

RAV4 hybrid only has 7" of ground clearance. So it's not exactly an off-road vehicle.

 

[NutBucket]

7" is enough for most "off roading"....but agreed not much. I much prefer our Forester's 8.7"...or something like that.

(Spam removed)

 

[jlee]

2017 Kia Niro has 6.3" ground clearance and ~50MPG. the 2018 has less at 5.9".
went to look at one, and the door handles feel kind of cheap, though everything else about it seems pretty good.

consumer reports says it's the most reliable KIA and KIA's generally above average, but i don't particularly trust their reliability measurements.

fyi, changing the wheel diameter may affect turning radius and handling.

It won't change turning radius unless they're oversized to the point where the tire is hitting other parts of the vehicle before the steering rack locks out (which is...not ideal, for more significant reasons than turning radius).

 

[mindless1]

I get the feeling it's not the clearance but rather the mud traction that matters... I mean unless bad advice is taken to get a 4WD/AWD car instead of an SUV... it's kinda what they're made for if you don't want an open pickup bed instead of cargo or seating room?

The whole MPG thing, is just trading one cost for another cost, annoyance, or handicap. Hint: Nobody would prefer to get fewer MPG. You choose the vehicle that checks all the right boxes then the MPG is what it is. There is no magical way to have it all.

 

[Squisher]

Often new wheels aren't necessary, rather you just buy higher profile (larger diameter) all terrain tires which you'd want anyway. The stock street tires on SUV/etc these days aren't very good in mud. Unfortunately they will reduce road handling performance some (arguably not as important on an SUV, which should be driven like... it's an SUV), add road noise and loss of 1-2MPG to whatever extent they're better in mud.

Larger diameter wheels whether it be through larger rims or just tires will make the speedometer read low. Sometimes it's a programming fix and other times a speedo gear fix (or just live with it including all calculations for MPG, otherwise taller A/T tires make MPG seem even worse than it is).

Larger wheels will also impact mileage because of their increased weight and that weight moving further out from the center which will impact mileage much more than that weight just added weight statically to a vehicle. Rolling resistance it is called and negatively impacts a vehicle's ability to start and stop.

 

[mindless1]

^ Sure, road performance and (light) mud performance are two different things. It doesn't matter much how fast you can stop and start if you can't go where you need to or risk getting stuck. If it were about road performance then stick with a car.

 

[Yuriman]

Fun example with the wheels, Kia Niro trims:

https://www.kia.com/us/en/build/niro/2017/trims?trim=115&model=608

FE trim is base, has low rolling resistance tires on 16" rims. 52 city / 49 highway / 50mpg combined

LX trim adds roof rails (aero drag), a little bit of weight, keeps the 16" rims and LRR tires. 51 city / 46 highway / 49mpg combined

Touring trim moves up to 18" rims, grippy low profile tires. 46 city / 40 highway / 43mpg combined.


Stuff like roof rails affects highway economy in a big way. Tires affect city and highway both, in a big way. First thing I do when I get a car is to rip off the roof rails and put LRR tires on it.