oiseautempete wrote:
The majority of people see in the 4x4 a sort of minivan with a different look, moreover the vast majority of 4x4s are SUVs and often not even 4x4 but 4x2 ... The "real" 4x4s (like land rover, Lada Niva, etc ..) there are actually very few, and these are the ones who are uncomfortable on the road and even less on the motorway and who consume a lot because of their specialization.
Some people also ask the question of why the Niva petrol engine: by -30 or even less petrol even without engine preheating it starts as long as the engine oil is not frozen, a diesel not (frozen fuel), moreover, diesel vehicles (for example caterpillars) which drive in the far north, they turn almost continuously unless they are connected to a heater when they are not in use.
Many SUVs are relatively light and consume barely more than a station wagon and the same as a comparable conventional MPV.
The advantage of the SUV (4x4 or not) is its versatility and this is precisely what most people are looking for ... I don't specifically defend them, it's just an objective observation.
Absolutely birdish, these are
multi-purpose vehicles, you can put firewood, tiller, mower, bikes, large appliances, etc ...
The top of the range has the disengageable 4-wheel drive transmission because, generally, these are front-wheel drive, the engines are the same as those of the sedans. Most of these vehicles are Euro 5 standards, this is not at all the case for the millions of Clio 1.9Ds that drive in town.
The quest for versatility is not just about the automobile; if you look around, everything becomes versatile.