Suzuki Forums banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello from a newbie looking to buy a Geo Tracker from 1995-1997 that seems to be a great choice for reliable and economical transport on rough country roads.

Before going ahead I have a question about the difference between the 2-door and 4-door Geo Tracker and also its Suzuki cousins. Is their any significant differences that would effect rough road performance, for example in the design of the chassis, body build etc, between the 2-door and 4-door models apart from the obvious one ie more doors and longer chassis in the 4-door than the 2-door?

The reason I ask is the 4-door "looks" like a stronger vehicle more suited to rough roads than the daintier 2-door but have not had an opportunity to test drive or get a look under either of these vehicles yet, so hope to get some good advice by posting this thread.

Most of the time I will be driving this vehicle solo with no passenger, so the number of seats is not important. But the strength, reliability and economy of the vehicle is very important as I need to do a lot of driving on rough bush roads.

What model Geo Tracker would you choose if you were in my seat?

p.s. do I also understand right the older version of the Geo Tracker is likely to last longer and perform better on rough roads than later model trackers (ie 2000+ models) or is this untrue?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,067 Posts
There are differences between the two and four door, and also differences between the Chevy/Geo & Suzuki but nothing that makes either less robust than the other - and whilst I'm on that topic - as far as I'm concerned, the later models are no less robust or capable off roaders.

For what it's worth, we've had a two door 1.6, and a 4 door 2.0 V6 in the older style, and a 4 door 2.0 4 cylinder in the newer style - and still have the last two - my preference, both on & off road is the newer four door.

Depending on your needs - both two door & four door have their advantages & disadvantages - the short wheel base of the two door limits the interior space and makes for a choppy ride, but it's also more maneuverable - the four door has more space and is more comfortable, the longer wheel base does allow a more refined ride (less fore~aft pitching) - the newer four doors have more space again, are more refined, better equipped and have more power.

For "driving on rough bush roads" (as compared to rock crawling/mudding/etc.) you can take your pick - they are all equally capable & robust - mine would be a 99 ~ 05 four door.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks Fordem for this very useful input. I have lots to learn, as I have only had the opportunity to drive a ´95 Suzuki Sidekick and that was fun but some years ago, so good to hear you are confident that all the trackers are equally suitable for driving on rough bush roads, as this gives me a broader selection of available vehicles to choose from.

Take your point about the longer wheel base giving a more refined ride; on the other hand does the 4-cil. 2-door use significantly less fuel? Am also curious if they have approximately the same clearance above the ground and wheel rim size?

Also very interested in your comment on performance of more recent models compared to the older ones, as some reviews suggest the newer models were designed with a different demographic in mind than the older ones, as is the case with most other 4x4s. My last car was an old Range Rover and it was certainly more suited to rough roads than the newer models but maybe that was an exception, which is why it is great to be able to get good advice like that you have given.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
24,207 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
What kinds of rough roads are you talking about and how fast are you driving on these roads? If you drive faster on like fire roads over bumps and stuff I would suggest the longer wheel base as it will be a bit easier to drive fast. The 4 door also has a lot more room if you ever need to haul camping gear and people. I have fit a lot of stuff in my little 2 89 2 door but it gets cramped for space quickly. Surprisingly lots of leg and head room but cargo room is a different matter. The later models are going to have much more power than the early ones. I think my 2 door has enough pep around town even on 31" tires but trying to climb things is another story. I have been eyeing the 2.3l aerio motor to swap in at some point. No, I don't want to put in lower gears. I like going fast and have plenty of room to run in the deserts of California.

The older 2 doors are definently more iconic and stand out a lot more than the 4 doors.


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top