New four-wheel drives are great. They’re quiet, comfortable and refined compared to their predecessors and they’re also capable of taking you further off-road than you’ve ever likely imagined. They have all of the modern conveniences you could ever want onboard and they are also, most importantly, equipped with the very latest driver-assist technology, aimed at keeping you and your passengers safe on and off the road.
But old-school 4WDs can be just as good, if not even better, just for wildly different reasons. If driven well, they’re capable of going just as far as, if not further than, a modern 4WD, they’re easier to fix on the fly, easier to find spare parts for – even in the middle of nowhere – and they’re better able to withstand the extreme punishment of daily life on Australia’s roads and tracks.
But which 4WD type comes out on top when it’s modern 4x4 tech vs old school hardware?
Read on to see what I think.
Driver-assist technology is great, if it works as it’s intended to. However, sometimes the application of it in the real world may range from mildly annoying to downright atrocious depending on the vehicle you’re driving at the time.
As much as it aspires to be, this kind of tech is not perfect. Off-road traction control, for example, uses sensors to detect and analyse driving conditions and anticipate vehicle motion, with the aim being to optimise power distribution to the wheels and prevent loss of grip before it happens.
Great, in theory, less so in reality.
Safe controlled momentum from a reliable foundation of traction are crucial to safe 4WDing.
That’s why when off-road traction control systems are flawed, unreliable or deliver otherwise patchy efficacy, your off-road fun-time is under threat.
Some off-road traction control systems are clunky. When the terrain becomes challenging, in practice many systems seem to just whirr and click and clunk, rather than actually limit useless wheel-spin and send torque to the wheels with at least some traction.
Some off-road traction control is also pre-emptive and too intrusive: it works, but it kicks in when it shouldn’t, either activating abruptly and with poor timing, or robbing the 4WD of precious momentum by backing off or cutting out. Better calibration and more precise activation is often needed, particularly when this kind of tech is designed to replace proper 4x4 hardware.
The same goes for hill-descent control. When it works well, it’s great. It keeps an off-road vehicle to a low and controlled speed while that vehicle drives down the hill. A good hill descent control should be smooth and effective, holding very low speeds, not jarring in its application as some systems are (only activating a second after the descent has started, when it’s too late) or so ineffective that the vehicle doesn’t hold to a low speed at all, instead feeling like it is free-wheeling down a steep slope once momentum builds.
Worse than that, modern 4WDs are essentially a mass of electronics, sensors, wiring, motherboards etc and those components may be vulnerable to damage.
And the effective application of driver-assist tech may be impacted with the ingress of bulldust, mud or water. If onboard sensors are compromised or damaged in some way, then you’re left at the mercy of nature.
Imagine this: You and your family are on a weekend trip away in the bush and you’re currently 80km from the nearest town. You drive through an innocuous-looking creek crossing – the water seems to be about shin-deep. However, some of that muddy water splashes onto one of the vehicle’s onboard sensors and your 4WD automatically goes into the equivalent of ‘limp home’ mode, which is far from ideal. What could be worse than that?
A lot of hype and hoopla is generated by carmakers’ claims that they test their vehicles in Australia, in tough Australian conditions.
That’s all well and good but the sustained, compounded impact of driving life here for a vehicle is punishing. The viability and efficacy of sensors and electronic wizardry over the long term after copping severe day-to-day punishment (extreme temperatures, corrugations, driving under load etc) may be called into question. Half a year of dust might be okay under testing, but what about a few years worth of dust building up where it’s hard to clean out?
While the same holds true for components on old-school 4WDs – that they’ll cop a massive amount of daily punishment and will fail at some stage – at least in theory those older vehicles can be more easily fixed in remote areas as opposed to trying to get a new vehicle running again which may require someone in your touring group to have a computer engineering degree and require you to have a team of specialists choppered in from Germany.
A real purpose-built 4WD with a full ladder-frame chassis, rigid (live) axles front and rear, and diff locks has always been admired by those in the know. Basic and solidly reliable powertrain and mechanical components are the way to go.
Any 4WDer worth their salt will have a soft spot for anything in the realm of Toyota LandCruisers (70, 80,100 Series, anyone?), Nissan Patrols, Land Rover Defenders (the old ladder frame kind), Mitsubishi Pajeros, even Jeep Wranglers or Gladiators - you get the idea. The old way of doing things is even sought after by some newer examples on the market like the Ineos Grenadier and Suzuki Jimny.
Plus, it's worth noting the difference between modern hybrid 4x4s which maintain links to the axles, like the GWM Cannon Alpha PHEV, as opposed to new more EV-motor based ones like the BYD Shark 6 - even if I think the hate directed at the Shark 6 by some 4x4 fans is a bit unwarranted.
Resolving issues on those old-school 4WDs can be completed with some common sense, plenty of ingenuity and a fair bit of elbow grease. A stack of spares, duct tape, cable ties and some welding skills also help and will get you a whole lot further than nothing at all and you’ll likely be able to patch up your 4WD, continue your trip and reach civilisation or at least the nearest town.
There are pros and cons to modern 4x4 tech and old school hardware – but sometimes no matter how clever software and sensors are, there’s no replacing the stuff that’s worked for over seventy years.