I am new to the board and really intrested in buying an Xterra. I just wanted to know how they do on the trail completely stock. How do they compare in performance against competition like Jeep cherokee, Liberty, explorer, etc...

the cherokees and libertys are good comparisons.

the explorers however, if you're talking about the full size, is in a completely different price range, has independant rear suspension is more of a family van than suv anymore.

the liberty and cherokee both have independant front suspension, with a live rear axle. same as the xterra. i believe the jeeps have a lower crawl ratio.

but stock to stock, excluding pretty specific situations, you will be able to hang with any liberty or cherokee. also nissans are more reliable. if the suvs you listed are your only choices, then the xterra is an easy choice.

Actually, the Cherokee has a solid front axle. But they don't make it anymore...

ClaptoVaughn couldnt be anymore right about what he has said. Although the Jeeps have some good things about them, they do not compare to the Xterra's reliability. Unless you are planning on keeping your car for about a year go ahead and buy a jeep, because i bought myself a 2001 Grand Cherokee brand spankin new from the dealership which a couldnt wait to give back because i had only leased for 2 years. The trany had to be changed twice and the differential i dont even remember how many times it had to be changed. I admit that i took it off-roading but nothing compared to my X. They are nice cars the Jeeps but very delicate. In other words, if i were you i would go for an Xterra. Although i must admitt that you are goin to have a little things here and there but nothin that most cars dont go through. Hope this will help!! Oh yeah one more thing about jeeps lol

thanks guys. The more I read the more I want one.

Well, since you asked...

It all depends on what you want. The Xterra handles great on the trail (IMO), but it does not have a solid front axle like a Jeep Cherokee. The Liberty is comparable in class/size, but is on a unibody platform. I would have bought a Jeep if it weren't built by Chrysler, because being having my truck RUN is very important to me, and the American trucks just don't have the workmanship.
If you can afford it, buy a Toyota. They're bulletproof, and are very reliable. But try touching a 4WD truck-based SUV for under $30,000 at your Toyota dealer. Uh-uh.
I bought my '03 4WD Xterra because it was the only truly truck-based, 4WD (w/ transfer case), reliable Japanese SUV I could afford. I gave up the bells and whistles, and got a 5-Speed Manual with hand-crank windows and finger-powered door locks for $20,065 out the door. It's very buildable, and with a couple grand (even less if I fabricate my own stuff), I can have a VERY capable off-road vehicle that will probably run far longer than any of its American competitors.

If Jeeps were as bad as these guys make it sound they wouldn't be in business, but I'm biased. I have an '80 CJ-5 with 160,000 miles and my girlfriend has a '96 Cherokee with 98,000 miles. Hers hss been reliable and what we both expected out of a 8 year old vehicle. I'd look for a '01 Cherokee or step of to a Grand Cherokee if you want to offroad your new vehicle. IFS vehicles can't really compete. Modding a Jeep is also much cheaper.

Bah... go buy a Land Cruiser... I've got a 95' w/ " mods " and it goes everywhere... I had it literally all over Moab this summer, with a brief stop-over in Colorado on the Rubicon.

But seriously... Xterra's are impressive in their own right and their own price bracket. I spent the same amount of $$$ on my LC that my better half did on her old Xterra. She got a warranty and a new car... I wheel w/ the guys here in NC all the time and they're a great bunch of guys. A lot better IMHO than some of the Toyota guys I've run into. Don't get me wrong... for the most part they're great, but then you run into the $$$ guys who think $$$=driving ability.

Go w/ the Xterra... like it's been said before... IT's the only truck-based Japanese SUV that can be had to $20k or so.

Jason

Isn't the Rubicon in California?

Um, the Rubicon is in Northern California, not Colorado...and it's far from a brief stop-over via Moab.
:rolleyes:

It is next to Lake Tahoe on the Ca / Nv border..
http://www.rubicon-trail.com/Rubicon/map.html

Having owned both the X and a cherokee I can tell you that they are similar in many respects, but bone stock the cherokee will outwheel the X. As far as the liberty, it is no better and in many areas worse than the X. As far as off road prowess/durability I rate them Cherokee, Xterra, Liberty in that order. If you have the money, go with a 4-runner. For the rest of us who don't have a trust fund, the X is the best thing going.

Cherokee Advantages:
Solid Front Axle
Horsepower and low end torque
aftermarket parts support in all aspects
2.72 low range tc
lightweight

Cherokee disadvantages:
Need a 3" lift and trimming for 31" tires
weak front and rear axles
unibody design (that's how it is so light)
weak rear springs
need slip yoke eliminator with any kind of lift

Xterra advantages:
body on frame = durable and easier to modify
bulletproof rear axle
32" tires stock, no lift
better (reasonable) rear springs
more interior room
integrated roof rack= one less thing to buy
headlights, I can actually see more with the low beams than I could with the high beams on the Cherokee!
reliability

Xterra disadvantages:
IFS
CV joints
autolocking hubs...either selectable or always-on are my preferences
relatively low horsepower, reasonably low torque
2.00 low range TC...least reduction in the industry
lack of aftermarket support (relative to jeep)

Now, take the Liberty with all of the same disadvantages of the cherokee. Then also take away the IFS, low end torque (not max torque, but where the torque is at), and cargo room.

As far as reliability with Jeep products, they are at both ends of the spectrum. The jeep 4.0 litre is considered a solid workhorse, the 4 speed transmission in the cherokee and NP231 transfer case are all considered very reliable in the industry. Everything around them is hit or miss. I have heard of vehicles with very few problems at up to 400k, and others that should be turned in under the lemon law. In fact, it is for this very reason that I leased the cherokee that I had. I knew if it was a good one during the lease that it would be a keeper. If it turned out to be crap, it would go back. Turns out it was a keeper, until the 14k lease buyout was 3k above what it would sell for on the lot. Since I wheeled with a few X's, new their capability and value, and didn't have a trust fund to get the 4-runner here I am with an X.

Bottom line, every vehicle has its quirks, advantages, and liabilities. With the X I have found a solid performer that will be in the stable for some time.

This is one thing people seem to get confused on. The transfer case is geared at 2.02:1, but with lower transmission gearing (3.580:1) and axle gearing (4.90:1), the Xterra has a final low range reduction of 35.43:1, which is very comparable to the 4Runner (about 43:1) and Cherokee (about 32:1 to 36:1).

With CALMINI's gears my ratio is 65.06:1, or just a tad shy of the Rubicon.

heh, actually, new 4Runner was listed as one of the top weakest SUV's in collisions (as in how much damage can be caused by pretty small force applied to bumper ) So bulletproof it is not.

That's just bumpers though, which these days are all made of foam filled, color matched plastic so they flow with the body style. Underneath it's still a rugged truck.

In looking at 4Runner prices, I came across the crash test data and the 4Runner has the highest rating of any midsize suv for safety.

I think XOC did his homework on this because I think most if not all suvs have cheap plastic bumper covers. Even the Xterra changed to cheap plastic since I got mine, which is metal.

Look behind them and you'll see it's a metal bumper with a plastic cover. It's as sturdy as the 2000-2001 models.

Yes that is what I said, cheap plastic bumper cover.

Isnt having a plastic bumper a safety item that most every car/truck comes with now?

having a metal bumper means more dings and less give in a small accident... i didnt know that the xterra ever came with a metal bumper unless you put an ARB on or something...

Go kick your front or rear bumper with a bare foot then report back here.

I would much rather have a bumper that works better in a large crash than a small accident.

Excellent write up....I would only add...
My dad has a Cherokee and has way lees interior leg room than the X. Especially in the rear.
Also, the X has a higher ground clearance than almost anything in it's class.

yea but isnt that a form of a crumple zone? i mean if the bumper were just metal, the crash would have a HUGE jolt for the passengers. the way it is now, the car will crumple up a little, still no were near as much as a range rover or some other SUV's with crumple zones.

I understand why metal would be better for a lot of circumstances, but safety i dont think it is. I think Nissan would have a lot of problems if they had a steal bumper on one of there stock vehicles.

Check the ARB web site and you will see that they crash test them to ensure they crumple in a severe accident. Why would you want your bumper to disintegrate in a low speed accident? Wouldn't it be better to hold up in low speed situations, and crumple in high speed situation? Who would benefit from that kind of thing, a dealership/parts department? No, its the governments fault a 5mph accident just cost you $850 in parts. We have to design them to meet those standards right?

Many people run up to 7 inches of lift on Cherokees without SYEs. It depends on year of the Cherokee and it varies Jeep to Jeep sometimes, just depends on your driveline angles and you can work them out with shims too.

I hate how the 4runners are getting lower with each redesign.

I mean, look at say a 93' model. You can have a child sitting under there. Then say a 99' model, it's lower, but still the highest in its class (I think they are higher than our X). But turn to the 2004 models and they look kinda like an Explorer.

Toyota would never admit that the newer models lost any offroading ability compared to the earlier ones, but I think they have. They now rely heavily on electronic stuff like the Land Rovers to overcome their lower trail abilities.

But then again, if the manufactures try to satisfy the few offroaders out there, they'd go bankrupt.