Road Test: Hyundai Santa Fe vs Suzuki Grand Vitara V6

By Feann Torr & Paul Maric - 23/Aug/2006

Can you get off-road on a budget? Suzuki and Hyundai would argue that yes, you can, as they both offer competitively priced AWD vehicles with 6-cylinder power, good standard features and modern styling.

We took these two Asian car makers up on the challenge and the battle arena was set, pitting the Suzuki Grand Vitara V6 against Hyundai’s new Santa Fe.

Both vehicles are powered by V6 engines, but from the get go it’s obvious that the Santa Fe is more suited to families with its seven seat capacity, but that’s not to say the Suzuki can’t handle taking the kids to cricket training.

In this comparo we put both vehicles through a number of different scenarios, so while we compared both new age 4WDs in the hustle bustle of commuter traffic, we also crammed them with people for short journeys, tried our hands at reverse parking in tight urban underground car parks and we even did the unthinkable – took them off road...

Now, people who know their 4x4 hardware will probably tell you that the Santa Fe shouldn’t leave the blacktop, while the Grand Vitara will be quite at home on a 4WD track. As we discovered, the Santa Fe is capable of getting dirty and the Suzuki shouldn’t be considered head and shoulders above it's Korean rival. Before we take a closer look at them to see if either can be crowned winner, the S: is the Suzuki score and the H: is the Hyundai score. Now let's have a look:

Drive: S3.5/5 H3.5/5

Though the Suzuki Grand Vitara V6 was more adept at scrabbling up muddy inclines, the Hyundai surprised us with its tenacity

Off Road: These vehicles are soft-roaders by nature, and therefore are not expected to be able to climb mountains. We didn’t take them off-road to throw mud in the respective manufacturer’s faces (pardon the pun), but rather we took them off-road to see just how far owners could trek if they so desired.

The terrain we put the vehicles through would be the upper limit that most owners would generally dare to tackle and at the end of the day, this is a guide to show you what could happen if you were so inclined to hit the mud for the weekend.

We really picked a great day for our off-road trek, it had been raining for most of the week and on the Saturday we went out, you guessed it – it was still raining. This meant the utmost level of care was required to wade the vehicles through what was literally big 4x4 territory. One of the things to always remember when traveling off-road is to bring a mate with a decent and capable vehicle and equipment to get you out of trouble. Our arsenal included two vehicles, a 5000kg rated tow rope and two CB radios for communication. A shovel is also a must, one thing that we forgot (and lamented) to bring.

One of the first things you notice when you leave the blacktop is the smooth and more pliant ride quality of the Santa Fe. The Santa Fe’s soft suspension soaks up the massive holes and ruts that the mud-encrusted tracks threw at us and generally made the drive much more relaxing. Though comfortable, this wasn’t always a positive quality; when fjording through mud filled ruts and mini-rivers, the Santa Fe would dive in and tend to react somewhat slowly, and this delayed reaction didn't inspire confidence.

With the Suzuki, the firmer suspension results in a less favorable ride, but reaction to bumps and ruts means there is less chance of knocking the front or rear of the vehicle coming out of miniature gullys. On the road the Grand Vitara delivered more direct steering, and this assisted off the beaten track. You can feel where the wheels are heading and have much more control over a given situation than compared to the Santa Fe, and this was particularly important when guiding the car through big  pre-formed ruts.

Some big differences between both vehicles' off-road ability came down to the 4WD modes on offer. The Santa Fe could only lock the centre differential to provide equal power to all four wheels at up a 30km/h limit. The Grand Vitara on the other hand was seemingly much more advanced and was capable of engaging a lower set of gear ratios for more torque, along with the ability to lock the centre and rear differentials.

So, what’s the main difference?

Basically, the Hyundai will remain a front-wheel drive (FWD) vehicle until it senses slip in either of the front wheels. Once such an event occurs, power can be delivered to each wheel individually as required, and this gives the Santa Fe a decent mud slinging ability.

The Suzuki on the other hand is more studied in the arts of mud slinging, and can vary power sent between the wheels much more quickly. When the rear and centre differentials are locked simultaneously, equal power is being sent to each wheel, and on top of that the rear wheels both receive the same amount of torque via a mechanical differential.

What happens when both systems are put into practice? We get very muddy, that's what.

Surprisingly, the Hyundai Santa Fe did a good job in most situations, even parts where ground clearance was the deciding factor. That said, on numerous occasions we tried to forcefully invoke the rear wheels to engage, but only 50% of power is ever apportioned to the rear wheels. This means no muddy doughnuts, but ample stability.

The Suzuki is more of a go-getter in the mud, however, on one occasion Paul got it stuck in a rather awkward ditch, whereby one tyre was free-floating in the air, whilst the other tyre had most of the vehicle’s weight on it. In 4H mode (4-Wheel-Drive-High) most of the power was being sent to the free-floating wheel, meaning that it spun aimlessly in the air.

After engaging the low-range gearbox, along with the centre and rear differential locks, things started changing – for the worse. Because the rear differential lock is mechanical, the engine sends equal power to each wheel. This meant that one wheel (the free-floating wheel) could easily spin, whilst the other wheel had the weight of the car on it. This created a set of clunking noises, which was the differential failing to send power equally to both rear wheels. From where we stood, this made the diff locking systems relatively pointless, as the car remained bogged.

NB: The Santa Fe came to the Grand Vitara's rescue, hauling the floundering vehicle from it's rut with a tow rope.

At the end of the day, we both felt the vehicles faired quite well when it came to the rough stuff. Both have at least 200mm of ground clearance and are able to hold their own relatively well on mud soaked and sometimes precarious 4WD tracks. They certainly weren’t capable of miraculous feats, but owners of both vehicles shouldn’t be shy of a drive down a muddy track every now and then. The Suzuki came out the other end relatively unscathed. The Hyundai on the other hand received damage to the left wheel arch guard, which became dislodged and rubbed against the wheel. It was simply a case of knocking it back into place; it later had to be replaced due to a crack that could affect the wheel guard later down the track.

When driving in an off-road environment, ABS brakes are generally not your friend. The ABS system prevent locking of the brakes. When traveling through mud and dirt you generally want the tyres to find traction, and ABS makes this difficult under brakes on slippery surfaces, particularly when the Suzuki Grand Vitara only has front-end disc brakes, while the rear axle features drum brakes (what year is this again?).

In essence, during hard braking in mud, the Suzuki Grand Vitara's braking performance was average, so whenever driving the Suzuki we had to be mindful of the fact that it couldn’t stop anywhere near as easily as the Hyundai Santa Fe.

The Santa Fe uses disc brakes on all four wheels and although it too has ABS, it resulted in much better stopping distances due to the braking power being sent through four wheels - as opposed to two in the Suzuki’s case.

The Santa Fe also featured an ESP (electronic stability program). This clever system allows the vehicle’s brain to send individual braking commands to each wheel at varying rates, and monitors the steering position, along with the vehicle’s lateral position to make decisions. In essence it prevents understeer and oversteer from occurring when driven on sealed roads. Normally these systems are very intrusive and annoying in off-road situations, yet in the Santa Fe’s case the system was very easy going and didn’t annoy the driver all too often.

On Road: Both these cars are fairly easygoing vehicles in everyday circumstances, such as driving to the shops, heading to the beach or visiting the folks. They feature independent suspension at all four corners (this is the first Suzuki 4WD to ditch a live rear axle), just like a family sedan. The Suzuki’s steering is more direct and in touch with the road compared to the Hyundai, which feels very power assisted compared to the Suzuki and needs 3.24 turns to get from lock to lock.

When it comes to cornering, both vehicles are certainly far from breathtaking, and rightly so: their respective ground clearances equate to substantially higher centres of gravity, so Mark Webber antics are not recommended.

Highway cruising is fairly placid and neither car exhibits any great amount of intruding noise inside the cabin, such as tire noise and engine noise. However the manual gearbox in the Suzuki had a faint yet perceptible whine during our test.

The Santa Fe feels more composed and featured better ride quality in all urban driving conditions and the suspension feels much more adaptable, able to deal with the ruts and bumps and is generally far softer and smoother than the Grand Vitara. The Grand Vitara is a little bit stiffer but it’s not enough to make Grandma cry. At the end of the day it’s something you certainly wouldn’t notice unless you had the chance to drive these vehicles side by side.

Like most vehicles with a jacked up ride height, seating positions for both vehicles are raised and provide a good view of road,. You have to step up a bit in each vehicle when entering, adding to the illusion of towering over other drivers. The driver’s seat in the Santa Fe doesn't offer enough flexibility to remain comfortable. Both of us experienced mild soreness in the back and legs after a highway stint in the Santa Fe, something just wasn’t right, but it was hard to pinpoint the exact problem.

Steering wise, the Suzuki comes across as though you can really feel the road through the wheels. By our measure, that’s no bad thing, and it has more weight to its steering than the Hyundai, which feels more assisted and somewhat detached from the front wheels. The Hyundai’s extra power assistance helps in city and urban driving and though it has more turns lock to lock and is a longer vehicle, it has more confidence when parking in tight spots. This is due to the car’s impressive 10.9 metre turning circle, which is a half metre tighter than the Toyota Kluger and Ford Territory, and is slightly smaller than the Suzuki’s 11 metre turning circle.

Neither of these cars will tear round a corner at the pace of an MX-5 – or even a Daewoo Lanos for that matter – and this is because they are taller (high centres of gravity), have softer suspension setups and the tyre wall profiles are not built for mid-corner grip. Their tread patterns tell a tale of a combination of both light off roading and lots of highway driving. Neither car is significantly better or worse in the handling department, and with a full load you’d be barmy to push one of these 4WDs hard through a corner.

According to Hyundai nomenclature, the Santa Fe possesses sedan-like handling. A bold claim in our opinion -- when thrown into a bend it feels far from sedan-like. It wasn’t even at the level of the Ford Territory in terms of its handling, which is significantly more sedan-like.

Engine: S4/5 H3.5/5

Both vehicles feature V6 engines with similar power outputs. The Hyundai Santa Fe uses a 2.7-litre V6 engine which produces 138kW @ 6000rpm and 248Nm of torque @ 4000rpm. The new ‘Mu’ variant of Hyundai’s V6 uses continually variable valve timing (CVVT) and a variable intake system (VIS), allowing fuel efficiency to reside at 10.6L/100km. This 'official' figure seems quite ambitious; we were pressed to get 12L/100km.

Them’s the specs, and on the road the V6 motor in the Santa Fe is very lively and vocal at the top end, stirring the soul with a truly un-Hyundai like sound – it's very sonorous - but is let down by offering very little at the bottom end. In other words, you have to rev the tripe out of it to get any decent response.

Max power and torque are both achieved at over 3800rpm, meaning that plenty of revs are needed to extract the peak performance potential from the engine. This could also be why the fuel efficiency is so low in comparison to the Territory and Kluger.

Power is sent through a 4-speed automatic gearbox (or an optional 5-speed manual). The gearbox is very smooth in the way it shifts, but it does take its sweet time actually swapping cogs. However, it is a fairly eager engine-gearbox combo, and will happily drop a gear with a half a bootful of throttle. Shifting is a little slow and it could easily do with a fifth gear. There is a 5-speed automatic ‘box on offer in the Sonata and Grandeur, so it would be have been nice to see it make an appearance in the Santa Fe. Who knows what the motivation for using the 4-speeder was when better technology is available? Probably monetary.

And then there was the Suzuki, which also uses a 2.7-litre V6 that develops very similar numbers: 135kW @ 6000rpm and 250Nm of torque @ 4500rpm. The fuel consumption is rated at 11.1L/100KM, which was again a slightly optimistic figure. It’s also a very loud and raspy sounding engine when revved hard, as opposed to the Hyundai’s surprisingly refined and pleasing tone – far from something you’d expect of Hyundai just a few years ago.

But of most interest here – and because the engines are very similar in a lot of ways – is how much more grunty the Grand Vitara felt. Now, this could be attributed to the fact that it came with an extra pedal (the clutch) and an extra gear and is about 300kg lighter. It simply felt much zippier low in the rev range.

The driving dynamics aren’t too bad. The clutch is quite heavy and the gearbox seems quite rough and rugged when transitioning through the gears, which bodes well for longevity but makes shifting nefarious. The brake pedal is quite light and could do with a bit more feel; it is a bit lifeless until you got close to the end of the pedals' travel.

In a drag race, the Suzuki takes the lead early due to the greater power at the bottom end of the rev range and the fact that it’s a manual and weighs less, but the Hyundai starts clawing back as speed builds, making it a relatively even race with the Suzuki staying a half car length ahead. Had the Hyundai been a manual, we reckon it would have been a photo finish.

Exterior: S3.5/5 H4/5

The Santa Fe is very nice to look at and, much the same as the interior, it shows how far Hyundai has come since the Excel days. The Suzuki is an altogether different creation. That’s not to say it’s not as pretty, just different. It has an almost military style, but enough modern touches to keep it contemporary.

The Santa Fe is a very smooth looking machine – perhaps too smooth for some – but it’s a fairly brave design and we reckon it pays off, and is perhaps one of Hyundai’s more avant garde vehicles. 

The front end has a very appealing style, with smooth curves everywhere and a strong grille bordered by very swish headlights with diffuse parking lights that take it upmarket slightly.

Both vehicles feature halogen projector main beams that did a good job at illuminating the road at night, and though the Suzuki isn’t quite as fancy looking as the Hyundai, it’s not without appeal. Flared wheel arches give it a tough, nuggety stance on the road, and the angular, squared-off design seen in the Grand Vitara seems to work for the hardy little rock hopper.

We weren’t too keen on the spare tyre mounted on the tailgate of the Grand Vitara (the Santa Fe’s spare was under body), as it hindered rearward vision just a touch. Some people may like the rugged connotations of having the wheel on the rear, making it look like a more traditional 4x4.

Both vehicles are poles apart in their unique styles, but neither of them offends the eye in any great way.

Interior: S3.5/5 H4/5

The Suzuki Grand Vitara comes across as a bit bland in comparison to the Hyundai Santa Fe – it’s neither brilliant nor terrible. Had we not been comparing these two vehicles however, the interior would have come across much better. It’s not shoddy, just not as nicely styled as its ever surprising Korean rival.

The steering wheel controls on the Suzuki were winners, and the ergonomics weren’t too bad either – everything's within reach and you won't pop your shoulder out trying to mess with the HVAC controls. Initially we found both cars to be a bit stiff in their seat cushioning, but it’s nothing too dire, and the cloth trim in the Suzi Grand Vitara is really nice, combining a double layer stitch to great effect.

And of the Hyundai? Well, there’s a pattern beginning to emerge here, and once again the interior of the Santa Fe is indicative of the South Korean brand's improving design, build and manufacturing qualities. This much can be seen just by glancing at the Hyundai’s interior: although the faux-wood finishes are exactly that – fake – they look quite stylish and up-market and together with the centre console the vehicle was a lot more inviting than it's Japanese rival, the Grand Vitara.

The flat folding 3rd row seats were also very well presented, and were easy to use; it took a total of 10 seconds to bring the 3rd row to life. Of the other SUVs we have driven with optional 3rd row seats, the Santa Fe is certainly a class leader. The best part is you don’t even know there is a 3rd row there when not in use, as they fold flush with the floor, remaining hidden until the ankle biters need a lift.

Overall: S3.5/5 H4/5

This test has made it clear to us that, yes, you can get off-road on a budget, and both these vehicles managed to delve remarkably deeply into the Australian scrub without suffering from any life threatening battle scars. But as you can see from the scores the Hyundai Santa Fe won this particular stoush.

The Suzuki Grand Vitara is a more capable vehicle when churning through megalitres of mud, yet the Santa Fe surprised with its tenacity and ability to keep up with the Grand Vitara when the going got tough, and was more thoughtfully designed in general.

These vehicles will spend the majority of their lives on the black top, and in this area the Santa Fe wins hands down. Sure, it's more expensive, but it offers more room, better ride quality, a pleasant interior and more storage spaces. If you have a growing family and have heaps of junk to cart around, and plan on spending most of your driving time on asphalt, the Hyundai is the winner. For $40,000 you get a lot of car, however even with its rear drum brakes the Suzuki can't be ignored when priced at around $31,000, and if you have hobbies that take you off road regularly then the Suzuki would be well worth investigating.