Nissan Xterra

Anyone have experience with the Nissan Xterra?

I'm looking for a cheap reliable crossover and I like the design of the 2003-4 models.

...

...

...

It's an suv, not a crossover.

It gets shit mpg
It has a shit interior
It has shit nvh

It's not a good DD unless your commute is like 15 minutes long.

>cue Xterrabro

...

thanks

any recs for something similar under 10 grand?

...

A civic for 3k.

4Runner
Forrester

>It gets shit mpg
For a decent hp v6 its bretty good
>It has a shit interior
Subjective9
>It has shit nvh
Im drunk right now. But wtf?

I dont even like nissan and i think youre dumb

Its good and reliable, has vq engine and manual if you want. Solid choice op

Not that guy but he's totally right on all of that.

Nvh is Noise, vibration, harshness.

They ARE cheap and reliable but the other shit is also true. I looked at them for the wifey car but the MPG put me off.

>has vq engine
No, it's a VG.

A Isuzu

Go grab yourself a fully loaded 4x4 Suburban for $2k.
Fuel economy with the 5.7l or 6.5l isn't any worse than the Xterra, which is pretty sad if you think about it.

Have a 2003. Pretty bad mpg, but dead reliable. No problems whatsoever in 174xxx miles. Roid noise/vibrations arent as bad as people are saying, but they arent good either. Not much stuff outside of radio, ac and heater. If you can get it cheap enough and just want something reliable then its great, but fuel economy is too shitty for commuting/long distance and there are better off-roaders to be had at the same price point

Yup gonna second this.
I personally love my burb and how dead simple it is to work on and find parts for, I litterly don't even have to leave my neighborhood to get parts.

Only complaint I have (very common on the gms) is the fuel pump enjoys going out every 50k miles. Cut access hole = done.

>Only complaint I have (very common on the gms) is the fuel pump enjoys going out every 50k miles.
Mine didn't fail outright but it was starting to get too weak to start reliably at 190k so I replaced it. Getting the gas tank lifted back up under there is a pain if you don't know what you're doing but once you get it figured out it's a breeze with the right tools.

I think one of the issue with the failures might be people using the cheap pumps when they do replace them, and then having to replace them all the time because the cheap pumps are shit. I put a Bosch pump in mine so hopefully I wont need to worry about it for another 175-200k.

I picked up an 01 model not too long ago for a steal. In the right color, it can look just as good as 02-04 facelift model.

Here is what I can advise. For the price points you are looking at, you might be getting a higher mileage vehicle. This is not a problem, the engines themselves are quite reliable, if feeling just a bit under powered.

Regardless of the mileage of what you get, unless you have positive proof otherwise, assume the timing belt needs changing. It is supposed to be done every 105k. I got mine just shy of 174k and it had never been done. It is a job you can do yourself, just take the time to do it right. I have pics if ya want em.

Speaking of service, the complete factory service manual is online free of charge. This makes any repair much easier.

As far as ride quality goes, it is a truck platform. It rides like one. if you expect otherwise, you are a fool. Comparing ride quality to some soccer moms crossover or an SUV that has a massive size and weight advantage is dumb. Think light truck when riding in one.

Also, riding as a rear passenger is somewhat odd feeling as the roof rises up in the back and has stadium seating. Being able to look over the top of a shorter drivers head with ease is different.

cool thanks for the info. Lucky enough to have found a 2003 4wd manual with only 67xxx for under 6 grand. Probably gonna pull the trigger.

You could have three Suburbans for that much, each more comfy and more reliable than the Xterra with the same or better economy and more capability.

Mmmmmmmm

Doesn't go off road well, though so don't get a 4x4 one. Just get a 2WD.

Mmmmmmmm

>Chevy
>Reliable
Pick None

Seriously, guy asks advice on a compact/small SUV and you try push towards one of the largest available? How does that make sense?

A suburban is no more reliable, comfort is a matter of opinion, and the only extra capability would be towing greater than 5k pounds, which if needed would have ruled out the Xterra to begin with, or moving lots of people, which any other midsize crossover or minivan can do better these days.

And if a Suburban is better, seems to me it would hold its value more, not less like it has. Seems folks don't want a landbarge.

IDK why people are even bitching. It's a fucking truck.

>Pick None
You've obviously never owned this model so your opinion on the brand is entirely irrelevant.

>guy asks advice on a compact/small SUV and you try push towards one of the largest available
The Xterra is far from the smallest of SUVs and the 92-99 Suburban is far from the largest.
Overall width is nearly the same, the Xterra is taller than the Suburban, the only noteworthy difference in physical size is the length, which is not enough to be an issue 99% of the time.

>A suburban is no more reliable
Statistics tend to favor the GMT400 platform as being extremely reliable.

>comfort is a matter of opinion
No, you can't argue that comfort doesn't matter because some retard MIGHT think a cheaply designed utilitarian seat is more comfortable than a comfort oriented design.

>or moving lots of people, which any other midsize crossover or minivan can do better these days.
What other $2000 vehicle is going to have the seating, comfort, off road capability, and towing capability of a Suburban?

>And if a Suburban is better, seems to me it would hold its value more
An incorrect assumption. Supply and demand. There's a huge supply and not enough demand to support it. This drives prices down regardless of how good or bad the vehicle is. Over the course of the next 10-15 years, the Suburban is going to hold far more value than the Xterra, as the Suburban has already finished depreciating. If you've paid attention to prices over the last few years, Suburbans have started gaining value rather than loosing it or just holding it.

>which is not enough to be an issue 99% of the time.
Sure, if you don't go off road.
>off road capability
400 keks. The off road capability of a 90 foot long barge with no lockers (no the Eaton autolocker doesn't count since it's a piece of garbage that requires wheelspin to lock).

>You've obviously never owned this model so your opinion on the brand is entirely irrelevant.
You have no idea what I have and have not owned, and that claim goes both ways.

>The Xterra is far from the smallest of SUVs and the 92-99 Suburban is far from the largest.
Per edmunds, a suburban is approx 6 inches wider and 4 feet longer. By your standards, an Excursion, at only 4 inches wider than a Suburban, is nearly the same as well. Comparatively speaking, a Suburban is closer in size to an Excursion and is quite a large vehicle. I will give you the height though, with the roof rack on an Xterra is a tall vehicle.

>Statistics tend to favor the GMT400 platform as being extremely reliable.
Which also doesn't change the fact that the vg33e in an Xterra is highly reliable as well. Personally, what I see on the road of Suburbans is that they usually sound and run like shit. That likely has something to do with them being so cheap that folks that otherwise can't afford a car can get one, and then not do any maintenance. Perhaps that skews my perspective a bit, but that's what I see everywhere.

>No, you can't argue that comfort doesn't matter because some retard MIGHT think a cheaply designed utilitarian seat is more comfortable than a comfort oriented design.
Are you actually trying to argue that a Suburban is a comport oriented design? Seriously, it's all a matter of perspective. I get that you like it, but other people like other things.

>What other $2000 vehicle is going to have the seating, comfort, off road capability, and towing capability of a Suburban?
As OP was looking at something with lower capacity seating, and a lower tow rating, one can argue that those points are irrelevant as they are not needed/wanted. As for capability off road, stock for stock, they Xterra has better ground clearance, a shorter wheel base (dont want to bottom out on those little hills) and a significantly better approach angle.

>An incorrect assumption. Supply and demand. There's a huge supply and not enough demand to support it. This drives prices down regardless of how good or bad the vehicle is. Over the course of the next 10-15 years, the Suburban is going to hold far more value than the Xterra, as the Suburban has already finished depreciating. If you've paid attention to prices over the last few years, Suburbans have started gaining value rather than loosing it or just holding it.
The Suburban is so cheap because it is a 20 year old vehicle and most folks that want one have one. It holds its value only because it cant go any lower without becoming cheap than the cars scrap value. Seriously, it's not a good thing when I can buy a new one each month rather than worry about repairs.

Look, it's not a bad truck, you just have to realize that for a lot of people, it's overkill for some of its features. And it is certainly not the end all be all vehicle. If you don't need the towing, and you don't need the seating, for what OP wants, the Xterra beats it.

Lets not forget he found it in a manual transmission, which I can't seem to commonly find in a Suburban in that model year range. I find manual Xterras all the time.

>wanting a manual SUV
Why do you autists do this?

>Sure, if you don't go off road.
You don't need the shortest wheelbase possible to "go offroad"
For prerunning which is usually the only form of "off roading" that Veeky Forums recognizes, extra wheelbase is of no disadvantage at all save for the slight impact on power:weight ratio. If you live somewhere with general beach/dune access, a long wheelbase isn't a disadvantage. Even when rock crawling a longer wheelbase is often preferred to prevent end over end rollovers.
Most trail trucks you'll find are ECSB, with a longer wheelbase than a Suburban. Many expedition oriented trucks are RCLB or CCLB with the same or significantly longer wheelbase than a Suburban.

In reality there are VERY few cases where something smaller than a Suburban is needed.

>You have no idea what I have and have not owned
I know you have not owned a halfway maintained 92-99 Suburban, or that you are intentionally misrepresenting it due to personal bias.

>and that claim goes both ways
I'm not basing my views on the Xterra on baseless assumptions or outdated unrepresentative reputations formed by those without experience.

>Per edmunds, a suburban is approx 6 inches wider and 4 feet longer.
For the 92-99 Suburban, I saw 4" wider and the length difference was closer to 3' than 4'. Every generation since has been noticeably larger. Most if not all of the difference in overall width is likely just the mirrors, as they stick out far more than needed on the Suburban if you're not towing. Which makes sense as they're the same mirrors the 1 ton pickups come with.

>Are you actually trying to argue that a Suburban is a comport oriented design?
The higher trim levels? Absolutely.

>Seriously, it's all a matter of perspective.
Sure, compared to a 2016 S Class, a 98 Suburban SLT may seem pretty basic. Compare it to the average pickup or non luxury oriented SUV of the time and it is most definitely luxury oriented. Keep a reasonable and fair perspective.

>I get that you like it, but other people like other things.
I do indeed like it, for multiple reasons that I've already listed. However I'm not interested in misrepresenting it. It has a few cons, but you've yet to hit any of them which is how I know you've never owned one.

And the fact that you do not like it does not change the facts or make it any less reasonable for OP.

>The Suburban is so cheap because it is a 20 year old vehicle and most folks that want one have one.
Exactly. But that's a pro, not a con. I'd much rather have a truck that's cheap because there's plenty of them than a truck that's cheap because it's absolute shit or expensive because it's hard to find.

>it's overkill for some of its features
I fail to see how this is a bad thing considering the circumstances. I get where the mindset comes from. When buying a new vehicle, overkill generally means significantly more money for diminishing returns in usefulness. But when you take price out of the equation, or turn it around to where the overkill vehicle is cheaper, there's no longer any reason to consider it a con.
"No, I want the expensive truck. I don't NEED one as good as the cheap one."
The logic just doesn't work in this case.

>Seriously, it's not a good thing when I can buy a new one each month rather than worry about repairs.
Please explain how you think that's a bad thing from an owner's perspective, especially when it doesn't need repairs every month.

>Lets not forget he found it in a manual transmission, which I can't seem to commonly find in a Suburban in that model year range.
Because in that year range they were not available from the factory with a manual. It's a fairly common swap though.

If you were trying to point out cons with that post, then you failed miserably.

>Why do you autists do this?
No idea. For anything you'd prefer an SUV for, automatic is superior.

Never said I did, just that OP did. I guess if you are looking for more of an off road vehicle, like a jeep, it might make sense. I'm with you on that though.

>I guess if you are looking for more of an off road vehicle, like a jeep, it might make sense.
It really doesn't. Trying to climb up some slick rocks is far easier modulating two pedals than it is three. If you don't want it to upshift you can lock the auto in 1, 2, or 3 anyway. Manual is fun in sports cars and in a way that's hard to describe it's pretty fun in large trucks as well, but it's not better.

>Even when rock crawling a longer wheelbase is often preferred to prevent end over end rollovers.
No. Long as necessary, short as possible.
>Most trail trucks you'll find are ECSB
So? That's not good. RCSB is what I'd take if I HAD to buy a full size pickup to take off road.
>Many expedition oriented trucks are RCLB or CCLB
Hah, no. Very few people are using full size trucks for that and for good reason, they are too bulky.

>No. Long as necessary, short as possible
Logically that could work the other way around as well..

>So? That's not good.
If it weren't then people wouldn't use them.

>RCSB is what I'd take if I HAD to buy a full size pickup to take off road.
Because you don't "go offroad" and are basing your entire argument on uninformed assumptions.

>Very few people are using full size trucks for that
Gary Wescott would like a word with you, son.

The argument you seem to be making is that more = better. If someone has a need for a Ranger and you come in to try to tell him get a F150 or a F250 as they are more capable, you are missing the point. The bigger the vehicle, the worse the maintenance schedule. Not to mention the increase in vehicle size and weight, therefor, cost of consumable items, i.e. tires, higher fluid capacities, etc.

Had a friends 95 Suburban blow out its rear diff last week towing a camper well under its capacity. Then its alternator went shortly after. Is this representive if all? Likely not. But it is the latest in a series of interesting events I have seen with friends and family having them. They all love them for one reason or another, but not one has had nearly the reliabilty you profess.

Now, I completely agree with you on the auto tranny. I see no need for a manual on 99% of SUVs. But it seems to be what OP wants.

tldr. You are trying to upsell OP to a higher class of vehicle than needed that doesn't have a desired feature.

I can now tell that you do not go off road. Some autists on Veeky Forums only recognize prerunning cause "gotta go fast". Nearby where I am at there happens to be a 900+ acre off road park. Miles of trails that are dirt, or mud, with ruts everywhere. Guess who is getting stuck and who isn't? I am surprised that the Jeep drivers don't get pissed off being asked to help pull out larger vehicles that have no purpose being off road. The number of stuck Expeditions, Suburbans, Ford Super Duty, and even a few Excursions makes them a joke.

They can haul and tow, but beyond a gravel or dirt road with some potholes they just aren't meant for it. Who is misrepresenting what now?

>Logically that could work the other way around as well..
And it would still make the same point. You want a short vehicle without raising the center of gravity too high. Another issue with your monster machine.
>If it weren't then people wouldn't use them.
People do sub optimal shit all of the time, are you serious with this?
>Because you don't "go offroad"
Ok nigga. I guess that's why I don't drive a giant full size pickup and instead drive a 4WD SUV like a normal person.
>Gary Wescott would like a word with you, son.
The ONE person actually doing some shit like that and he doesn't get onto tough backwoods trails.

>The bigger the vehicle, the worse the maintenance schedule.
False.

>Not to mention the increase in vehicle size and weight, therefor, cost of consumable items, i.e. tires, higher fluid capacities, etc.
245/75R16 and 265/75R16 vs 265/70R16 and 265/65R17, the difference isn't even worth mentioning.
Do you really think you're going to spend $5k more on fluid for a Suburban than you will for the Xterra? If not, then that really does not matter. And if you do, then you're retarded.

>You are trying to upsell OP to a higher class of vehicle than needed
Upselling is seen as bad because it costs a buyer money. If it saves them more than 50% the cost of the initial vehicle, then it's a good thing, not a bad thing.

>the guys YJs on locked 1 tons and 37s (whom have probably been going a lot longer) make it further than the guys with a stock 1/2 ton Suburban in a park with trails specifically designed to be challenging
And I'm sure a Suburban on locked 1 tons and 37s would make it further than a stock YJ with open diffs.

>And it would still make the same point.
If it were taken the same way, it would make a point opposite the one you were attempting to make with it.

>People do sub optimal shit all of the time
Like paying more for less.

>The ONE person actually doing some shit like that
Ron Douglas would like a word with you, son.

Op here, thank you both for the input. Not really interested in the suburban though. Frankly have no use for such a large vehicle and it would be more of a hassle than anything. I'm not a big commuter so I don't really care about gas mileage. Just looking for something that can handle some rough terrain now and then and is reliable/safe. I'm curious about the auto/manual thing though. Are there any benefits to having manual on a midsize suv?

And there goes any credibility you ever thought you had. It is a fact that the larger the vehicle, the more routine maintenance that should be/needs to be done.

And you are still pushing a larger vehicle than is needed, that is missing features OP wants, that could be 5 to 10 years older, with that much more wear, and pretending that it would be acceptable off road. Guess what, an Xterra can have lockers put on just as easily, while still having a better stock ground clearance, wheel base, angle of approach and departure. Once we talk mods for better offroading, it STILL beats it.

We get it, you like your truck, for us normal folks, we like to buy what we need/want. That way we have something to look forward to other than the day that our SUVs monetary value becomes less than its scrap value because our "new" SUV is 25 years old and was likely ridden hard all those years.

1998 is the best year desu

>benefits of manual on an suv
Usually they're cheaper to repair and harder to completely destroy.

>And there goes any credibility you ever thought you had. It is a fact that the larger the vehicle, the more routine maintenance that should be/needs to be done.
If you take a 5000lb SUV designed for a 1000lb payload and load it with 1000lbs, it's going to wear out faster than it would without the extra weight. Now take a 6000lb SUV designed for a 2000lb payload, and load 1000lb in the back. It's going to be heavier than the first, but last longer. Run both of them empty, and the 6000lb SUV will last longer under the same usage. Why? Because they don't use the same components.
Bigger wheel bearings, bigger ball joints, bigger differentials, thicker frame, bigger brakes, stronger transmission, etc. The mere fact that these parts are bigger does not mean they require maintenance more often. The entire fucking point of making them bigger is so they last longer and do NOT require additional maintenance. The only con to these parts is that when buying a NEW vehicle, they're more expensive. When they're cheaper than the smaller stuff, it's win/win.

Same concept of Xterra vs Suburban could be applied to Tahoe vs Suburban 2500. The Suburban is obviously heavier, but the 9.25 instead of 8.25, 4l80e instead of 4l60e, 14 bolt instead of 10 bolt, etc. mean that under the same usage with the same maintenance the Suburban will last longer.

>Once we talk mods for better offroading, it STILL beats it.
If you completely forget about cost, sure. But if cost isn't a factor you can always make one better than the other. A $2k Suburban with $4k in mods is going to do a hell of a lot better than stock $6k Xterra.

>That way we have something to look forward to other than the day that our SUVs monetary value becomes less than scrap
You're really grasping at straws when you attempt to make "more expensive to buy" out to be a pro instead of a con. Are you a attorney, or are you a politician?

>A $2k Suburban with $4k in mods is going to do a hell of a lot better than stock $6k Xterra.
No, it won't. Because it's fuck huge and has shitty approach, departure, and breakover angles.

I bet mine's got better angles than a stock Xterra.

Lets get this back on track. Never been interested in an xrerra until just now. Found one with a blown head gasket for a grand. Are they dependable other than head gasket?

I bet you it doesn't.

I bet you it does.

Where are the off road pics?

...

I'm not even the same person you hillbilly. I wanted to see it off road but of course there aren't any because you've been building that scrapheep for years and it's still not done.

It's almost there. Axles are done. Need to swap on the new rear brake line, bleed the brakes, weld on shock tabs, and weld up my exhaust.

Was planning on doing that this week but a cracked fitting on a grill resulted in second degree burns covering most of my forearm and some of my right hand. Not exactly ideal for welding and crawling around under a truck.

>charcoal wins again

Nice mall crawler.

Lets take a SUV, already getting to be too heavy for trail use, add even more weight in suspension to fix its shitty ground clearance, and pray that it doesn't sink.

>but, but, but, the Xterra is taller....
Not any more.

>8k in suspension upgrades on a 2k SUV
BUT ITS CHEAPER GUYS

>too heavy for trail use
That's not even a thing.

>add even more weight in suspension
The weight difference in suspension is minimal.

>and pray that it doesn't sink
Bet it's got more flotation with the 37x12.50s than the stock Xterra does...

>8k in suspension upgrades on a 2k SUV
I'm actually right around $4k into both axles, the lift, steering, gears, and locker. And my Suburban was $1800 for a near fully loaded K2500 SLT.

...

Of course only after you jack it sky high, making it worse off road. Your center of gravity is higher than the Empire State Building.

>Of course only after you jack it sky high, making it worse off road.
One more example showing you have no idea what you're talking about.
A high COG is far more of a disadvantage on the highway than it is for general wheeling.

Oh my god.

Yeah my mom drives one. Are you somebody's mom?

looks expansive is that a new axle from currie or something?

If you based your views on experience rather than assumptions and benchracing with size, weight, and COG measurements you'd know that none of it is a huge issue in most situations.

not using wood? why not?

only if you are running say something like Rockwells which are as heavy as a car making it damn near impossible to tip.

Just a nicely cleaned up 95-97 Ford Dana 60 with a Spartan locker, 4.88s, ARB cover, and high steer from SORD.

throw away your propane grill and get a real one.

Rockwells aren't even all that heavy once you take the monster drum brakes off.

It wasn't my grill, but propane is sooooo easy. Just turn it on press the button and hope nothing blows up.

Works fine most of the time.

Says the man who has literally never been off road in the vehicle he's trying to defend.

You're an idiot, everything you say contradicts the laws of physics. Fuck off.

Who said I've never been offroad in it? I certainly never said that.

Yes you did, has the thing even moved in 3 years?

Please show me where I said that, because I certainly don't recall it.

>has the thing even moved in 3 years?
No, see It's been parked at the grocery store for three years.

I love my 2nd gen Xterra, and have heard good things about the sc first gens. One like ops pic parks in my lot a lot.

3rd gen 4runner is objectively superior