What car/bench race, efficient ZAV/pothole eater edition

Requirements:

• TOUGH (or easily made tough w/ common midwest pick and pull junkyard bits) suspension, i.e. hit a pothole hard enough to eat a tire, and not need an alignment afterwards.
• Designed for, or will clear 28+" tires(truck sizes, heavy sidewalls)
• Preferably lockable storage, 4 actual seats (small pickups are not high on the list)
• ~24mpg city (definitely north of 20), I will usually hit the old EPA numbers with ease.
• Preferably under 20 years old.
• $2000 or less
• NO DIESELS(because at cost per mile, with current pricing, diesel rarely pays off, please don't argue this)
• NO SUBARUS(I don't like them)
• Nothing with a one star annotated crash test rating (tracker/sidekick)

Baja bug? 4 cyl, stick, 2WD XJ? RWD volvo?

XJ.... Meets all of your requirements with ease, except borderline on the fuel mileage (though probably does that mileage with a 2WD model using smallish tires).

4-door Chevy Tracker.

I would also look at the much forgotten Isuzu products like the Isuzu Rodeo (4dr) or Amigo (2dr)

Also Tracker/Sidekick/Vitara 4 door.

Astro too if the mpg of 20 is hyw.

I woulda said Forester, but the no Subaru clause tells me XJ.

Also, no Trackers, I want some odds of surviving a minor fender bender.

XJ. I've recently looked up a bunch of guys getting some real mpg improvements on the cheap.

You can always look for one with the 4cyl (comes with 4.11's!!!)

ebonyandivory wrote: XJ. I've recently looked up a bunch of guys getting some real mpg improvements on the cheap.

Do tell? The trouble with the XJ option is the only one I could afford to feed is a 4 cyl 2wd 5 speed one, which ARE NOT common.

Kenny_McCormic wrote: Also, no Trackers, I want some odds of surviving a minor fender bender.

...says the guy driving a Yugo!

In reply to sethmeister4:

I'd rather wreck the Yugo than a tracker.

I'll vote for the Astro too. Also available in AWD! Get the later version with a roller cam and improved injection and trans.

The Astro actually came outfitted with a 2.5L Iron Duke and 5 speed manual for its first couple of years in production but in cargo van configuration only.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySidePopUp.jsp?column=1&id=2605

Roadmaster wagon or similar could be the answer too.

I think a Vitara needing some maintenance is a really solid choice here.

I also really like the Astro idea. These things are S10s with a body, right? So parts are stacking up in every junkyard. It is probably one of the safer options list because of weight (are you seriously saying a Bug designed in the 40s is safer than a Tracker?) and with some reasonable mods should get 20+ mpgs regularly.

S-10 Blazer.(not the Z-R2 wide body model) 2wd has a more durable suspension that the 4x4 oddly enough.

The 2wd S10 pre-runner lift spindles open up the door for a lifted G-body...

The s10 blazers almost all came with v-6s, but you could certainly swap the 2.2 and 5-speed into a 2-door blazer and it would have to do as well as the extended cab pickup did for mpg.

Cost might be an issue, but a manual transmission 2-door Tahoe might get you pretty close. Slant 6 OD manual Ramcharger as well.

In reply to Kenny_McCormic:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/28-5-mpg-97-jeep-cherokee-12696.html

How tough is an early CR-V?

Another thought was to take a XJ and swap in a more efficient engine, like a GM LN2 2200 pushrod 4, being basically worthless, showing good economy numbers in the S trucks(a whole gallon/100miles less than the 2.5 XJ, and the two weigh about the same), and I didn't kill the one I had in a sunfire. Also same bell pattern as the AMC 2.5 (if wikipedia is to believed) and XJs were equipped with various GM engines(2.8, iron duke) before, so it very well may be bolt in with the right mounts.

I truly can't fathom a good enough reason to put a gm 2.2 where an amc 2.5 already bolts right in. The effort/return value seems to be pretty far in the hole. Just my .02.

In general though i think more people should consider the 2.5 Cherokee.. Should be able to knock back 28mpg hwy and they aren't even that slow. Close friends of mine have a 00 dakota with the same motor that's much bigger/heavier and still gets 24mpg hwy @70mph and isnt THAT slow.

Left field suggestion: if not for the tire requirement I bet you could rock a P71. They built them for red misted curb jumps during high speed pursuits.

Apparently you can fit 255/50/17 under the fenders, which is a 27 inch tire with some clearance: http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/big-tires-on-a-big-car-oh-yes-fr500s-on-a-p71/12040/page1/

With a stock 15 or 16 inch wheel (pre-03) that's plenty of sidewall. General Grabbers are relatively tough as well and I know they come in Impreza-friendly fitments, so you could definitely make those work on a car as large as a Vic. Those fancy Kevlar Goodyear truck tires look like they start at 30 inches tall so that probably won't fit.

Mileage is more of a concern.

TBH an XJ with a LSX, well anything with an LSX and a 6 speed will pull your mpg requirements.

I like the idea if an xj with a swap. Like a Buick 3800.you can do that swap with factory parts!

In reply to singleslammer:

The Buick 3800 and I do not get along, I killed one bad.

Saturn Vue (FWD, 2.2, 5spd) or first-gen CR-V would get my vote...

Reviving this thread (Zombie pun intended ). I would 2nd the CR-V suggestions. Not sure what size tire you can fit under there, but they are the best ZAV in my opinion. Tough as nails, common, AWD, mods available, excellent gas mileage, auto or manual trans. If the zombies do appear, or some other catastrophe, I don't want to be waiting in line at the gas station. Getting 28-30 mpg all while having AWD, storage room, and high ground clearance is hard to beat. Throw on some all terrain tires and have at it!