Suzuki X-HEAD Concept Vehicle

[cj!]

[Source: Suzuki]

PRESS RELEASE (Translated):
Exhibition summary of 40th Tokyo motor show 2007

X-HEAD
"X-HEAD" is " the cross utility vehicle " of the new genre which brings the various values which until recently are not. It has high running the whole distance characteristic, the "gym knee", "the escudo", it has high loading characteristic, DNA "of [kiyarii]" was succeeded, functional hopefulness was had. The naming, "X-HEAD" adjusting to the life style and sense of value of the person who rides, has meant the possibility this car which corresponds to various uses becoming unknown. Being possible to combine the carrier unit which is adjusted to life style 2 adults sleeps and can stay " the camper " and in the town coolly to ride it handles, " fashion " and so on, the person who rides " you play and stimulate heart and curiosity ". In addition, supposed the rescue rescue in various road circumstances " rescue " and so on, it is possible to answer also social mission, being tough, you propose the pleasant car.

[cj!]

More pics.

[cj!]

and one more.

[gwagensteve]

I reckon suzuki is trying to sex up the APV type market in a way that hasn't happened since the mid '80's carry van. The fact it has beadlock wheels and a jimny chassis/running gear isn't a reflection of how this would be built.

Never forget people that when the RAV-4 concept was launched it had mud pattern tyres, twin diff locks and a winch. Concepts are just that - a concept. They bear very little relationship to reality.

It does look cool though.

Steve.

[christover1]

I want one now
I need one
Love it

[mightymouse]

I want one now
I need one
Love it

I think you should start building one - at least then one will actually exist.
I wonder is forward(ish) control as scary to drive down hills as it looks ?

Damm computers, get you all worked up, and then let you down if you see the actual vehicle.

[christover1]

I wonder is forward(ish) control as scary to drive down hills as it looks ?

YES VERY

but brilliant up hills and in technical stuff

[gwagensteve]

I can't really see the advantage Chris - a forward control vehicle with 50/50 weight balance won't be any better up hills than a normal car with the same wheelbase, and it will have a higher COG.

IMHO all of the advantages of forward control relate to load area over a given wheelbase, so a very short wheelbase car can have a usable load area.... but the problems with climbing with ultra short wheelbases are well known.

As i said a while ago, forward control works when the cab and driver/passenger weigh less than the payload. If that's not the case, (like in a carry van or something) then the behaviour of a forward control car will suck.

Steve.

[christover1]

FC is brilliant for drivers viewing of obstacles. When going up hill there is no huge bonnet to look over. Wheel placement can be done almost by sight rather than feel/experiece.
Not really commenting on off road abilities, just the drivers view.
Weight balance,and off roadability, of course, would be another story and would depend on vehicle and other important stuff.
I used to off road a Carry Van, and it was brilliant, but down hill it felt like you were going head over any moment

[gwagensteve]

I agree the visibility thing is a winner, but other than that, the other advantages are more than outweighed IMHO by the disadvantages for our type of use.

If we needed to move a standard pallet (1200X1200X 1000 X 1000kg) across country, foward control would be the way to go, as Mercedes figured about 1000 years ago with the Unimog.

I have seen photos of early (67" wheelbase ) unladen Unimogs decending with two guys hanging off the tailgate to stop them going end over.

steve.