Talk:Lada Niva

Australia

"In Australia, this vehicle is very poorly regarded and unpopular because parts are extremely difficult to get..." This is simply not true now days. All parts can be ordered online (and at quite reasonable prices too). The main reason that the Niva was not universally popular in Australia is that it was sold in the face of better equipped and more powerful Japanese 4WDs. Tartanperil 02:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

"In Australia, popularity is limited as the vehicle is manufactured for a very different climate and many Nivas imported to Australia were rejects from the European Market" This is also unfounded. Niva's operate fine in hot climates. It is unlikley that the ones sold here were rejects from Europe as we are right hand drive and they are left hand drive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.96.96.167 (talk) 11:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

"recirculating ball truck steering box"? the Aus model I was familiar with had a lightweight cast aluminium steering box that suffered catestphoic failure and had to be replaced, info at the time (1999) suggested this was common. I didnt see any recirculating balls. Perhaps that was a later modification to compensate for the original being so weak. Cant remember if it was the water pump or the termostat housing (also cast aluminium) that spontainiously developed a pin-hole leak because the casting was paper thin in that spot.

---

Awaiting verification:

The Niva has seen competition in rally racing and finishing in good standing. In 1981, a Niva won the Rally Algeria, and placed 3rd in the Paris-Dakar Rally. In 1982, it won both the Rally Algeria and Pharaoh Rally, and took second in the Paris Dakar. In 1983, it won the Pharaoh Rally and came in second in the Paris-Dakar.

Source: http://users.skynet.be/vger/canaris/niva.htm

TimothyPilgrim 14:47, May 6, 2004 (UTC)

Even though the Lada Niva is occasionally sited in Australia, it couldn't really be considered popular. I think that Australia should be removed from the list.

---

Tigre?

I remember seeing these vehicles advertised in the early 1990s on New Zealand television. Lada sponsored the programme 'Country Calendar', which was (and I quote) "brought to you by the Lada Niva, Cossack and Tigre". The Tigre appeared similar to the other vehicles, but I can't spot it in the Niva wiki... does anyone know more? --Samf-nz 05:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• I don't know anything about Tigre but in my opinion we should add a better picture of Niva here. Maybe a commercial photo because this picture is really bad. With respect, Deliogul 21:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Better photo added. // Liftarn

Chevrolet Niva with Ecotec Family 1 engine

The GM-Avtovaz website lists a model called the Niva FAM1 ("Characteristics CHEVROLET NIVA with FAM1 1,8 L Ecotec engine, 4-cylindric, 16 valved") [1], so it looks as if it is now in production. GagHalfrunt 23:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Plymouth-Dakar (Lo-Cost) enthusiast rally

I wanna get one of these and fix it up for the Plymouth-Dakar enthusiast rally. (See also the Budapest-Bamako run). Lo-tech, rugged, good ground clearance, few electricals to get 'gremlined' during the long and hard run. So Basic, you can fix it with a few tools (included :-) ) Eddyholland 10:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Eddyholland 10:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Niva isn't back to Brazil

The Niva was the number one jeep in sells, in Brazil between 1990 and 1993.Problems in Russia, lack of parts,etc. doomed Lada in Brazil.Today, the niva is back to Brazil.See these sites, in portugese: CAOA Niva and [Niva Autoesporte.Agre22 (talk) 20:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)agre22

This Brazilian site: [Niva won't be back] that this Russiann jeep isn't back to Brazil. The Brazilian Grupo CAOA decided not to return this vehicle.Agre22 (talk) 00:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)agre22

Needs to be checked

"Bognor Diva Car manufacturer Bognor in Uruguay assembled a version, the Bognor Diva released in 2004." - Sounds like vandalisim to me... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.164.49 (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Check here [2] --100.34.59.122 (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Some fixes

In basic form, the Niva has a carbureted 1.6-litre overhead cam four-cylinder petrol engine

Actually, new cars with carbureted engines currently are not sold in Russia. The Niva currently is called LADA 4x4 and has 1.7L engine with fuel injection - [3] (link in Russian). 95.79.20.134 (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The Lada Niva and Chevrolet Niva are two different vehicles, although both produced by Avtovaz. Santamoly (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I have moved part of the text from the introduction into another paragraph, since it is obviously not necessary to write about Putin's personal offroader in the preface of the article, and brought it to a neutral point of view. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 06:18, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Putin

I think the press may have gotten Putin’s side of the story wrong. In 2006, Lada started offering the Niva with an Opel engine as the result of a design study with Chevrolet about export markets. This became the top-tier engine on the Chevy Niva domestically, Niva FAM1.

I think Putin was saying that he ordered the standard Opel engine option - not a custom car. Telegraph not knowing this, extrapolated that it was a custom car - inferring Putin was not buying the same car any average Russian could buy.

Not sure just yet if it should be edited, but “custom car” doesn’t seem like a good fit. Perhaps, it would be better to say that he ordered one with an Opel engine, similar to Chevrolet models of the Niva. Tabris06 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying things here. I've edited that part of the article to avoid misunderstanding. Eriba-Marduk (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Transmission and full time 4WD

The article states that the transmission was changed from 4 to 5 speed in 1985 which is wrong, since I personally own a 1988 production Lada Niva 1600 (VAZ-2121) with originally build 4 speed transmission. Moreover, I checked many post 1985 and even post 1990 production Nivas which all also have the usual 4 speed manual transmission.

Actually, the transmission really was changed, but yet on the new model (Lada Niva 1,7/VAZ-21213) starting from 1993 when the previous one was discontinued. So, there is no 5 speed Niva 1600, except maybe some exceptions - either some export models which were often tuned up by foreign Lada importers for their market, or some of the sole Niva owners, which sometimes changed 4 speed transmission with 5 speed one, mainly to achieve lower fuel consumption on higher engine RPM.

Other thing, it is also stated that Niva today does not use full time 4 wheel drive anymore, which is even more incorrect. From where is that info pulled at all? All Nivas, starting from 1977 with the old Niva 1600 to latest, 2014 LADA 4x4 always had permanent, that is, full time, 4WD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.226.146 (talk) 18:10, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Naming conventions, clusterfuck of typos

In a listing of short models, there was speak of "Landole" models. This is, as far as I know, essentially "landaulet", but I need a citation for that. I suppose I could use the pronunciation of Ландоле in Russian but I don't know Russian... And then there was a clusterfuck of "Used a limited demand because of low high-torque motor for off-road and poor speakers on public roads." Aeaaaeaeaee?? what is this? Ellenor2000 (talk) 20:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Crash test

90.155.195.3 (talk · contribs) insists on adding a preface to the paragraph about safety to specify that the car was designed in the 70s, "long before the modern car safety assessment progammes". This material is not found in the reference, and only exists to support a specific POV. I have removed it several times, but they keep adding it back.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Because it is an old car designed in the 1970s; merely stating that a car is from 1977, whereas the test is from 2001, is neither POV nor original research. Both dates are found in the articles about the Lada Niva and the ARCAP; one can also check the Euro NCAP article to see when such safety programmes were established and that the car is actually older than modern tests. Pushing a POV like yours is at odds with WP:NPOV. And I have no idea why the article should start with the "Safety" paragraph placed before "History"; that's a very unusual way in car-related articles here. 90.155.195.3 (talk) 13:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:STICKTOSOURCE seems pretty unambiguous to me: "take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context". There are no exceptions for 'basic facts' if they're not supported by a relevant, reliable source.

If you want to move the safety section further down the article, that's fine by me.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:38, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Then I can solve this issue by adding sources, I guess. As for the "Safety" section, I believe it should be left where it is, i.e. after "History". 90.155.195.3 (talk) 13:53, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

That's pretty much the problem. If it really was that unusual to test older cars under modern safety standards, you'd expect the reviewer to mention it somewhere in the article. From what I could find, this isn't the case. In fact, there are plenty of other old VAZ and GAZ cars that were tested by AutoReview in the early 2000s. There is nothing that leads us to believe that the Niva test was unusual in this regard.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 14:06, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, their descriptions are traditionally very short, as the authors are not interested in adding any explanations or additional comments, such as telling the reader that one shouldn't expect a vintage car to meet modern safety standards, etc. All their tests are always described in the most brief manner, limited only to the results of a crash test.

Anyway, I've added a bit of information and references to the safety section. 90.155.195.3 (talk) 14:57, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not too happy with the use of sources unrelated to the crash-test to draw conclusions not supported by the reference. That's a form of OR, see WP:SYN.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Sounds very dubious to me. As this section mentions a car and a crash test of that car, there is hardly any OR in adding the dates when the car and the test were introduced. 90.155.195.3 (talk) 20:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

It is OR if you're combining multiple facts to draw conclusions that are not supported by the sources in any way.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 00:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

I've got your point. 90.155.195.3 (talk) 01:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

"their descriptions are traditionally very short" -- only in the free demo mode on their website. On the pages of their magazine they do get into details and make it perfectly clear that many of the crash tested cars were old in design and had little to no chances of having a good result: "...let's not forget that this abbreviation (Euro NCAP) stands for "The European New Car Assessment Programme". New cars. And can the heroes of our crash tests be considered as such? This, perhaps, is the most contentious issue". Their more detailed reviews are available on paper and for subscribers on the official website, many have been published on other web sources as well and can be easily reached there (free of charge). I will, perhaps, add a few sentences in order to make the authors' views on this subject a bit clearer to the reader. VietLove (talk) 00:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

If it's in the source it should be reflected in the wiki article, I agree.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 00:29, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Requested move 23 September 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:58, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

---

Lada Niva → Lada 4x4 – The Lada Niva was remaned the Lada 4x4 by AutoVaZ due to an agreement with General Motors as GM produceda highly modified version called the Chevorlet Niva as GM now has the naming rights. Degen Earthfast (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 16:47, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment – What is your opinion related to article titles policy, specifically WP:OFFICIALNAMES and WP:COMMONNAME? Does your proposal meet these criteria? Does your proposed new name have a "prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources"? Are they present in the article's references? A relatively similar discussion has taken place at the Lada Riva article some time ago. Personally, I'm not sure which name is better to be used as the article title, I might tend to the current official one, but based on reliable arguments that have to be brought to the discussion. (I believe that on recent topics, considering the car is and has still been manufactured recently, newer official names might be preferred if they are used in those required sources that I mentioned before.) Your nom's description does not seem enough to me. Please consider a reply based on the policies I provided. I'm not any kind of administrator type of user, just a random one. Regards, BaboneCar (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. It had been Lada Niva for almost 40 years and history will remember it as such. We use common names, not official names, and it's more so for artifacts that had a significant history behind one name. No such user (talk) 20:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Guess it is not an easy question. On one hand, the car has been known as Niva for decades. But on the other, it is produced under a different name, officially, and we cannot ignore the name change. 126.122.108.119 (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose - once people start calling it the "Lada 4x4" rather than the Lada Niva, then we will talk. The car's common name will remain the Niva for quite some time, I believe.  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Two Nivas

And now there are two Lada Nivas, the Lada 4x4 and the Lada Niva II, an incorrect appelation, formerly the Chevrolet Niva.Degen Earthfast (talk) 18:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't know why the new article was moved to Lada Niva II. Perhaps it ought to be called VAZ-2123 Niva? Do articles always have to have the most recent name of a car? I looked at the automotive naming conventions and they do not really cover cars whose names changed.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Niva travel.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

False and unnecessary comparison with Land Rover

The mentioned comparison of Niva with Land Rover Series and Land Rover Defender in the introductory section of the article is both false and unecessary due to two very obvious reasons.

First and foremost, those two are actually completely different types of cars. The Land Rover on the one hand, is a purebred off-road vehicle with classic, boxy-alike body with no-sloped rear section and which features removable roof (for placing tarpaulin), an externally placed spare wheel as well as having a simple rear door instead of a tailgate (which, thus, opens either to the side or downwards) and whose trunk compartment features two foldable and removable benches placed in configuration facing each other (like on a flatbed truck) instead of featuring a single rear seat, like found on all passenger cars. Taking these above stated design features into account, the Land Rover can and should be comparable exclusively to the other vehicles of such type, which in Russian case falls only to two models of their military 4x4 vehicles; the GAZ-69 or UAZ-469/3151 (nowadays UAZ "Hunter") - but by no means Niva.

The Niva on the other hand, is something totally different than anything described above. It is an truly revolutionary and highly innovative design, since it is, purely and simply stated, an "off-road vehicle hidden in body of a classic passenger car", as was described by its own creators, the late Vladimir Solovyev and Pyotr Prusov. The Niva features a typical semi-coupe (three-door) hatchback body of its time (conceptually nothing different than body of VW Golf Mk-I, Renault 5, VAZ-2108 Sputnik/Lada Samara or Zastava Yugo/Koral 45 - both externally as well as internally) due to which also features an unibody structure (integrated chassis), but placed on a 4x4 suspension - with springs and shock absorbers featuring hightened ground clearance and with wheels and tires appropriate for such type. Exactly due to this very distinct and specific appearance, the Niva is very often misconcepted as being a "classic/usual off-road vehicle" (especially when compared to modern/21th century cars featuring oblique body with aerodynamic profile, where its classic, "boxy-alike" body even more resembles "pure" off-road vehicle and which only additionally draws to false conclusions to which type of car it actually belongs).

Furthermore, the article itself points-out the fact that Niva was described as "Renault 5 put on a Land Rover chassis", which at the end turns out even more contradictory to the stated comparison with Defender - which has nothing to do with such concept nor design. Niva can be barely even described as being an SUV, since all of the SUVs naturally never feature any kind of (serious) off-road capabilities, in contrast to Niva and all the usual off-road vehicles.

To additionaly clarify the point, the basic off-road vehicles (like Defender, UAZ-469, GAZ-69, Willys MB, Fiat Campagnola, Mercedes G class/Steyr Puch G, and etc.) in official Russian terminology regarding vehicle types are all described as "Внедорожник" ("Vnedorožnik", anglicized as "Vnedorozhnik") and simply meaning; "off-roader", while the Niva is the sole and the only car featuring off-road capabilities which is described as "Автомобили повышенной проходимости" ("Avtomobil povišennoj prohodimosti"/"Avtomobil povishennoy prokhodimosty") which translated as "car with improved capabilities", additionally pointing to the fact that it belongs to unique and very different type of vehicle which is thus, simply uncomparable to classic off-road cars, or in other words - to all other vehicles featuring off-road capabilities.

To simplify, Niva is not an off-road vehicle but it still features the off-road capabilities (it is a literal hybrid of a passenger car and off-road vehicle), which makes it so unique and almost completely uncomparable to Land Rover or any other "ordinary" off-road vehicle. Exactly due to this, it does not have and actually never had any counterparts by class and type - it is actually the sole car of its class and which it represents (a short digression here; this is also the first and the main reason why it is still in production for currently 44 years so far - also making it the third longest-produced car in the entire history of automotive industry), so it simply cannot be directly compared to any other "usual" off-road vehicles, or vice-versa. Its sole feature than can be comparable lies exclusively in its off-road capabilities (which are straight in-line with the ordinary off-road vehicles), but it cannot be compared by class, that is, by type in any means.

Second and arguably even more obvious reason why this comparison is false lies in fact that Defender actually came to production and market six full years after Niva (yet in 1983), which makes comparison of Niva to Defender even more nonsense. So, the Defender can be eventually comapared to Niva in production-length, but not the opposite and not in anything else - beside their off-road capabilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.227.2.28 (talk) 13:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Lada Niva is an off-road car: 1234. Jirka.h23 (talk) 07:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

With full respect sir, It is indeed not, as I have stated above and fulfilled my claims with decent arguments, as I believe. Despite the fact that it feaures serious off-road capabilities, due to its classic hatchback body as well as interiors it still cannot be categorized as an "off-road car/vehicle" by any means, which makes it so specific in appearance. The Defender, UAZ, GAZ, Willys MB, Steyr Puch and so on, are off-road cars.

Also, another thing which I have previously omitted - in contrast to Defender (as well as all other off-road cars), the Niva was literally never officially used nor was ever intended to be used by any military through both Europe and rest of the world, which only additionally ponts to the fact that it is not an off-road vehicle, but simply a civilian passenger car featuring off-road capabilities, what makes it an unique hybrid which is simply not found anywhere else in the entire automotive industry.

But, as You wish, since I am not going to start a debate over this. I just wanted to point out this illogicalitiy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.227.2.28 (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

With full respect to your opinions, they have no value here, original research is here forbidden. Wikipedia RS. Jirka.h23 (talk) 10:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I am terribly sorry for Your misunderstanding of the point regarding this observation of mine, but the things I have stated here have absolutely noting to do with nobody's "opinions" and less indeed some kind of "original research", but are actually more than obvious and easily checkable facts. I am well aware that Wikipedia does not allow original research, but the stated here really does not and should not fall into category of such in an way, since it contains very easily verifiable content.

Furthermore, I noticed that academic-level discussion is unfortunately not welcomed here when You have not provided any of arguments to support Your contrary claims in the first place.

Ironically, my mistake here was thinking that the fact-supported arguments are welcomed to so-called "Encyclopedic" page. But it appears that I have turned out of just being naive. With kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.227.2.28 (talk) 10:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Jirka.h23 (talk) 19:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Suzuki Samurai Inspiration

The article says: "It was the only Soviet car that was ever sold in Japan, starting from the early 1980s, inspiring their Suzuki Samurai".

The source of that information is listed just as "Thompson, p.187". I have not been able to find any additional information that supports this claim. I don't see how a Lada Niva released in 1977 could be the inspiration for a car that was released in 1970. 201.49.154.3 (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Name

"Niva is a Russian word that literally means "(corn) field", but also "area of practice". Not correct. Niva is a wheat or rye field, because when Russian language was formed, there was no such thing as corn in Russia. Niva does not mean "area of practice" and never did. Niva in this sense is used in the same way as "field", i.e. instead of "in the field of something" one could say "in the niva of something". Usually used in a very formal way: "The Communist Party achieved enormous progress in the niva of improving ordinary people's lives" or "Korolev worked in the niva of improving space travel" etc. It's the same as to say that in English "field" means "area of practice". 104.195.218.132 (talk) 14:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)