R Class versus Q7

[Rose Chap]

This might be controversial, but I see cars like Audi Q7s, BMW X5s, Lexus RX400s and Porsche Cayennes etc etc as essentially fashion purchases anyway.

I'd never ever tell people what they can spend their money on, but if I had to buy a 4x4 with more than 5 seats I'd at least buy something with some 4x4 credibility, like a Discovery, a G Wagon, or a Range Rover.

I guess the crux of my prejudice is that an Audi Q7 (especially with 20" wheels) is an off roader which fundamentally isn't very good off road. It doesn't matter whether its wheels never even touch wet grass or not as I see it, its all about the potential of the thing. Its like buying a sports car which is slow and doesn't handle - makes the owner look like a bit of a plonker.

Okay, rant over.

 

[ian_c_uk]

Between the two, I would go for the forthcoming 7-seat R class (I assume this will have 3 individual middle row seats).

I believe it's a bench design, albeit with 60/40 folding I expect.

As a family of five that needs a big boot, it suddenly brings it into our radar.

(ok, when a few years old and cheap enough )

 

[ian_c_uk]

Its like buying a sports car which is slow and doesn't handle - makes the owner look like a bit of a plonker.

But they do.

307/megane CC? Hyundai coupe? Alfa GTV? The market is full of FWD coupe's \ convertibles that the general public think are "sports cars" that most of us wouldn't even consider, but they do sell on image alone. For that reason, lifestyle 4x4's will sell also.

 

[BonzoDog]

This might be controversial, but I see cars like Audi Q7s, BMW X5s, Lexus RX400s and Porsche Cayennes etc etc as essentially fashion purchases anyway.

Okay, rant over.

But it's good to be controversial isn't it sometimes?
Absolutely agree about fashion statement bit. I see them as a compromise and a mechanical compromises usually doesn't work.
If I wanted capacity I would go for a Vito or whatever it is called now.

 

[Rory]

Wonder what happened there - Well, I can see what happened, but I wonder how?

Actually I think both cars performed pretty well - offset frontal impact is one of the worst tests and the passenger compartment of both vehicles look OK. The crush zones seem to have worked perfectly and should have minimised the injuries.

What you *don't* want is car (like the one in the MB USA GL ads) that doesn't yield at all - then your body takes the full force on the impact.

 

[BTB 500]

As a family of five that needs a big boot, it suddenly brings it into our radar.

(ok, when a few years old and cheap enough )

We're looking at a VW Shuttle SE at the moment - 3 seats in the front, single plus dual (both removable) giving up to 3 seats in the second row, and the rest as a very big boot indeed!

With the 174PS/400Nm 2.5 5-cyl engine of course, lowered suspension (this is an official VW option!), 18" 5-spoke alloys, privacy glass, etc.

You can even have 4WD if you want, but only with the de-tuned 130PS engine

The Caravelle is basically the same vehicle with more toys as standard, but you can't have 3 seats in the front row with that.

 

[ian_c_uk]

Yes, the Shuttle (and Viano) are nice solutions to be in, but there is no getting away from driving "a van" so many customers will always accept less space and go for Q7 \ R class \ etc

 

[jeremytaylor]

I believe it's a bench design, albeit with 60/40 folding I expect.

As a family of five that needs a big boot, it suddenly brings it into our radar.

(ok, when a few years old and cheap enough )

Ditto here! Something which the original R fails on.

 

[BTB 500]

Yes, the Shuttle (and Viano) are nice solutions to be in, but there is no getting away from driving "a van" so many customers will always accept less space and go for Q7 \ R class \ etc

Certainly. We also have to fit 5 dogs in though, so limited options! Will still have the R129 for posing & cruising (without the dogs)

 

[ian_c_uk]

Certainly. We also have to fit 5 dogs in though, so limited options! Will still have the R129 for posing & cruising (without the dogs)

You have the right solution, a boring but "nice place to be" family bus and a toy. I hope to have something similar to join the minivan next year.

 

[BenzComander]

Part one of the R CLass versus Q7 road tests!!

I hasten to add we are not looking to buy one (maybe if we won the lottery!)

Took an R320 CDi Sport for a test drive this morning (Thank you MB MK!!)

First impresions were OK, car looked very good in metalic black with 19" rims (more on this later)

Interior is very spacious, with the drivers seat where I would need it (I am 6.0') the first row of seats has plenty of space for pasengers, and even reclined still left enough space for me in the 3rd row. And it was not the LWB version.

Interior seems very well put together, with high quality plastics and leather. This car had Comand, memory seats, panoramic sunroof etc, so was well speced. Asked about the Comand, and the only difference from an E Class Comand is the R class version will not play DVD's

Anyway, driving impresions were good. Car seemed smooth and fairly quick, gearchanges were excellent. It was my first time with the seven speed box and that was good. Only small complaint, on a very light throttle there was noticeable diesel clatter. Car was very quiet once cruising though.

Would I have one?? Is it 10 times better than my 1997 W210. Would I spend my hard earned on one. Probably not, coming home we were chatting and we concluded it did nothing significantly better than our car, even the fuel economy is about the same if you look at their figures. Dont get me wrong, it is a great car, smooth, fairly fast and very comfortable with a great deal of space, but as my wife said, it really does not have a WOW factor.

Anyway, Q7 roadtest on Monday will be interesting to compare. Watch this space!

 

[goldestate]

What you *don't* want is car (like the one in the MB USA GL ads) that doesn't yield at all - then your body takes the full force on the impact.


can you fill me in on the above maybe a link, thanks

 

[fuzzer]

This might be controversial, but I see cars like Audi Q7s, BMW X5s, Lexus RX400s and Porsche Cayennes etc etc as essentially fashion purchases anyway.

I'd never ever tell people what they can spend their money on, but if I had to buy a 4x4 with more than 5 seats I'd at least buy something with some 4x4 credibility, like a Discovery, a G Wagon, or a Range Rover.

I guess the crux of my prejudice is that an Audi Q7 (especially with 20" wheels) is an off roader which fundamentally isn't very good off road. It doesn't matter whether its wheels never even touch wet grass or not as I see it, its all about the potential of the thing. Its like buying a sports car which is slow and doesn't handle - makes the owner look like a bit of a plonker.

Okay, rant over.

I beg to differ , my X5 with M tech suspension and 20" wheels handles pretty well thanks very much and its fast to boot. 8.0 sec to 62 which feels faster than you think due to the grip the car has on the road.

Its no sports car , but could easilly keep up with a smiliarly sized estate car.

I could ask you why you bought a C class with the back doors welded up? Fashon choice? i think so

( p.s. not meaning offence or to be mean )

 

[glojo]

Asked about the Comand, and the only difference from an E Class Comand is the R class version will not play DVD's

Thanks for the constructive write-up. The COMAND system is the 'cheaper' version and is of a different type to the E-class, I'm annoyed it is not the same version as the new S-class which has the upgradeable Hard-drive. It is surprising to hear about 'diesel clatter' and will be interesting to hear if other owners of the new V6 CDI have experienced this?

John

 

[big x]

the new X5 is gonna wipe the floor again , so hold off for that

Er..no.Late next year the V12 Tdi twin turbo Q7 is coming out.500 bhp, 740 lb torque @ 1700rpm, 0-62 5.5 secs. Still pig ugly though, I saw the standard version at the Goodwood revival meeting.What this has got to do with with reducing greenhouse gases I don't know, I suppose they want to get one up on the feeble VW 309 bhp V10 Tdi.

adam

 

[fuzzer]

Er..no.Late next year the V12 Tdi twin turbo Q7 is coming out.500 bhp, 740 lb torque @ 1700rpm, 0-62 5.5 secs. Still pig ugly though, I saw the standard version at the Goodwood revival meeting.What this has got to do with with reducing greenhouse gases I don't know, I suppose they want to get one up on the feeble VW 309 bhp V10 Tdi.

adam

That V12 TDI Twin turbo will be just as popular as the Toureg V10 5.0 TDI thats out just now ( and when was the last time you saw one of those )

There are 3 4x4's that have any road presense . Range rover sport , BMW X5 and Mercedes ML .

In that order. Q7 is just plain weird looking.

 

[big x]

That V12 TDI Twin turbo will be just as popular as the Toureg V10 5.0 TDI thats out just now ( and when was the last time you saw one of those )

There are 3 4x4's that have any road presense . Range rover sport , BMW X5 and Mercedes ML .

In that order. Q7 is just plain weird looking.

In the 14th Feb issue of Autocar the Q7 4.2 was rated higher than the ML500. However in my view it's just to big for the UK.The Mercedes GL is even bigger.Luckily the Q5 looks better proportioned, it's based on the forthcoming A4 chassis. A dinky Q3 is also being proposed...based on the 2007 Golf 4x4. Mind you all these are, or will be, better than the BMW X3...this weeks Autocar says of the Mk2 X3 "a lick of paint over the cracks... the same old problems remain.." When I drove the first version the poor ride,ugly looks and cheap interior where very obvious.Yuk,and I speak as a BMW fan.

adam

 

[Rose Chap]

I beg to differ , my X5 with M tech suspension and 20" wheels handles pretty well thanks very much and its fast to boot. 8.0 sec to 62 which feels faster than you think due to the grip the car has on the road.

I don't doubt your X5 handles very well on the road Mr Fuzzer. My point is though that the very things that make it good on the road (stiff suspension, big wheels etc) make it fairly rubbish off it.

Okay you say, I never go off road, in that case, why buy a 4x4 like that to start with? A 5 Series estate would do the job just as well. No offence intended of course.

Clarkson wrote a typically humourous review of the Range Rover Sport in the Sunday Times yesterday in which he conveys far better than I can the dubious qualities of 'sporty' 4x4s.

Here's a link. http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12529-2359257,00.html

All the best.

RC

 

[wallingd]

Have to say I went by the Audi dealer on Friday (the new TT is on sale so thought I'd cross over the road and have a look) and had a closer look at a Q they had there. WOW @ 20nch wheels - they dont' look ry big but once you get a lot closer they totally envelope you!!!. The front is monster ugly but really purposeful and inspiring for it. R-Class looks a bit tame - even with bigger wheels. Am off to read tht Overfinsh R-R Sport -----------> :bannana:

 

[marcos]

I beg to differ , my X5 with M tech suspension and 20" wheels handles pretty well thanks very much and its fast to boot. 8.0 sec to 62 which feels faster than you think due to the grip the car has on the road.

Its no sports car , but could easilly keep up with a smiliarly sized estate car.

I could ask you why you bought a C class with the back doors welded up? Fashon choice? i think so

( p.s. not meaning offence or to be mean )

Sorry Jason but it's 8.3 0-62 as a manual and 8.8 with an auto, dog slow

Joking aside though I took out a Range Rover sport diesel a few weeks ago and my life that is slow.
It has about as much sport in it as Chubby Roy Brown, 0-62 took 11.9 secs, not good considering what the BMW and MB equivalents manage.