|
Im going to change my grotty 307 -see thread in technical section- and Im wondering about the above mentioned. Im tall, need to be comfortable, automatic required but above all must be reliable. Boot space not a problem or looks. Whats your opinion please?
|
I may regret this.
I appreciate that you have come up with a shortlist and it is usual to shoot down in flames any who suggest alternatives but have you considered the Hyundai Tucson and the Kia Sportage?
The Hyundai seems to fair well in HJ's opinion against the RAV4, which has been the champion of on-roaders for some time. It also has a 5 year warranty.
I've driven the x-trail and it was nice, but it didn't make me reach into my pocket and buy one. It was certainly comfortable and had loads of headroom. There have been isolated reports of reliability issues. You may want to look at HJ's summary in the Car by Car breakdown.
|
|
|
|
Apologies -this is one of those where someone suggests a car not on your list....Freelander - we haven't had an ounce of trouble from ours in 20,000 miles and if you're looking for off-road ability I understand only the X-trail could compete with it from your list.
|
Compete with a Freelander's off-road ability, I think you'll find anything from a tricycle up could do that.
If yours has been reliable, then congratulations quite a lot fo them are not. But off-road ability ? I don't think so.
|
|
|
Not sure why you would specifically suggest these softroaders because you are tall.
I suggest a Honda Jazz or Renault Modus if you are tall, or the small MPVs like the Focus C-Max.
If you must get a softroader and assuming it will never go off-road then all are fine and as $kint says the Hyundai/Kia twins as well. Just find the right one for you.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
|
|
|
Do you want a 4x4 ? What sort of driving do you do ? There must be more to your requirements than comfortable with an automatic gearbox.
You need to really want, or to really need, a 4x4. Ending up with one by accident would probably be a mistake and you'd probably hate it.
|
|
Do you really need a 4x4? I live 600 yards from tarmac, am into the horses in a big way, on the edge of the Downs etc and I'm very happy without one (had a Shogun a while back) - and as a for a Freelander being good XC - I can go XC better in a Tipo!
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice-very interesting to listen to you who know more thanI- keep it coming please!
|
For softroaders, also consider the Subaru Forester, maybe not as pretty as the RAV4 but a better drive on road and field.
StarGazer
|
The only place I wouldn't drive my Freelander where I would drive my Series III or say a Discovery or a Defender is along deep ruts, but none of the cars suggested would do that either.
|
I've owned both a CR-V petrol manual and X-Trail 2.5 petrol auto.
If comfort and auto are the most important factors - as they are in my case - then it has to be the X-Trail which has exceptional seats and a very good gutsy engine/smooth auto combo which does not hunt through the gears which is a tendency with e.g. Honda and Subaru autos.
Hope this helps j3b4.
HectorG
|
|
Thanks Hector- Im tending towards the X Trail 2.5 SVE Auto but Im a bit concerned about reliability reports recently!
|
|
|
To elaborate a bit more - Honda build quality and engineering second to none, but ergonomiclly flawed, e.g - very poor front seats, rear seats only tumble not fold.
Nissan perceived build quality suspect(although not necessarily reliability),but ergonomically excellent and very practical- rear seats fold in proper estate car fashion. Also,X-Trail quite convincing on the rough stuff.
I considered a Honda Accord Tourer 2.4 auto when trading in my CR-V (which I changed because I wanted an auto). I stuck with a soft-roader because of the much better residuals. Whether this will continue to be the case with continuing high fuel prices is anybody's guess. Although the 27 mpg overall I have achieved in the X-trail in 8000 miles is not bad.
HectorG
|
|
The fuel consumption of a 2.0 petrol X Trail was exactly the reason why my BIL got rid after just 6 months. Mid 20s was all he could get out of it.
|
Hector is doing very well to get 27mpg from the X-trail 2.5 auto. I get about 22mpg from my Forester Turbo Auto, although this is mostly suburban driving with few motorway trips. It hurts, but at least I only do 12,000miles pa.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
|
|
|
j3b4
My last post was made before I saw your recent post. I think you will find that reliability is only an issue with the turbo diesel. There are various owner forums where major problems with the turbo on the diesel model have been highlighted. It appears that Nissan don't seem to know what is causing the problem. I would steer clear of the diesel particularly as it is not hugely more economical than the petrol and is only available in manual.
The main feature of the X-Trail I see as a weakness is the surprisingly heavy and lifeless steering compared with the CR-V.
This is not really mentioned in road tests and some people consider the steering 'meaty', particularly if the don't like overlight steering.I suggest you try an extended road test.
I remember when I first drove the X-Trail 2.5 SVE Auto -which I have now - when still a CR-V owner I was not particularly aware of the steering, but was immediately impressed by the comfort -fantastic seats and good driving position together with the ease of the auto gearbox.
Let me know if you have any specific queries you think i may be able to answer.
HectorG
|
Espada,
I tried a Forester turbo, but the dealers where very honest and advised that having a turbo means tht you tend to use the performance at the expense of fuel consumption. Whilst I like turbos I find that relatively large normally aspirated petrol engines can give you sufficient torque in the real world, but at much less cost in fuel terms compared with slightly smaller turbo engines.
The 27 mpg I get seems to vary very little whether I am doing 80 mpg on the motorway or slower variable speed driving on country roads.
HectorG
|
|
I really appreciate all your replies, and especially Hectors as he has an X Trail. As you can see Im a hopeless novice as far as cars are concerned (thankfully I excell in certain other interests) and your help is very greatly appreciated! Many thanks again.
|
I also own a 2.5 SVE auto, I agree with all of Hectors comments. I tried the Rav4, CRV and Tuscon and bought the X Trail. A recent "spirited" cross country trip from from South Wales to Worthing produced 30mpg, I get about 25mpg around town.
Mike.
|
Comfort is, to some extent, a matter of personal taste. Have you test-driven any of these vehicles?
As for reliability, the RAV4 usually does best in the surveys, though the latest Which? report, for what it's worth, listing the proportion of cars having breakdowns in the first year or two (can't remember which)gives Honda CRV as the best at 1%, Toyota RAV4 at 3%, and Nissan X-Trail at 4%.
Since it gives the Peugeot 307 at 3%, you may not want to consider this report in isolation!
|
|
>Whilst I like turbos I find that relatively large normally aspirated petrol engines can give you sufficient torque in the real world
Try the 2.0ltr normally aspirated Forester. No slouch despite lack of turbo, fine off road ride and exemplary handling. Also more like an estate than other soft roaders are. I'd call it a discreet 4X4. The Xln comes with toys such as satnav, climate, leather. A bit juicy though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Test drive them all j3b4. You'll find that they all have their little design quirks that might put you off completely. The CRV has an entirely logical design with the auto on a column change, but it and the rest of the interior look so cheap to my eyes I could not put up with it as a car of choice. The RAV4 has the most annoying rear door that bites back. The X-trail is more ponderous to drive on the roads compared to the other two.
Both the CRV and the RAV4 have had their face-lifts some time ago and retirement is nigh. This can be a good thing to get a highly specified model at a decent price, but there may be more depreciation when the new models come out.
My advice is to drive the x-trail and if you can live with the drive, that will be the pick of the bunch. Get the sat-nav! There is a new RAV4 out next year but if you want a car now I think the x-trail is excellent.
I, by the way, have a RAV4.
|
|
Again thanks for all the comments- its great to find a site like this where the more knowledgeable help the less knowledgeable in such a friendly way. Many thanks!
|
|
|
|
