I'm looking at new cars. My self-imposed brief is a) CO2 < 225, ie not in top VED band, b) automatic, c) 4-wheel drive, d) must be good ON-road, OFF-road irrelevant, e)medium/large estate, f) image totally irrelevant.
So far I've got Audi A6 Avant SE 2.7TDi Quattro Tiptronic and Land-Rover Freelander 2.2Td4 SE Auto on the shortlist.
I'd appreciate constructive comments, even if they're negative about the cars.
Any suggestions for additions to the shortlist would also be appreciated provided they meet a) to e) absolutely.
|
The A6 must be about the only estate that fills those criteria (or maybe an Octavia? I think a Legacy will be too high on emissions and the Forester is hardly medium/large).
The A6 will have a much bigger boot than the Freelander or similar soft-roader - Outlander, Santa Fe, CRV, etc. - and would be my choice.
|
|
Thanks for your input, the Octavia didn't make my shortlist because it has automatic or 4wd but not together.
|
Inevitably, the A6 would be quicker and have better handling. It's 4wd system was designed for the tarmac, whereas on the LR it was designed for muck.
Plus the A6 has an understated coolness about it (imo anyway)
|
|
|
|
If you go for the A6, you will be missing the chance to spend a lot of time with your new friends at your local Land-Rover dealer's service dept.....
|
|
|
volvo XC90 strong auto box 180+bhp 400nm torque at 2000rpm & good fuel economy from a well built reliable bus. Engines appear reliable.
Audi dear to run & free landers have a reputation that goes before them ,or the volvo cross countryD5.
Mitzi L 200 doing good deals & three years servicing for £250 paid up front
Doc
|
|
awd v70 or xc70 would be options
|
Thanks for further input.
I'm aware of the old Freelander's reputation - if we cut through the myths, what's Freelander 2 actually like for reliability?
Volvo XC90 is VED band G on the auto
Volvo XC70 seems cramped in back seat when I've done a "showroom test"
Mitsubishi L200 - I want a roomy estate car with good on-road ride.
|
|
Just out of interest why is 4WD on your list of necessities? It seems a rather unecessary restriction on choice when you're only talking of road use and involves extra complexity and cost for very little benefit.
|
We travel a lot on country roads all year round so 4wd would be useful but I'm not prepared to compromise on-road ride comfort or economy very much.
|
|
|
|
>c) 4-wheel drive, d) must be good ON-road, OFF-road irrelevant
Don't you just hate it, RT, when people start tinkering with the premise of your question? Anyway, I'll take that risk and ask why you're insisting on 4WD if you don't need off-road capability. I can't think of an on-road situation where I've ever found myself thinking, "I wish this car had 4WD."
|
|
Or what Lord Woody said!
|
Suzuki Grand Vitara 1.9 DDiS - apparently there´s an auto option.
Rav4 2.2 TD 180 - likewise
Passat 140 TD 4motion - likewise
|
|
|
> We travel a lot on country roads all year round so 4wd would be useful
Really? Surely 4WD helps only where driving wheels are short of grip - mud, say, or extreme bumps and ruts that prevent wheels touching the ground - where it doubles the chance of a wheel gaining traction. Yer average country lane may have a bit of grass up the middle, but I've never found any of my FWD cars spinning helplessly or sliding around, even in the winter. And if a road is covered in sheet ice, even 4WD won't help.
I can see how a rural vet or similar might want 4WD for negotiating muddy, rutted farm tracks in all weathers (although even then I suspect ground clearance is usually more valuable than 4WD) but nothing you've said so far tells me you wouldn't be just fine in a FWD car with nice, tall tyres, which would then open up all sorts of lower-CO2 options with automatic.
|
|
Try driving a 4wd car like a Legacy or Forester. They feel so much more assured all the time. The OP wants 4wd so let's answer the question shall we?
|
having at one time owned two A4 tdis one fwd the other awd I can say that even my wife noticed the difference and prefered the quattro.
Have you driven the freelander ?? I would say a6 every time from your two options
subaru are bringing out diesel now arent they?
|
|
|
|
No, lets argue! I've had all sorts of 4WDs ( Range Rover, Disco, Shogun, Sporttrak,Defender) and lived exclusively in rural areas for 30 years and have never felt more secure in a 4WD as opposed to any of my 2WD cars. They're more complex and thus more expensive to repair, and less fuel efficient.
|
|
|
This is Discussion, Nick. I'm broadening the discussion a little, that's all! I've driven a friend's Freelander over the kind of country lanes I had in mind when I wrote the last piece. It was OK but I wouldn't have called it any more 'assured' than my regular FWD car. (I did notice the sluggish engine and the horrible grey plastic dashboard, though! And I know that one let in water and broke down a lot.)
And you'll have noticed that Subarus aren't on RT's list because lugging around all that 4WD gubbins adds unacceptably to the CO2 output. I'm looking to see if he really has to choose between a nice but very expensive Audi and, well, a Freelander. I do this sort of thing all the time at work (not in the motor trade, admittedly) and customers generally appreciate having their assumptions checked - it's surprising how often what people think they want differs from what they really need!
Incidentally, according to Toyota UK's website, you can have an automatic RAV4 but only with a petrol engine; CO2 is 212g/km.
|
|
I was talking about cars, not off- or soft-roaders like Rav4 or Freelanders. They will always feel less secure than a 'normal' car due to the ride height and suspension compromises for some off road work. Try a 4wd car next to a fwd or rwd car. You'll notice the difference more often than you'd think. There's very little extra 'gubbins' in a Subaru to carry around. The CO2 output is more to do with the engine design and power output. But back to the OP's original question, I'd have the Audi of the two options offered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My next car might well be an Audi Allroad. Although 95% of the time I wont need the height or 4wd, it is the other 5%. Snow is always useful to have 4wd and as we do occaisionally have snow in this country (and never seem to change tyres) it might be nice. Also I do go off road every now and then - not mud plugging but enough to need extra height and 4wd.
I believe that whilst the XC70 is very comfy, it is a bit of a dog. Only from what I have read in motoring press but a friend who has one thought it was very good.
|
|
If image is not important to the OP, then why Audi? A Hyundai Santa Fe ticks all the boxes, is a lot cheaper and probably a lot more reliable. I can think of no good reason to buy a Freelander adn suspect it is a lot smaller than the Audi or Hyundai inside.
|
|
Espada, then you can also take it further with the Kia Sportage althought in the CBC breakdown, it says mpg is dire. Cheap and I think quite good looking (if it is the Kia I am thinking about!!)
|
|
I remember driving in snow soon after I bought my Disco. I slid across the road and nearly ended in a ditch. 4WD may make life a little easier a few days a year, but it doesn't make you invulnerable, and the additional costs and expenses that 4WD involve outweigh any minimal advantages (IMHO)
|
|
Oh, and I've had a Freelander too. It broke. The headgasket went and it was fixed for about £800, but it was also discovered some looming problems with the cylinder linings so I got shot quickly.
|
|
The latest Freelander should be more reliable. At least it has been spared the pathetic 1.8 K Series.
|
|
No brainer. A6. But do you really need 4WD? Save yourself some dosh and fuel and some CO2.
|
I need 4wd, ok?
My initial thoughts and test drives went to SUVs but most that were inside my CO2 limit, including the Hyundai Santa Fe, just wallowed, didn't feel secure on corners and rode just as badly as my current car, a high mileage Vauxhall.
The Freelander 2 is clearly very different from other SUVs in it's ride characteristics - not surprising given that development was 99% Ford - but very pricey too, unless reliability has moved half-a-dozen steps from the old Freelander.
What I really want is a Skoda Superb Estate with VAG tiptronic 4wd - but they only build 2wd saloons - even on Passat Estate you can't have auto and 4wd together.!
|
Buy an nearly-new Outback 2.5 SE Auto for £17K or so (it's band F) and use the money you've saved over the Audi to pay for the petrol. The dealers are nicer, too.
Davros
|
|
|
>>whereas on the LR it was designed for muck.
Really? On what basis do you make that assertion?
|
|
I like your logic, Davros!
|
>>> Suzuki Grand Vitara 1.9 DDiS - apparently there´s an auto option.
Rav4 2.2 TD 180 - likewise
Passat 140 TD 4motion - likewise >>>
My searches revealed no auto on the diesel Grand Vitara and diesel RAV, just their petrol versions - auto 4wd is only available on saloon Passat, not estate.
|
|
Sorry Rupert - that was all I could come up with after a brief perusal of the mag stats. Hope your search is successful.
|
>>whereas on the LR it was designed for muck. Really? On what basis do you make that assertion?
It's an off roader. It's on road dynamics must have been compromised in order for it to be good on muck (ie. off road)
The A6's dynamics havent been compromised in this way
|
>>It's an off roader... designed for muck.
Is it? OP is referring to a Freelander, not a Defender!
|
|
Mapmaker - I wouldn't be so quick to write off the Freelander's off-road capabilities, ground clearance aside, you'd have to be facing some really serious terrain for a Freelander to wimp out and there are times when its lower weight makes it a more useful vehicle.
|
|
even on Passat Estate you can't have auto and 4wd together.!
You can, but only with the 3.2 petrol engine. I think its done to stop the passat undercutting the top end A6s
|
|
|
|
|
Go for the A6, RT. It's a lovely car, and like most Audis it gives you a terrific feelgood factor, as well as the added surefootedness of 4wd even on-road.
You won't regret it.
|
FWIW, the boot of the current Freelander is not large - its certainly more shallow, front-to-back, than any Focus-sized estate.
The Forester and Legacy were mentioned earler: there's no more than an inch difference in useful space in any direction between the boot of either car and, again, neither is as large as a Mk1 Focus (I've measured them to check if there's enough space for the dogs!). The Forester has less volume below the window line, though, if you're carrying a load you want to keep under the tonneau cover to discourage thieving eyes.
Subaru are supposed to launch a diesel in the Legacy for 2008. Its been displayed at some of the motor shows, but Subaru have been supposed to be "just about to" launch a diesel for several years now. Personally, I wouldn't delay my buying to get one.
If you're considering an A6, the Volvo XC70 / Cross Country is also worth a look.
|
|
|
To return to the 4x2 vs 4x4 arguement, a lot of the grip a car gives is down to the tyres.
I remember a couple of years back we drove to the Swiss Alps in convoy with parents-in-law. Us in Merc E320 with snow tyres, them in a Forester with standard tyres. We had better grip than then when driving in snow! Most soft-roaders come with tyres will be useless in mud/snow/off-road, because they are designed for the 99.9 road use that the cars get in the real world.
I have since used the tyres on our C8 in snow, and again had absolutely no traction problems. I now fit them for general winter use. They are quieter and provide much better grip in the wet as well as at lowish temperatures (less than 10 degrees C) - the 'rubber' compound is clearly much softer.
|
|
But the Forester on snow tyres would be better than the Merc on snow tyres. You're comparing apples and pears.
|
Yes, it would be.
My point is that if grip is the main requirement, you don't necessarily need a 4x4. Yes, many 4x4 vehicles have added benefits to some people, such as added ground clearance if you are going off-road. But as the OP said, he's not going off-road. He just wants grip. In that case look at the tyres.
|
|
Frankly the Geolander G900 tyres they fit to Subarus are dreadful things and anything, 2wd or whatever, would outperform a Subaru on Geolanders in snow. Now fit a decent set of tyres to the Forester or anything else and traction improves dramatically. We fitted some Bridgestones to our old Forester and the snow performance was far superior to the Geolanders on the newer one.
|
|
|
|
|
Is the Peugeot 4007 on the market in the UK? the HDi seems to be relatively economical.
BIG
|
|
There's no automatic transmission option on 4007 here.
|
|
You're quite right - from the other ranges, it seems that Peugeot can fit an automatic box to the 2.0 and 2.7 engines but not the 2.2.
|
|
|
|
The German Peugeot site indicates an automatic petrol version will be available in Nov. with a CO2 figure of 222g.
|
4x4 is a waste of time here in snow. Even on winter tyres.
You can have all the grip in the world but if the remaining cars on the road have not, you'll be stuck.
(I speak from experience of driving in hilly Stoke on Trent in snow: on day I drove 50 miles cross country in half the time my wife took (5 hours) to travel 7 miles in snow...Buses do not like snow.. and as for BMWs...:-)
madf
|
The inability of English city/town drivers to cope with snow is proportional to their distance from Hadrian's Wall!
Fortunately, my needs are on country roads not urban Staffordshire.
|
How can you be happy to spend £30,000 (Thats THIRTY THOUSAND POUNDS) on a car but be bothered about whether the road tax is a few hundred quid (Thats HUNDRED POUNDS) or not?
Bizarre.
Next you'll be saying 32mpg is unacceptable whereas 34mpg is great.
|
I'd love to find a car that met all my criteria, cost £10,000 and did 50mpg, but we all have to draw limits somewhere - my top limit is 224 CO2 g/km.
Why can't I chose a car to my requirements, rather than someone else's agenda?
|
|
Go ahead and and choose car to your own requirements. If you come on to a busy forum and ask for suggestions then you shouldn't be surprised if people make comments and ask you some questions and even suggest that they find your criteria puzzling or odd.
|
|
Of the two, I'd pick the Avant. Given what everyone was saying, I think you're right to want 4WD, if that's what you want. We live in the countryside too and getting around is easier and safer in winter with 4WD. We briefly had a 4WD X-type V6. Perhaps see if this suits you, though will be a bit smaller, it is still a nice car in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This question is rather like who would you rather go to dinner with :-
1) Jade Goody - Freelander
2) Jennifer Lopez - A6 Avant
Nuff said......
|
|
Interesting short list and only one choice in my book of the two and it has to be the audi. Heaven knows how many visits to the LR service queue you could have if you voted the other way...bet the service desk would be astounded that one of Halewoods finest could have a problem! People keep commenting on the idea that if you can afford 30k for a vehicle then £400 road tax is peanuts..well that 400 nicker isn't going to get reduced by govenment waste depts its only going up, also and i'm sure youre thinking of this what is the resale of band G vehicles going to be like in say 5 tears when the road toll will probably be nearer 6 or 8 hundred. Also go to your friendly LR dealer and practise putting the stupid breeze block key in and out of the dashbord and imagine how long it would be before you took a hammer to it.
|
The choice finally got resolved, thank you Davros!
Buy an nearly-new Outback 2.5 SE Auto for £17K or so (it's band F) and use the money you've saved over the Audi to pay for the petrol. The dealers are nicer, too.
I bought a 15-month old Outback 2.5SE auto with 9,000 miles for £15,300, with 21 months Subaru warranty left.
The first test drive in an 4-cyl Outback put a big smile on my face - I'd forgotten how cars should handle and it's smooth like an old straight six. I didn't buy that particular one but kept coming back to the model.
The Audi went out when the price went over £35,000 because I kept noticing something optional that came as standard on my 8 year old top spec Astra!
Lack of boot space finally eliminated the Freelander 2 but in reality I would've needed proof of it's reliability, not dealer hearsay, and that won't be available for 4-5 years.
Fuel bills will be higher but that £20,000 will go a long, long way even if the Audi's higher residual value at 5 years old is deducted.
Edited by Ruperts Trooper on 12/11/2007 at 10:22
|
Good choice and one that I might have to investigate at sometime in the near future.
Going back through the thread, I see a some people asking why you want 4WD and how this is a waste and unnecessary etc etc. Thought that I would add that I personally find torque steer in cars one of the most unattractive qualities possible and therefore that limits the number of FWD cars that would appeal to me. RWD cars that I would realistically look at are limited to BMW, Mercedes and I think Chrysler (300C but that is a bit phat for me). Therefore 4WD is a distinct possibility next time I change my car.
|
Pal of mine has just turned in his diesel Freelander 2 (which I thought was an excellent drive) after just 5 months, following warning light problems needing tedious downloads then an oil leak that sent smoke through the dash vents.
He's going back to a new Disco...
|
He's going back to a new Disco...
Another vehicle not exactly praised for its reliability!
|
|
|
|
