£20k max SUV: BMW X5, Audi Q5, Touareg, ...

[Amp34]

Amusingly thats the reason why i dont like SUV's. In my car i cant even see thru theyre back window to check the road ahead, and they tend to be poor drivers (along with people carrier drivers). They seem popular with old codgers tho because some people like driving a car that handles like an armchair (unless you go expensive and german).

Probably because they drive like normal human beings, not ****holes like many in faster saloons and hot hatches.

Personally I’ve never really seen the fascination with fast cars on roads, you can’t use them without doing something illegal and risk using your licence, and then even if it’s “legal” a lot of the time it’s it’s still arguably dangerous to other road users and pedestrians.

Take a vehicle “off road” and suddenly you’ve or lots of fun to be had at much slower and legal speeds. Although admittedly I wouldn’t want to d that with most crossovers!

99% of SUV's look gash, including the Q7 which is just a massive van. Though estates are no lookers.

Never felt the need for an SUV or an estate with 2 kids. Maybe if we went camping a lot......

TBH I’ve always found most of the premium Marques SUVs fugly. The X5 as a prime example, anything Audi, most of the Mercs (largely because of the saloon style front bonnet they had on them - the most recent ones aren’t too bad). Landrover has its own style, although the RR (as much as it’s iconic) always looks like it’s going to tip over. The new Disco and Evoque are really nice though, as are the Volvo’s - very tempted by the XC40 that’s just been released. The Landcruiser and Jeeps are another matter however, the G Cherokee has always beeen stunning. The midsize market has really taken off style wise in the last few years though and (other than the G Cherokee and Volvo) would rather one of those from a looks perspective.

On the flip side most estates are pretty dreary, the only ones that aren’t are ones that try to look sportier, but then they lose many of the benefits of an estate, with less boot volume and still exceedingly low.

Saloon - rep mobile do those doing high mileage commutes.
Estate - compromise rep mobile for those doing high mileage commutes with a family.

IMO, and probably one of the big reasons sales have collapsed in recent years as more smaller SUVs have made it to the market. Not to mention SUVs are usually smaller for the same volume/carrying capacity. Good for navigating increasingly busy roads and finding parking on roads/short drives.

 

[[TW]Fox]

I wouldn't if I was you, X5 (E70 and F15) are one of the best all-round vehicles out there. Just because something is old doesn't mean it's carp.

No, but when you are spending £20,000 on a car you want something a little more up to date than 2003 tech level. It feels really old inside an E70 now, especially things like the horrendously dated speedometer with little monochrome orange display which does very little. The 5 Series on which its based now starts from £1500 in the classifieds. It's not a £20k vehicle experience anymore.

The E70 was a great car, but the time to buy one was 5+ years ago. The F15 is a great car - but you need £30k to buy one thats good, at least.

My point isn't that the X5 is poor. It's very much not. It's that buying a decent X5 is very very expensive.

 

[SpeedFreak]

Having had a Quasqai+2 followed by a 5 series touring and three young children I have a reasonable view on this. In all honesty the Nissan was easier, for loading/unloading the kids but the boot of the touring is more usable. While volumes are probably similar, I seem to get more in the BMW without piling the boot high and impeding my view.

 

[crinkleshoes]

I forgot about how much I laughed at this. More likely? Perhaps in that single accident type. But that has to be a minuscule chance of that happening compared to almost every other crash scenario, where the SUV will more likely come out better.

I mean, how many cars on the road are actually likely to act like a "ramp" for a Nissan X-Trail? I suspect you'd have to be all sorts of unlucky to be crashing into Housey in his R8, or his pals McLaren.

Sounds like someone plays too much GTA to me.

Definitely more likely... there has been plenty of research into the subject... heck even Top Gear did a segment on it and the Volvo easily won against the Range Rover.

SUVs have a surprisingly high tendency to roll quite easily when the wrong force is applied to it.

If you want a safe/big family car... then Volvo/BMW estates or saloon is a good option. Also leave you with more money to spend on the kids... go to Florida Disney more often of something.

 

[Vern1961]

Take a vehicle “off road” and suddenly you’ve or lots of fun to be had at much slower and legal speeds. Although admittedly I wouldn’t want to d that with most crossovers!

Thinks back to the epilogue of "Cars"...

Having just bought a Sportage no intention of taking it off road (only 2wd on L1 anyway) but coming from a 1.2 Corsa it's a nice chunk of a car, feels solid and stable and I love the bus driver position for visibility. Couldn't honestly see me going back to a conventional hatch or saloon. Plenty of space to chuck the bikes in the back, too, which was one of the reasons for buying.

 

[mjt]

Having had a Quasqai+2 followed by a 5 series touring and three young children I have a reasonable view on this. In all honesty the Nissan was easier, for loading/unloading the kids but the boot of the touring is more usable. While volumes are probably similar, I seem to get more in the BMW without piling the boot high and impeding my view.

That's the thing though, isn't it? I love the fact that my I can throw pretty much anything child-related into the back of my A6 Avant and it will go in without a fuss. SUVs have shallower (and usually higher) boots and I'm pretty sure with the seats up the luggage capacity is smaller. I'm firmly in the estate camp. Never tried loading kids into an SUV, so you're probably right regarding loading children, but I value the luggage capacity due to my gf's insistence on using gargantuan Emmaljuna prams..

 

[Amp34]

No, but when you are spending £20,000 on a car you want something a little more up to date than 2003 tech level. It feels really old inside an E70 now, especially things like the horrendously dated speedometer with little monochrome orange display which does very little. The 5 Series on which its based now starts from £1500 in the classifieds. It's not a £20k vehicle experience anymore.

The E70 was a great car, but the time to buy one was 5+ years ago. The F15 is a great car - but you need £30k to buy one thats good, at least.

My point isn't that the X5 is poor. It's very much not. It's that buying a decent X5 is very very expensive.

Out of interest how much did they both start at? Is the price disparity in part because of higher residuals on the X5?

 

[Amp34]

Definitely more likely... there has been plenty of research into the subject... heck even Top Gear did a segment on it and the Volvo easily won against the Range Rover.

SUVs have a surprisingly high tendency to roll quite easily when the wrong force is applied to it.

If you want a safe/big family car... then Volvo/BMW estates or saloon is a good option. Also leave you with more money to spend on the kids... go to Florida Disney more often of something.

Have you actually got any data to back that up?

Just looking at this article (using stats from the US market) it’s pretty clear that SUVs are more dangerous. For the other driver in a crash.

https://www.google.ca/amp/nationalp...are-proven-to-cause-more-fatal-collisions/amp

To boil it own the article basically points out (with data and comment from studies) that the bigger the car the more “survivability” you have, but the more danger you are to other road users in a crash.

So you’ll be safe in your Volvo if you hit/are hit by a fiesta then yes, you’ll probably come out of it better. If on the other hand you’re hit by a Range Rover you’re likely to be in more of a mess than the Range Rover occupant.

That’s one of the reasons NCAP have vehicle classes. They even point out specifically that different class star ratings can’t be compared.

Edit: just been looking around for UK/European data and the only thing I could find was this article from 2007

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/4x4-safety-under-question

Which, when ignoring the slightly sensationalist headline and the 2x likely to overturn in a crash (6% rather than 3%) the crux of the matter is again that:

Despite these findings, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders claims that occupants of 4x4s are still less likely to be killed or seriously injured than those of other types of car. They also point out that a report into 2004 accident data, published by the Department for Transport in October 2006, revealed that SUV occupants were half as likely to be killed or seriously injured in a two-car impact as those in other vehicles. Again, however, this is only true if one vehicle is not an SUV – meaning that all these facts tell us is that smaller cars can be squashed by bigger cars…

So basically bigger is “better”, just like the other US centric study, even if you’re just as likely to be injured if you’re hit by the same sized vehicle.

If you can find other more relevant studies to back up your assertion that SUVs aren’t safer for their occupants then it would be interesting to see it.

Thinks back to the epilogue of "Cars"...

Much like all those performance car owners that never take them out on a track.

Its such a shame all the green lanes have been shut in the UK.

 

[neocon]

I did a YouTube search for SUV crashes.

There are a number of roll-overs, they look pretty bad. Maybe some are more unstable than others.

The SUVs take crashes well, they keep their cabin structure intact.

 

[darknite]

Is a food edge down to 20k yet? I must admit I do like them a lot and want one as my next car. Maybe in a years time or so.

 

[xs2man]

That's the thing though, isn't it? I love the fact that my I can throw pretty much anything child-related into the back of my A6 Avant and it will go in without a fuss. SUVs have shallower (and usually higher) boots and I'm pretty sure with the seats up the luggage capacity is smaller. I'm firmly in the estate camp. Never tried loading kids into an SUV, so you're probably right regarding loading children, but I value the luggage capacity due to my gf's insistence on using gargantuan Emmaljuna prams..

It depends on what you are comparing here. I would say the X5 luggage compartment is roughly the same size as that of a 5 series touring. Footprint wise, it'll have the 5 series beat on height. That was the impression I got when comparing the two before ending up with the 5 series for the reasons as Fox highlighted. You are going back a generation most likely with regards to tech unless you up the budget considerably. I bought my 5 series when the new X5 was just released (roughly), just as the LCI F11 was released. So my choice was a generation older tech or a significant push in budget to move up to the X5. With that said, depreciation looks like it would have been similar between them. The extra £10k or so the X5 would have cost to buy looks to be almost entirely offset against the resale price as the X5's look to be about £10k more than the 5 series does just now. Of course, the other consideration is there were fantastic discounts on the 5 series, whilst not so good discounts on the X5.

 

[inflames]

Having kids myself and ferry my disabled mother in law around with her wheelchair i can see the appeal of an SUV I like the Toureg and XC90. But i would go for an estate car myself if i was buying, seem to get that much more boot space. We just about manage using a Focus and a IS200.

 

[Ant C]

Not a lot of love the the E70 on here, down to people criticising the colour of the speedometer!? I went from an F11 to X70 and didn't feel like I was stepping back in time.

Picture of it 'off-roading' this summer at Centre Parcs.

 

[tsinc80697]

I bought an E53 X5 a few months ago and love it. Not used it yet for the real reason I bought it for (towing) but it's come in useful having more than 2 seats in a car I own

 

[timmeh]

This thread is classic OCUK Motors. Have you considered buying 2 or 3 MX5s instead of 1 SUV?

If you have young kids then an SUV is way better to load them in and carry all their **** around. Loading our 2yr old into my wife's SUV is a load easier than trying to get him into my car.

Have you tried using the 3rd row seats in an estate car? lol.

 

[chroniclard]

Had couple of hatchbacks and a saloon, neither were an issue with kids(2). Are people just cack handed?

 

[xs2man]

Had couple of hatchbacks and a saloon, neither were an issue with kids(2). Are people just cack handed?

No. But if you are buying a motor with the absolute priority as a family car, why not get the vehicle that is actually easiest for that purpose? Sure, you can do it with a regular car, that is not is dispute. But it is genuinely easier in an SUV type of car.

I often ship my kids about in my 3 door Golf GTI. And it isn't an issue. However it is a much easier task in the Alhambra. This is a huge part of the reason I sold the F11, which was purchased as the family vehicle before. The Alhambra was just easier to use for the task.

 

[crinkleshoes]

Kids dropped on their heads early in their development cycle certainly explains any liking for SUVs

 

[Conscript]

Anyone who resorts to hyperbole such as calling them "abhorrent" and referring to anyone who owns one as an idiots, just because they don't like them personally, doesn't really have any leeway to start lecturing others on intelligence.

 

[crinkleshoes]

Intelligence? I was referring to early age brain damage and impeded development... that's not necessarily related to intelligence.