# New Car Expected (Now With Photos)??



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Decided to include a functional vehicle into the fold (ditching a fun but impractical) MX-5 Roadster Coupe. Shortlisted down to a brand new Q5 & looking very likely we'll close the deal this week.

The available vehicle is a very high spec 2.0TFSi 211ps S-Line S-Tronic Quattro, in Ibis White. Loaded with Panaromic roof, B&O, HDD Nav, Electric & Heated Seats, Cruise & a few other toys i've forgotten.

Question is, does anyone on here own one as would be interested in it's day to day functionality? Power is pretty good & ride/comfort quite lush. Tis far from slow, but i'd be interested in real world economy? It will be kept for 5 or more years & will be the workhorse vehicle.

This opens up the possible replacements for my RS4 as i will no longer need a semi practical car


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

We were tempted by that spec Q5 (although manual) but ultimately preferred the more conventional Avant.

I've got that engine and trim level etc and it seems to do it all well enough that I'm not clamering for anything more.

The car has 170 miles on it last week but a week in Cornwall has helped to push this up a lot so the breaking in is almost over. Then again doing 85 with a full car and a roof box perhaps isn't the easiest break in a cars ever had :roll:

So far we're averaging 26-27 mpg but it's not done enough varied miles to consider this representative.

p.s. The HDD Nav ("3G") is good and it's made me glad my previous car was incorrectly made so that I could re-order. :wink:


----------



## silveraudi225 (Aug 2, 2008)

scoTTy said:


> We were tempted by that spec Q5 (although manual) but ultimately preferred the more conventional Avant.
> 
> I've got that engine and trim level etc and it seems to do it all well enough that I'm not clamering for anything more.
> 
> ...


on a private airfield i hope


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

scoTTy said:


> We were tempted by that spec Q5 (although manual) but ultimately preferred the more conventional Avant.
> 
> I've got that engine and trim level etc and it seems to do it all well enough that I'm not clamering for anything more.
> 
> ...


Paul, hadn't realised it was the 2.0T S-Line you just received.

Not being a big Avant fan & liking the look of the Q5 (prefer it to the Q7) i feel for our needs (see new dog & mountain biking), the Q5 just appears to have extra room over the Avant that we will likely need. Would guess the Q5 will ride differently given it's extra height & IIRC it's not much heavier than it's A4 relatives.

Quite excited about the prospect of a new car, but am venturing into unknown Audi territory so any pointers would be good?.

75% of the time it will only have 1 0r 2 adults in the car, it's the other 25% that is pushing us into a soft roader.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

matt9238 said:


> on a private airfield i hope


You don't need a private airfield to do 85 kmph do you ? :wink: 

Paul - we ruled the Q5 out for a few reasons but as with all cars it's a very personal choice.

Our reasons :

[1] It's a softroader
[2] The dimensions :
Avant (w)1826 (l)4703 (h)1436 (boot depth)1027
Q5 (w)1880 (l)4629 (h)1653 (boot depth) 926
The Q5 is that bit too wide and too high for our garage. You gain height but the Avant is actually nearly 3" longer and the boot 4" longer. We weren't fans of the upright seating positions. i.e. the chairs seem higher so more like sitting on a dining room chair than stretching legs forward in a car. The boots also shorter.
[3] I'm simply not a fan of softroaders styling nor the higher centre of gravity and the effect on handling.
[4] Price - it's hard to do a direct comparison as they contain different options but the Q5 was a bit more expensive and when we were buying it was brand new and hence there was no discounting. I got over 11% on the A4.
[5] Did I mention "it's a soft roader"? 

To be honest unless you wear a hat and need the extra head room, I'm not sure what it offers as a benefit.

If I wanted something that could drive down a muddy track to take my dog for a walk then I'd seriously look at the A4 Allroad. This seems to have the car like benefits of the A4 Avant but with some off road ability/styling.

We put the dynamic suspension on our car and find it's great. The recent trip to Cornwall and back was done on "Comfort" and made it much more relaxing that the standard sports suspension. I haven't driven a Q5 so I don't know how much difference there is in the suspension. I notice the Q5 S-line gets S-line suspension that's not dropped. That's gotta be quite different to the A4 S-line suspension which gets a 30mm drop (N.b. on the A4 S-line's you don't get S-line suspension unless you spec it. Otherwise you get Sports suspension with a 20mm drop. I got the Sports suspension as it's the only way of getting 19" wheels on)

As I said it's a personal choice and will come down to how you intend to use it and which you prefer the looks of.

p.s. One dowside of the Avant if you have a dog is the sloping rear window, It's could be quite intrusive if you have a dog that quite high up.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Cheers Paul, that all makes sense & i do think it's a taste preference to the styling as i really like the Q5 & feel it's just a tad more practical. Garage isn't an issue luckily & not sure if you checked out the S-Line Q5 as the Sports seats didn't appear armchair like, however the higher ride height could give that impression.

The car in question is also on 20" bling (gotta love big wheels) :lol:

May have a quick look at the A4 Avant though, as we maybe didn't pay it enough attention due to my preferences. Not sure the same dimensions apply with rear seats folded, as the rear legroom with seats up is huge even with my driving position.

As said, the capability once in a blue moon to carry 2 adults, 3 kids, 1 Labrador & some camping gear drives the go large ethos & the Q5 just gives the impression it's a bigger vehicle & more capable of carrying all this.

You know what i'm like with cars? see it, like it then buy it. Sensible evaluation does not happen very often although i'm getting better.


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

What about the A4 Allroad??


----------



## elrao (Apr 19, 2005)

We looked at the Q5 as a possible upgrade from out A3 Sportback and were disappointed in the boot size on the Q5. If you download the specs then the boots on the A3 Sportback, A4 Avant and Q5 aren't too disimilar, just roughly the same volume in different ways. The boot floor in the A3 goes down below the bumper level so is actually quite high if you remove the parcel shelf, but it isn't that 'deep' (distance to the rear seats); the A4 boot was flat to the rear bumper so was not as 'high' as the A3, but it was deeper; the Q5 I think was flat from the bumper but you get the height from the roof being higher, but I don't recall it being that deep. So I guess it is how you want your space!

Inside the cabin there is also little extra space, considering the size of the Q5 compared to the A3 there isn't a whole lot of extra room, so we kept our £20k and bought a '67 VW Splitscreen camper and a 3.2 911 engine and gearbox!


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

elrao said:


> We looked at the Q5 as a possible upgrade from out A3 Sportback and were disappointed in the boot size on the Q5. If you download the specs then the boots on the A3 Sportback, A4 Avant and Q5 aren't too disimilar, just roughly the same volume in different ways. The boot floor in the A3 goes down below the bumper level so is actually quite high if you remove the parcel shelf, but it isn't that 'deep' (distance to the rear seats); the A4 boot was flat to the rear bumper so was not as 'high' as the A3, but it was deeper; the Q5 I think was flat from the bumper but you get the height from the roof being higher, but I don't recall it being that deep. So I guess it is how you want your space!
> 
> Inside the cabin there is also little extra space, considering the size of the Q5 compared to the A3 there isn't a whole lot of extra room, so we kept our £20k and bought a '67 VW Splitscreen camper and a 3.2 911 engine and gearbox!


You sure? I've been in many A3's & if they are very similar in interior size then i need to get myself down to SpecSavers pretty sharpish. 

Being S-Line & having no spare wheel, the boot has almost full width/depth under floor storage in the boot & that adds quiat e a bit of space, plus it's the height we need as we'll be putting a dog cage in the boot.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

W7 PMC said:


> You know what i'm like with cars? see it, like it then buy it. Sensible evaluation does not happen very often although i'm getting better.


TBH just seeing this thread was a bit of a surprise ! :lol: :wink:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Paul - buy the Q5 !!

My A4 has LED rear lights but the indicators are normal bulbs. On the Q5 they're LEDs.

Q5 LED Q.E.D. :wink:

p.s. Yes it does bug me that the indicators aren't LEDs [smiley=bomb.gif]


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Who would be crazy enough to buy a car 'because the indicators are LEDs'. you can't even see them!

:lol:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Did you see who I addressed the post to ?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Hadn't even spotted that Paul. Taking one out on an extended test drive tonight so will give the rear lights a good look 8)

Me thinks we'll be getting one


----------



## elrao (Apr 19, 2005)

We had one as a courtesy car when the A3 was in for service. I stand by my comments, other than headroom and extra height in the boot then they aren't really that much roomier than the A3 we have (sportback (5 door), also an S-Line etc.). Yes it is bigger, but given the overall size of the Q5 compared to the A3, the interior room isn't proportionally as big as the rest of the car.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Had one on loan overnight & it ticks all the relevant boxes, so all sorted this morning & the car will be ready to collect on Wednesday.

Has got me thinking that the need for 2 cars is getting smaller all the time with our different work patterns, so may get rid of the RS4 when the market improves further & just run with the Q5.

I must be getting old 8)


----------



## Hipflyguy (Jun 1, 2006)

Should be some useful reading here:
http://www.myaudiq5.com/


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

elrao said:


> We had one as a courtesy car when the A3 was in for service. I stand by my comments, other than headroom and extra height in the boot then they aren't really that much roomier than the A3 we have (sportback (5 door), also an S-Line etc.). Yes it is bigger, but given the overall size of the Q5 compared to the A3, the interior room isn't proportionally as big as the rest of the car.


The Q5 is built on the A4 platform so it's not going to be that much bigger in certain proportions than the A3.

That said, i've got a B7 RS4 so if we agree that the A4 is a bit larger than the A3, then the Q5 is much bigger. The room in the cabin feels half as big again as my car as well as the length, although the width feels pretty similar. Perhaps it's just the much higher ride height, but even sat in the car park it towers over regular Audis & side by side it only looks marginally smaller than the Q7.


----------



## cuTTsy (Jan 31, 2003)

W7 PMC said:


> it only looks marginally smaller than the Q7.


hmmm had one parked next to my Q7 at work not sure it was marginally smaller.

Very nice though and agree I think the overall looks are better, never liked the rear end on the Q7 just something uncomfortable about it. Enjoy.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

The B8 A4 is 5" bigger than the B6/B7. Add in the extra inch (I think) of the Q5 and you'll noticed the difference in size.

What's the colour, spec, etc are do we have to wait until Wednesday?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

cuTTsy said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > it only looks marginally smaller than the Q7.
> ...


I should have been a little more specific  The Q7 is a few ft longer than the Q5, but the dealer had an Ibis Q7 & Q5 side by side front on facing the window & the width & height proportions look very similar. Defo alot more boot space in the Q7 as i guess it's designed to take a 3rd row of seating, but from the rear seats forward the space only feld marginally bigger. I did hanker more for the Q7 but i think the Q5 is the safer bet given the main driver  :lol:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

The Spec is:

Q5 2.0 T Q S-line S-Tronic 211
Ibis White
Alcantara leather
20" 7 Twin Spoke alloys
Bang & Olufsen Sound System
Cruise Control
CD Changer
Electric front seats
Heated front seats
Interior light pack
Light and rain sensor with high beam assist
Mobile phone prep low
Panoramic glass roof
Technology pack
Without capacity designation

Think that's pretty much it. Got a couple of grand off the new price & a few freebies thrown in.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Interesting how Audi package stuff differently in their models.

Q5 tech pack had 3g Sat Nav plus includes Parking Plus and Electic tailgate for £2k
A4 tech pack had 3g SatNav plus cruise and AMI for £2k (well £1.5 for me as I got the S-line Executive).

How can cruise and AMI be the same cost as Parking Plus and Electric tailgate? Weird. I added them both as options instead.

Seems like a decent spec. The only tweaks I'd personally really have liked are the AMI and Storage Pack. CD changer - how quaint :wink: 

White does seem to be the new black.

p.s. I'm going to debadge mine. It certainly tidies up the rear.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

What's AMI?

Agree about Tech Pack. On RS4 it's DVD Sat-Nav, CD Changer & Adaptive Headlights.

If had been specing form the factory we'd probably have gone for Rear Bench & Storage Pack, but we've got the dealer to throw in a net & loadliner for the boot, so only missing out on under seat storage. The rear bench although not quite as attractive as the standard seat, does allow the whole bench to be pulled forward bt 10cm, so quite handy when extra boot space needed, as rear legroom is plenty regardless.

Rear backrests can be reclined, thus locked more upright when required, only about a 10 degree scope though. Does look very nice in white with the chrome & 20" wheels. Only thing Sue finds odd & will take some gettign used to are the wing mirrors, i'm sure they're the same size as the Q7, but look massive in the Q5  .

Only 2 more sleeps :lol:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

AMI - Audi Music Interface - it gives you a small connector in the glove box into which you can connect either a headphone outlet on your mp3 player, a USB memory stick, an iPod etc and give you full control via the MMI. I've just pluged in a 160Gb iPod Classic so I've got all my music again - I was missing my Phatbox!

If the underseat storage is anything like on my Avant then you're not missing much. It's no where near as big as on the B6/B7. In fact in the US some guys are spending crazy money ($50) on an umbrella and it just fits in taking all the space!! However I do like the seat back nets, etc.

The rear bench was the thing that nearly pulled us to the Q5 but eventually we decided not.

Audi seem to have a thing about big mirrors. Fortuantely one of the changes on the MY2010 A4's is slimmer ones. I'm really glad I got them as there's quite a reduction in wind noise.

p.s. No pics of LED indicators when you get it!! :roll: :?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Paul, i'm pretty sure it's got that. It defo has the 2 SD card slots, but i saw mention of a Media Library that you can download from onto the Head Unit (i think), maybe that's it. I'll check on Wednesday.

Gonna post up lots of LED pics, it's the future.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

LED pics are fine as I've got them too .... just none of the fecking indicators! :mrgreen:

The SD slots and the Hard disk drive (about 10Gb useable) are part of the 3G MMI.

The AMI is hidden away in the glove box. When you collect the car (or is it a van?? :wink: ) take a look. If it's there then ensure then give you two cables to go with it.

You normally get a USB cable and an iPod one but you can swap them for 2.5mm analogue and/or mini USB.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

I will look for it & let you know.

Never been keen on iPOD in the car as the quality is never as good as CD, just allows you more tunes in the car.

With a 6-disc changer, 2 SD Cards & a 10GB hard drive, i think that will cover all but a round the world drive :lol:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

W7 PMC said:


> Never been keen on iPOD in the car as the quality is never as good as CD, just allows you more tunes in the car.


You must have ears like a bat to tell the difference in a car. Either that or you're using something cr4p to rip the CDs with 

So where's the pics etc ?

p.s. A guy on another forum had one as a loner and is only getting high teens mpg out of the 2.0T


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

It's a big difference, usual iPOD is 128KBS & a CD is 760ish, so 5-6 times the quality.

Would only play original CD's in the car, not ripped from MP3's, the SD Cards will be holding MP3's

The car does not have AMI, but has the Hard Drive Jukebox, 2 SD card slots & an an Aux input which i'm told will (with cable) link to an MP3 player or any other applicable media device (will check what that includes).

Picked it up at 13:00, but i've not driven yet (too busy). Looks stunning, so very happy.

Would assume getting that low MPG would be due to caning the car, book says high 30's for combined. I guess we'll average high 20's to low 30's. My manual doesn't state the average i get in my RS4 :lol:

Will take some piccies over the weekend.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

I'm no expert on iPods (and no audiphile) but my understanding is that iTunes rips at 128 and downloads to iTunes are at 128 but the player can play back at the quality you've ripped at i.e. if mine are 320 then that's how it'd play. I could well be wrong though :?

Regardless of claimed mpg, I think we'll both do better than the S4 and RS4


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

p.s. Just looked in the iPod manual :

AAC (M4A, M4B, M4P, up to 320 Kbps)
Apple Lossless (a high-quality compressed format)
MP3 (up to 320 Kbps)
MP3 Variable Bit Rate (VBR)
WAV
AA (audible.com spoken word, formats 2, 3, and 4)
AIFF

so at 320 it's ONLY half the quality :wink:

I guess I'm lucky I can't tell the difference in amonst the road noise etc


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

W7 PMC said:


> It's a big difference, usual iPOD is 128KBS & a CD is 760ish, so 5-6 times the quality.


That's not really how it works. The bitrate of audio from a standard CD is about 1411Kb/s (44.1KHz sample rate, 16bit samples, x2 for stereo) but bitrate is not an accurate measurement of quality as MP3s are compressed.

In a moving car, with engine and road noise, you lose detail from so much of the audible spectrum anyway that I would defy anyone to tell the difference between a CD and a well encoded MP3 at 320Kb/s. Add to that the fact that the CD will suffer from vibration so you will also be listening to a certain amount of error correction with your tunes and I can't see any reason to avoid MP3s in a car.

If you really wanted to get picky with it though, you could still use a lossless codec such as Apple Lossless on the iPod and it would be identical to the CD.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

All my MP3's are imported at the maximum 320 so my iPOD is OK, but most import at the default 128 & i can certainly tell the difference.

Just swapping iPODs in a dock i can tell between 128 & my 320. I think most downloads from iTUNES are restricted to 128 (could be wrong).

That said, i'm never in a car long enough to want my entire audio library with me, so 6 cd's, 10GB hard drive & 4GB of SD card should be enough :lol: plus if the mood takes me i can plug my iPOD in via the aux input socket in the armrest.

Got nice LED indicators as well 8)


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

W7 PMC said:


> Got nice LED indicators as well 8)


We need pics :wink:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Feckers! :roll:

When I get around to it I'll put in LEDs and a resistor. I will!! I bloody will you know!


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

W7 PMC said:


> All my MP3's are imported at the maximum 320 so my iPOD is OK, but most import at the default 128 & i can certainly tell the difference.


I agree with that but are you saying you can here the difference between 320 on an iPod and a CD in a car?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Not tried it yet in the Q5. Looking forward to some B&O action soon.

In the MX-5, was a noticeable difference in quality between my Touch at 320KB & a Nano at 128KB


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

As an aside, I think that OLD imports from iTunes were 128KPS but they're now all higher than that. And I think it will retrospectively upgrade your old stuff for a minimum fee.


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

I've always yearned for a car _without capacity designation_.

You must be very proud.

:wink:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

jdn said:


> I've always yearned for a car _without capacity designation_.
> 
> You must be very proud.
> 
> :wink:


Me too.

Odd really as my RS has no capacity designation, but it wasn't an option.

I assume it's a copy BMW idea. :lol:


----------



## Wolfsburger (Oct 21, 2002)

wallsendmag said:


> We need pics :wink:


Yep, let`s have a look then!


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

I'll take some tomorrow & fire them up to FB & post a link. Not cleaning the car though (it's too big)


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Some piccies of the Q5:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=3 ... 3056&saved


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Def looks good in white ! :wink:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

I defo think so.

Is odd getting a car that you intend to keep for many years & actually more difficult i think. Kinda a head purchase which i'm not good at.

It's really nice to drive, very quiet & the elevated position is good. Could do with a little more boot space, but a dog cage does fit in the boot, although still need to work out how to secure it properly to protect the back of the seats & the rear screen etc.

Only want the cage in there when taking the dog out so can't look at permanent fixings.

The gearbox needs to loosen up a little, as it's a bit jerky when pulling away from standstill, but it's a good turn of speed & once rolling, gear changes are ubber smooth. Cracks me up it's got paddle shift though.

I'm well pleased with it & it may soon become the only car in the household for a little while.


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

Im not on facebook :?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

http://rides.webshots.com/album/575043417JrFXSS

Just sent a random few for hosting, so should be viewable here (i think)


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Paul - keep an eye on the gearbox. Some Q5's, A4's etc with the 2.0T and S-tronic are having issues where the revs pull up even if you've got a fixed speed set in the cruise. Many have had s/w updates but it's not perfect.

It doesn't seem to affect them all.


----------



## Wolfsburger (Oct 21, 2002)

Very nice, Ibis suits it.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Will do Paul. Hopefully it's just a little tight as it's new & i'm sure the electronic gizmos will be forced into recognising my style of driving when i use it :wink:

The car has gone South this week, so that will put 500ish miles on it.

Was wrong on the MPG if the first couple of weeks is anything to go by  . Has mainly been town driving but haven't got the average MPG above 25 yet. Hope the long motorway run will mpull that up, but am a bit surprised it's so low. The S-Tronic does get into the higher gears very quickly (5th, 6th & 7th), so i'd have been expecting better.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Wolfsburger said:


> Very nice, Ibis suits it.


Thanks, i do think the colour suits the car very well & more so with the 20" wheels & S-Line styling.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

A keeper! So the white car isn't just for Xmas eh Paul?

Interesting choice but makes sense and ticks all the boxes. Hope PH are being good to you. :wink:


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

Welcome back, Gary. You've been missed.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> A keeper! So the white car isn't just for Xmas eh Paul?
> 
> Interesting choice but makes sense and ticks all the boxes. Hope PH are being good to you. :wink:


Works well having the Q5 alongside the RS4 & well enough that am looking at selling the RS4 early next year (before the warranty expires) & just running with the Q5 for 12 mths (need to save some money).

As for HP, another big round of WFR & it's very close to my door this time  . Big changes in Middle Management & the overall HP structure is undergoing major change currently :?

Glad you're back. What you up to now?


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

lovely09 said:


> The new Audi Q5 combines the dynamism of a sports sedan with highly variable interior and versatile options for leisure-time and family use.Strong and efficient engines,quattro permanent all-wheel drive and agile running gear have been brought together to create a superior technology package for both on and off road driving.These are some of Q5 features to see its reliability for practical use.


Have you been reading the Audi marketing blurb? :lol:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

lovely09 said:


> The new Audi Q5 combines the dynamism of a sports sedan with highly variable interior and versatile options for leisure-time and family use.Strong and efficient engines,quattro permanent all-wheel drive and agile running gear have been brought together to create a superior technology package for both on and off road driving.These are some of Q5 features to see its reliability for practical use.


Agile? is that not a IT/PPM Methodology :lol:

No idea about the variable & versatile interior, it has 5 doors & 5 seats, that part is no more versatile than my RS4 (except the bigger boot & more interior space).

Do agree it's got a great turn of speed & last night now it's through 1K miles i gave it a bit a bit of a spanking in flappy paddle mode on some B Roads & it's a total hoot with very compitant handling. Still think it's cracking but can't see a variable or versatile interior.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Maybe you didn't tick the box for that option :wink:


----------



## head_ed (Dec 10, 2002)

Hey Paul, nice motor.

Just out of interest, did you look at a Disco during your research?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Mart,

Didn't look at the Disco as that's too large for requirements & those levels of off road capabilty were not needed. Wanted it to be big enough to fulfill every potential eventuality, but not too big to be a PITA for general use & parking etc.

Functional & practical is what was needed & that covered Q5/X3 sized vehicles along with the Mazda/Ford/GM variants. The Q5 came out way ahead.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Is a disco really that much bigger in terms of end to end dimensions or does it just look bigger as it's squared off?


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Quick google reveals:

LRD - length 4838, width 2176
Q5 - length 4630, width 1880

So I suppose it's a fair bit bigger.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Kell said:


> Quick google reveals:
> 
> LRD - length 4838, width 2176
> Q5 - length 4630, width 1880
> ...


The widths quoted aren't correct. The LR one includes mirrors, while the Q5 doesn't. The Q5 is 2089mm including mirrors.

21cm mirrors, eh? Whatever you do, don't drive through a safari park - You'll end up with a randy elephant following you all the way home...


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

21cm mirrors....more likely two mirrors each of 10.5cm :roll:


----------



## cuTTsy (Jan 31, 2003)

I looked at all sorts when I bought my Q7 including a Disco, by far the most practical space wise and I really like its exterior, for me the levels of technology available at the time as well as the interior finish put me off.(that was two years ago)
The Disco is a much larger car than the Q5 not sure they should be compared.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

scoTTy said:


> 21cm mirrors....more likely two mirrors each of 10.5cm :roll:


Ooops...

Although that's not quite right. The mirrors stick out an *additional* 105mm each, but they are a lot more than 105mm wide themselves. That's why I got carried away with the size - I saw a picture of the Q5 and thought the mirrors looked huge.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

cuTTsy said:


> The Disco is a much larger car than the Q5 not sure they should be compared.


If the Disco can't be compared to the Q5 based on the size difference (20cm in length), then it can't be compared to the Q7 either, as that is more than 20cm longer itself.

The Disco price range has more of an overlap with the Q5 than the Q7 and the sizes aren't massively different (although the interior of the LR makes better use of it with a more boxy shape), so ultimately comparisons will be made and it'll end up in the same short-lists. I think the Q7 buyer is more likely to consider the Range Rover if they're looking for something comparable from another manufacturer.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

The mirrors on the Q5 are huuuge & i'd guess the same as the Q7. Is a bit of an oddity as takes a while to get used to such size when looking out the side windows, but personally i think it adds to the larger than fact stance of the car.

Defo not the same size as a Disco or Q7, but it does have a stance that makes it look larger than it actually is & the huuuge mirrors accentuate this. I guess the S-Line bodykit & 20" wheels also add to this.


----------



## cuTTsy (Jan 31, 2003)

Spandex said:


> cuTTsy said:
> 
> 
> > The Disco is a much larger car than the Q5 not sure they should be compared.
> ...


After looking at this sector and buying a Q7, I glanced at a Range Rover but it seemed so much more expensive and the RR sport which I think is more comparable to the Q7, however after test driving several cars on day tests, I believe the Disco is probably the best car in regards to space and practicability but the interior let it down for me.

I just can not see how you can compare the Q5 to a Disco...regardless of size or cost as this can cross so many platforms for comparison.


----------



## cuTTsy (Jan 31, 2003)

W7 PMC said:


> The mirrors on the Q5 are huuuge & i'd guess the same as the Q7. Is a bit of an oddity as takes a while to get used to such size when looking out the side windows, but personally i think it adds to the larger than fact stance of the car.
> 
> Defo not the same size as a Disco or Q7, but it does have a stance that makes it look larger than it actually is & the huuuge mirrors accentuate this. I guess the S-Line bodykit & 20" wheels also add to this.


I saw a white Sline Q5 parked up near me the other day and it looked really nice in the flesh, you must be pleased.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

cuTTsy said:


> I just can not see how you can compare the Q5 to a Disco...regardless of size or cost as this can cross so many platforms for comparison.


Similar price and size. Both 4x4s. Both mid-range 'luxury' vehicles. Why wouldn't you compare them?

Maybe I have some weird definition of 'comparison', but if I was in the market for a 4x4, I'd compare everything that was in my price bracket and discount the ones that didn't meet my other requirements.


----------



## head_ed (Dec 10, 2002)

cuTTsy said:


> I believe the Disco is probably the best car in regards to space and practicability but the interior let it down for me.


Having been spoilt with the beautiful cockpit of TTs for the last 8 years, the interior of a car is very important to me too - but I have to say, when I had a Disco for a loan car last year I thought it was a great place to be (this maybe down to the fact that my work run around is a Mitsibushi Warrior Sport!)

The HSE models seem very well specced inside indeed.


----------



## head_ed (Dec 10, 2002)

p.s. Sorry to hijack your thread Paul.


----------

