X5 3.0D

junkyard

I've had both and the 5 series is quite limited if your doing any work like towing etc. The ride height is great in the X5 too and there's no doubt you are safer in an SUV too. I wouldn't go back to a car as my regular mode of transport, to hell with the greens I say!!!!!!!!!:D

AlanD

I really like the E60 5 series estate alright, but the wife isn't a fan of any sort of estate which is a pity. I could really do with estate style space for the paddling.

It's possible that the X5 would be a little harder on juice than I would really like, but I will do the sums and see if it all adds up. It possibly could.

I reckon some real crackers will come up for good money at some stage in '09 alright. The min requirement would be the facelifted post '03 version, xenons, sport, leather, wouldn't say no to nav either.

Seweryn

landyman wrote: »

Why not buy a nice 5 series estate?? Makes more sence - there more aerodynamic so in all probability better fuel consumption. Better resale value; most people dont want a 25-30mpg suv anymore. They dont look as good half as cool aswell..........
I'm struggling to see any advantage the x5 has over a 5 series estate apart from the ride height!!!
Can someone convince me otherwise?

I agree with you. I just can't understand why you wouldn't buy an estate if you are looking for the extra space. I just do not see any advantage of the X5 over a large Estate car.
Estate car has more space inside, especially in the boot, can carry higher load (my old Mercedes estate can take nearly 700kg on board + 2100kg trailer), has self leveling rear axle (great system if you take the extra load and add more comfort), much better aerodinamics, better fuel economy with the same engine, better acceleration, better brakes, better resale value, is usually equipped with cheaper tires and other cheaper parts, is lighter, it handles better, it is usually cheaper to buy and it looks lovely. A classic estate looks fantastic with a windsurfing board on the roof . If you need the 4x4 facility, but I don't believe you do - get a 4 wheel drive estate (BMW, Mercedes or Subaru Outback - in this one you get even raised ground clearance). What more do you want?

L-M

Seweryn wrote: »

I agree with you. I just can't understand why you wouldn't buy an estate if you are looking for the extra space. I just do not see any advantage of the X5 over a large Estate car.
Estate car has more space inside, especially in the boot, can carry higher load (my old Mercedes estate can take nearly 700kg on board + 2100kg trailer), has self leveling rear axle (great system if you take the extra load and add more comfort), much better aerodinamics, better fuel economy with the same engine, better acceleration, better brakes, better resale value, is usually equipped with cheaper tires and other cheaper parts, is lighter, it handles better, it is usually cheaper to buy and it looks lovely. A classic estate looks fantastic with a windsurfing board on the roof . If you need the 4x4 facility, but I don't believe you do - get a 4 wheel drive estate (BMW, Mercedes or Subaru Outback - in this one you get even raised ground clearance). What more do you want?

To be sitting 2 feet above everyone else:P

AlanD

as I've previously said, I like estates, she doesn't. We both have to be happy with the purchase since we both will be paying for it. So a compromise is in order. I totally agree with you though.

I'll probably just end up buying another 607! haha. I've managed for 3 years now with one. I can land a 607 with about 10k on the clock with xenons, nav, electric everything and a nice twin turbo engine for about 20k including vrt.

An outback would be nice, but the diesels are too dear. I love the new legacy estate too, but alas, she doesn't. :rolleyes:

So I've just been looking in to the X5 because of their price crash. I like the sound of it and if fuel consumption stacked up for what we do, then I'd consider one. I'll go test drive one in January and taunt some poor sales man thinking I'll actually buy it.

L-M

AlanD wrote: »

as I've previously said, I like estates, she doesn't. We both have to be happy with the purchase since we both will be paying for it. So a compromise is in order. I totally agree with you though.

I'll probably just end up buying another 607! haha. I've managed for 3 years now with one. I can land a 607 with about 10k on the clock with xenons, nav, electric everything and a nice twin turbo engine for about 20k including vrt.

An outback would be nice, but the diesels are too dear. I love the new legacy estate too, but alas, she doesn't. :rolleyes:

So I've just been looking in to the X5 because of their price crash. I like the sound of it and if fuel consumption stacked up for what we do, then I'd consider one. I'll go test drive one in January and taunt some poor sales man thinking I'll actually buy it.

Your current 607 isn't Red is it? Lol, the only 607 i've seen in Limerick.

Mycroft H

Limerick-man wrote: »

To be sitting 2 feet above everyone else:P

Get a proper 4x4 if you want to sit higher, ie. pajero, trooper, disco, RR, landcruiser amazon. But not a Q7 or an X5 x3 or a toureg, there a mish mash of two things....

AlanD

Limerick-man wrote: »

Your current 607 isn't Red is it? Lol, the only 607 i've seen in Limerick.

No it's gold/beige. For a long time I had roof bars and a big v-bar for the boat on it. Looked hideous but served a purpose! Took the roof bars off recently though cos I haven't the time to train/paddle. New baby on the scene. :eek:

There are more 607's around limerick than you think!

Seweryn

Limerick-man wrote: »

To be sitting 2 feet above everyone else:P

Get an estate with a sunroof and just raise the seat

AlanD

landyman wrote: »

Get a proper 4x4 if you want to sit higher, ie. pajero, trooper, disco, RR, landcruiser amazon. But not a Q7 or an X5 x3 or a toureg, there a mish mash of two things....

i don't really need a "proper" 4x4. I view all these as cars and don't care whether they sit tall or not or whether they can plough through the amazon rain forest or not. I like function, form, driveability, reliability and that something else that sets a car apart. I love my 607 because few people have them and they are a nice place to be when driving around. The X5 wouldn't be so exclusive, but still....I'm liking them at the moment.

AlanD

Seweryn wrote: »

Get an estate with a sunroof and just raise the seat

I know this is a joke, but I just want to clarify, I'm not interested that much in being higher up.

Seweryn

AlanD wrote: »

An outback would be nice, but the diesels are too dear. I love the new legacy estate too, but alas, she doesn't. :rolleyes:

So I've just been looking in to the X5 because of their price crash. I like the sound of it and if fuel consumption stacked up for what we do, then I'd consider one. I'll go test drive one in January and taunt some poor sales man thinking I'll actually buy it.

To be honest, I do believe that the X5 with the Diesel engine is not too bad for fuel economy in a long jurney. Of course it is not as good as any estate, but not really bad. Town driving is a different game.

If you can, talk to your wife and show her the new Subaru Outback - it is fine car really and it sits higher as well...

Mycroft H

Limerick-man wrote: »

To be sitting 2 feet above everyone else:P

Get a proper 4x4 if you want to sit higher, ie. pajero, trooper, disco, RR, landcruiser amazon. But not a Q7 or an X5 x3 or a toureg, there a mish mash of two things....

AlanD

Seweryn wrote: »

To be honest, I do believe that the X5 with the Diesel engine is not too bad for fuel economy in a long jurney. Of course it is not as good as any estate, but not really bad. Town driving is a different game.

If you can, talk to your wife and show her the new Subaru Outback - it is fine car really and it sits higher as well...

I brought her out to see the new legacy estate, same thing, but she just didn't like it.

Yeah town driving will never give good mpg. I get about 22mpg from my other car around town and about 30mpg from my 607 around town. We do very little town driving anyway so it's no big deal. The majority of my miles come from a dual carriageway trip to work for my wife (I work at home), trips to Letterkenny for my own work, trips to the folks houses and trips to kayak races around the country. So mostly inter urban travelling at cruising speed. With the chipping that junkyard talks about, an X5 would seem like a reasonable car to own.

junkyard

landyman wrote: »

Get a proper 4x4 if you want to sit higher, ie. pajero, trooper, disco, RR, landcruiser amazon. But not a Q7 or an X5 x3 or a toureg, there a mish mash of two things....

Ha, ha, ha, proper 4x4's being a trooper, disco, RR, or a pajero? I think not. Ye must be big into hardship with tractormobiles like them landyman.:) They're probably fine if you have to cross fields or mountains to get to work. My X5 works for a living and tows regularly and does the job fine.

AlanD

junkyard wrote: »

My X5 works for a living and tows regularly and does the job fine.

... towing range rovers....

AlanD

VolvoMan wrote: »

You are full of sh1te.

keep it to yourself please. It's an opinion with which you don't have to agree with and I'm sure you could articulate yourself without descending in to the depths.

Traumadoc

Mature response there Volvoman- merry christmas.

VolvoMan

AlanD wrote: »

keep it to yourself please. It's an opinion with which you don't have to agree with and I'm sure you could articulate yourself without descending in to the depths.

Traumadoc wrote: »

Mature response there Volvoman- merry christmas.

My apologies. I do agree that my comment was unbecoming, especially seeing as it's Christmas. I just very much loathe the ignorant perception that because SUV's are high up it means that they are automatically safer. I have therefore deleted the comment out of my own goodwill.

Merry Christmas by the way!:)

junkyard

VolvoMan wrote: »

My apologies. I do agree that my comment was unbecoming, especially seeing as it's Christmas. I just very much loathe the ignorant perception that because SUV's are high up it means that they are automatically safer. I have therefore deleted the comment out of my own goodwill.

Merry Christmas by the way!:)

Just out of interest, which would you prefer to be in if something crashed into you, a car or an SUV?

VolvoMan

junkyard wrote: »

Just out of interest, which would you prefer to be in if something crashed into you, a car or an SUV?

A car because the SUV would have more of a chance of toppling over.

There are many modern cars I'm sure that would be able to survive a head-on collision with an SUV. Sure the Audi Q7, launched in 2006, achieved a very poor for the time 4/5 star Euro NCAP rating. On Youtube there is a video of a head-on collision crash test between a new model FIAT 500 and the Audi Q7. The former performed well for it's size and the latter proved that bigger isn't always safer.

Traumadoc

Large SUV seem to roll over and more prone to being crushed.

But a lot of MVAs in Ireland are small cars in collision with large HGVs ( often on the country lanes that are called national intercity routes ( N9 is appalling)

I feel it is swings and roundabouts, sure SUVs have a higher center of gravity, I would honestly feel that they safer in collision with other vehicles or animals.

VolvoMan

Traumadoc wrote: »

I feel it is swings and roundabouts, sure SUVs have a higher center of gravity, I would honestly feel that they safer in collision with other vehicles or animals.

Is that not a selfish reason to drive one though? An animal or even pedestrian for that matter would have a small chance of surviving if hit by one.

Also, it is not proven that SUV's are safe. Whoever says that or buys one for that reason is pulling the whole safety thing out of their ass.

junkyard

Would you like to ban them off the roads so Volvoman? And then maybe trucks and maybe vans would be a bit on the large side too, and what about Volvo's? They're a bit square at the front too, somebody might get hurt too if you drove into them, maybe we should all walk. Truth be told, everything with wheels are a menace on the roads really.

Traumadoc

I have seen the results of small car vs HGV on country roads-and I honestly believe that you are safer in a SUV than a mini. ( and much safer in both than being on a motorbike or bicycle or on foot).

VolvoMan

junkyard wrote: »

Would you like to ban them off the roads so Volvoman? And then maybe trucks and maybe vans would be a bit on the large side too, and what about Volvo's? They're a bit square at the front too, somebody might get hurt too if you drove into them, maybe we should all walk. Truth be told, everything with wheels are a menace on the roads really.

Yes I would.

Trucks and vans have a purpose. They will always be needed and are definitely an exception on our roads. A Merc E-Class Estate can do just as good a job of transporting kids around as an Audi Q7, BMW X5 and Volvo XC90 can and while polluting less to the environment, not being as big a risk to pedestrians and not creating blindspots for other motorists. Therefore SUV's do not have a purpose unless they have actual off-road capabilities and their potential is fulfilled by their owners.

As regarding Volvo's being square at the front. Unless you are talking about a classic 200 or 900 series than you would have a point but the rest of your argument is just plain nonsense.

VolvoMan

Traumadoc wrote: »

I have seen the results of small car vs HGV on country roads-and I honestly believe that you are safer in a SUV than a mini. ( and much safer in both than being on a motorbike or bicycle or on foot).

You are entitled to your own beliefs but I am pretty sure it hasn't been officially proven.

Traumadoc

Its interesting that no one seems to object to SUVs when they were /are driven by tradesmen.

It seems very few people would give out about a BMW550 estate but drive a 2 lit BMWx3 and you are scum?
Similarly a large volvo estate can more polluting than the 2.4 lit XC90

The argument seems to be driven by people with chips on their shoulders.

VolvoMan

Traumadoc wrote: »

Its interesting that no one seems to object to SUVs when they were /are driven by tradesmen.

It seems very few people would give out about a BMW550 estate but drive a 2 lit BMWx3 and you are scum?
Similarly a large volvo estate can more polluting than the 2.4 lit XC90

The argument seems to be driven by people with chips on their shoulders.

That's a bit of as stupid comparison really that you could go on forever with. If there was a 5.0 litre X3 it would be more polluting than a 550i, simple as. And a 2.5 LPT 5 cylinder petrol engine in a V70 is far less polluting than in an XC90.

The people who dislike SUV's do not have chips on their shoulders. They are just proper car enthusiasts who get frustrated when they know a car is stupid and the height of bad taste when everyone continues to defend it. If someone had a well specced X5 they would just think what a tosser. But if someone had a really nice 5 Series Touring with a straight six engine, they might be envious then!;)

Traumadoc

VolvoMan wrote: »

They are just proper car enthusiasts who get frustrated when they know a car is stupid and the height of bad taste when everyone continues to defend it. ............ But if someone had a really nice 5 Series Touring with a straight six engine, they might be envious then!;)

A lot of SUV owners are proper car enthusiasts..... I own a straight six BMW 5 series and an air cooled flat 6 as well as a SUV, I also believe junkyard has a passing interest in cars.
As for being "stupid" well everyone is entitled to their opinion. Are renaults stupid ?
"Bad taste" well that depends on your own taste- some people would find modified small japanese family cars as bad taste.