AWD or 4WD car suggestions.

Pique

I'm looking to change cars soon and want another awd/4wd.

I've currently got an SF5 Forester but want something different.

I'm currently thinking of Audi Quattro, V70 or equivalent AWD, X-Type AWD etc.

Any others out there for approx 5k or so?

Matt Simis

You listed everything of interest already. All different cars with different abilities and benefits, but you would really have to narrow down your priorities to get any meaningful feedback!

Pique

Ok, as capable a machine as the Forester is, it has some drawbacks IMO.
Too thirsty (turbo too necessary for any kind of real power)
Too loud (in that redneck rally fan baaaarp-tsssh way)
Too old-fashioned (compared to similarly aged cars whos looks belie their age, and the forester was never a thing of beauty in any case.)
Too agricultural inside. It's just not refined, at all.

Anan1 will be on shortly to tell me off but that's the way I feel at the mo.
I've fallen out of love with it, tbh.

I do need comfort and rear seat space (missus expecting ).
On that note, isofix would be nice.
Estate would be essential for the dogs.
Integrated dog-guard is also a must. The aftermarket extendable ones suck.
Style that looks more businessman than rallyfan.
Toys would be nice, but the usuals will do (ac, heated seats etc but mp3 and cruise if poss)
Reliability in high mileages will be important as I will be looking in the near-100k mile bracket.
Decent powered (180bhp nice, 210+ better).
Lower tax is better (obv).

Sub E5k. Lets start there and see what's about...

exador

Pique wrote: »

Ok, as capable a machine as the Forester is, it has some drawbacks IMO.
Too thirsty (turbo too necessary for any kind of real power)
Too loud (in that redneck rally fan baaaarp-tsssh way)
Too old-fashioned (compared to similarly aged cars whos looks belie their age, and the forester was never a thing of beauty in any case.)
Too agricultural inside. It's just not refined, at all.

Anan1 will be on shortly to tell me off but that's the way I feel at the mo.
I've fallen out of love with it, tbh.

I do need comfort and rear seat space (missus expecting ).
On that note, isofix would be nice.
Estate would be essential for the dogs.
Integrated dog-guard is also a must. The aftermarket extendable ones suck.
Style that looks more businessman than rallyfan.
Toys would be nice, but the usuals will do (ac, heated seats etc but mp3 and cruise if poss)
Reliability in high mileages will be important as I will be looking in the near-100k mile bracket.
Decent powered (180bhp nice, 210+ better).
Lower tax is better (obv).

Sub E5k. Lets start there and see what's about...

If you deffo need estate and also ISO then XTYPE is not a runner as I.S.O only available in saloon. They are also thirsty

Eric Cartman

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Audi/A6/3.0-QUAT/201122202668662/advert?channel=CARS

A6 Avant , Quattro , tax and fuel will hurt on this but it has all the toys and will do the job.

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Subaru/Outback/2.5-Auto/201127203245562/advert?channel=CARS less toys but still nice , lighter on tax (maybee not this one specifically, 130k miles on it , but you get the idea

colm_mcm

All jokes aside, Octavia 4x4 estate 1.9 TDI

Pique

Eric Cartman wrote: »

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Audi/A6/3.0-QUAT/201122202668662/advert?channel=CARS

A6 Avant , Quattro , tax and fuel will hurt on this but it has all the toys and will do the job.

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Subaru/Outback/2.5-Auto/201127203245562/advert?channel=CARS less toys but still nice , lighter on tax (maybee not this one specifically, 130k miles on it , but you get the idea

That Quatto would be nice if the tax wasn't such a killer. Fuel I could live with (reluctantly).

The Outback is a nice deal. Didn't think they had come down so much in price. I'd consider the normal Legacy estate too...lovely cars, imo, and quite underrated and understated.

Monty Burnz

Lada Niva.

Edit: ah, just saw your extended list of criteria, scratch that.

Pique

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Lada Niva.

Edit: ah, just saw your extended list of criteria, scratch that.

Yeah...if none of these were considerations...

Pique wrote: »

Too agricultural inside. It's just not refined, at all.

Style that looks more businessman than rallyfan.
Toys would be nice, but the usuals will do (ac, heated seats etc but mp3 and cruise if poss)
Reliability in high mileages will be important as I will be looking in the near-100k mile bracket.
Decent powered (180bhp nice, 210+ better).

...I'd be on that like a shot, seriously !

Monty Burnz

Pique wrote: »

Yeah...if none of these were considerations...

...I'd be on that like a shot, seriously !

If it's toys you want, I'm pretty sure they have windscreen wipers.

Nissan doctor

IMO you should just try to get a newer forester or legacy if you want something more up to date as most of the others you've listed will just dissapoint when it comes to reliability/repair costs IMO, especially if you're looking at high mileage examples.

savagecabbages

A6 Allroads come up occasionally at around your budget(and often a little over it).
I think they are really cool looking once the bumpers/wheelarches are colour coded. Prob not the worlds most inspiring drive, but certainly comfortable, high spec and rare.

Edit: Petrol or Diesel or do you mind?

opinion guy

savagecabbages wrote: »

A6 Allroads come up occasionally at around your budget(and often a little over it).
I think they are really cool looking once the bumpers/wheelarches are colour coded. Prob not the worlds most inspiring drive, but certainly comfortable, high spec and rare.

Edit: Petrol or Diesel or do you mind?

Sounds like the height adjustable suspension would suit the OP also

GavMan

As a matter of interest,

Is there a difference between AWD and 4WD??

GavMan

....Double Post....

opinion guy

GavMan wrote: »

As a matter of interest,

Is there a difference between AWD and 4WD??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-wheel_drive#4WD_versus_AWD

Monty Burnz

opinion guy wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-wheel_drive#4WD_versus_AWD

This seems totally counter-intuitive to me:

Part-time 4WD systems are mechanically simpler and cheaper than AWD systems. Also, a part-time 4WD transfer case is usually equipped with a reduction gear setting that provides for higher torque at lower speeds, a vital feature for vehicles that will see much off-road use. In AWD systems a more expensive separate reduction gearbox is usually used. The main drawback of 4WD is that because it lacks a center differential, a part-time 4WD system can only be used in low traction situations where the wheels have the ability to slip as needed.
For these reasons, full-time AWD is appropriate for improving on-road handling and is seen on cars and car-based crossover SUVs, while traditional part-time 4WD systems without center differentials, or with locking center differentials, are better for heavy-duty use such as off-road or in deep snow and are commonly seen on trucks and truck-based SUVs.

So full-time 4*4 as on a Range Rover is bad for serious off-road use, but good for road use, whereas part-time 4*4 as seen on Hyundai Santa Fe and other faux by fours is good for heavy-duty off road stuff, but not good on roads?

Sounds arseways to me.

Tea 1000

Monty Burnz wrote: »

This seems totally counter-intuitive to me:

So full-time 4*4 as on a Range Rover is bad for serious off-road use, but good for road use, whereas part-time 4*4 as seen on Hyundai Santa Fe and other faux by fours is good for heavy-duty off road stuff, but not good on roads?

Sounds arseways to me.

Never depend fully on Wiki! It is arseways.
Anyway, OP I'd be looking at a Legacy for your budget. I'd run a mile from a 5-owner Audi, it'll break your heart.

Pique

Thanks all...looks like the Legacy it is then.

Now, to find one !

On that note...anyone want a JDM Forester S/Tb ?

opinion guy

Monty Burnz wrote: »

This seems totally counter-intuitive to me:

So full-time 4*4 as on a Range Rover is bad for serious off-road use, but good for road use, whereas part-time 4*4 as seen on Hyundai Santa Fe and other faux by fours is good for heavy-duty off road stuff, but not good on roads?

Sounds arseways to me.

Lol there is a reason I posted a wiki link instead of trying to explain it myself

Tea 1000

opinion guy wrote: »

Lol there is a reason I posted a wiki link instead of trying to explain it myself

Actually having read the link, it does make sense. Not as simple as Monty stated!

savagecabbages

Heres what I'd be going for:Allroad 2.7T
£3,275 €932 to clear. Only thing its a petrol, and an auto....
I've a feeling its the same v6 twin turbo you'd find in an S4 of the same era, but not too well up on such engines...

The 2.5 v6 tdi would be more sensible, tho fetch a slightly higher price.

tossy

savagecabbages wrote: »

Heres what I'd be going for:Allroad 2.7T
£3,275 €932 to clear. Only thing its a petrol, and an auto....
I've a feeling its the same v6 twin turbo you'd find in an S4 of the same era, but not too well up on such engines...

The 2.5 v6 tdi would be more sensible, tho fetch a slightly higher price.

You were close same engine as the B5 S4 - great engine,there was no S4 in 2002.

Eric Cartman

Monty Burnz wrote: »

T
So full-time 4*4 as on a Range Rover is bad for serious off-road use, but good for road use, whereas part-time 4*4 as seen on Hyundai Santa Fe and other faux by fours is good for heavy-duty off road stuff, but not good on roads?

Sounds arseways to me.

shíte : santa fe : full time awd , no low range box

good : range rover/sorento/a few others - full time 4wd with low range box and optionally locking rear diff

hilux/dmax/landcruiser/patrol/navara/pathfinder/explorer/F series etc... part time 4wd with low range box , some models rear differential

the santa fe has the same full time AWD as the kia sorento , it has a 4wd lock switch which locks it in a 40/60 front/rear distribution for offroad use , whereas the sorento has a low range box for more torque and to lock it 50/50 front/rear for offroading

Anan1

Pique wrote: »

Ok, as capable a machine as the Forester is, it has some drawbacks IMO.
Too thirsty (turbo too necessary for any kind of real power)
Too loud (in that redneck rally fan baaaarp-tsssh way)
Too old-fashioned (compared to similarly aged cars whos looks belie their age, and the forester was never a thing of beauty in any case.)
Too agricultural inside. It's just not refined, at all.

Anan1 will be on shortly to tell me off but that's the way I feel at the mo.
I've fallen out of love with it, tbh.

Not at all, I still love mine but all of the above failings are still present (although some to a lesser extent) in my SG. Maybe get an Outback H6 and put up with the tax?:)

Monty Burnz

Eric Cartman wrote: »

shíte : santa fe : full time awd , no low range box

good : range rover/sorento/a few others - full time 4wd with low range box and optionally locking rear diff

hilux/dmax/landcruiser/patrol/navara/pathfinder/explorer/F series etc... part time 4wd with low range box , some models rear differential

the santa fe has the same full time AWD as the kia sorento , it has a 4wd lock switch which locks it in a 40/60 front/rear distribution for offroad use , whereas the sorento has a low range box for more torque and to lock it 50/50 front/rear for offroading

Cheers for that Cartman, seems a bit clearer.

ralc

Hiya,
Did you ever decide which car to go for?
I've had an X-trail for the last 5 years (the older type) and she's a great car for towing. She's come to the end of her days now and I'm looking to change.
SUV's are getting expensive now but I need something for pulling a 1.7tonne boat and some country site work so I'm looking at a crossover.

The best one I can come across is the new Mazda CX-5 for running costs and performance but I'm worried about the AWD system for say slipway and other slippery surface towing as opposed to the lock 4WD option on the x-trail.

Does anybody have any views?

Turtle-TM

During the bad winter a couple of years ago my Audi A8 Quattro was the only car that could handle a steep icy and snow covered hill out of an estate in leixlip. I saw an x5 Suzuki jeep and the cops 4x4 all fail to get up it, mine just cruised up like it was a normal evening! From everyone I've talked to the Quattro is the best awd around.
It's pretty hard to find a nice spec'd a4 or a6 with Quattro, but the all road has the adaptive air suspension that the a8 has and it gives a great ride

me julie

AWD is Yuppie for 4x4

anthony4335

I would second the Legacy, I have one and it is great. Although I will be moving it on soon, but only out of boardom as I have had it nearly 3 years. Very reliable and comfortable. I love the quatros but I do not see you getting the same spec for the same price. If you can put up with the mpg, around 30 for the 2.5 auto and 33 for the 2.0 manual I would highly recommend it. You should be able to get a low milage 05 2.5L for around 3 to 3.5K.

CJhaughey

Eric Cartman wrote: »

shíte : santa fe : full time awd , no low range box

good : range rover/sorento/a few others - full time 4wd with low range box and optionally locking rear diff

hilux/dmax/landcruiser/patrol/navara/pathfinder/explorer/F series etc... part time 4wd with low range box , some models rear differential

Landcruiser 90 series are permanent 4wd with low range box and optional locking rear diff ( UK models it was std)
I think the 120 series are the same permamant 4wd as well.
80 series are different though.

Tea 1000

Turtle-TM wrote: »

During the bad winter a couple of years ago my Audi A8 Quattro was the only car that could handle a steep icy and snow covered hill out of an estate in leixlip. I saw an x5 Suzuki jeep and the cops 4x4 all fail to get up it, mine just cruised up like it was a normal evening! From everyone I've talked to the Quattro is the best awd around.
It's pretty hard to find a nice spec'd a4 or a6 with Quattro, but the all road has the adaptive air suspension that the a8 has and it gives a great ride

Hmmm...

Matt Simis

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Hmmm...

Thats a BMW video though and its setup is very deliberate to take advantage of the mechanism quattro uses to sense slip. Its somewhat misleading.
In a more realworld test, driving up a steep incline in snow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAHPMUkhj5Q

Test - Snow Climbing - Bmw 3Serie, Bmw x5, Lexus Rx300, Nissan Patrol, Volvo Xc70, Audi Allroad 2.7

It ruins the competition.

The Audi allroad can be got with a low range manual gearbox, has standard height adjustment to give Land Rover clearance levels.

Tropheus

I've a 2003 2.5 TDi allroad from new. It now has 185k miles on the clock and going strong.

Plus points are comfort, spec and off road ability. It was epic in the snow a couple of years ago.

Minuses are tax, fuel consumption (26 mpg around town and 31/32 on the motorway) and maintenance cost. You need deep pockets in terms of maintenance. Air springs need to be replaced every 80k miles in my experience and you're looking at €500 per corner. There are also other common problems with the air suspension, but I've been lucky so far.

Max Power1

Holy necro thread bump batman

bbam

ralc wrote: »

Hiya,
Did you ever decide which car to go for?
I've had an X-trail for the last 5 years (the older type) and she's a great car for towing. She's come to the end of her days now and I'm looking to change.
SUV's are getting expensive now but I need something for pulling a 1.7tonne boat and some country site work so I'm looking at a crossover.

The best one I can come across is the new Mazda CX-5 for running costs and performance but I'm worried about the AWD system for say slipway and other slippery surface towing as opposed to the lock 4WD option on the x-trail.

Does anybody have any views?

Would you not go for another x-trail ?

Turtle-TM

the video was very misleading, the Q7 was being driven badly compared to the X5, to deliberatly make it fail.

going on personal experience i cant fault the Quattro system!

peasant

There are two (or more?) systems from Audi that call themselves quattro.

The real deal comes with a longitudonal engine, a straight through shaft to the rear wheels, a purely mechanical Torsen diff in the middle and equal length drive shafts to the wheels. That's the one that doesn't get stuck, the one that gives the best on-road experience (and co-incidentically the one that' most like Subaru's system)

The other quattro's come with all sorts of electrical 4WD gadgetry and sensors and are nowhere near as good.

ralc

Their too expensive to buy and run these days.

pippip

ralc wrote: »

Their too expensive to buy and run these days.

For some people, not for everyone.

ralc

Even if I had the money for one I wouldn't buy another one and I currently have one. They are more intelligent buys out there.
Good that you're so flush though. That's info really worth sharing here!

ShadowHearth

Op. why you need awd in the first place?

Foresters are tanks. Yes, not the most refined tanks, but they get job done. I was in lads 06' forester with cream leather and all the toys and it was a savage place to be in.
If you really want a good awd then look in to estate legacies. 3.0R ones are really good on petrol for such engine, lots of n/a power. They Go for pennies too. If 3.0 is too much then there are 2.0 and 2.5 non turbo versions of legacies. Those are really lovely inside.
Then ofc there is a impreza estate version. If you really need estate car. New age impreza quite nice inside. You can find wrx ones with full leather heated seats, sunroofs, all electrics, a/c etc.
Just keep in mind if you are looking for proper awd car, don't expect it to be light in fuel. The whole AWD system is already a thing which uses extra petrol.

tossy

ralc wrote: »

Good that you're so flush though. That's info really worth sharing here!

It was as worthy of sharing as this....

ralc wrote: »

Their too expensive to buy and run these days.

I'm on my 3rd 4wd car and can't myself going 2wd again soon.The are not that much more expensive to buy/run compared to their fwd counterparts(where possible)

pippip

ralc wrote: »

Even if I had the money for one I wouldn't buy another one and I currently have one. They are more intelligent buys out there.
Good that you're so flush though. That's info really worth sharing here!

Don't believe i said anything about the money being in my pocket.

Tea 1000

Matt Simis wrote: »

Thats a BMW video though and its setup is very deliberate to take advantage of the mechanism quattro uses to sense slip. Its somewhat misleading.
In a more realworld test, driving up a steep incline in snow:

It ruins the competition.

The Audi allroad can be got with a low range manual gearbox, has standard height adjustment to give Land Rover clearance levels.

Ah I know alright that the video is by BMW, so they will have designed it to suit. The Torsen quattro system is excellent alright, but I'd wonder in that other test if they all had the same type of tyres on. You pick that All-Road and put different sized wheels and tyres on it and you'll get different results each time.

Tea 1000

Turtle-TM wrote: »

the video was very misleading, the Q7 was being driven badly compared to the X5, to deliberatly make it fail.

going on personal experience i cant fault the Quattro system!

It was a Q5 versus X3, and they were driven by the same woman, and very similarly. But the test itself is designed to favour the particular BMW system.
And personal experience with the quattro system (small Q please, unless you owned THE Quattro), is all well and good, but unless you've owned both then you can't comment!

peasant wrote: »

There are two (or more?) systems from Audi that call themselves quattro.

The real deal comes with a longitudonal engine, a straight through shaft to the rear wheels, a purely mechanical Torsen diff in the middle and equal length drive shafts to the wheels. That's the one that doesn't get stuck, the one that gives the best on-road experience (and co-incidentically the one that' most like Subaru's system)

The other quattro's come with all sorts of electrical 4WD gadgetry and sensors and are nowhere near as good.

You're talking about the Torsen system versus the Haldex system. Haldex is a rather ordinary system alright. It'd still help you out in snow though.
The Subaru system is excellent too.

Matt Simis

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Ah I know alright that the video is by BMW, so they will have designed it to suit. The Torsen quattro system is excellent alright, but I'd wonder in that other test if they all had the same type of tyres on. You pick that All-Road and put different sized wheels and tyres on it and you'll get different results each time.

Yeah I cant tell what they did tyre wise, though it would be poor form to upgrade some and not all. The AR comes with All Seasons stock as do most of the cars in the test. I dont think any had All Seasons though, they just arent good enough in the snow.

Here is another test, newer with all top end stuff (several over 500bhp):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjlHbvDeuoQ

Skip to 4:15 for the results, which are the top handling in the test:

- Audi S4
- Nissan GT-R
- Mitsubishi Lancer Evo

tossy

Tea 1000 wrote: »

You're talking about the Torsen system versus the Haldex system. Haldex is a rather ordinary system alright. It'd still help you out in snow though.
The Subaru system is excellent too.

Have you any real world experience of these systems ? I've had both and couldn't separate them in terms of 4wd performance or 4wd tyre wear characteristics.

Tea 1000

tossy wrote: »

Have you any real world experience of these systems ? I've had both and couldn't separate them in terms of 4wd performance or 4wd tyre wear characteristics.

Subaru Symmetrical AWD versus Audi Torsen or Torsen vs Haldex?

tossy

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Subaru Symmetrical AWD versus Audi Torsen or Torsen vs Haldex?

Sorry Torsen v's Haldex.

Tea 1000

tossy wrote: »

Sorry Torsen v's Haldex.

A little, but not extensive. But a snowy Christmas in Ireland isn't extensive testing! The real test is to get two cars like a Passat 4Motion on winter tyres against an A4 on the exact same tyres. Anything else is not comparing like with like.