[Closed] Suv yay or nay ?

drove the father in laws. too small in the front for me, too small in the back for bikes.
I bought a zafira tourer. it is huge.

We've been looking at a new larger car and it is interesting how many SUVs look huge but are actually not. Juka, Mokka etc, the mini-SUVs, all look spacious on the outside but are no larger than our wee Jazz on the inside.

Zafira Tourer is definitely like a cavern on wheels. Our shortlist is C4 Picasso or Qashqai for "not huge but spacious enough for some combination of two kids / two dogs / four bikes."

the Ateca won the group awards recently, so of the bunch, it's a pretty safe bet.

Had a look at one at weekend, but a bit big for our needs.

Nice car though.

Nice car the Skoda, but nicererer is the Tiguan it's based on.
Still, you can get the front passenger seat flat and flatten the rears for that extra space (if required) the VW dealer I went to didn't know the front seats fold flat..

I looked at the Tiguan after test driving the Ateca and I honestly expected it to be way plusher inside .. It wasn't and I really struggled to see where the extra £4K was spent ? The only tangible thing I could see/feel was the door handle inside felt bit less robust on the Ateca ..

Same as plus one. Couldn't justify the Tiguan over the Ateca. Waiting to test the new Koraq before making a decision. Expect I'll be buying an Ateca tho...

I would suggest that the ride might not be as good for your wife's back as you might expect - a lot of taller cars I've driven seem to have much stiffer suspension to limit body roll. SUVs also often seem to be quite inverse-tardis like (not sure how that particular one is).

For the sake of fairness, I can't see any circumstances where I'd buy an SUV unless I needed 4wd and ground clearance for some reason, or something heavy for towing.

MPV over an SUV every time unless I needed 4wd and ground clearance. Won't make that mistake again.

SUVs also often seem to be quite inverse-tardis like (not sure how that particular one is).

Precisely this. I'd go for an estate.
Plus, if I want to buy a sports car, I'll buy a sports car. Putting "sport" in the description of an oversized hatchback is like standing a fat bloke in Lycra in front of me and saying he's an athlete.

For the sake of fairness, I can't see any circumstances where I'd buy an SUV unless I needed 4wd and ground clearance for some reason, or something heavy for towing.

personally Luke, I agree, but my wife, and many of her pals, seems to want a higher up driving position and easier to get in and out of seat. I'd also say that with young kids it's easier to get them in and out, especially if they are still in child seats. So there is a huge demographic who do prefer them !

Do the front seats of any of these vehicles fold flat by folding the seat backs forwards, or do they fold flat backwards, and if the latter do the rear seat squabs get in the way when the rear seats are folded forward?

On my Octavia I can remove the rear seat squabs and fold the backs forward. Then the front seat folds back almost flat so I can get a windsurf board in. It would be more convenient if the front seat back folded forward then I wouldn't have to remove the rear seat squabs.

Can anybody understand what I've just posted?

The Quashquai was a replacement for the Almera which replaced the Sunny/Pulsar which was the size of a Mk 3 Golf, so these are not big cars, they just feel like it when you stand next to them. I can see the advantage of ground clearance and sitting up high, but I don't know what it does to the wind resistance/drag and fuel consumption.

Dad has a Mokka and a bad back. Although it makes it easier to get in and out the ride is very firm.

As mentioned above, when they are jacked up to stop the car from rolling so much the firm up the suspension which can make it unmanageable.

I would consider a people carrier or smaller crossover like a Kaptur before an SUV if seat height and comfort are to be balanced.

Having spent the last year driving a very wide variety of cars, from Smart Cars up to Audi Q7's, with vans and pickup trucks mixed in, and having been the owner of an Octavia for eleven years, my next car will be an SUV of one sort or another.

I would suggest that the ride might not be as good for your wife's back as you might expect - a lot of taller cars I've driven seem to have much stiffer suspension to limit body roll. SUVs also often seem to be quite inverse-tardis like (not sure how that particular one is).

The ride is easily as good as most saloon cars, unless you're going for something like an Audi A5 or a Beemer, and few of the BMW's I've driven have been cars I'd want to own; if I want a sports car, I'll buy a sports car, I find the ride of most to be harsh and noisy, due to the firm suspension and low-profile run-flat tyres, for fairly short vehicles most SUV's have more than enough space unless you're hauling four or five people and loads of stuff, in which case an MPV or big estate is clearly more suited.
As I've got older, with a recurring back muscle problem and osteoarthritis in my left knee, even getting in and out of the Octy can be a pain, SUV's, with the higher seating position are so much easier to get into, and the higher seating gives a better all-round view.
I picked up a Qashqai on Friday, three years old, and there was loads of room inside for me, as a six foot adult with fairly long legs, and I tried the back seats too, with the front passenger seat-back tilted back slightly, I still had a couple of inches or so clearance in front of my knees.
The drive quality was good, not too much body roll, but they're not an MX-5; if you want an SUV with sportier characteristics, then look at the Mazda CX-5, which is supposed to be a very good handling car of its type. Sadly, they're not a car that Motability or lease customers tend to have, so I've not had one to drive, but it's a car I'm very taken with for the spec, either that or a Mokka X.
The Hyundai SUV's, the ix35, Santa Fe and Tucson are all fine cars to drive as well, quiet, decent handling, and good-looking as well.
I no longer need to get a bike in the back, but it would be perfectly easy to do so with most SUV's, with big tailgates and seats that fold fairly flat, certainly easier than my Puma, and I managed with that, but as an average, fairly compact family car, but just taller, they're fine, parking is definitely easier than my Octavia, the Mokka and the Qashqai are both nearly eighteen inches shorter, so easier to get into spaces in on-street parking.
But it's the getting in and out that scores biggest, I can just slide in and out, instead of dropping right down into the car, and if I get a 4x4, the crappy narrow and steep local lanes will be easier to negotiate in winter as well, but that's just a bonus.

After having a 3 series for the last few months and Mrs Ps back finally giving up the ghost getting in and out of the thing we had to swap for something taller. For something 'nice' now truth is you're really looking at getting an SUV.

I wasn't keen on the additional cost for tyres/fuel/VED that SUVs come with so we ended up with a 2 series Active Tourer which I quite like in a way. It feels BMWish it's comfy and easy to get in and out of.

Boot is small, but the car is much smaller than an X3/Tiguan/Q5 so I'm fine with that. Plus it still does 55+MPG and costs £30 to tax (would have been £20 but the original owner specified enormous wheels for some reason)

I'd definitely recommend one for someone that wants a higher driving position without getting an SUV.

[img] [/img]

Edit - re the windsurf comment, you can spec a folding front seat at additional cost, of course it's a BMW so whilst it's well equipped as standard there are some fairly normal things you'd expect it doesn't have. Like a lumbar support.

philjunior

SUVs also often seem to be quite inverse-tardis like (not sure how that particular one is).

sbob

Precisely this. I'd go for an estate.
Plus, if I want to buy a sports car, I'll buy a sports car. Putting "sport" in the description of an oversized hatchback is like standing a fat bloke in Lycra in front of me and saying he's an athlete.

There's a grain of truth to this if you're talking about "Compact SUVs" "Crossovers" "Urban SUV" etc etc, cars like the Nissan Juke, Qashquai, Ford Ecosport, Skoda Yeti, Rav4 and many more.

It's just not true when you get to full sized SUVs or 4x4s. It seems that compact SUVs have become so popular that people have disassociated the term from the bigger vehicles, probably relegating them to some other sub category like "4x4" even if they are 2wd.

Even when compared with a decent sized estate like an Audi A6 there is still more room in a Toureg or SQ7 or Merc ML or Porsche Cayenne. Sure, the boot space in an estate might be suitable for bikes but the rear passenger space in a big, full sized SUV is a nicer place to be than that of a similarly specced estate car.

I was pretty sure I'd earmarked the new Skoda Superb estate as our next family car maybe a year down the line but I'm starting to ethink that based on how much the kids enjoy traveling in my sister in laws full sized SUV and how much space they have.

personally Luke, I agree, but my wife, and many of her pals, seems to want a higher up driving position and easier to get in and out of seat. I'd also say that with young kids it's easier to get them in and out

I can see that benefit too, actually. Luckily my wife left all car buying decisions to me last time - it took a fair bit of persuasion for her to even see the thing before I signed on the line!

Yay. I've spent the last three years driving a Ford Kuga and it just worked for my family of three, with a six year old daughter. Small enough footprint but decent cabin space and a deep boot meant I could load it up with lots of camping gear. Could do five people every so often but it's smaller than a decent estate. I fitted a tow bar so I could put a bike rack on the back and the roof rails were good for my kayak and/or SUP. Proper lifestyle 😉 We live in Australia, so the benefit of AWD and slightly higher ground clearance was good for gravel roads and beach driving - did we need that, no, but it opened up some options. Actually, some of our camp sites needed AWD, but we probably chose them because we could.

Handling was fine - I'm past making progress - but it is slower and uses more fuel than the equivalent Focus or Mondeo. We had the petrol engine and rarely saw more than 30mpg. We did a few decent (3000km) road trips and it was fine - if a bit limited in range, it needed fuel before we needed a stop!

Higher drive position was good - but again, that's in a country were everyone drives SUVs, pick-ups etc., so it's a survival of the highest thing.

The main bad thing? It wasn't big enough, so we've just traded it today for a Landcruiser Prado. Haters be hating, but it works for us in WA and I've already got the next two camp trips planned out' one including a beach river crossing that saves 200km 🙂

So yes, try it. Maybe there's bett options but you'll not hate it.

Neil

since swapping my A4 avant for a full size merc ml ill never go back, acres of room inside, great for road trips, weekends away and get all our stuff, bikes camping, dogs, whatever in the back, over long distances super comfy to drive, ( done scotland, alps, cornwall) high up so great view, and 30mpg. sure they have high running costs but its only money..and if you buy used the depreciation hit isnt quite so bad.

SUV's were invented in America where in some situations the extra ground clearance actually makes sense. In the UK however, its generally pretty pointless and inferior to estate cars in almost every way.

I'd even go as far as saying i'd consider banning them. There's plenty of 4x4's on the market for people that actually need that sort of thing.

Well I preferred the Tiguan, but hey.

The seat (passenger) folds flat Forwards, like they do in a Touran. Small black/red grab handle on the seat base, pull it and the seat back folds forwards without the need to lift the seat base or do anything else with it.

HTHs.

The thing with SUVs, for me, is that I need floor area, not height. I have 2 big dogs which take up a fair bit of room

I have a Merc E class estate (with 2 seats that fold out the boot floor for carting kids around). The running costs of a comparably sized SUV is higher, and while they look bigger I really don't think they are bigger. The E class boot is HUGE (I think it was the biggest estate boot when on sale). Would be interested to see the numbers against a big SUV

Our family holiday next week will involve bikes on the tow bar rack and a rather large roof box for kit (that's just stuff, no camping kit, lord knows where that would go if we were to need it)

fifeandy - Member

SUV's were invented in America

[img] [/img]

Hmmmmmmmmm.

In the UK however, its generally pretty pointless and inferior to estate cars in almost every way.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I'd even go as far as saying i'd consider banning them.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

There's plenty of 4x4's on the market for people that actually need that sort of thing.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Even when compared with a decent sized estate like an Audi A6 there is still more room in a Toureg or SQ7 or Merc ML or Porsche Cayenne. Sure, the boot space in an estate might be suitable for bikes but the rear passenger space in a big, full sized SUV is a nicer place to be than that of a similarly specced estate car.

I suppose "space" for me has always been "enough inside the cabin and a bike sized boot". Of course if I really wanted a nice (and big) place inside the car, I'd buy an old A8 LWB or similar - but I digress.
I don't really buy into the whole "ooh look at how BAD SUVs are" stuff though, they're a bit worse than most similar cars in terms of weight and emissions, but there aren't many people whose cars couldn't be replaced with something more environmentally friendly.

Nico - Member

Do the front seats of any of these vehicles fold flat by folding the seat backs forwards, or do they fold flat backwards, and if the latter do the rear seat squabs get in the way when the rear seats are folded forward?

You can fold the front passenger seat back of our C3 Picasso completely forwards to accommodate long objects. The seat bases drop as you lower the backs too, so you can get a really good load area sorted out in about 30 seconds. It's one of the best features of the car, to be honest.
There's none of this lifting seat bases & folding them out of the way, while tipping the seat backs forwards etc. that I have to do in my Ibiza.

jimjam - Member

Original Range Rovers were hardly SUV's, they were proper 4x4's that just happened to be nice inside.

This on the other hand doesn't have the ground clearance to qualify as a proper 4x4 and serves no purpose other than inflating its owners ego:
[img] [/img]

Edit: Go look at the tyres on the next 10 range rovers you see, then come back and tell me how many may have got where the one in your photo did without a helicopter

fifeandy - Member

jimjam - Member

Original Range Rovers were hardly SUV's, they were proper 4x4's that just happened to be nice inside.

So if a proper 4x4 is nice inside that's ok? Define proper 4x4?

This on the other hand doesn't have the ground clearance to qualify as a proper 4x4

Quantify the absolute minimum amount of ground clearance to qualify as a "proper 4x4".

Can't get a bike in my Yeti. Can get a bike in an Aceta

[url= https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4323/35918352812_393e92194a_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4323/35918352812_393e92194a_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/WHYWV3 ]It fits![/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/alexleigh/ ]Alex Leigh[/url], on Flickr

There is some old horsepoo talked on here. I've had two Yeti's and and X-Trail. There's stuff I've really liked and some stuff I've not liked as much. The former overrides the latter hence buying another one. YMMV etc 😉

My experience is I wanted to buy an estate. But after 10+ years of driving the XT and the Yeti, I just couldn't get on with one. Felt like I was in a go-kart.

We have an MX5 as well. I love driving it when the sun's out and the roof is down. It's a pleasure. The rest of my driving is looking to be safe, relaxing and comfortable. SUV's work for me.

[img] [/img]

I dunno, even new RR are proper off roaders, it's just that they are also status cars and driven by n0bs

Proper 4wd have a low box!

Surely if a car has four driven wheels it is a 4x4. SUV is a term that came from the US and included pick-ups and more car-shaped 4x4s. Crossover seems to be popular to describe high-rise vehicles that may not have four driven wheels but still have the general layout.

So, either term describes pretty much all of the vehicles we are talking about although a few are not 4x4s and a Subaru Justy is not an SUV.

I admit I thought they were all wasteful and ridiculous but familiarity breeds acceptance in this case and I quite fancy something like an Alteca. I'd have a Yeti (I love their looks) but I'd want a petrol with a bit of poke. Having a car (currently) with annoyingly poor ground clearance is a big factor in my thinking.

And thanks for the info on fold-forward seats.

This on the other hand doesn't have the ground clearance to qualify as a proper 4x4 and serves no purpose other than inflating its owners ego:

Absolute nonsense.

We had two Shogun's (200,000 miles driven) and a Rav4 (70,000 miles) all as family cars, much prefered the easy access of the high vehicle when 3 kids where small. Looking again at "SUV" / 4x4's currently Yeti is top of the list or possibly if we go new the Karoq which will replace it in 2018

Going back to the OP's point about back problems, I've found that a higher seat to floor distance (as you get in most SUVs and proper vans) is way better for my back and have a really bad back. Don't know why it is the case (I suspect it has to do with less stretching of the sciatic nerve) but it really really helps my back and is the only reason I bought a 4x4 (Volvo btw).

[img] [/img]
hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[img] [/img]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

a lot of the comparisons aren't really like-for-like. The easiest of those I can think of is the focus estate vs kuga. focus is the same length, has a 4% bigger boot, and is ~12% more fuel efficient on a like-for-like basis (same engine, 2wd), and £3k cheaper (£20k vs 17k for titanium ecoboost)

overall, some would suggest that's not much to pay for what you get, some would say it's terrible

We have ordered an Ateca for my wife, currently 3 months into a 4 month wait to get it. This is due to a big demand for the 1.4 tsi engine which seems to be a good balance of performance and being fairly frugal due to it's small size. Obviously people jumping overboard from their various diesel powered ships has also had an effect on the demand for these engines. Whilst it's not going to worry a Golf Gti handling wise it does seem to get a lot of praise for how it out-handles most of it's rivals.

When we test drove it we thought there was lots of space on the inside. All the reviews seem to comment on how it beats the Qashqai et al especially in boot size. We even thought it gave my Octavia a run for it's money so far as rear legroom.

I say you have made super choice but being in a similar boat I am completely biased.

SUV's were invented in America where in some situations the extra ground clearance actually makes sense. In the UK however, its generally pretty pointless and inferior to estate cars in almost every way.

Our Tiguan is better in almost every way than the equivalent Golf Estate.

Better visibility
Better residuals/lease so actually cheaper
Shorter so easier to park / smaller footprint
Easier to load
Identical overall boot volume but more practical for bikes
Better ride with bigger sidewalls

Probably 4/5mpg worse off though, very small price to pay.

I really don't see what this has to do with America nor why they would be banned but I am assuming you're joking.

Some good feedback thanks

Coming from a vw polo it's plenty big enough

Looked at a few suv type motors and the Ateca to my eye looks the least offensive and the reviews were pretty positive.

What model are you having isto? I'm going from 192hp to 115hp 🙄

I've made peace with the drop in power it's about practically now my boy racer days are behind me !

nickfrog - Member

Our Tiguan is better in almost every way than the equivalent Golf Estate.

Better visibility

Worse for everyone else. 💡

Probably 4/5mpg worse off though

Worse than that according to google, FWIW.

I really struggled to see where the extra £4K was spent ?

On making it not look like a turd?

HTH 😉

What model are you having isto? I'm going from 192hp to 115hp

We have ordered a 1.4tsi SE Tech. The 1.4tsi is 150 so it has a decent turn of speed. Just over 8 seconds to 60 I think so a bit of an improvement on my wife's 1.9 tdi Leon.

The good news if you have gone for a different engine is you have avoided what is now around a 6 month wait.

On making it not look like a turd?

Personal opinion and all that but I am not sure there is much difference in the level of turdiness.

[img] [/img]

keen to hear how that wee 1.0 tfsi (115) engine gets on. We have a car coming soon with it - looks ideal for the short journey, urban type stuff my wife will be using it for

S'all aboot da Cross Coupe' darhlinks..

[img] [/img]

a lot of the comparisons aren't really like-for-like. The easiest of those I can think of is the focus estate vs kuga. focus is the same length, has a 4% bigger boot, and is ~12% more fuel efficient on a like-for-like basis (same engine, 2wd), and £3k cheaper (£20k vs 17k for titanium ecoboost)

That's not quite fair though as the Kuga is finished to a higher standard so it's not exactly like for like. I went from a 62 reg focus to a 14 kuga. As has been mentioned, the SUV might be officially smaller but the space is more practical and easy to use if that makes sense. I would prefer a car myself but have to agree that the SUV is great with two children under four. As a practical option when choosing a vehicle to fit a certain time of your life the Kuga really fits the bill.

We had a look at the Ateca a few months back when our pcp was coming to an end but decided against as it felt a bit smaller than the Kuga, especially in the boot. To get the spec we wanted the price was creeping up too so ended up paying the Kuga off and keeping that for now.

I was sad enough to look this up but the Kuga has a fairly small boot..lifted from a review:

[i] Ford Kuga has a smaller boot than a Volkswagen Tiguan and Honda CR-V, while even the smaller SEAT Ateca and Peugeot 3008 beat it for space. Furthermore, the spare wheel option decreases boot space to 406 litres, giving it 97 litres less than a Mazda CX-5.[/i]

On paper I was going to get the 1.4 as I still wanted some oomph .. But after driving the 1.0 tsi I was pleasantly surprised it pulled very well up to 50mph and as it won't see lots of motorway miles it will be ideal ..

It's same engine that is going into the vw up gti so it's a gti by default 😆

plus one - Member
On paper I was going to get the 1.4 as I still wanted some oomph .. But after driving the 1.0 tsi I was pleasantly surprised it pulled very well up to 50mph and as it won't see lots of motorway miles it will be ideal ..

It's same engine that is going into the vw up gti so it's a gti by default

good to know, thanks !

Personal opinion and all that but I am not sure there is much difference in the level of turdiness.

My bad - I'd not seen the new one, or was thinking of something different

Boot size in litres isn't always the best test. a tall narrow boot might be less useful in certain circumstances that something wide and shallow (think bags of delicate things you don't want to stack)

Shape and design is almost as important

Agree with the above. The Kuga may be smaller in official litres but has a more practical load space. Isn't a decent amount of the VAG group space under the initial boot floor? Either way, with the pram base against the back seat the Ateca wouldn't have as much space for the dog as the Kuga.

How big are your dogs? As they get older are you able/willing to lift them into the hire boot of an SUV? If not buy an estate - safer bet for dog owners IMO.

SUV's were invented in America where in some situations the extra ground clearance actually makes sense. In the UK however, its generally pretty pointless and inferior to estate cars in almost every way.

Perhaps if you got away from your comfortable urban existence and spent more time driving around in some proper countryside, with narrow, potholed, muddy lanes with occasional cratered passing places, or grass verges you have to drive up onto to get past oncoming vehicles, because the last passing place was a quarter of a mile back up a 1:6 hill, you might get over yourself and begin to realise that what is ideal for [i]you[/i], isn't ideal for others!
I've got absolutely NO need for an estate, I don't even need a car the size of my Octavia any more, what I [i]do[/i] need is a shorter car that's got tyres with deeper sidewalls and greater ground clearance to cope with the shitty roads I regularly drive over, and give me the option of being able to drive some green lanes without ripping the underside out of the car, along with the overwhelming desire to be able to get in and out of the car easily, which I'm finding it increasingly difficult to do with lower saloon cars.
SUV's were invented as a more civilised utility vehicle than a pickup truck that enabled people into outdoor activities/sports to carry a shitload of stuff into the back country without trashing the car, an estate with greater ground clearance, the smaller crossover cars are more suitable for general usage than the likes of a Range Rover, Jeep Grand Cherokee and the like
I've had to replace a couple of suspension springs and two alloys on my Octavia, due to potholes on main A-roads, a bloke opposite had to have a lower wishbone on his VW Amarak replaced after hitting a pothole recently, which also did a lot of damage to the outside of the nearside alloy, and that's a pretty big crewcab 4x4 pickup, so Christ knows what that would have done to a car with low-profile tyres!

sbob - Member
nickfrog - Member
Our Tiguan is better in almost every way than the equivalent Golf Estate.

Better visibility

Worse for everyone else.

Probably 4/5mpg worse off though
Worse than that according to google, FWIW.

Considering that a good proportion of cars are now SUV height then, no it's not everyone else as SUV vs SUV is non worse than Estate vs Estate but I still get your point. Having said that, lateral visibility is still there and not to much detriment of other road users.

As for mpg, Google is not always your friend, short of running both cars. We get actuall 44mpg out of the old heavy Tiguan in TDI 150 2WD manual despite 70% short town trips. I find that staggering and whatever the additional "saving" would be against the estate, it's really not worth it for us, it's basically cheap as chips.

As for turdiness, while I appreciate that image/looks are important for some (despite them not having to have a SUV), not only that's pretty subjective but we don't give a damn what others think. I do agree they look ridiculous but we bought one despite that, that's how brilliant they are functionally.

How big are your dogs? As they get older are you able/willing to lift them into the hire boot of an SUV? If not buy an estate - safer bet for dog owners IMO.

We have one, a Lab. As mentioned, the SUV suits us now. When it doesn't we'll change it.

TBH I'm interested in the whole backlash against derv at the moment and expect some more revelations to appear in the future so am happy to keep what we have while greener tech improves and until the wind significantly changes at which point I will dump the oil burner.

We looked at the Tiguan and Ateca, neither justified their price tags for us. The Ateca felt especially dreary inside.

The CRV was a different league of capacious. Loved the seats too. Sadly the shite dash layout and naff infotainment system let it down, badly. It's expensive too.

We went for a CX-5 in the end. Massive discount off list as it was one of the last built before the new model came out. Not as much tech as the Tiguan but still had all necessary features and is a rather pleasant place to sit for a few hours.

Perhaps if you got away from your comfortable urban existence and spent more time driving around in some proper countryside, with narrow, potholed, muddy lanes with occasional cratered passing places, or grass verges you have to drive up onto to get past oncoming vehicles, because the last passing place was a quarter of a mile back up a 1:6 hill, you might get over yourself

Where the hell are you driving? I live in the Peak District and drive narrow back country roads every day. I drive a hot hatchback with 45 profile tyres and wouldn't want anything bigger.

I'm a bit disappointed by this thread- SUVs are a bad thing for the environment pretty much every way you look at it. Always less economical than the equivalently sized hatchback/estate and use more raw materials to produce for now gain in interior space. And do more damage to pedestrians. If you really must have one, because you live up a very muddy track that requires ground clearance, then do but in places like the Swiss Alps most people just drive a normal car with four wheel drive.

I'm a bit disappointed by this thread- cars are a bad thing for the environment pretty much every way you look at it.

FTFY

I live in the Peak District and drive narrow back country roads every day. I drive a hot hatchback with 45 profile tyres and wouldn't want anything bigger.

I'm a bit disappointed by this thread- SUVs are a bad thing for the environment pretty much every way you look at it.

Compare your hot hatch emissions to a low emission SUV.

munrobiker

If you really must have one, because you live up a very muddy track that requires ground clearance, then do but in places like the Swiss Alps most people just drive a normal car with four wheel drive.

Normal cars with four wheel drive??!!? Those inconsiderate swines. Why would they destroy baby rabbits and melt glaciers by driving heavier, less fuel efficient, four wheel drive cars when [i][u]we all know[/u][/i] that a front wheel drive car with winter tyres is immeasurably better than four wheel drive.

😈

As for mpg, Google is not always your friend, short of running both cars.

Don't need to drive either vehicle to know that increasing frontal area increases drag and therefore fuel consumption. 🙂

We get actuall 44mpg out of the old heavy Tiguan in TDI 150 2WD manual despite 70% short town trips.

I got over 50mpg from my last car; petrol auto built in 1995! 💡

CountZero - Member

Perhaps if you got away from your comfortable urban existence and spent more time driving around in some proper countryside, with narrow, potholed, muddy lanes with occasional cratered passing places, or grass verges you have to drive up onto to get past oncoming vehicles, because the last passing place was a quarter of a mile back up a 1:6 hill, you might get over yourself

😆
I've stayed in rural Sweden. Neighbour had a MkII Micra.

Does seem a little weird that this thread is veering down the SUV Good or Bad route.

TBH if you're that concerned about whether an SUV is Good or Bad, you may want to have a chat with the millions of Hyundai/Kia SUV owners and Gazillions of Quashqai/Kuga owners and get thier POV.

For its them that will be hardest hit when the SUV/Diesel debate really gets going.

sbob - Member
As for mpg, Google is not always your friend, short of running both cars.
Don't need to drive either vehicle to know that increasing frontal area increases drag and therefore fuel consumption.

We get actuall 44mpg out of the old heavy Tiguan in TDI 150 2WD manual despite 70% short town trips.
I got over 50mpg from my last car; petrol auto built in 1995!

I never said the MPV didn't use less fuel - I said the difference in consumption was negligible compared to the equivalent Estate Golf. Certainly less than the difference in depreciation in favour of the SUV.

50mpg is rubbish - we get 60mpg out of our Yaris petrol. 😉

Comparing like for like, are we ?

Either way, our Tiguan is better in almost every way than the equivalent Golf Estate but may or may not be as good as a car built in 1995.

My soon to be wife has just got an Ateca after a well-to-do woman in an AMG V8 sportscar thing pulled out of a t-junction into the side of her Fiat 500. The Fiat was a write-off so we went on the hunt for a new safer car.

After looking round a car supermarket it was the compact SUV's that took her fancy, a bit of research later and she had settled on the Ateca because of all the 5 star reviews and decent price compared to some of the competition.

She managed to get her hands on one of the only ones available in the country on short notice. It's a 1.6 oil burner with fairly good options package for a very reasonable price.

She absolutely loves the thing. Much prefers the higher driving position, feels really good on the road, decent acceleration, great fuel economy and she does 18k per year so will be noticed. She also works on a farm so feels the ground clearance will be useful. Overall we are both very happy with the purchase.

CountZero - Member
Perhaps if you got away from your comfortable urban existence and spent more time driving around in some proper countryside, with narrow, potholed, muddy lanes with occasional cratered passing places, or grass verges you have to drive up onto to get past oncoming vehicles, because the last passing place was a quarter of a mile back up a 1:6 hill, you might get over yourself

😆

I used to drive 8 miles up a Highland single track road, rarely gritted or ploughed in winter. Best car ever was the light, nimble, low power Yaris on winter tyres. Many of the local farmers in 110's and 90's commented how good it was at stopping compared to 3tons of 4x4.
[img] [/img]
Even the Touran was handy enough.
[img] [/img]

Edit - the last mile was up 1:5 up 800' climb of a driveway, no passing places at all.
[img] [/img]

Don't give me the 'countryside needs 4x4' line...

We went for a CX-5 in the end.

It was between a CX-5 and an Ateca for us. I would agree the Mazda is a nicer place to sit but we thought the Ateca was nicer to drive and had more up to date tech in it.

Can't believe we've had 2 pages and no Audi Q2's ...... 😀

I think the Q2 is a fair bit smaller and the Q3 is probably around the same size but more expensive. But yeah I am surprised no-one has suggested a Q3/X3/Chintzy Merc (model escapes me) or worse still an Evoque. Not that any are in the same price bracket...but that doesn't usually hinder people.

Q3 is X1 size, we looked at them when we bought the 2AT.

Q5=X3=GLC

Q3 is X1 size, we looked at them when we bought the 2AT.

Q5=X3=GLC

Cheers. Sorry I didn't put that well, I was comparing them in size to the Ateca mentioned in the OP.

Q2 and Q3 share the same platform, though Q2 is a bit smaller in and out. It feels about same size as an X1.

Q2 and Q3 share the same platform, though Q2 is a bit smaller in and out. It feels about same size as an X1.

Q2 is significantly shorter than a X1, which is 10 inches longer. Even the Q3 is shorter than the X1.

The Q2 felt like at least 1 category down in size, unsurprisingly.

T6 4motion Kombi for the win.

mandog - Member
T6 4motion Kombi for the win.

Nah.

That's a "lifestyle" vehicle and there's a thread for that 😉

Own an E-class (07) for general use and a Discovery3 (06), mainly for work (towing 3500kg, on and off road). More often than not we use the estate. It's quicker, more economical and in 80-90% of circumstances, it swallows all our stuff. The roof bars are lower, so much easier to get stuff on and off of.

I wouldn't own an SUV (the D3) unless I towed big trailers, it's just too expensive to run, although 7 seats are handy sometimes. Estates for me every time.

I thought long and hard and realised I'd be spending silly money on a new Seat Ateca which would only see trips to work and putting the dogs in 😀

So I canceled the new car and bought this £3700 and all it's missing from the Ateca is touchscreen and Led lights 😆

[url= https://s26.postimg.org/bjcb1boeh/IMG_8092.jp g" target="_blank">https://s26.postimg.org/bjcb1boeh/IMG_8092.jp g"/> [/img][/url]