Audi Q5?
11-07-09, 08:52 PM
#31
I spent about an hour this afternoon driving a loaded Q5. It is really about the same size as an RX350 and Audi is marketing it as an RX competitor. It is worlds better than the GLK in both appearance and drive. The one I drove was pretty loaded with NAV, panorama roof, upgraded interior, etc. Sticker was just over $45K so it is even priced like an RX.
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
11-07-09, 09:01 PM
#32
Lexus Test Driver
I spent about an hour this afternoon driving a loaded Q5. It is really about the same size as an RX350 and Audi is marketing it as an RX competitor. It is worlds better than the GLK in both appearance and drive. The one I drove was pretty loaded with NAV, panorama roof, upgraded interior, etc. Sticker was just over $45K so it is even priced like an RX.
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
As far as the ZDX salesperson.... he is certainly not going to say the car is ugly. *skip*
11-07-09, 09:54 PM
#33
Pole Position
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Arlington TX
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
Good review...could you please elaborate more on the Cadillac SRX vs. the Lexus? My daughter-in-law is interested in both, but has yet to test drive the Cadillac.
Good review...could you please elaborate more on the Cadillac SRX vs. the Lexus? My daughter-in-law is interested in both, but has yet to test drive the Cadillac.
11-07-09, 10:31 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...light=cadillac
My 3RX 350 review
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...x-350-fwd.html
11-07-09, 11:16 PM
#35
Lexus Champion
The 2.0 TFSI lacks a bit in HP but the S-tronic makes up for it somewaht with faster shifting. The MB GLK you really have to see it in person, the interior was almost as bad as the X3. The Volvo XC60 is a nice car, not a big fan of the tail lights and the water fall center concole. My biggest concern is Volvo will be own the Chinese soon.
11-08-09, 05:18 AM
#36
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent about an hour this afternoon driving a loaded Q5. It is really about the same size as an RX350 and Audi is marketing it as an RX competitor. It is worlds better than the GLK in both appearance and drive. The one I drove was pretty loaded with NAV, panorama roof, upgraded interior, etc. Sticker was just over $45K so it is even priced like an RX.
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
The drive experience compared to an RX is about like comparing an A4 to an ES350. The Audi handles much better when driven hard, but is quite a bit stiffer at low speeds. Noise level in the Audi were also much higher than in the RX, with most of it being road noise.
The interior is very nice with passenger space near what the RX has, but the cargo space behind the seats is a lot smaller, particularly in width. The back-up camera is a vast improvement over Lexus with guide lines that indicate where the car will go that respond to steering inputs. The NAV control is not as user friendly and the 2010 RX, but it is pretty good. Controls are on the back end of the console and were easy to learn and use.
Full throttle acceleration is about the same as the RX, but part throttle acceleration around town requires a downshift much of the time. The RX seems to have a big mid-range torque advantage.
Assembly quality seemed very good and paint quality was excellent and I would rate it as equal to the RX.
With the 2 vehicles at the same price, I prefer the RX for the ride and quiet but I can see why someone wanting sportier handling would like the Q5.
I have driven both the GLK and SRX and they are pretty poor competitors for the RX or Q5. After a terrible experience with Volvo reliability a few years ago I'm not ready to go there again.
I went by the Acura dealer to check out the ZDX, but they aren't in yet. The brochure photos still make it look weird, but the sales guy insists that it looks better in person. After looking at the new TL "in person", I seriously doubt that.
Steve
11-08-09, 07:06 AM
#37
Pole Position
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Arlington TX
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
Thanks for the link to your review of the SRX. We missed the same comparo a few weeks ago.
I was shocked to read that to brakes in the Bimmer were subpar, as well as the problem with the auto tranny in the SRX.
My BMW 330 had just about the most "perfect" brakes and smooth (GM) auto tranny I have recently experienced. I haven't driven the latest Bimmers to see how they compare these days. I find their styling inside so dated it's hard to even consider owning one again.
My daughter-in-law liked driving the new Lexus RX and she even liked the interior. I did not like the way they positioned the gear shift at all, but then it's going to be her decision and I am not going to try to influence it one way or the other. One thing she doesn't like at all on her present RX is the mechanical noise. It sounds like it has a broken muffler. She took it to the dealer twice and it was pronounced healthy. I rode
once on the back seat and really sounds bad at highway speeds. We'll have to test drive the new RX on the open hwy and see how the noise compares to hers.
Again, thanks for your reviews, I really enjoy them!
Hugh
Thanks for the link to your review of the SRX. We missed the same comparo a few weeks ago.
I was shocked to read that to brakes in the Bimmer were subpar, as well as the problem with the auto tranny in the SRX.
My BMW 330 had just about the most "perfect" brakes and smooth (GM) auto tranny I have recently experienced. I haven't driven the latest Bimmers to see how they compare these days. I find their styling inside so dated it's hard to even consider owning one again.
My daughter-in-law liked driving the new Lexus RX and she even liked the interior. I did not like the way they positioned the gear shift at all, but then it's going to be her decision and I am not going to try to influence it one way or the other. One thing she doesn't like at all on her present RX is the mechanical noise. It sounds like it has a broken muffler. She took it to the dealer twice and it was pronounced healthy. I rode
once on the back seat and really sounds bad at highway speeds. We'll have to test drive the new RX on the open hwy and see how the noise compares to hers.
Again, thanks for your reviews, I really enjoy them!
Hugh
11-08-09, 09:06 AM
#38
Lexus Test Driver
Oldcajun, thats about the most un-bias revirew I have read in here in a long time. Everything you said was right on and it really comes down to comfort vs sportiness when comparing the RX to the Q5. Although, I do think the Audi paint job is a better than Lexus' and overall, the Q5 just feels more solid all around.
11-08-09, 08:55 PM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Steve,
Thanks for the link to your review of the SRX. We missed the same comparo a few weeks ago.
I was shocked to read that to brakes in the Bimmer were subpar, as well as the problem with the auto tranny in the SRX.
My BMW 330 had just about the most "perfect" brakes and smooth (GM) auto tranny I have recently experienced. I haven't driven the latest Bimmers to see how they compare these days. I find their styling inside so dated it's hard to even consider owning one again.
My daughter-in-law liked driving the new Lexus RX and she even liked the interior. I did not like the way they positioned the gear shift at all, but then it's going to be her decision and I am not going to try to influence it one way or the other. One thing she doesn't like at all on her present RX is the mechanical noise. It sounds like it has a broken muffler. She took it to the dealer twice and it was pronounced healthy. I rode
once on the back seat and really sounds bad at highway speeds. We'll have to test drive the new RX on the open hwy and see how the noise compares to hers.
Again, thanks for your reviews, I really enjoy them!
Hugh
Thanks for the link to your review of the SRX. We missed the same comparo a few weeks ago.
I was shocked to read that to brakes in the Bimmer were subpar, as well as the problem with the auto tranny in the SRX.
My BMW 330 had just about the most "perfect" brakes and smooth (GM) auto tranny I have recently experienced. I haven't driven the latest Bimmers to see how they compare these days. I find their styling inside so dated it's hard to even consider owning one again.
My daughter-in-law liked driving the new Lexus RX and she even liked the interior. I did not like the way they positioned the gear shift at all, but then it's going to be her decision and I am not going to try to influence it one way or the other. One thing she doesn't like at all on her present RX is the mechanical noise. It sounds like it has a broken muffler. She took it to the dealer twice and it was pronounced healthy. I rode
once on the back seat and really sounds bad at highway speeds. We'll have to test drive the new RX on the open hwy and see how the noise compares to hers.
Again, thanks for your reviews, I really enjoy them!
Hugh
I think a change in pads would have helped the X5...I've never felt an issue with brakes on BMWs before...it was very grabby. The SRX is really nice but the auto tranny is tragic....and reviews in mags feel the same way.
The RX has a "mechanical" sound to me. No sexy exhaust note.
I'm going to check out a Q5 soon...had a bar-b-que today and one of my buds and his wife are going SUV shopping. They are happy with their previous Lexus and like the new RX. The husband felt it drove "soft" and was unresponsive and wasn't a fan of the image. Fair shake....
Onto the Q5. They liked it a lot and felt it drove tighter and sportier. The dealer was inept. They told them they are selling like hotcakes and they are not going to discount the vehicle. The one they looked at was 50k, which made them scratch their head as it was pricey at that point. The dealer did a very poor job according to them.
He said he's driven past and seen that same Q5 on the lot for 3 months and the sticker price is now dropped. Since they treated them like crap, they are not considering it anymore.
11-08-09, 11:40 PM
#40
Pole Position
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: WA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Q5 is a fair amount smaller than the RX in terms of utility behind the second row seats, as it is a somewhat shorter vehicle. So if utility is a focus the RX might be the preferred between the two. We have owned several RXs and I have very recently test driven the Q5 and agree with prior comments that for sport the Q5 is the choice and for a more "plush" ride and also utility the RX would be the choice.
The choices we are currently facing for a purchase include both the Q5 and RX but also the Mercedes ML350. If you add the ML350 into consideration then should we also consider the X5 and Cayenne? Recognizing that we are mixing classes a bit and some $$ variation too, what is the preferred choice in this group, ranging from the RX on the value end and the Cayenne on the extreme end?
IMHO it is hard to argue against the RX as being the best all around value leader but the Q5, ML, X5 and Cayenne sure add some fun into the mix. What direction would you go?
The choices we are currently facing for a purchase include both the Q5 and RX but also the Mercedes ML350. If you add the ML350 into consideration then should we also consider the X5 and Cayenne? Recognizing that we are mixing classes a bit and some $$ variation too, what is the preferred choice in this group, ranging from the RX on the value end and the Cayenne on the extreme end?
IMHO it is hard to argue against the RX as being the best all around value leader but the Q5, ML, X5 and Cayenne sure add some fun into the mix. What direction would you go?
11-09-09, 01:33 AM
#41
Lead Lap
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One point about the Lexus is that it will give you the fewest maintenance headaches, so if that (and dealer friendliness) is important to you, second thoughts on the Audi are advised.
11-09-09, 06:07 AM
#42
Lexus Test Driver
I am not sure why Lexus kept the shifter where is it in the new design, it would have been the perfect opportunity to put it in the center console where it belongs.
11-09-09, 09:11 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the Q5 way better than that backwards tear drop Q7 thats for sure. As always the best thing to do is go to the dealer and mess around with them a bit as that usually helps with making ones mind up.
Last edited by Milla...; 11-09-09 at 09:15 AM.
11-09-09, 11:02 AM
#44
Lexus Test Driver
Most magazine reviews agree with you, the Q7 was a big disappointment for Audi and the Q5 have been a home run so far.
11-09-09, 01:13 PM
#45
Lexus Champion
The choices we are currently facing for a purchase include both the Q5 and RX but also the Mercedes ML350. If you add the ML350 into consideration then should we also consider the X5 and Cayenne? Recognizing that we are mixing classes a bit and some $$ variation too, what is the preferred choice in this group, ranging from the RX on the value end and the Cayenne on the extreme end?
IMHO it is hard to argue against the RX as being the best all around value leader but the Q5, ML, X5 and Cayenne sure add some fun into the mix. What direction would you go?
IMHO it is hard to argue against the RX as being the best all around value leader but the Q5, ML, X5 and Cayenne sure add some fun into the mix. What direction would you go?
....I've spent a fair amount of time this year shopping new SUV's. The Q5 and Cayenne are the only ones that I haven't driven. So far I've driven: X5 4.8, X5 35d, X6 3.5, X6 5.5, X3, RX350, GLK 350, ML 320 Bluetec (which we bought) and now the GL 350 Bluetec (actually tomorrow
)I agree with you that the RX is an in-betweener. I think it's head and shoulders above any of the cute utes and competes on many levels with the next segment up (size wise) the X5/6, ML/GL.
Imo, the Cayenne doesn't offer nearly enough bang for the buck. When compared to all the other SUV's you're looking very base for the Cayenne compared to well equipped from the other brands. I'd love a Cayenne GTS PD3....but that extra $30K would be tough to swallow.
The X6 is a ton of fun to drive...it's the best handling SUV I've ever driven...but it seriously lacks in utility. It can hardly carry anything and the vision from the drivers seat is poor. For a retired couple with a small dog, like my folks, it works fine....but for a family.
The X5 is also a very good drive, but the interior is the typical BMW spartan/less is more. They have improved but they still trail their competitors, imo. The third row seats are essentially useless for anyone but small, small children.
The ML is a nice combo of luxury and driving stability. It doesn't handle as well as the X5, but it is tighter than the RX. It's a little larger than the RX as well. You could argue that the interior of the RX is better than the MB and I wouldn't disagree with you. Remote touch is light years better than COMMAND.
The GL is a bigger version of the ML with more luxury appointments. Airmatic suspension comes standard and the third rowing seating is the most functional that I've seen yet. Driving one tomorrow and this could very well end up in our garage.
The GLK was pure garbage imo. There was nothing that I liked from it. The X3 at least handled well, but I also think that it's weak. I've seen the Q5 (but not driven it) and would still pick the RX over everything smaller.
The RX competes well with many aspects of the larger SUV's, so it really comes down to how much space you really need/want. We had an '05 RX that we loved but we were looking for more space and we like diesels now.