Which is the best mid-size luxury SUV?

[blueoval]

Is getting an SUV/crossover 4x4 purely for the higher seating position and off road capabilities or is it actually a status thing? I have wondered this considering the amount of people who own one in suburbia and have never seen a dirt road.

PS. I have neighbors who are like this before you think I have cast a blanket assumption on the subject.

[Sioso]

Originally Posted by blueoval

Is getting an SUV/crossover 4x4 purely for the higher seating position and off road capabilities or is it actually a status thing? I have wondered this considering the amount of people who own one in suburbia and have never seen a dirt road.

PS. I have neighbors who are like this before you think I have cast a blanket assumption on the subject.

My wife has a CX5 and it was purely for the ease of getting young kids in and out of car seats.
We also get ice and occasional snow in winter so I wanted her to have AWD.

[Bearman]

Well, now I am in my first SUV type car and to compare with my previous Sedan what I am liking is:
- Ease of access. I like not having to fold myself up and lower myself into the car. I ain't small and I'm getting older.
- Cabin room. Got more elbow room than my old Honda and I also like not having the windscreen as close to my face.
- The ride height means I can go down a gravel road and not worry about running aground or ripping my nose off in a dip.
- Better visibility although this is pretty much a moot point with all the other SUV's on the road.
- more carrying capacity and versatility. Sure, wagons have this but how many such cars can you buy new that are not in the SUV realm?

When I think back to my childhood our family car was an EH Holden. We would travel down bush tracks in it all the time for family picnics etc in convoy with extended family with the car loaded with 4 of us, food and a slab of VB. Could you do that in a standard family sedan now?? I reckon the old EH ride height was nearly that of my current Mitsi ASX.

I'm not talking about bush bashing, just normal gravel or dirt roads with some imperfections.

My last two sedans, Honda Accord Euro and BA XR6 I was always very wary of taking them off the Tarmac.

This for me is why an SUV type car will be my daily transport pretty much from here on in. Just see them as comfortable transport only, not as a performance car.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by tempted

Well it's a discussion forum, people are allowed to have negative opinions.
Or would you rather we all conformed with each other like blind sheep? How boring and one sided would the discussion be then?

I realise this, but I would have thought that once you had made you thoughts known that you don't like a certain type/brand or vehicle you would leave it at that, instead of banging the same drum in every post !!

[Brazen]

I think as time goes on it will be harder for me to avoid a SUV. They remind me of Fords and Holdens of the 80s as they are pretty versatile all rounders, and there made pretty awesome family cars.

They don't handle as well as a sedan but they are closing the gap as sedan handling isn't progressing as fast as SUVs. But I reckon a well sorted SUV probably handles as well as 10 year old Falcon, Commodore, Accord Euro and back in 2005 those cars handled well and probably do the job with lower and lower travel speeds.

It will also be a dollars and cents thing too, I think it will become harder and harder to sell a sedan in the used market as buyers move to SUVs. If I were to buy a car today a SUV will probably be worth more in 5 years time (guessing).

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by Sabantien

I don't get SUVs. I'd much rather a sedan for on the road, or a proper 4wd to go off road.

The bonus of an SUV is you sit higher, which you really only need to do because every other bastard out there is driving a SUV.

Admittedly the older I get, the more my back wouldn't mind stepping into a car rather than sitting down into one... but still.

Definitely like the look of the Range Rover inside and out of those cars, but would prefer a Discovery if I was doing that.

FWIW the SUV we chose ended up being a great car for a family and matched our interests. It had space for gear and growing kids, AWD for snow trips, smooth ZF auto for town, ride height that was preferred. Did country runs in comfort and economy, could fit a quiver of boards for a trip up the coast. It did most things well rather than one thing to a degree of specialisation. The bonus was we picked one (AWD ZF Inline 6 Territory) that was also a great handling package.

Being based now in SE Oz, it supplanted both the hardcore 4x4 Landcruiser used in my outback WA work, and RWD Falcon used everywhere from the wheatbelt to the suburbs of Perth.

Off the top of my head, the only other 'handling' SUVs for those twisty roads would be
superseeded BMW X1 RWD/AWD
BMW X3/4
BMW X5/6
Porsche Macan
Range Rover Sport
maybe the RSQ3
Forester GT
Outback 3.6R
forthcoming Jaguar F-Pace

Those are the SUVs that make most sense to me. Most are a lot more expensive than a Territory!

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Sabantien

I don't get SUVs. I'd much rather a sedan for on the road, or a proper 4wd to go off road.

The bonus of an SUV is you sit higher, which you really only need to do because every other bastard out there is driving a SUV.

Admittedly the older I get, the more my back wouldn't mind stepping into a car rather than sitting down into one... but still.

Definitely like the look of the Range Rover inside and out of those cars, but would prefer a Discovery if I was doing that.

Sedans look good, but SUVs are heaps more practical.
Also Look on the lower front bumper of every modern car. I bet you will struggle to find one without scratches. In my sedans I got sick of 45 degree approach angles while driving around the city.

[duaned]

For me I would take the Mercedes first as I think it has the best interior. Following up would be the Range Rover, the Lexus and the BMW last. It's interior hasn't changed much in years and looks outdated (just look at the cluster) and boring.

[Sabantien]

Originally Posted by blueoval

Is getting an SUV/crossover 4x4 purely for the higher seating position and off road capabilities or is it actually a status thing? I have wondered this considering the amount of people who own one in suburbia and have never seen a dirt road.

PS. I have neighbors who are like this before you think I have cast a blanket assumption on the subject.

Surely if you wanted a higher seating position you'd just buy a Falcon...

[Sabantien]

Originally Posted by Sprintey

FWIW the SUV we chose ended up being a great car for a family and matched our interests. It had space for gear and growing kids, AWD for snow trips, smooth ZF auto for town, ride height that was preferred. Did country runs in comfort and economy, could fit a quiver of boards for a trip up the coast. It did most things well rather than one thing to a degree of specialisation. The bonus was we picked one (AWD ZF Inline 6 Territory) that was also a great handling package.

Being based now in SE Oz, it supplanted both the hardcore 4x4 Landcruiser used in my outback WA work, and RWD Falcon used everywhere from the wheatbelt to the suburbs of Perth.

Off the top of my head, the only other 'handling' SUVs for those twisty roads would be
superseeded BMW X1 RWD/AWD
BMW X3/4
BMW X5/6
Porsche Macan
Range Rover Sport
maybe the RSQ3
Forester GT
Outback 3.6R
forthcoming Jaguar F-Pace

Those are the SUVs that make most sense to me. Most are a lot more expensive than a Territory!

That makes sense. I guess for me, I don't have a family and don't want one to be honest, so I don't need all the extra room.

It would have been handy when we went camping, the Falcon was pretty darn full, but I would like to be able to go to camping sites that aren't all on sealed roads. My brother tried convincing me to get a Territory when I was shopping around, and i guess it would have been a good choice (even if it uses even more fuel). If it's not going to be a full on 4x4, then at least it should drive well.

[Express]

Originally Posted by tempted

From some people's attitudes it seems that you strictly aren't allowed to criticize Mercedes as they cannot put a foot wrong. We all have to get down on our knees and worship that badge.

I’m not entirely happy with the grey colour of the carpet material used on the inside of the glovebox in my C Class, in my opinion it could be greyer.

There see, I can be critical of Mercedes when it’s warranted.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Express

I’m not entirely happy with the grey colour of the carpet material used on the inside of the glovebox in my C Class, in my opinion it could be greyer.

Lighter or darker ?

[Tassie f100]

Originally Posted by duaned

For me I would take the Mercedes first as I think it has the best interior. Following up would be the Range Rover, the Lexus and the BMW last. It's interior hasn't changed much in years and looks outdated (just look at the cluster) and boring.

Well for me it would be the Lexus mainly because I like to hop in a car at any time and know it will start and get me where and when I want.The Rangy has to be last and would be a lot further down the list if there were more choices when it comes to reliability.In a recent survey Range Rovers came in about 100 with 200 warranty claims /100 vehicles.

[outback_ute]

I'd also be more confident in the Lexus compared with the Germans or Land Rover for dependability, too bad about the front end looks. It is a shame they didn't mention boot space at all, some of this type of car can be pretty poor here.

I agree with Ben73, a lot of the rise of CUV's is a reaction against the way sedans have gone, in that they have decent ground clearance and more upright rooflines, so you have a bit more room around your head (A/B-series Falcons were one of the worst for this). Most of them are not so high as to compromise handling in normal situations, they are only where cars used to be 30+ years ago as a general rule.

[FG50T]

The problem is with the BMW is that if you owned one in the past 10 years you know the interior has only changed in the slightest. It's like FG to the FGX basically across all their models. I like the Mercedes interior, they generally have a nice solid feel and the roung vents match the round badge and all the round dials...Blends well I think. I'd happily own any except the Lexus.

[Wretched]

On looks alone, between the Merc and BMW. I like the look of the BMW interior, looks functionally fine but questionable materials.
Range Rover I am still up in the air about. A change in design doesn't mean a change in engineering and craftsmanship. The darkhorse for me.
The Lexus may be the best put together but that interior looks horrid, like someone had a number of items to put in there in about 10 seconds, plus the car looks horrid.
When spending this kind of money, i'd want to make sure I actually like the look of it. Lastly, Lexus aren't known for good steering.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by duaned

For me I would take the Mercedes first as I think it has the best interior. Following up would be the Range Rover, the Lexus and the BMW last. It's interior hasn't changed much in years and looks outdated (just look at the cluster) and boring.

What you need to understand about BMW vs MB visually is that the former has the approach of retaining references to tradition whereas MB decided to go for brash modernity.

With the BMW you feel like you're owning a classic marque (reinforced by a leading driving experience), whereas Merc is more look at me /new money. Note which marque abandoned its traditional grille. They're both very good, they just appeal to different types of buyer. Each to their own and neither should judge the other. But BMW leads world sales between the two, so I think they're more on the money.

The feeling of owning a classic marque appeals to me and I've talked to a few owners of older MBs who are quite annoyed that MB dropped the traditional grille. The last C class with the old grille was a thing of beauty compared to the current one.

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by new2ford

With the BMW you feel like you're owning a classic marque (reinforced by a leading driving experience), whereas Merc is more look at me /new money.

You reminded me of years ago when living in the US what a friend said to another friend of ours when he pulled up in his brand new BMW, “I see you’ve got one of those poor man’s Mercedes.”

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by tempted

I'm still stuggling to see what is so special about the Mercedes interior. To me it looks very plain, industrial and almost truck like. It's as though they have taken the dash out of a Sprinter van and just glued some glossy finishes and a screen to it. Certainly not the standard I would be expecting in a luxury car and a big step backwards from their previous efforts.
The BMW interior may be an old design but at least it looks like it belongs in a luxury car.

I have found that interior is very dependent on trim/colour choice. The all black version is as you describe. Two tone versions with different leather choices lift the look of the interior.

[mcflux]

Originally Posted by Brazen

They don't handle as well as a sedan but they are closing the gap as sedan handling isn't progressing as fast as SUVs. But I reckon a well sorted SUV probably handles as well as 10 year old Falcon, Commodore, Accord Euro and back in 2005 those cars handled well and probably do the job with lower and lower travel speeds.

You're spot-on there. On a holiday in 2014 I'd arranged for a RAV4 hire car, but upon arrival the RAV4 wasn't available so we were given a new GLK350 instead. Not bad for a free upgrade.

I had a 2006 BF Fairmont at the time so I can directly compare the ride/handling between both the BF sedan & the GLK SUV. GLK actually rode better than the BF, & the Fairmont was a damn comfy car to cruise around in. Also had way more power, better auto response, and the interior appointments were flawless.

Why do cars like this exist? Because people are willing to pay $$$ for a known brand that stakes its reputation on luxury/quality.

Did I like driving it? Hell yes. Would I ever own one? Hell no; I'm more comfy wearing hi-viz vs a tux, & the same goes with cars.

My sister & her husband are weighing up which luxury mid-size SUV to buy as their next car. They're the perfect demographic for these kinds of cars (city-dwelling professionals, etc), & I for one will be very interested in which model they choose and the reasons they chose it.

inb4 "but they're 10 years apart", "but they're $60,000 apart", "but they're not the same class of car", "but an AU ute is better", "but(thurt)"

[Sioso]

If you're after a nice interior you go for the Range Rover Autobiography:
Not sure if I would rather be driving or in the back sipping a straight rye whiskey!

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Sioso

If you're after a nice interior you go for the Range Rover Autobiography:
Not sure if I would rather be driving or in the back sipping a straight rye whiskey!

image

That looks like the Holland & Holland version...........

http://hollandandholland.com/lifestyle/range-rover/

[Tassie f100]

Well if the UK price is about £35000 this one at about £180000 would want to be a little bit flashier

[mik]

rangie biography is nice to be sure, just looked up rangie biography in carsales and selected price highest in the sorting and came up with ...... wait for it ........... $397,453 ..... for that money i would want scarlett johansson to be sitting in the passenger seat ..... or drivers seat .

[Express]

Originally Posted by mik

........... $397,453 ..... for that money i would want scarlett johansson to be sitting in the passenger seat ..... or drivers seat .

I know where I'd want her to sit.

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by Express

I know where I'd want her to sit.

[Cosmo Kramer]

Originally Posted by Sabantien

I don't get SUVs. I'd much rather a sedan for on the road, or a proper 4wd to go off road.

The bonus of an SUV is you sit higher, which you really only need to do because every other bastard out there is driving a SUV.

Admittedly the older I get, the more my back wouldn't mind stepping into a car rather than sitting down into one... but still.

Definitely like the look of the Range Rover inside and out of those cars, but would prefer a Discovery if I was doing that.

You get used to them and then you can't go back. I've had several performance sedans, and bought my first SUV in 2003. Kept cars as well but over the years I ended up driving the SUV's and never getting in the car. Shopping around for a new vehicle a couple of months ago, I didn't look at anything less than 7 seats. I now have two 7 seaters, I don't need 7 seats but love that size vehicle. I can't go back......I won't.....

Cheers