lab
9:13 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
The opening post is clearly , clearly a wind up .
|
wurzel
8:50 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Sort of off topic but I bought a BMW a few years back, a 320si. Only 500 imported into the UK.
Had a few little M Sport touches on it, etc
Shit shit car. 2 litre, 25 mpg, nearly £300 a year to tax. Slow.
Was lovely to look at when parked and that was about it.
It had those 'Angel eye' lights, one of the bulbs went, £125 to replace. Had numerous visits back to dealer, CAT probs, etc
Got rid of it after a year.
Bought a 1.6 idtec Honda Civic.
Believe it or not, quicker, nicer drive. Fully equipped with everything. Driving around I get 80mpg, £0 a year tax.
I think I must bought the worst BMW going.
|
BRANDED
8:00 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
The thing is theres always two things to consider
TCO
TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP
on these older but nice vehicles the big thing you'll never know is the maitanance cost. Buying real cheap is a lottery but if you win you get to drive great cars for nothing.
TCV
TOTAL CUNT VALUE
These cars really fuck off loads of people so its a thumbs up on that indicator.
|
Jim79
7:49 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Had a Touareg, was a cracking car. Had XC90, very nice to and had an X5 which turned out to be a bit problematic.
Got a Range Rover Sport Overfinch now and its a different league to all of the previous, best car i’ve had by a country mile. Spent substantially more than £5/6k on all of them individually though and could only see buying a world of trouble trying to get a high end 4x4 for peanuts.
|
Capitol Man
7:18 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
VirginiaHam 4:20 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
It certainly did, especially near the end.
As I said it was great until high 90k miles then big ticket items kept going on it.
|
Any Old Iron
5:22 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
To the OP - are you mad? For £5-6k any of those are going to be close to knackered. Need to spend at least double to get anything decent.
Beats me why so many people want to clog up the roads with these massive lumps.
|
Pi Alpha Nu
4:59 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
If you opt for the Audi or the BMW make sure its got the optional extra of indicators.
|
VirginiaHam
4:20 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Capitol Man 2:40 Wed Oct 24
Did the Cherokee have that nice, bouncy American suspension?
|
VirginiaHam
4:18 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
I've got an Acura MDX; made by Honda, who also made my lawnmower.
Absolutely brilliant. Both start first time, both are workhorses. The MDX has done 138k, will at least double that.
A Mazda dealer told me jap cars are manufactured to such high standards they can sell them relatively cheaply because although they come with warranties they never need to pay out.
|
ray winstone
4:10 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
EN, I agree, great workhorse of a car and a lot cheaper to run than the others mentioned in the OP.
|
Enoch Nutter
3:41 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Land Cruiser. Beats them all.
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-search?sort=price-desc&radius=1500&postcode=e15&onesearchad=Used&onesearchad=Nearly%20New&make=TOYOTA&model=LAND%20CRUISER&price-from=500&price-to=6000&page=1
|
BubblesCyprus
3:39 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Hired an X5 in Dubai loved it !! Bit of a gas guzzler though was in and out of Petrol Stations the whole month.
|
joe royal
3:35 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
My last two cars were bought for 10% of the original purchase price.
A 3k BMW 330 and a 2k Astra twin top.
BM broke down every 6/8 weeks , nothing serious , water pumps , power steering pumps and a coil from memory .
Astra went great for a year then threw an inlet manifold (common problem apparently)
1400 for a replacement engine.
Check the common faults with any second hand car and budget for it to fail.
On hindsight I would have not bought the Astra .
|
BRANDED
2:55 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
BTW this belongs on the drug dealer thread
|
Joe C
2:41 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
J.Riddle 1:56 Wed Oct 24
Tell that to my Golf which is swallowing money like it's going out of fashion.
|
BRANDED
2:40 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
I had a £2k Range Rover for 5 years. So long as you can keep the upkeep costs down you're fine.
|
Capitol Man
2:40 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
I had a grand Cherokee and drove that into the ground over about 10+ years. It was great until about 100k miles then virtually everything went wrong, from the heads to the transmission, the works.
Have had a Q7 for about 80k miles. Great car. Very little wear. Not cheap to do anything on.
Got a new Discovery earlier in the year, which I prefer to all of them, but it has all the newer toys on it. Have to see how I feel about it a few years down the road.
Honestly I’d go for one of the German or Japanese ones with the more reliable history given the age.
|
bobbymoore
2:35 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Don't do it... we had a £20k Audi Q7 and the suspension went, £3k bill, but fantastic car.
Now have a 3yr old Q7, no issues as yet. If you're going to get one, min spend £15-20k
|
Spandex Sidney
2:02 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Expect to budget for around 100% of the purchase price in annual maintenance costs for all these shit kickers in this price range.
|
J.Riddle
1:56 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
Claroos shout for the Toureg would be a good move doesn't have the prestige name as such but VW are know for their reliability and initial outlay will be less for a newer vehicle lower mileage.
|
Deanooooo
1:53 Wed Oct 24
Re: Range Rover v Audi Q7 v BMW X5 etc
|
I should probably say something a couple more times.
|
| 
