|
I bought a Kia venga 2 1.4 MT (with the balance of the 7 year warranty) as I was struggling to get out of the Rio, on which it is based.
Driving position and ease of access excellent, and PLENTY of headroom.
Fuel consumption so far not as good as the Rio, but the essential is that i can EASILY get in and out.
Did not want or need diesel or 4wd and it ticks the boxes for me.
Maybe there are "fashions" but this is one that is helping me stay mobile.
And it was a cracking deal, even if the salesman was not entirely truthful about the previous owner. He said "demo" on the invoice, but when I got the v5c for the car it was actually a lease car. (9 months old and £5000 cheaper) and AS new..
Edited by oldroverboy. on 20/02/2016 at 08:51
|
|
|
|
Drive one an find out.
I had a 1.8T Audi Quattro Avant with sports suspension. That car convinced me that i would only ever have 4wd and a turbo engine, and estate cars for their practicality.
Problem was it was useless with speed humps and going over even a bumpy CL site off road was very tricky, and going down rough roads to fish the Trent was asking for the car to ground. And was very thirsty being petrol.
Enter the high riding diesel Xtrail, a comfortable diesl car with character and good to drive, a supberb towcar great off road, and as a bonus great for the inlaws to get into. And great residuals. Normally only in FWD but with an advance automatic 4wd system borrowed from the skyline super car.
Now on my number 4 suv with no intention of ever getting another hatch back.
But they are not for everyone thankfully, and it important to avoid the more common Suv's as they do not hold their value, cashcow being one example.
|
|
I've always liked the look of the Xtrail and it being a Nissan too implies decent build. But isn't it more of a traditional SUV, with AWD, and proper off road and towing ability, as you quite rightly state. I can imagine an Xtrail being vastly superior off road than something like a Kuga or Mokka, which really just appear to be heavier, higher and bulkier Focus estates/Astra estates respectively. As ORB says, ease of access seems to be the main reason for opting for one. I've driven a few of these and enjoy the visibility, but there seems to be a significant dynamics and economy penalty, which would be why I would opt for the equivalent estate, eg Octavia estate rather than Yeti. Good discussion!
|
|
Your last para puts your finger on the main issue, Bazza. I've recently test driven quite a few MPVs / crossovers / SUVs, whatever you like to call them, and too many lose something, despite similar engines and gearboxes, in the transition from conventional car to Higher Up Vehicle (HUV - perhaps that should be the generic term!).
The Audi Q3 and Skoda Yeti were competent but unexciting - a friend and neighbour calls his Q3 'a lump' - and the Nissan Qashqai was a big disappointment, with vague steering that seems strangely disconnected with the wheels (obviously not literally).
I tried a Subaru Forester - the XT Turbo - which was powerful and refined, but I couldn't call it fun to drive. In fairness it probably isn't meant to be. But the lack of lumbar support in the seats, with no adjustment available even as an option, ruled it out for me.
It can be done - I was impressed with both BMWs - X1 and 2-series Active Tourer - and the Ford C-Max. I suppose what they prove is that if the basic design of the car it's based on is sound, it should still handle well as an HUV.
|
|
Increasing the ground clearance allows longer travel, softer suspension - which is good for off-road or poor road use - and also more comfortable on normal roads - BUT - the higher CoG and softer suspension makes the dynamics worse. While the Subaru Outback can outhandle many sports estates, it's the exception and relates to Subaru's heritage.
On mainstream crossovers, that's the price you have to pay if you want the advantages. On premium crossovers, and most premium SUVs as they're used for similar things, it's possible to make the suspension more sophisticated, but at a price.
On things like Range Rovers, the air suspension can vary the ride height so reducing the CoG when appropriate - AND - the damping and anti-roll bars can be stiffened to allow excellent dynamics.
I now have a VW Touareg, which I added air suspension and variable damping as an option, to give me the compromise I need - excellent ground clearance when leaving the "black top", comfortable on UK's potholed roads and dynamic enough for me on days when I "drive it like I stole it" - but it's at a cost that would simply be nonsense on a mainstream crossover.
As ever, it's horses for courses.
|
|
I for one cannot wait for the next fad:
Autonomous driven blocks on wheels... *shudders*
tinyurl.com/zjh9958
|
|
Its not a fad.
The rav4 come out a long time ago. Fads come and go quickly, if anything cross overs or whatever you label them are now more popular, as your average hatchback have simply become too boring to want to drive or even buy.
Xtrail isn't a off road car and never will be, its just a sensible car for all road conditions, any extensive off road use will allow the 4wd system to over heat and default to fwd.
|
|
That's where we will have to disagree, xtrailman.
The Rav4 was Toyota's "late to the party" Vitara/Sportrak with a more road friendly manner.
I don't disagree that it allowed other manufacturers to see that there was a niche to be filled.
There weren't too many of these style vehicles on the market and they came with 4 wheel drive as standard.
You are correct about the Xtrail not being a proper off-roader.
Very few really are. The original Xtrail was closer to a "truck" than the one available now.
The majority of current mainstream crossovers are just jacked-up hatchbacks with little pretense to any other function than to "look good".
There is imo a saturation of the market with them and visibilty excepted offer nothing extra.
You can fool most of the people a lot of the time.
|
|
Soft-roaders have been around nearly 4 decades, check out the Simca-Matra Rancho and they've simply evolved into what we now call crossovers.
|
|
|
|
My wife is considering a crossover for her next car. Not because it is the latest fad but they suit her requirements .
She wants the slightly higher access and seating, also the extra ground clearance compared to standard cars but has no need for 4 wheel drive. A 'jacked up car' is exactly what she wants and until recently there was little that filled the bill.
I suspect this also is the appeal of these cars for many others.
Edited by ohsoslow on 20/02/2016 at 20:42
|
|
I'll ask someone (anyone) to put my Yeti into a category please. TBH if someone were to ask me "is your Yeti a crossover or an SUV or an MPV or an estate car"?...I'd have to tell them I wasn't sure. I've seen it described in a variety of guises but am honestly not sure (or especially bothered - but would invite suggestions so I can answer more sensibly next time someone asks).
It's only got front wheel drive but it rides quite high. It has winter tyres on it in winter which makes me feel as though it's a bit more capable in slippery conditions. It's square, like an estate car. It has a lot of wheel arch clearance so it looks a bit "off road" but it only quotes a wading depth of "up to the sills". The air intake is higher than most modern saloon/hatchbacks.
But having said all that I love it. It might not be "fun" but I can live with that. It definitely isn't super economical...32mpg, but, for an automatic flat fronted, boxy, high riding, petrol vehicle that gets used for running around and occasional longer trip, it's OK for me/us and my/our creaking joints. Much easier to get in and out of than a Mondeo, Focus or a Civic.
Opinions invited.
Edited by KB. on 20/02/2016 at 21:35
|
|
Subaru Forester...SUV, Crossover or simply a small estate with higher suspension. The Mk1 and Mk2 were small estates jacked up a bit. Not sure what they are now, but whenever I see a Mk2 is still looks 'right' ten years after I last owned one.
|
|
For me, crossover is exactly the right term for something in between conventional estate and "proper" SUV - and covers a wide range of styles.
|
|
i bought my so called "Crossover" because the combination of all its characteristics and the favourable deal given to me by the dealer suited what I needed. I didn't buy it because of its looks or that it was the current fad (if it is).
The acronymns SUV, MPV, Crossover etc are just names given to them by the manufacturers to fit them into a category they think will attract the band of people they are aiming them at. if you look at the range available using this description they are often competing in the same or very similar size range.
To me a crossover is something sitting between a standard hatchback or estate and and a full off road capable vehicle such as a Range Rover.
Whether you like them or not is a matter of personal taste as it is with any other type of vehicle.
|
|
The higher seating position is one of the biggest appeals I think. You see a lot of women driving them for the reason that they feel less intimidated by other traffic. And the ease with which you can get into them if you have a bad back is not to be underestimated.
I know that you can get these attributes in an MPV but those are mainly bought to get as many people and stuff in as possible, you can't do that with a small crossover.
|
|
As OP points out and RT said "BUT - the higher CoG and softer suspension makes the dynamics worse"
The point made here of higher center of gravity has worried me for quite a time, since seeing an accident where a MPV finished on it's roof on the hard shoulder of a dual carriageway. It had just happened and I believe there were no other vehicles involved.
Another not uncommon type of accident is where a LGV cuts back into the inside lane say on a roadworks-speed restricted section, and clips a car unseen by the driver already on the inside lane. This typically can push the car around so that it's at 90 degrees on. Then pushes the car sideways until both eventually stop.
The above happened to someone I know in an estate car and survived, shortly after he was allowed by the Police to carefully drive his estate car home (within the hour), keeping speed down as tyres were scrubbed. Then not far ahead he was stuck in traffic caused by the exact/same type of accident but the car was a Landrover Freelander and it had flipped over and it's driver sadly did not survive.
The Freelander has a higher CoG, again the 'safety' angle worries me, and therefore I would choose a vehicle with a lower CoG, i.e. a 'normal' car etc. Just my opinion, but relatively slow speeds (for a motorway or dual carriageway) say 50 mph accidents can be deadly even with all today's air bags and protection.
Edited by nailit on 21/02/2016 at 13:08
|
As OP points out and RT said "BUT - the higher CoG and softer suspension makes the dynamics worse"
The point made here of higher center of gravity has worried me for quite a time, since seeing an accident where a MPV finished on it's roof on the hard shoulder of a dual carriageway. It had just happened and I believe there were no other vehicles involved.
Another not uncommon type of accident is where a LGV cuts back into the inside lane say on a roadworks-speed restricted section, and clips a car unseen by the driver already on the inside lane. This typically can push the car around so that it's at 90 degrees on. Then pushes the car sideways until both eventually stop.
The above happened to someone I know in an estate car and survived, shortly after he was allowed by the Police to carefully drive his estate car home (within the hour), keeping speed down as tyres were scrubbed. Then not far ahead he was stuck in traffic caused by the exact/same type of accident but the car was a Landrover Freelander and it had flipped over and it's driver sadly did not survive.
The Freelander has a higher CoG, again the 'safety' angle worries me, and therefore I would choose a vehicle with a lower CoG, i.e. a 'normal' car etc. Just my opinion, but relatively slow speeds (for a motorway or dual carriageway) say 50 mph accidents can be deadly even with all today's air bags and protection.
Whilst a higher CoG is detrimental to stability, it's not by that much particularly compared to all the other things that can be detrimental to stability. They all have a marginal effect.
|
|
Manufacturers which bring to market cars bearing an irrelevant, whimsical, archaic or downright idiotic model descriptor should, IMVHO be shut down and have their assets seized immediately.
I am thinking especially of liftback, shooting brake, station wagon, estate, sports tourer, sports hatch, sports utility vehicle (SUV), multi purpose vehicle (MPV), caravan and my eternal pet-hate "people carrier" (as opposed to carrying what, exactly - triffids?). It is only eclipsed by Isuzu's particularly evil "Mysterious Utility Wizard".
|
Manufacturers which bring to market cars bearing an irrelevant, whimsical, archaic or downright idiotic model descriptor should, IMVHO be shut down and have their assets seized immediately.
I am thinking especially of liftback, shooting brake, station wagon, estate, sports tourer, sports hatch, sports utility vehicle (SUV), multi purpose vehicle (MPV), caravan and my eternal pet-hate "people carrier" (as opposed to carrying what, exactly - triffids?). It is only eclipsed by Isuzu's particularly evil "Mysterious Utility Wizard".
You'd end up walking if you got your way!
|
|
I prefer the sitting high with plenty of shoulder room and headroom and with decent windows to see out of, let alone the obvious height advantage, plus the useful addition of being a couple of feet higher so getting not quite so many millions of watts of the prisms of modern headlights battering your eyes.
The problem with too many cars now is how ridiculously large they are, even standard cars are stupidly wide, in comparison to something like an Audi A5/6/7 or Mondeo/Insignia my old Landruiser is narrower and shorter and has a better turning circle, plus acres more room inside (the doors are not a foot of wasted fashion width), yes it has a higher centre of gravity as do all the vehicles i drive for work, but i don't drive as if on a track day on the open road so keep within the limits of my vehicles yet hold no one up, as do the vast majority of us so don't quite get the concerns about CoG.
|
|
Do cars undertake the 'elk' test or similar these days or is that just a Scandinavian thing? MB got a roasting with its A class several years ago so I would hope other manufacturers have learnt something.
|
even if the salesman was not entirely truthful about the previous owner. He said "demo" on the invoice, but when I got the v5c for the car it was actually a lease car.
If that happened to me I would be strait back to the dealer demanding a full refund. It missrepresentation and that is breaking the law.
Minimum I would accept would be 3 free services.
If they refused to play ball I would be off the Trading Standards with a view to starting a case.
So get back to the dealer and ask to see a senior manager.
Also inform Kia Customer Services, bet they do not want their cars being miss sold.
|
|
|
|
|
