|
|
VS |
|
This is the latest Audi Q5 vs The latest Q5 has been around for a few years about 2008 and due for replacement hence reservations at reviewing one. As luck would have it we sourced a ride in one and can now tell you what its like versus the perceived competition. The SUV we picked to compare is the Range Rover Evoque due to the similar price tag. Unfortunately both require addition equipment packs to be anything their brand promotes them to be however inspire of their expensive RRP they are quite basic in terms of standard equipment expected for the price.
Audi Q5 vs Range Rover Evoque exterior: The Audi looks sad and grumpy from behind and the front looks a little retro but does not flow or translate well with the rest of the Q5. For example where as the BMW despite all it weird angles looks coherent design front to rear the Audi tries too hard to be different. The Q5 is not a good looking car or even an expensive one at that. The Evoque does look regardless of viewing angle but the 4 door version looks like an afterthought but shows you don’t need to try uglify a car to stand out. Sure the base Evoque really needs the optional packs to look good but at least the basis already works. Just don’t go overboard with the options because some really don’t work.
Audi Q5 vs Range Rover Evoque interior: Note that we are ignoring the size difference for this comparison. The Audi has very nice interior when released but it’s not longer a front runner for the price. The no-ergonomic button placement shows it that modern tech was not part of the original design plans and there is too much VW (prior generation) in Audi’s Dashboard and trim to truly differentiate it’s self from much cheaper models. You can easily tell it’s not a new model Audi which is annoying for the price. The Evoque has a nice base interior that is simply better than the Q5.
Audi Q5 vs Range Rover Evoque engine and technology: The major problem with Audi is the huge variation in engine specification. Essentially the same engine used in all the groups cars from ‘lowly’ Skoda and Volkswagen to Audi. Each engine now has it’s turbo tuned for more or less power and a gearbox which is changed and updated frequently. As a result you are being ripped off in terms of pricing – if badge shopping there are plenty of equipment options to choose from, which most find unreasonable unless you have stacks of cash.
Audi Q5 vs Range Rover Evoque : The Evoque drives well as per our prior drive review but it’s not exciting but a little noisy for our expectations. Our drive in the Audi was nice but nowhere as nice a the old 120 series yet alone a 150 series Prado which does set the benchmark for everyday ride quality in SUVs. In terms of handling – seems Ok due to the drive conditions. It does have an engine and gearbox that is ‘troublesome’ in traffic but it is perfect for press on driving. Which is probably the reason why so many Audi drivers need to go fast…
The conclusion is the Audi Q5 is pretty good SUV for the price but only in a competition field by its self ie. in isolation. The Audi badge is not a premium or prestige for this model by any stretch of the imagination except for those who think price is the only consideration. The Range Rover Evoque in base trim look and feels like a better thought out, it feels European. As cars and SUVs both are very good but not asking price compared to their cheaper rivals from other manufacturers and brands. Brand is the key word with perception, marketing and brand history are the only truly important thing at the price range. Range Rover does ‘feel’ better than the Audi Q5 any day regardless of trim level. Audi needs to move away from looking and literally feeling like a VW aka Camry to impress. We’d have the Evoque in the driveway – easily.
| Audi Q5 | Range Rover Evoque |
 |
 |
| Engines | |
| V6 Cylinder Petrol CTV 3 Litre (2995) 95 Octane Supercharged DI DOHC EFI Claimed 200Kw @ 4780 RPM Claimed 400Nm @ 2500 RPM |
IL4 Cylinder (224DT) DOHC EFI Direct Injection Turbo Desel 2.2 Litre (2179cc) Claimed 140Kw @ 3500RPM Claimed 420Nm @ 1750RPM |
| 4 Cylinder Petrol CNC 2.0 Litre (1984) 95 Octane Turbo DI DOHC EFI Claimed 165Kw @ 4500 RPM Claimed 350Nm @ 1500 RPM |
IL4 Petrol DOHC VVT EFI Intercooled Turbo 2.0 Litre (1999cc) Claimed 177Kw @ 3500RPM Claimed 340Nm @ 1750RPM |
| 4 Cylinder Diesel CGL 2.0 Litre (1968cc) DI Turbo diesel Claimed 130Kw @ 4200RPM Claimed 380Nm @ 1750RPM |
|
| V6 Cylinder Diesel CCW 3.0 Litre (2967cc) DI Turbo diesel Claimed 180Kw @ 4000RPM Claimed 580Nm @ 1500RPM |
|
| Weight | |
| Kerb weight FROM 1895 Kg Towing capacity up to 2000kg |
From 1745Kg Towing capacity up to 1800kg |
| Fuel capacity & consumption | |
| Up to 75 litres (95 Octane) IL4 2.0 litre Petrol 6.1 litres per 100km IL4 2.0 litre Diesel 6.1 litres per 100km V6 3.0 litre Petrol 8.5 litres per 100km V6 3.0 litre Diesel 6.4 litres per 100km |
Up to 70 litres (95 Octane) IL4 Diesel 6.5Lts per 100km AVG IL4 Petrol 8.7Lts per 100km AVG |
| Other specifications | |
| 7 or 8 speed Auto Overall height/width 1653/1880 Overall length/wheelbase 4629/2807 4WD system: None ANCAP Safety: 5/5 Tyre size: 235-60-18 (base) |
9 speed Auto Overall height/width 1635/1965 Overall length/Wheelbase 4365/2660 4WD system: AWD or 2WD ANCAP Safety: 5/5 Tyre size: |
| Capability | |
| Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) xxmm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Min ground clearance xxx mm Water Fording depth xxx mm |
| Performance | |
| Pricing | |
| 2015 FROM $62,600 – 76,100 AUD + any additional equipment packages *Always check with the dealer for up to date pricing, specifications, on-road costs, accessories and specials etc.. everything as usual is subject to change! |
2014 FROM $49,990 – 81.490 AUD + any additional equipment packages |