Discussion
Chap on the A8parts forum has one of each and reckons the 4.2 is far superior, but being heavier it gets through consumables like tyres and brakes at an even more alarming rate than the 3.0. They tend to feature the larger option wheels as well which makes tyre changes more frequent too.
Garage I use reckons an annual service on a Q7 will pretty consistently involve brakes and/or tyres at one end of the car. He could reel off the likely requirements on mileage grounds based on the ones he's seen.
The new Q7 is going to be noticably lighter than the old one, so I'd expect values of the old model to take a fairly sharp dive once the new one appears
Garage I use reckons an annual service on a Q7 will pretty consistently involve brakes and/or tyres at one end of the car. He could reel off the likely requirements on mileage grounds based on the ones he's seen.
The new Q7 is going to be noticably lighter than the old one, so I'd expect values of the old model to take a fairly sharp dive once the new one appears
Adrian E said:
Chap on the A8parts forum has one of each and reckons the 4.2 is far superior, but being heavier it gets through consumables like tyres and brakes at an even more alarming rate than the 3.0. They tend to feature the larger option wheels as well which makes tyre changes more frequent too.
Garage I use reckons an annual service on a Q7 will pretty consistently involve brakes and/or tyres at one end of the car. He could reel off the likely requirements on mileage grounds based on the ones he's seen.
The new Q7 is going to be noticably lighter than the old one, so I'd expect values of the old model to take a fairly sharp dive once the new one appears
I've had a 4.2 for over 6 years, and we settled on it after testing a whole load of 3.0s and found that it didn't have quite enough urge to get the old beast moving. My wife felt the same way - that the 4.2 just felt a better "fit" for the car.Garage I use reckons an annual service on a Q7 will pretty consistently involve brakes and/or tyres at one end of the car. He could reel off the likely requirements on mileage grounds based on the ones he's seen.
The new Q7 is going to be noticably lighter than the old one, so I'd expect values of the old model to take a fairly sharp dive once the new one appears
We've got 20 inch rims (smallest size for the 4.2 I think) because the thicker tyre sidewalls give a noticeably better ride. We got through the first set after about 12,000 miles (usual: worn on the outer edges) but since then by keeping an eye on the tracking & pressures we get easily 20,000 out of a set of OEM fit Continentals. I will replace the current set when we change over to the winters, but it's been at least a couple of years since we changed them and we do 18,000 miles a year in this car (though we do run on winters for ~4 months of the year).
Similarly, I'm sure we've changed the discs & pads in our ownership but it's been quite a few years and definitely NOT done every service. Having said that, we do quite a lot of long motorway journeys in this car (i.e. light on brakes) and it gets serviced at a trusty independent specialist rather than a main dealer who might recommend changing things before they really need it...
Overall I think the Q7 can have very high running costs, it depends how it is used and to a degree how it is looked after (see tracking & pressures comment above), but in my experience they're pretty reasonable for the mass of the vehicle, and how we use it. I would recommend the 4.2 over the 3.0, if the price differential between them is reasonable. When I bought mine, in 2008, there was a £10,000 list price difference between the 2 engines (with no extra equipment either) but because of the recession and fuel prices at the time we got a simply amazing deal on a dealer demonstrator 4.2.
Just hope your driver's wing mirror doesn't get smashed!
slippery said:
Yes and responds well to being remapped too.
Whose map do you have experience of, and can you give us details of the gains? I've been toying with getting mine done now that the warranty is long gone, but I've been hesitating because I hear that the Q7 has 2 ECUs to flash which can confuse some mapping outfits, and that the 4.2 doesn't feel particularly inadequate in OEM form. A first hand experience might tip me over the edge...PhilboSE said:
slippery said:
Yes and responds well to being remapped too.
Whose map do you have experience of, and can you give us details of the gains? I've been toying with getting mine done now that the warranty is long gone, but I've been hesitating because I hear that the Q7 has 2 ECUs to flash which can confuse some mapping outfits, and that the 4.2 doesn't feel particularly inadequate in OEM form. A first hand experience might tip me over the edge...PhilboSE said:
We've got 20 inch rims (smallest size for the 4.2 I think) because the thicker tyre sidewalls give a noticeably better ride. We got through the first set after about 12,000 miles (usual: worn on the outer edges) but since then by keeping an eye on the tracking & pressures we get easily 20,000 out of a set of OEM fit Continentals. I will replace the current set when we change over to the winters, but it's been at least a couple of years since we changed them and we do 18,000 miles a year in this car (though we do run on winters for ~4 months of the year).
Similarly, I'm sure we've changed the discs & pads in our ownership but it's been quite a few years and definitely NOT done every service. Having said that, we do quite a lot of long motorway journeys in this car (i.e. light on brakes) and it gets serviced at a trusty independent specialist rather than a main dealer who might recommend changing things before they really need it...
Overall I think the Q7 can have very high running costs, it depends how it is used and to a degree how it is looked after (see tracking & pressures comment above), but in my experience they're pretty reasonable for the mass of the vehicle, and how we use it. I would recommend the 4.2 over the 3.0, if the price differential between them is reasonable. When I bought mine, in 2008, there was a £10,000 list price difference between the 2 engines (with no extra equipment either) but because of the recession and fuel prices at the time we got a simply amazing deal on a dealer demonstrator 4.2.
The chap I was speaking to about them is an indy specialist - I lot of the 4.2s have the 21" wheels and most of the cars they see are basically used as people movers around town with relatively low annual mileage. They might see the cars every 18 months for a service and in that kind of usage his view was you could 'pretty much' assume what was going to be needed given what had been done at the previous couple, in terms of tyres and brakes.Similarly, I'm sure we've changed the discs & pads in our ownership but it's been quite a few years and definitely NOT done every service. Having said that, we do quite a lot of long motorway journeys in this car (i.e. light on brakes) and it gets serviced at a trusty independent specialist rather than a main dealer who might recommend changing things before they really need it...
Overall I think the Q7 can have very high running costs, it depends how it is used and to a degree how it is looked after (see tracking & pressures comment above), but in my experience they're pretty reasonable for the mass of the vehicle, and how we use it. I would recommend the 4.2 over the 3.0, if the price differential between them is reasonable. When I bought mine, in 2008, there was a £10,000 list price difference between the 2 engines (with no extra equipment either) but because of the recession and fuel prices at the time we got a simply amazing deal on a dealer demonstrator 4.2.
A lot depends on what tyres and brakes you run, of course. And how quickly the school run needs to be completed, with the number of roundabouts and dual carriageways probably having an undue influence!
At 33k miles and 4 years old ours is still on the first set of pads and discs all-round - they have a pad warning indicator so no need to change at service time. Only on the second set of tyres as well, current set still have a fair few miles in them.
Depends what age you are buying on the 3.0d - the face-lifted ones came with the ZF 8 speed box and it made a huge difference. When we bought ours I was similarly looking at the 4.2 but the difference to the 3.0d wasn't that great. The extra fuel economy, reduced road tax and big discount / finance contribution from Audi outweighed the 1.4 seconds 0-60 difference.
Depends what age you are buying on the 3.0d - the face-lifted ones came with the ZF 8 speed box and it made a huge difference. When we bought ours I was similarly looking at the 4.2 but the difference to the 3.0d wasn't that great. The extra fuel economy, reduced road tax and big discount / finance contribution from Audi outweighed the 1.4 seconds 0-60 difference.
Many thanks All for some very useful feedback. This car is going to be my wife's but will also be our main car when we go anywhere, (she refuses to get in my Subaru now.. 
). She was originally just looking at the 3.0 but I now feel somewhat vindicated in having badgered her towards the 4.2, (I failed to convince her that a Nissan GT-R would be a good family wagon).
). She was originally just looking at the 3.0 but I now feel somewhat vindicated in having badgered her towards the 4.2, (I failed to convince her that a Nissan GT-R would be a good family wagon). yellowstreak said:
Many thanks All for some very useful feedback. This car is going to be my wife's but will also be our main car when we go anywhere, (she refuses to get in my Subaru now.. ). She was originally just looking at the 3.0 but I now feel somewhat vindicated in having badgered her towards the 4.2, (I failed to convince her that a Nissan GT-R would be a good family wagon).
I think that it comes down to the price differential between a 3.0 and a 4.2 that meets your other specifications/requirements. If the gap is small, go for the 4.2 every time would be my advice. It's not about the 1.5s 0-60, it's about the midrange. Even a standard unchipped 4.2 has real urge when accelerating at motorway speeds. I haven't driven a 3.0 enough to get consumption, but the official figures have the 3.0 only marginally more frugal. I'd guess this is because the 3.0 has to work harder to get the mass moving. We get about 22mpg average out of the 4.2 and sometimes 30mpg on a fully loaded motorway run (and we're not talking slipstreaming a lorry here...) ). She was originally just looking at the 3.0 but I now feel somewhat vindicated in having badgered her towards the 4.2, (I failed to convince her that a Nissan GT-R would be a good family wagon). I don't think the difference between them is worth the current £10k list price gap, but if you can get that down it brings the 4.2 into the equation. Second hand prices of 4.2s can sometimes be pretty close to the 3.0 because 9 out of 10 people "want" the 3.0. For a couple of grand on (say) a £30k second hander, I'd go for the 4.2 every time.
PhilboSE said:
I think that it comes down to the price differential between a 3.0 and a 4.2 that meets your other specifications/requirements. If the gap is small, go for the 4.2 every time would be my advice. It's not about the 1.5s 0-60, it's about the midrange. Even a standard unchipped 4.2 has real urge when accelerating at motorway speeds. I haven't driven a 3.0 enough to get consumption, but the official figures have the 3.0 only marginally more frugal. I'd guess this is because the 3.0 has to work harder to get the mass moving. We get about 22mpg average out of the 4.2 and sometimes 30mpg on a fully loaded motorway run (and we're not talking slipstreaming a lorry here...)
I don't think the difference between them is worth the current £10k list price gap, but if you can get that down it brings the 4.2 into the equation. Second hand prices of 4.2s can sometimes be pretty close to the 3.0 because 9 out of 10 people "want" the 3.0. For a couple of grand on (say) a £30k second hander, I'd go for the 4.2 every time.
Thanks. She's looking at a used 2014 with 1-2k miles on. There are a few about and they are not an awful lot more than the 3.0. Are there any options that you would recommend? I think a reversing camera would be a good idea, its a big truck! I don't think the difference between them is worth the current £10k list price gap, but if you can get that down it brings the 4.2 into the equation. Second hand prices of 4.2s can sometimes be pretty close to the 3.0 because 9 out of 10 people "want" the 3.0. For a couple of grand on (say) a £30k second hander, I'd go for the 4.2 every time.
yellowstreak said:
Thanks. She's looking at a used 2014 with 1-2k miles on. There are a few about and they are not an awful lot more than the 3.0. Are there any options that you would recommend? I think a reversing camera would be a good idea, its a big truck!
Well, I'm a bit envious as a 2014 model will have lots of nice new things like xenons and the 8 speed box. Mine isn't specced to the hilt but if you can get a HD or touchscreen based satnav then they will be nicer to use than the DVD one. We don't have a reversing camera, haven't missed it, wife hasn't hit anything either. The wing mirrors are huge and give a good view. I think you get used to the size, it's not an issue in our experience. I can't think of any must-have options; folding mirrors maybe (are they standard? not sure) and personally I like auto dimming mirrors. The rest is just personal taste and whether you feel the cost of a Bose or MMI or auto tyre pressures are worth the £££.yellowstreak said:
PhilboSE said:
I think that it comes down to the price differential between a 3.0 and a 4.2 that meets your other specifications/requirements. If the gap is small, go for the 4.2 every time would be my advice. It's not about the 1.5s 0-60, it's about the midrange. Even a standard unchipped 4.2 has real urge when accelerating at motorway speeds. I haven't driven a 3.0 enough to get consumption, but the official figures have the 3.0 only marginally more frugal. I'd guess this is because the 3.0 has to work harder to get the mass moving. We get about 22mpg average out of the 4.2 and sometimes 30mpg on a fully loaded motorway run (and we're not talking slipstreaming a lorry here...)
I don't think the difference between them is worth the current £10k list price gap, but if you can get that down it brings the 4.2 into the equation. Second hand prices of 4.2s can sometimes be pretty close to the 3.0 because 9 out of 10 people "want" the 3.0. For a couple of grand on (say) a £30k second hander, I'd go for the 4.2 every time.
Thanks. She's looking at a used 2014 with 1-2k miles on. There are a few about and they are not an awful lot more than the 3.0. Are there any options that you would recommend? I think a reversing camera would be a good idea, its a big truck! I don't think the difference between them is worth the current £10k list price gap, but if you can get that down it brings the 4.2 into the equation. Second hand prices of 4.2s can sometimes be pretty close to the 3.0 because 9 out of 10 people "want" the 3.0. For a couple of grand on (say) a £30k second hander, I'd go for the 4.2 every time.
Some of the significant options I have are: -
- Reversing Camera
- Bose
- AMI
- DAB
- Bluetooth
- Panoramic Roof
- Headed front and rear seats (a must if you have kids!)
- 4 zone climate control
- Powerfold mirrors
- Xenon headlights
Edited by bridgland on Wednesday 10th December 06:10
OR buy an Allroad - drives like a car, rides like a car, has adjustable dampers & ride height (option on the Q7) if you need/like that type of thing - 3.0 is ample in Allroad & can be tuned, fastre than Q7 gives 30 MPG & doesn't offend the green brigade as much, and arguably looks much nicer with correct options choice.
Unless you like green laning which is unlikley i fail to see the point?
Unless you like green laning which is unlikley i fail to see the point?
PhilboSE said:
slippery said:
Yes and responds well to being remapped too.
Whose map do you have experience of, and can you give us details of the gains? I've been toying with getting mine done now that the warranty is long gone, but I've been hesitating because I hear that the Q7 has 2 ECUs to flash which can confuse some mapping outfits, and that the 4.2 doesn't feel particularly inadequate in OEM form. A first hand experience might tip me over the edge...Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff