What car, Discovery 4 or X5?

[jonnynine11]

Had a quick look in an X5 at lunch time and the rear most seats look pretty pathetic,they look like two booster seats in there. I don't think the kids would enjoy being in them. I thought i'd decided on the X5 too, have to think again. The Volvo does'nt do it for me, i thought of the GL Merc but i think thats too large,Q7 is too long so its looking like the D4,may have to try and scrape more money together for the 8 speed though.

[Trommel]

If it's accepted that they never go off-road (because they can't), what is the advantage of an X5 over an F10 Touring?

[anonymous-user]

Zod said:

St John Smythe said:

Zod said:

300bhp/ton said:

Zod said:

I don't have any in-gear figures, but the 0-60 figures tell a tale: the current Discovery manages 0-60 in 9 seconds, vs 7.8 sseconds for the X5 30d, 6.5 seconds for the 40d and 5.5 seconds for the 50d.The Discovery is s l o w .

Yes it is. But it's still quite capable of using the road network without holding things up and I think they feel more pokey than the stats suggest.

It's not the slowest thing around, but if you want to have a bit of real poke, don't buy the Discovery. I find the 40d loaner we currently have to be quick enough, just.

Last thing I'd be worrying about with a 4x4 is the 0-60 time to be honest.

It's jsu tindicative, given I don't have in-gear figures to hand. These are mostly driven as cars. If, as I did the other week, you are doing a lot of driving on Yoirkshire and Lincolnshire B roads and want to make progress, you need an accelerative car.

I can't believe that the current Discovery is too slow to make progress on B roads. But as I haven't driven one I can't really comment on the performance.

[300bhp/ton]

St John Smythe said:

I can't believe that the current Discovery is too slow to make progress on B roads. But as I haven't driven one I can't really comment on the performance.

Yep it's way too slow, in fact just as slow as a 2.0 Mondeo, Focus, Vectra, Astra. So basically it's as slow as most normal larger engined cars you see on the road and faster than most small engined cars you see on the roads. But yeah, it's s l o w

[Zod]

jonnynine11 said:

Had a quick look in an X5 at lunch time and the rear most seats look pretty pathetic,they look like two booster seats in there. I don't think the kids would enjoy being in them. I thought i'd decided on the X5 too, have to think again. The Volvo does'nt do it for me, i thought of the GL Merc but i think thats too large,Q7 is too long so its looking like the D4,may have to try and scrape more money together for the 8 speed though.

They'll take kids up to twelve with no trouble. My six year old and his mates love it back there. It's not a bus.

[Zod]

Trommel said:

If it's accepted that they never go off-road (because they can't), what is the advantage of an X5 over an F10 Touring?

Three rows of seats was the clincher for me.

There are any number of videos on youtube to show it can go off-road. It's nto as competent as a Land Rover product for various reasons, many of which are to do with the compromises required ot make it a better road car, but a driver who actually cares will have done his research. The vast majority of Range Rovers, X5s, Q7s, Gls, MLs, XC90s etc never go off-road.

[Zod]

300bhp/ton said:

St John Smythe said:

I can't believe that the current Discovery is too slow to make progress on B roads. But as I haven't driven one I can't really comment on the performance.

Yep it's way too slow, in fact just as slow as a 2.0 Mondeo, Focus, Vectra, Astra. So basically it's as slow as most normal larger engined cars you see on the road and faster than most small engined cars you see on the roads. But yeah, it's s l o w

Glad you agree.

[anonymous-user]

300bhp/ton said:

St John Smythe said:

I can't believe that the current Discovery is too slow to make progress on B roads. But as I haven't driven one I can't really comment on the performance.

Yep it's way too slow, in fact just as slow as a 2.0 Mondeo, Focus, Vectra, Astra. So basically it's as slow as most normal larger engined cars you see on the road and faster than most small engined cars you see on the roads. But yeah, it's s l o w

That is very slow. In fact, I'm surprised it doesn't have problems getting over speed bumps tbh

[jonnynine11]

Zod said:

They'll take kids up to twelve with no trouble. My six year old and his mates love it back there. It's not a bus.

It just looked like they would be sitting with there knees up, if you know what I mean, the way into them didn't seem that good either

[Zod]

jonnynine11 said:

Zod said:

They'll take kids up to twelve with no trouble. My six year old and his mates love it back there. It's not a bus.

It just looked like they would be sitting with there knees up, if you know what I mean, the way into them didn't seem that good either

Kids have no trouble climbing in. Adults are a different matter.

[whoami]

Zod said:

St John Smythe said:

Zod said:

300bhp/ton said:

Zod said:

I don't have any in-gear figures, but the 0-60 figures tell a tale: the current Discovery manages 0-60 in 9 seconds, vs 7.8 sseconds for the X5 30d, 6.5 seconds for the 40d and 5.5 seconds for the 50d.The Discovery is s l o w .

Yes it is. But it's still quite capable of using the road network without holding things up and I think they feel more pokey than the stats suggest.

It's not the slowest thing around, but if you want to have a bit of real poke, don't buy the Discovery. I find the 40d loaner we currently have to be quick enough, just.

Last thing I'd be worrying about with a 4x4 is the 0-60 time to be honest.

It's jsu tindicative, given I don't have in-gear figures to hand. These are mostly driven as cars. If, as I did the other week, you are doing a lot of driving on Yoirkshire and Lincolnshire B roads and want to make progress, you need an accelerative car.

I live amongst Yorkshire B roads and the D4 was just fine.

I don't think you've driven one Zod?

I'm not really sure who buys this sort of car to transport their family around who really puts 0-60 figures at the top of their list of priorities.

As has been said, it has boat loads of torque and in real life driving (Yorkshire B roads included), it's actually a great drive.

I remember that you used to slag off Aston Martin as their cars were too slow.

And then you actually drove one...

[Zod]

whoami said:

Zod said:

St John Smythe said:

Zod said:

300bhp/ton said:

Zod said:

I don't have any in-gear figures, but the 0-60 figures tell a tale: the current Discovery manages 0-60 in 9 seconds, vs 7.8 sseconds for the X5 30d, 6.5 seconds for the 40d and 5.5 seconds for the 50d.The Discovery is s l o w .

Yes it is. But it's still quite capable of using the road network without holding things up and I think they feel more pokey than the stats suggest.

It's not the slowest thing around, but if you want to have a bit of real poke, don't buy the Discovery. I find the 40d loaner we currently have to be quick enough, just.

Last thing I'd be worrying about with a 4x4 is the 0-60 time to be honest.

It's jsu tindicative, given I don't have in-gear figures to hand. These are mostly driven as cars. If, as I did the other week, you are doing a lot of driving on Yoirkshire and Lincolnshire B roads and want to make progress, you need an accelerative car.

I live amongst Yorkshire B roads and the D4 was just fine.

I don't think you've driven one Zod?

I'm not really sure who buys this sort of car to transport their family around who really puts 0-60 figures at the top of their list of priorities.

As has been said, it has boat loads of torque and in real life driving (Yorkshire B roads included), it's actually a great drive.

I remember that you used to slag off Aston Martin as their cars were too slow.

And then you actually drove one...

No, I haven't driven one, but look at the figures. The guy in the office next door has one and given we have an any driver policy for partners, I could try it, I suppose. I've been using hyperbole in this thread, but 9 seconds for 0-60 is really not that quick (thinking about the 30-60 part of that). I just happen to like cars that accelerate hard, whcih is why I bought a silly X5 that drank petrol.

My problem with Astons used to be that the V8 was too slow (the 4.3 was) and there was no manual DB9 at launch. Both of those problems were resolved. There was also the fact that, once I finally drove an Aston, the aura of the car had me smitten. That's not going to happen with a Discovery.

[Trommel]

There's an appealing honesty to a Discovery which the awful D4 facelift hasn't removed. Very useful things.

[whoami]

Trommel said:

There's an appealing honesty to a Discovery which the awful D4 facelift hasn't removed. Very useful things.

Agreed.

Having just traded mine, I miss it.

Strangely enough, I miss the D3 more (now that was slow).

[Trommel]

whoami said:

Strangely enough, I miss the D3 more (now that was slow).

Yes, they are pretty slow. Great design in its original form though.

[onesickpuppy]

Zod said:

jonnynine11 said:

Had a quick look in an X5 at lunch time and the rear most seats look pretty pathetic,they look like two booster seats in there. I don't think the kids would enjoy being in them. I thought i'd decided on the X5 too, have to think again. The Volvo does'nt do it for me, i thought of the GL Merc but i think thats too large,Q7 is too long so its looking like the D4,may have to try and scrape more money together for the 8 speed though.

They'll take kids up to twelve with no trouble. My six year old and his mates love it back there. It's not a bus.

Yup, my kids fight over who gets to sit in the boot!

[onesickpuppy]

jonnynine11 said:

Zod said:

They'll take kids up to twelve with no trouble. My six year old and his mates love it back there. It's not a bus.

It just looked like they would be sitting with there knees up, if you know what I mean, the way into them didn't seem that good either

Did you tilt the 2nd row forward?

[300bhp/ton]

Trommel said:

whoami said:

Strangely enough, I miss the D3 more (now that was slow).

Yes, they are pretty slow. Great design in its original form though.

The 4.4 V8 went quite we though. And while we don't get them the D4 can still be had with a proper motor.

[OscarIndia]

Zod said:

No, I haven't driven one, but look at the figures. The guy in the office next door has one and given we have an any driver policy for partners, I could try it, I suppose. I've been using hyperbole in this thread, but 9 seconds for 0-60 is really not that quick (thinking about the 30-60 part of that). I just happen to like cars that accelerate hard, whcih is why I bought a silly X5 that drank petrol.

My problem with Astons used to be that the V8 was too slow (the 4.3 was) and there was no manual DB9 at launch. Both of those problems were resolved. There was also the fact that, once I finally drove an Aston, the aura of the car had me smitten. That's not going to happen with a Discovery.

Drive one then come back. Even the X5 launched from 0 is slow. well compared to my E55k....
It is not about 0-60, in gear acceleation is very good, I drive B roads in Northumberland as my daily commute, overtaking is never an issue.
The other option is to skim read autocar and spout irrelevant figures!

[longblackcoat]

Zod said:

I don't have any in-gear figures, but the 0-60 figures tell a tale: the current Discovery manages 0-60 in 9 seconds, vs 7.8 sseconds for the X5 30d, 6.5 seconds for the 40d and 5.5 seconds for the 50d.The Discovery is s l o w .

And the 0-60 has relevance how often?

Mid-range, there's not a lot in it (though I admit the 50d will be well ahead). That said, my D3 has been mildly fettled and is a lot quicker than the standard for a very small outlay. The speed's irrelevant - the real limiting factor is the sheer weight of the thing. Not that the X5's a lot better in this regard.

Edited by longblackcoat on Thursday 27th September 17:06