RE: Audi SQ5 Plus: Review

[E65Ross]

big_rob_sydney said:

Phil,
Again, you're attacking the messenger, and ignoring the message.

The laws of physics means precisely what I think it means. A heavier car has more momentum. The SQ5 is a heavy car. Add a potent engine to accelerate the mass, and you have vectors and moments at play significantly above that of the most popular vehicle on the road. Just doing a google search, it says the most popular vehicle is the Fiesta. The Fiesta's mass is listed here:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/fiesta/2016/features-s...

2578 pounds.

Sorry to say, but if someone was in a Fiesta, and had a head on with this barge, it wouldnt be pretty.

But thats ok. Phil can stun us all with his twisted physics. He can argue away the fact that the SQ5 will obliterate the oncoming family. Fingers crossed for you that none of your own family ever find themselves in this situation. I would hate to think of you trying to positively spin a eulogy under the circumstances that had a selfish prick take a family member from you.

His point is about you being incredibly hypocritical. You drive an extremely heavy car. What would be different between having a crash against this vs against your Lexus? Or are you a selfish prick for driving a big heavy car?

[Nors]

big_rob_sydney said:

PhilboSE said:

"The laws of physics". You keep using that phrase. It does not mean what you think it means.

Any attributes you apply to the SQ5 on grounds of weight apply equally to any car of a similar weight. Those are the laws of physics. No-one is attacking your choice of car, but you're too dim to recognise that. If it's OK for you to drive a "fat bd" of a car, why is not for anybody else?

Face facts, you're prejudiced against SUVs for whatever reason, but you rationalise your prejudice with stupid arguments about SUVs being "too long" or "too heavy" without being able to recognise that these characteristics apply to any car with similar attributes, not just SUVs. And then the kicker is that you choose to drive a car which is just as long and heavy - the specific attributes which YOU choose to define something as a "selfish behemoth". Which makes you either a hypocrite, or stupid. Or both.

Edited by PhilboSE on Wednesday 15th June 13:44

Phil,
Again, you're attacking the messenger, and ignoring the message.

The laws of physics means precisely what I think it means. A heavier car has more momentum. The SQ5 is a heavy car. Add a potent engine to accelerate the mass, and you have vectors and moments at play significantly above that of the most popular vehicle on the road. Just doing a google search, it says the most popular vehicle is the Fiesta. The Fiesta's mass is listed here:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/fiesta/2016/features-s...

2578 pounds.

Sorry to say, but if someone was in a Fiesta, and had a head on with this barge, it wouldnt be pretty.

But thats ok. Phil can stun us all with his twisted physics. He can argue away the fact that the SQ5 will obliterate the oncoming family. Fingers crossed for you that none of your own family ever find themselves in this situation. I would hate to think of you trying to positively spin a eulogy under the circumstances that had a selfish prick take a family member from you.

If you do indeed drive a car of similar length and weight, then why does it not apply to your car then, is I think the 'message' being asked of you?

You seem to be picking on this particular car for these attributes when there are hundreds more types of vehicle that have the same or worse stats. The SQ5 is not unique in any department you are going on about and I don't get why this car should be more likely to take one of your family out more than any other similarly sized/powered car/SUV or whatever.

You are avoiding answering that!!

[big_rob_sydney]

Ross and Nors, 2 points:

1. My car weighs 1705kg. The SQ5 weighs over 2 tonnes. It is also quite a bit more powerful to boot, meaning all that mass can be accelerated to a bigger speed, faster. Do you need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what will happen in a collision? Or have you buried your head so far in the sand that you refuse to accept basic physics?

2. This article is about the SQ5.

[PhilboSE]

big_rob_sydney said:

Phil,
Again, you're attacking the messenger, and ignoring the message.

The laws of physics means precisely what I think it means. A heavier car has more momentum. The SQ5 is a heavy car. Add a potent engine to accelerate the mass, and you have vectors and moments at play significantly above that of the most popular vehicle on the road. Just doing a google search, it says the most popular vehicle is the Fiesta. The Fiesta's mass is listed here:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/fiesta/2016/features-s...

2578 pounds.

Sorry to say, but if someone was in a Fiesta, and had a head on with this barge, it wouldnt be pretty.

But thats ok. Phil can stun us all with his twisted physics. He can argue away the fact that the SQ5 will obliterate the oncoming family. Fingers crossed for you that none of your own family ever find themselves in this situation. I would hate to think of you trying to positively spin a eulogy under the circumstances that had a selfish prick take a family member from you.

I can't work out if you're being deliberately obtuse, or just trolling. I'm not attacking the messenger, I've deconstructed your comments and shown them to base on prejudice.

I'll try and make this easy for you.

You dislike SUVs. We get it. Your argument is that they are too heavy, and you keep on going on about the laws of physics and how a 2000kg SQ5 would wipe out a Fiesta. I'd actually agree with your last point; a SQ5/Fiesta interface wouldn't be pretty.

But you completely fail to understand that the outcome would be the same for any 2000kg mass. The laws of physics don't just apply to SUVs, they apply to all cars. Your Lexus would cause exactly the same damage to the Fiesta and the occupants. But you seem to attribute the downsides of car mass uniquely to SUVs. If a 2000kg SUV is bad, why is a 2000kg saloon not equally bad?

Which weighs more, a ton of lead or a ton of feathers?

[PhilboSE]

big_rob_sydney said:

Ross and Nors, 2 points:

1. My car weighs 1705kg. The SQ5 weighs over 2 tonnes. It is also quite a bit more powerful to boot, meaning all that mass can be accelerated to a bigger speed, faster. Do you need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what will happen in a collision? Or have you buried your head so far in the sand that you refuse to accept basic physics?

2. This article is about the SQ5.

SQ5: 2000kg
Lexus LS: 1965kg (source: Wikipedia)

So now you're introducing a speed differential into the equation to make the SQ5 look worse. Your car is capable of over 140mph, imagine the carnage when you mount the kerb down the high street doing that sort of speed!

[E65Ross]

big_rob_sydney said:

Ross and Nors, 2 points:

1. My car weighs 1705kg. The SQ5 weighs over 2 tonnes. It is also quite a bit more powerful to boot, meaning all that mass can be accelerated to a bigger speed, faster. Do you need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what will happen in a collision? Or have you buried your head so far in the sand that you refuse to accept basic physics?

2. This article is about the SQ5.

Which LS is that? Must be an old 400? If so, why did you choose the big heavy model, and not a lighter car? Should we all drive about in original minis or smart cars?

I bet the SQ5 has much better brakes too.

We know the article is about the SQ5, but you're being a bit hypocritical by driving the biggest and heaviest model in the Lexus range at the time of its manufacture.

[big_rob_sydney]

PhilboSE said:

I can't work out if you're being deliberately obtuse, or just trolling. I'm not attacking the messenger, I've deconstructed your comments and shown them to base on prejudice.

I'll try and make this easy for you.

You dislike SUVs. We get it. Your argument is that they are too heavy, and you keep on going on about the laws of physics and how a 2000kg SQ5 would wipe out a Fiesta. I'd actually agree with your last point; a SQ5/Fiesta interface wouldn't be pretty.

But you completely fail to understand that the outcome would be the same for any 2000kg mass. The laws of physics don't just apply to SUVs, they apply to all cars. Your Lexus would cause exactly the same damage to the Fiesta and the occupants. But you seem to attribute the downsides of car mass uniquely to SUVs. If a 2000kg SUV is bad, why is a 2000kg saloon not equally bad?

Which weighs more, a ton of lead or a ton of feathers?

Phil,
My comments aren't based on prejudice. They are based on science.

As an aside, I have previously agreed my own car is a heavy piece of crap as well. This is on record. Show me where I have said my car is light? Show me where I have said a NON-SUV that weighs 2 tonnes is ok.

In a nutshell, there is no prejudice, because I think heavy cars are heavy, full stop. I'm not happy about the weight of my own car, which is why my daily driver is a 200kg motorcycle, and I try to use the car sparingly, although that is no excuse.

None of what I've said here though, in any way, shape, or form, changes the weight of the SQ5. So, if people can move past the messenger and what the messenger drives, and look at this car, what we are left with is a 2+ tonne car, with 340bhp, accelerating to 60ish in 5.1 seconds. That is quite rapid for a very heavy vehicle.

And for those that yet again seem to want to twist the argument ("oh its ok because other vehicles are 2 tonnes, they are / are not the same because they are / are not SUVs..."), bullst. Its not. Those other vehicles are just as bad.

Thank you for your agreement on the "interface" between the Fiesta and SQ5. All I was wanting to point out was that these cars will crush smaller cars, of which that includes pretty much everything else. In return for wanting to make the point, I've seen people make all manner of observations to try to steer around that one very nasty, and yet very obvious point.

I cant help but wonder why people would do that.

[mrnoisy78]

cheddar said:

J4CKO said:

Sort of like it, but seems like a hell of a lot of money

£50k for 340bhp/516 torques and 4 wheel drive plus nappa leather premium badge and other goodies seems ok value, I'd love one

I'd rather have a BMW 535d estate or an A4 or A6 Avant TDI
More power, more torque, better handling, better looking.
Very few people can recognise a real need for an "SUV" IMHO.
Most that I see are driven badly by school Mums who can't park for toffee or are used to frighten other people on the road though intimidation by driving too close or at them. I completely recognise the other comments from people here about massive cars like the big VW's etc. They're commonly seen tailgating way too fast and driven badly - in a sense they've become the new "M3 driver"
Awaits flaming...

Edited by mrnoisy78 on Thursday 16th June 21:09

[PhilboSE]

big_rob_sydney said:

Phil,
My comments aren't based on prejudice. They are based on science.

As an aside, I have previously agreed my own car is a heavy piece of crap as well. This is on record. Show me where I have said my car is light? Show me where I have said a NON-SUV that weighs 2 tonnes is ok.

In a nutshell, there is no prejudice, because I think heavy cars are heavy, full stop. I'm not happy about the weight of my own car, which is why my daily driver is a 200kg motorcycle, and I try to use the car sparingly, although that is no excuse.

None of what I've said here though, in any way, shape, or form, changes the weight of the SQ5. So, if people can move past the messenger and what the messenger drives, and look at this car, what we are left with is a 2+ tonne car, with 340bhp, accelerating to 60ish in 5.1 seconds. That is quite rapid for a very heavy vehicle.

And for those that yet again seem to want to twist the argument ("oh its ok because other vehicles are 2 tonnes, they are / are not the same because they are / are not SUVs..."), bullst. Its not. Those other vehicles are just as bad.

Thank you for your agreement on the "interface" between the Fiesta and SQ5. All I was wanting to point out was that these cars will crush smaller cars, of which that includes pretty much everything else. In return for wanting to make the point, I've seen people make all manner of observations to try to steer around that one very nasty, and yet very obvious point.

I cant help but wonder why people would do that.

No-one has denied the negative aspects of greater mass of vehicles. Let's take this statement above at face value and accept that you have a problem with any "heavy" car (and you've defined 2000kg as heavy/overweight/behemoth).

Where should the line be drawn? If 2000kg is too heavy, is 1900kg OK? 1800kg? 1700kg?

Cars are getting heavier all the time, across the board. If you do indeed have a 1700kg LS then it could be 20 years old - and was quite the behemoth in its day - the latest model of the LS is 1965kg. Within a whisker of your definition of overly heavy. The outcome of you hitting a Fiesta in that would be pretty much the same as hitting it with a Q5.

You may be surprised to learn that your victim car of choice, the Fiesta, actually weighs nearly 1600kg. If you think about it, the fact that an SQ5 has a much larger engine, 4WD drivetrain, greater bodysize, better quality interior etc all for just 25% extra mass is actually pretty impressive. The original Mini weighed 587kg, but if vehicular safety is your concern then I'm sure you wouldn't want to be in one of those on today's roads. And not just because of what would happen if the original Mini interfaced with ANY modern car, in any accident situation it's bad news for anyone inside.

Pretty much the only car segment where weight is coming down in a significant way is in the SUV sector. The latest Q7 is over 350kg lighter than the previous model.

Overall, what has confused most people is your insistence on 2000kg being selfish/overweight, and yet you have decided that 1700kg is perfectly acceptable. It's a very fine line you've drawn there, and it looks like it's for your own convenience.

[E65Ross]

Plus, despite 1700kgs for his car being lighter, I bet the SQ5 will stop better, handle better, and have much better safety features for those involved in or out of the car in the event of an accident.

I suspect a new Fiesta crashing with the SQ5 would result in less injury than a new Fiesta and his lighter LS, because of the age of the car and the safety features not being the same.

[cheddar]

mrnoisy78 said:

cheddar said:

£50k for 340bhp/516 torques and 4 wheel drive plus nappa leather premium badge and other goodies seems ok value, I'd love one

I'd rather have a BMW 535d estate or an A4 or A6 Avant TDI

More power, more torque, better handling, better looking.

Awaits flaming...

Edited by mrnoisy78 on Thursday 16th June 21:09

They both have less power and less torque

[mrnoisy78]

cheddar said:

They both have less power and less torque

Haha but when you add a simple map then 340-350 bhp and 680-700nm is easily achievable no?
Why spend more money on an ugly car that serves no real purpose other than to intimidate other road users when you can have a nicer looking car that's just as practical if not more so and will drive and handle much better?

[big_rob_sydney]

PhilboSE said:

No-one has denied the negative aspects of greater mass of vehicles. Let's take this statement above at face value and accept that you have a problem with any "heavy" car (and you've defined 2000kg as heavy/overweight/behemoth).

Where should the line be drawn? If 2000kg is too heavy, is 1900kg OK? 1800kg? 1700kg?

Cars are getting heavier all the time, across the board. If you do indeed have a 1700kg LS then it could be 20 years old - and was quite the behemoth in its day - the latest model of the LS is 1965kg. Within a whisker of your definition of overly heavy. The outcome of you hitting a Fiesta in that would be pretty much the same as hitting it with a Q5.

You may be surprised to learn that your victim car of choice, the Fiesta, actually weighs nearly 1600kg. If you think about it, the fact that an SQ5 has a much larger engine, 4WD drivetrain, greater bodysize, better quality interior etc all for just 25% extra mass is actually pretty impressive. The original Mini weighed 587kg, but if vehicular safety is your concern then I'm sure you wouldn't want to be in one of those on today's roads. And not just because of what would happen if the original Mini interfaced with ANY modern car, in any accident situation it's bad news for anyone inside.

Pretty much the only car segment where weight is coming down in a significant way is in the SUV sector. The latest Q7 is over 350kg lighter than the previous model.

Overall, what has confused most people is your insistence on 2000kg being selfish/overweight, and yet you have decided that 1700kg is perfectly acceptable. It's a very fine line you've drawn there, and it looks like it's for your own convenience.

Hi Phil,
I applaud you. Its not often on these forums that people might start with seemingly opposing views, and yet arrive somewhere close together.

My own car is heavy, I've never sought to even attempt to suggest otherwise. Its just that cars are getting bigger and heavier, along with more potent, and seeing all this mass of metal, on increasingly congested roads, doesn't seem like progress.

There will always be the question of what is acceptable, and where you draw the line. You've captured the spirit of that argument very well. Its not up to me (thankfully) to decide that, but each individual. In my own personal view, I would say 2 tonnes is where I draw the line. I might have said lower, but 2 tonnes seems like a nice round, and totally and admittedly arbitrary, figure.

But at some point, you really have to question it. Do you want to see cars weighing, say, 3 tonnes? What will happen when such a car interfaces with a Fiesta, or, God forbid, an early mini?

People can shrug their shoulders and carry on because it doesn't affect them at present. Until it does. But by then, its too late.

[PhilboSE]

big_rob_sydney said:

I applaud you. Its not often on these forums that people might start with seemingly opposing views, and yet arrive somewhere close together.

People can shrug their shoulders and carry on because it doesn't affect them at present. Until it does. But by then, its too late.

Sorry Rod, I don't think we're at all close. I'm trying to understand your point of view (rather than agreeing with it), because it seems pretty skewed. You've popped up on the SQ7 and SQ5 threads with blanket negative statements about these cars based on length and weight as if SUVs are the only such cars that have these traits. The kicker is that you have decided, pretty arbitrarily, that the car that you choose to drive is perfectly acceptable but anything a tiny bit bigger is a selfish/behemoth.

You come across as a fully paid-up member of the anti-SUV brigade who rationalises your prejudice with faux arguments that you choose not to apply to any other car sector. The arguments that you espouse about SUVs being bad you choose not to apply to your own choice of car, or you justify it by saying that it's OK because you don't drive it very often. That's pure hypocrisy and it pretty much voids your arguments.

[Nors]

big_rob_sydney said:

Thank you for your agreement on the "interface" between the Fiesta and SQ5. All I was wanting to point out was that these cars will crush smaller cars,

No st Sherlock! Big car hits little car = not good!

Thanks for sharing, I'd never have known that!

Give it up Rob, before the White Coats come calling.

Edited by Nors on Friday 17th June 12:34

[Nors]

PhilboSE said:

Sorry Rod, I don't think we're at all close. I'm trying to understand your point of view (rather than agreeing with it), because it seems pretty skewed. You've popped up on the SQ7 and SQ5 threads with blanket negative statements about these cars based on length and weight as if SUVs are the only such cars that have these traits. The kicker is that you have decided, pretty arbitrarily, that the car that you choose to drive is perfectly acceptable but anything a tiny bit bigger is a selfish/behemoth.

You come across as a fully paid-up member of the anti-SUV brigade who rationalises your prejudice with faux arguments that you choose not to apply to any other car sector. The arguments that you espouse about SUVs being bad you choose not to apply to your own choice of car, or you justify it by saying that it's OK because you don't drive it very often. That's pure hypocrisy and it pretty much voids your arguments.

Sussed and summed up! Can't add any more to that Phil.

[st4]

Better with an A6 wagon.

Faster, more comfortable, better to drive more economical.

Tall cars aren't as good as low ones.

[st4]

Who cares if they car kills those in an oncoming car if its solid enough to spare your life.

There's got to be an advantage to being rich, and that's a safer car if you can afford one.

[anonymous-user]

st4 said:

Better with an A6 wagon.

Faster, more comfortable, better to drive more economical.

Tall cars aren't as good as low ones.

If you want a tall driving position and relatively high ground clearance - which a number of people suddenly do, for some reason; it's perfect...

[scherzkeks]

stuart-b said:

... big, heavy, ugly* polluting ...

.

Indeed, all 3 points apply to your M3, too.

Sad times.