Urus v DBX v bentayga v porker review in topgear
Discussion
Given the option, which would you choose (assuming someone held a gun to your head and said you must buy one of these SUV's)?
The review seems to say just pick the one with the badge you like. All the negative / room for improvement areas on the DBX (infotainment, equipment and 'posh bits') can be addressed relatively quickly (the infotainment in particular will become the latest MBUX kit in the near future you'd think, perhaps even in the forthcoming hybrid this year, I hope so at least).
The Cayenne, at that level of spec is at a somewhat no man's land price point (£129k before options - I priced one up with what I'd like and it came in at £144k). Still cheaper than the starting point of the DBX, but it sits in an empty part of the market above a FFRR and beneath the other 3 cars on the test. They could have included the RSQ8, the trouble is that when you look at it compared to the Urus, it's a similar comparison to R8 vs Huracan.
I think where the DBX sets itself apart, is it doesn't have any brothers, sisters, nieces or nephews in the SUV ranks - whether you're spending more or spending less, most of the equivalent cars all stem from the same base architecture, so the differences become calibration, interior trim, horsepower and price. That might not matter to some, but because of the way VAG do things, I've come to view the respective SUV's a bit like how VAG divvy up their more ordinary, 'normal' people offerings with Skoda, Seat, VW and Audi. There's something for every budget, but there isn't one car that offers the best of everything, each is a compromise in one area to keep them under a certain price point.
There's perhaps the opportunity for Aston to really throw everything they have at future variants of the DBX, and fill in all the gaps - more performance, updated tech, more luxury. At that point it would be well placed to pinch sales from elsewhere, because at the moment (as is the case with current Astons), folks will get all hot and bothered about the lack of wireless charging and other fairly minor things.
The review seems to say just pick the one with the badge you like. All the negative / room for improvement areas on the DBX (infotainment, equipment and 'posh bits') can be addressed relatively quickly (the infotainment in particular will become the latest MBUX kit in the near future you'd think, perhaps even in the forthcoming hybrid this year, I hope so at least).
The Cayenne, at that level of spec is at a somewhat no man's land price point (£129k before options - I priced one up with what I'd like and it came in at £144k). Still cheaper than the starting point of the DBX, but it sits in an empty part of the market above a FFRR and beneath the other 3 cars on the test. They could have included the RSQ8, the trouble is that when you look at it compared to the Urus, it's a similar comparison to R8 vs Huracan.
I think where the DBX sets itself apart, is it doesn't have any brothers, sisters, nieces or nephews in the SUV ranks - whether you're spending more or spending less, most of the equivalent cars all stem from the same base architecture, so the differences become calibration, interior trim, horsepower and price. That might not matter to some, but because of the way VAG do things, I've come to view the respective SUV's a bit like how VAG divvy up their more ordinary, 'normal' people offerings with Skoda, Seat, VW and Audi. There's something for every budget, but there isn't one car that offers the best of everything, each is a compromise in one area to keep them under a certain price point.
There's perhaps the opportunity for Aston to really throw everything they have at future variants of the DBX, and fill in all the gaps - more performance, updated tech, more luxury. At that point it would be well placed to pinch sales from elsewhere, because at the moment (as is the case with current Astons), folks will get all hot and bothered about the lack of wireless charging and other fairly minor things.
Interesting article. I found this early quote the most telling
Each is too caught up conveying its own brand image to deviate into being the best SUV it can be. They’re not designed to be good SUVs, but good representatives of the raging bull or winged B.
So I suppose the badge of "Best SUV" might belong to the grand daddy, the Range Rover?
Each is too caught up conveying its own brand image to deviate into being the best SUV it can be. They’re not designed to be good SUVs, but good representatives of the raging bull or winged B.
So I suppose the badge of "Best SUV" might belong to the grand daddy, the Range Rover?
dbs2000 said:
I'm sadly in the camp where I think these should all be electric.
An Audi Q8 is said to weight 2.5 tons.
Obviously a Q3 or Q5 would not do at all, because neighbours might buy a bigger SUV.
In the SUV world, it is apparent that giant is considered best.
If starting at 2.5 tons, what would the electric version weigh, when filled with batteries ?
In the days of supposedly conspicuous consumption (domestic ingredients were delivered in brown paper bags, on a shop bike) and there was no consideration for everything sustainable, environmental, diversified and renewable, motorists drove 0.75 ton cars.
Is there something wrong here ?
What's I'm struggling to understand is who the DBX is aimed at? All in the test are aimed at different demographics and the rest I can understand who, but the DBX I'm struggling.
Along with the Porsche probably has the most conservative appearance but this is a car with quite a harsh ride and not too much insulation.
The reason I feel that Aston building their own platform is a bit of an issue, is that all the work that goes into dynamics is forgotten when the target audience for 150k SUVs care more about the finer details of an interior, such as button placement (which they cocked up for LHD) and infotainment systems. If McLaren can develop their own touch screen infotainment, why can't Aston?
Also, this quote is unusual given the reviews TG gave the Vantage and DB11:
'Fundamentally it’s a good car, one that I’d argue actually performs better in its sector than the Vantage or DB11 do in theirs'
Along with the Porsche probably has the most conservative appearance but this is a car with quite a harsh ride and not too much insulation.
The reason I feel that Aston building their own platform is a bit of an issue, is that all the work that goes into dynamics is forgotten when the target audience for 150k SUVs care more about the finer details of an interior, such as button placement (which they cocked up for LHD) and infotainment systems. If McLaren can develop their own touch screen infotainment, why can't Aston?
Also, this quote is unusual given the reviews TG gave the Vantage and DB11:
'Fundamentally it’s a good car, one that I’d argue actually performs better in its sector than the Vantage or DB11 do in theirs'
Edited by WantSagaris on Wednesday 16th June 20:38
WantSagaris said:
If McLaren can develop their own touch screen infotainment, why can't Aston?
When I test drove a 570LT last year I was told by the salesman that the infotainment system was basically just Android on a built in tablet, and it certainly felt that way. It was terrible, laggy and unresponsive to input, and the actual sound quality was so dreadful I had to turn it off and try listen to the somewhat muted and dissapointing engine tone. Suffice to say I was unimpressed....LTP said:
So I suppose the badge of "Best SUV" might belong to the grand daddy, the Range Rover?
Exactly. If you want a GT/sports car take your pick from AM/Porsche/Bentley etc.If you want a SUV/off-roader, buy a Range Rover. You get a better suited car for the purpose with better spec and for less money.
pschlute said:
If you want a SUV/off-roader, buy a Range Rover. You get a better suited car for the purpose with better spec and for less money.
However, the DBX is not aimed at those buyers though.
Your comments make financial sense, but there are some SUV buyers for whom that is not important They want to stand out and wish to be seen with a far more exclusive SUV, especially one from a very prestigious marque.
The Range Rover is an excellent product, but they have become so common now, with over 400,000 on UK roads.
Popularity can sometime create opportunities for others, especially when the planned production numbers are to be fairly low.
Jon39 said:
However, the DBX is not aimed at those buyers though.
Your comments make financial sense, but there are some SUV buyers for whom that is not important They want to stand out and wish to be seen with a far more exclusive SUV, especially one from a very prestigious marque.
WantSagaris said:
What's I'm struggling to understand is who the DBX is aimed at? All in the test are aimed at different demographics and the rest I can understand who, but the DBX I'm struggling.
Along with the Porsche probably has the most conservative appearance but this is a car with quite a harsh ride and not too much insulation.
The reason I feel that Aston building their own platform is a bit of an issue, is that all the work that goes into dynamics is forgotten when the target audience for 150k SUVs care more about the finer details of an interior, such as button placement (which they cocked up for LHD) and infotainment systems. If McLaren can develop their own touch screen infotainment, why can't Aston?
Also, this quote is unusual given the reviews TG gave the Vantage and DB11:
'Fundamentally it’s a good car, one that I’d argue actually performs better in its sector than the Vantage or DB11 do in theirs'
Aston could have used a Mercedes platform, like a GLE - it would have made the car cheaper, but they chose to develop their own platform because they could make the vehicle they wanted, without constraints. It wasn't purely about driving dynamics; interior space and layout were a key factor - the packaging exercise is quite remarkable compared to its rivals (not that anybody cares). Along with the Porsche probably has the most conservative appearance but this is a car with quite a harsh ride and not too much insulation.
The reason I feel that Aston building their own platform is a bit of an issue, is that all the work that goes into dynamics is forgotten when the target audience for 150k SUVs care more about the finer details of an interior, such as button placement (which they cocked up for LHD) and infotainment systems. If McLaren can develop their own touch screen infotainment, why can't Aston?
Also, this quote is unusual given the reviews TG gave the Vantage and DB11:
'Fundamentally it’s a good car, one that I’d argue actually performs better in its sector than the Vantage or DB11 do in theirs'
Of course had they gone the route of a shared platform, people would no doubt say it was a GLE with an Aston badge. In that respect, they simply haven't got a chance of doing the 'right' thing, because like all the current cars, they aren't afforded the luxury of being granted a pass in all the areas they aren't perfect, unlike their predecessors, which were littered with outdated technology - but alas, if it's pretty, all is forgiven.
If for a moment, all the petty, trivial, nitpicking stopped - the DBX is up against some very established competition, and scored highly immediately. The difference with the DBX over previous Aston 'efforts' is it has the headroom to improve dramatically and evolve. Given a bit of time to refine it, it'll become a superb bit of kit, if it's decreed it isn't already (IMO, it's about 90% there already, but I'm a glass half full, rather than half empty sort).
Moers recently announced the plan for updated infotainment systems. The one in the DBX is better than that found in the GT cars currently[1], and will improve again in the near future. I'm sure it wont be enough to appease an audience whom were OK with an outdated, rubbish system in a Vanquish, but cannot stand contemporary infotainment in the current cars (again, if it's pretty, you can get away with a lot).
[1] There isn't really anything wrong with the GT car infotainment, but if it's not the latest, greatest, most blingy - it's deemed terrible. Times have changed, because in 2012 when the Vanquish was launched, the abomination of an infotainment system that came with, was simply swept under the carpet by saying "you can fold the screen away, job jobbed".
As I noted in the Moers thread, everyone involved are acutely aware that every bowel movement of the design and execution of the cars is under scrutiny, where in the past it didn't really matter so long as they looked attractive. The DBX showcased what Aston can do from a standing start; I'm sure there'll be things to pick apart when the next DBX variant arrives, because that's just how it is now, but the foundation of a platform with the flexibility for all manner of derivatives, that doesn't handle like a bus, is a good start IMO.
Jon39 said:
pschlute said:
If you want a SUV/off-roader, buy a Range Rover. You get a better suited car for the purpose with better spec and for less money.
However, the DBX is not aimed at those buyers though.
Your comments make financial sense, but there are some SUV buyers for whom that is not important They want to stand out and wish to be seen with a far more exclusive SUV, especially one from a very prestigious marque.
The Range Rover is an excellent product, but they have become so common now, with over 400,000 on UK roads.
Popularity can sometime create opportunities for others, especially when the planned production numbers are to be fairly low.
I will confess that I’ve sometimes thought about a Bentayga but the running costs of our GTC feel outrageous (the cost for which easily exceeds running 2x v12 Astons). Specified nicely they can be quite subtle but quite a few are not.
A friend has the Porsche, better dynamically than my FFRR but not by much (I can still keep up), and doesn’t inspire confidence off tarmac. I certainly don’t see Cayenne as being a peer to Urus/Bentayga/DBX. The £60k entry price (£20k less than the cheapest FFRR) doesn’t bestow “exclusivity”. Yes, I know the model tested is more expensive but the vast majority of people wouldn’t tell the difference and the view being expressed is that the “look how much I spent!” factor is important...
Urus, always seems very shouty. So quite “on brand” for Lamborghini! Is it hardcore enough... not sure. Every now and again I consider lambos but they need to be a bit nuts to work.
I think it’s a shame that, given they need to prise people out of RRs (and same applies to the others too), they didn’t include a Rangie in this test. Would have been interested to see how they felt a supercharged FFRR/RRS compared.
NFC 85 Vette said:
Aston could have used a Mercedes platform, like a GLE - it would have made the car cheaper, but they chose to develop their own platform because they could make the vehicle they wanted, without constraints. It wasn't purely about driving dynamics; interior space and layout were a key factor - the packaging exercise is quite remarkable compared to its rivals (not that anybody cares).
Of course had they gone the route of a shared platform, people would no doubt say it was a GLE with an Aston badge. In that respect, they simply haven't got a chance of doing the 'right' thing, because like all the current cars, they aren't afforded the luxury of being granted a pass in all the areas they aren't perfect, unlike their predecessors, which were littered with outdated technology - but alas, if it's pretty, all is forgiven.
Moers recently announced the plan for updated infotainment systems. The one in the DBX is better than that found in the GT cars currently[1], and will improve again in the near future. I'm sure it wont be enough to appease an audience whom were OK with an outdated, rubbish system in a Vanquish, but cannot stand contemporary infotainment in the current cars (again, if it's pretty, you can get away with a lot).
I think MB engine/chassis/infotainment probably would have been too much as you say, and I think it's a bold move to develop your own platform with such a modest budget. Here's hoping SUV popularity lasts for a while longer to get as much as they can from it.Of course had they gone the route of a shared platform, people would no doubt say it was a GLE with an Aston badge. In that respect, they simply haven't got a chance of doing the 'right' thing, because like all the current cars, they aren't afforded the luxury of being granted a pass in all the areas they aren't perfect, unlike their predecessors, which were littered with outdated technology - but alas, if it's pretty, all is forgiven.
Moers recently announced the plan for updated infotainment systems. The one in the DBX is better than that found in the GT cars currently[1], and will improve again in the near future. I'm sure it wont be enough to appease an audience whom were OK with an outdated, rubbish system in a Vanquish, but cannot stand contemporary infotainment in the current cars (again, if it's pretty, you can get away with a lot).
When you talk about audience with the Vanquish, it's not the same audience. DBX is Aston in new territory and the new customer is likely to be far more nit picky.
NFC 85 Vette said:
...... which were littered with outdated technology - but alas, if it's pretty, all is forgiven.
If for a moment, all the petty, trivial, nitpicking stopped ......
If for a moment, all the petty, trivial, nitpicking stopped ......
I think comments on here Jon, about the importance of a beautiful looking Aston Martin to existing owners, only applies to the sports cars.
By the nature of an SUV being basically a high rectangular two box shape, cannot in my eyes ever be considered a beautiful car. Without identification badges, many SUVs could not even be named at a glance, so Aston Martin has done well to create one of the more interesting SUV silhouettes.
Edited by Jon39 on Thursday 17th June 08:35
Jon39 said:
An Audi Q8 is said to weight 2.5 tons.
Obviously a Q3 or Q5 would not do at all, because neighbours might buy a bigger SUV.
In the SUV world, it is apparent that giant is considered best.
If starting at 2.5 tons, what would the electric version weigh, when filled with batteries ?
Jon39 said:
In the days of supposedly conspicuous consumption (domestic ingredients were delivered in brown paper bags, on a shop bike) and there was no consideration for everything sustainable, environmental, diversified and renewable, motorists drove 0.75 ton cars.
Is there something wrong here ?
Safety had obviously come on leaps and bounds but your right with paper bags, milk bottles were delivered and collected to. I'm too young (at 39 I don't get to say that often) to remember but it seems a lot was done right then too.Is there something wrong here ?
Edited by dbs2000 on Friday 18th June 13:27
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff