[José]

I don't know mate I think elitism is a little extreme; I would have gone for the 3.0tdi if the SQ5 wasn't available I just think I/We got a little overwhelmed when something we love, our Q5/SQ5 was put down like this!

I agree, I am more upset with the autocar reviews comparison with and ending recommendation of the vastly and widely agreed inferior Evoque than the fact it is not drooling over the SQ5 specifics when compared to a Q5. If this was a review of another other spec of Q5 I would be equally as scathing of it because of the misleading information RE the Evoque.

 

[Snow Man]

Snow Man don't you have an SQ5 on order?

Yeah, the existing Q5 is going 1st of sept for one.
I just accept not everyone will see everything the same way.

Take the positives from the reviews, rather than the other stuff.
Clearly i dont want a RR, or i would have got one and kept some change in the bank. (for repairs and bits that fall off)
The problem with adding an S to the car is people are "expecting" more.

I'd just like us to not end up going the way of some other forums bitching about other (rival) cars.
The sales speak for themselves, even after all these years. We don't need convincing to get a Q5 (or another one), nor do we need to try and convince others...

 

[....]

Am I missing something here is there an Evoque with comparable Performance [NO]
X3 gets 5 Stars from Autocar it was the worst Car we had a test drive in 8 Speed Box was Awful due to the Software and more cramped up front than the Q5 and sounds like Tractor in the 2ltr Diesel.
Q5 was more refined than the X3, S-Tronic is lumpy and dim witted when Cold.
Evoque has a better interior than the Q5.
For me Evoque is a *** Car
X3 gets **
Q5 in any form forgetting S-Tronic Gets****

 

[ray.afzal]

Funny story actually when we went to BMW about our X5 and how we didn't like the new one he immediately brought up the X3 35d in comparison to SQ5. When we drove it; podgas you are so correct about its tractor noise, it was very fast and of course had its high qual BMW interior but the overall styling wasn't very appealing to us.

 

[Fat Belly Budda]

Interesting debate guys. Is it a little special - yes. Is it just another trim level - honestly yes. Is it elitist-no not really. Are we being a little defensive - probably.
I thought it was a really poor (quality) review and somewhat lazy journalism ( Daily Mail sprang to mind). But something bothered me about the closing comment ('Nuffield said'), seemed very familiar - something I'd seen before through google news alerts I get for the SQ5... And sure enough, a lot of the comments/statements have been lifted and recycled from other hacks/articles such as this one ; http://www.topspeed.in/cars/audi/2012-audi-sq5-ar137311.html from 2012....
Few other examples are out there... Leads me to think that Junior had a page to fill at short notice..was working from home and resorted to google....school boy error....

 

[Fat Belly Budda]

Slight correction; Actually...I think Autocare might be recycling their initial review from last year...which a lot of other forums and websites have referenced/ requoted. Either way. Lazy.

 

[windmill]

Slight correction; Actually...I think Autocare might be recycling their initial review from last year...which a lot of other forums and websites have referenced/ requoted. Either way. Lazy.

Excellent recall! As said journalists are just plain lazy. They will either let you write for them (hence why PR companies do so well) or just copy and paste from someone else. Again looks as if he has never driven either car he references.
Not sure why members are being called "elitist" as far as I can see this is far from the truth. Visit the Evoque site and read how they feel they are really special and how those who drive Fords etc are in their words "lower life".
Of course the SQ5 is just another trim level just as are all vehicles in all ranges within Audi's portfolio.

 

[Obsidian]

we need to get away from this SQ elitism we seem to be developing on here...
its just another trim..

The Q5 has been around for years and as with many older models, it takes new models, updates and special editions to keep customers buying. At this moment in time, many of the new owners on this forum are SQ5 buyers (still a tiny fraction of overall sales), resulting in an understandable but somewhat skewed level of posts focussing on that model. As part of this, it is natural to have a debate on the 'S' designation; Audi have started that debate.

However, if all of the currently active members who have purchased SQ5's weren't on this forum, there would be far fewer posts. For some reason, this appears to antagonise you and your stock answer on several occasions now is to accuse the forum of developing SQ elitism. That really is quite unfair because it is simply down to the demographics of those active members. Balance will be returned as time passes.

One thing to consider, if you think things are bad now you should wait until the new model is on the horizon; there really will be a level of elitism that develops between those who have the new model and those with the old.

 

[Snow Man]

What antagonises me is that owners believe it should automatically get the best results.

Pretty much all the reviews are saying the same thing and thats fine, but lets not start saying the reviewers don't have a clue and only we (the owners of SQs) know the truth. Thats the elitism i'm getting at - its just a trim level of the existing Q5, its faster, but other than that the same. it has its issue, but the quality, and resale values are rock solid. Is that not why most of us buy them?

Does it really matter if the RR has a better 4WD systems? (not that this is a surprise given they have been doing it for 4000years). who goes off road often enough that the Q system is not good enough?
The main thing reviewers are picking up on is the dynamics of the cars. (or lack of when it comes to the SQ).
Said it before, if Audi had not added an S badge, most of the reviews IMO would not be as negative.

MK2 - looking forward to it already...
It is strange how this forum has so many less post vs the evoque one by the looks of things when both cars sold @ 100k units last year.
Any offers on why?

 

[Obsidian]

Fair point. There does seem to be a belief that it should get the very best reviews which is a little unrealistic. Very few cars get universally excellent reviews with many journalists and motoring magazines disagreeing while reviewing exactly the same car.

I do think it important not to assume that all of this relates to elitism because that is too simplistic. No one who is into their cars wants to read a review that says anything other than 'yes, you made the right choice and you drive a great car'...it's only human to want validation at times. That's not elitism, I hope.

I have to admit, I was also thinking about how quiet this forum is relative to others. I expected a lot more people talking about the Q5 in general rather than just a specific model.

In some ways, I guess we should be grateful...so many of the posts on babyrr refer to significant and ongoing challenges owners are encountering with their cars. Quite depressing reading.

However, when I have owned previous cars and joined the relevant forum, they have always appeared more active, more engaged.

 

[José]

Audizine and Audiworld both have very active Q5 sections, though both have a strong US bias... Not sure how many options there are for Evoque owners when it comes to forums - but if there are only 1 or 2 compared with the 5 or 6 we have that might explain why we are quieter here.
I would also guess that the type of person who buys a Q5 over an Evoque is looking to be more understated, whereas RR owners are usually in part purchasing that brand in a bit of a 'look at me' statement and so would potentially wish to shout about it more online as well?

 

[ray.afzal]

Yes I agree Jose, that was the drawback with the Cayenne for us; having a lovely BMW, Merc or Audi in our driveway looks good, but as soon as an RR or Porsche come into a picture it opens up a whole new view on us and thats exactly what the wife didn't want

 

[aldfort]

The Q5, in any trim level, is a good and capable car. As with all cars the further up the model ladder you climb, the worse the value for money. I think what's got the journo's is the S badge.

 

[scorchio]

Well having picked ours up yesterday I am over the moon with it and frankly dont give a flying FCUK what autocar make of it, to say they would have a evoque over it though is a insult. We spent some time test driving the other offerings X3, evoque, kuga, tiguan...................and lets just say the ford just was a let down, the evoque looks stunning but it just reminded me of driving a freelander, the price and options was another thing, we just could not look past the SQ5 especially the great deal we got.
The evoque WILL always be a stereo typical footballers wifes car as will range rovers, which suits me down to the ground, just leave the orange chavs to get on with buying the rangies and leave the SQ5 to us, and that noise ....... mmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Estoril SQ5]

I also don't care about reviews. I bought what I wanted and am very happy.

 

[Wilf]

The two best cars ive owned (before the SQ5 that is) have been slagged by the so called experts!! Its a matter of personal opion, they just get paid for putting theirs in writting that the only differnce.

 

[ray.afzal]

Thats also very true. What other two cars did you own Wilf?

 

[Snow Man]

true, but they have more perspective in which to make the compare...

 

[Wilf]

Thats also very true. What other two cars did you own Wilf?

4.0lt Jeep, Misubishi Shogun, Discovery, misubishi Sport, XC90, Land-cruiser Amazon, BMW X5, Ranger Rover, V10 Tauareg, Q7, BMW X3 sd, V8tdi Touareg and now the SQ5

Of all them the two that i loved the most was the V10 Touareg and the BMW X3 and its those two the the motoring journalist and especially that pr1ck Clarkson said are the worst to own!

 

[Sq5john]

This is going to seem a bit 'bah humbug' but needs saying.

Sadly the dynamics of journalism when related to testing products of any kind rather deny any objective quality at all. To this end I don't buy any newspapers or magazines, period. I speak from experience as professionally I've written a fair number or pieces for industry journals over more than 30 years and entertained numerous editors and journalists for lunch in that time, for ease of reading I'll bullet the facts:

1) Few journalists are genuine experts in the subjects they write about, it's better to think of most of them as 'contract writers' who will research a topic or regurgitate manufacturers PR material (copy written for this very purpose). Around the time the SQ was announced your may recall that there were numerous articles that all said the same thing using the same words though apparently produced by different people. Easy money....

2) The greater majority of journalists, in my experience, are freelancers paid by the column-centimeter published or commissioned to write a specific piece. I've written dozens of articles that have been published with someones name in the title other than mine. I was working with a journalist a couple of years ago on a manufacturing article, he also wrote for a green energy journal and a gardening magazine so was he an expert on all three topics? No, and he didn't claim to be either it's simply a job to him.

3) So if you are journo' trying to earn a crust to feed your family and pay the mortgage are you really going to spend a week properly testing an Audi or RR product and then write a balanced and objective article? Its more likely that you will produce something innocuous and readable that will offend neither manufacturer and ensure that their Press fleet department will invite you to the next jolly and not add you to the blacklist of 'unfriendly' journalists whilst awaiting acceptance of your pieces and some money into the bank account.

So are most magazines worth buying/reading? No, not really - just look at the pictures and don't bother with the words and then figure that the pages are content-light and vehicles for advertising...it's a shame they don't print them on toilet tissue isn't it?