Audi Q5 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have read one or two comments lately, one just today on this forum claiming the SQ5 is not deserving of its 'S' badge. Am I missing something here 0 to 60 in 5 seconds over 300 bhp, 650 Nm of torque, lowered S suspension - what’s not to like and be deserving of the S badge. Audi S models have always been the subtle performance car of each range and they have that sweet spot of performance and comfort as opposed to the ultimately quicker but harder edged RS models. Each model of S car is different and thankfully so. They all offer different things – a TTS will give you a different drive and experience to S6 Avant. So why not an SQ5?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Right on Bry. It's understated power as with all S cars. I own one and have driven various high powered cars including other S cars and I think it is well deserving of the badge!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: ?? SQ-BEAST ??

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
It's just a softroader. It's not setup as an S car.

It's no more of an S that the A6 version is. S is about sportiness, that goes way beyond a 600nm headline number.
SQ5 handles/feels like a basic 20tdi Q5. It will be interesting to see what the RS Q3 turns out like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
706 Posts
It surely is an S car. "SQ5" or am I missing something. Maybe the RS will have the rock hard sports suspension.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
It's pure marketing though isn't it? To not put a 'sporty' Q5 out there would be to get left behind by the competition.
It isn't a sports car, but it does have performance.
To be fair I find all 'S' cars sit in the middle ground.. pretty much just more powerful S-Line models with an S logo on the brakes.
Stick the BiTDi engine in an S-Line at the same price and it would still sell well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
to the OP - No it does not deserve the S badge - IMHO and I think Audi will come to regret it, but not as much as they will come to regret the RS Q3. The S designation has been used in the past to designate sporting performance. Nobody in their right mind would start with an SUV chassis if they set out to design a sporty car. They should have done what they did with the A6 and called it a Bi-turbo which is what it is. Don't get me wrong it's a brilliant car in every respect but I think the S badge has more to do with marketing in this case than with engineering. I'd still buy one if I could afford it but I'd have it de-badged then just pop the Q5 badge on it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
It is far from a 2.0TDI Q5 in handling Snowman! That's a crazy comparison...

You can't compare it to a TTS for example, as they are very different cars, the TT is a sports car in the first place. Equally the A4/A6/A8 are not sports cars to start with and adding an S in the name and fettling with the suspension/engine doesn't make them one, it just makes them sportier versions of what they were in the first place.
I am going with the fact the SQ5 is as sporty as you can reasonably make an SUV... so it has an S badge.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
529 Posts
It is far from a 2.0TDI Q5 in handling Snowman! That's a crazy comparison...
I am going with the fact the SQ5 is as sporty as you can reasonably make an SUV... so it has an S badge.
Spot on Josè with the first bit.

Reasonably make an SUV? Audi could have drilled deeper into that available power. B&B tuning have managed to push the SQ5 to nearly 400hp and down to 4.7 seconds so Audi could have found that bit more for the production car. We all know they have to cover there arse for the likes of joe public that doesn't have the car serviced at the recommended time or use poor fuel, but it is a premium product at a premium price so its not joe public driving it!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Oh, don't get me wrong you could put 500bhp in a Q5, but then to make that power usable you would have to make extensive chassis changes and then it would be an RSQ5 and arguably no longer an SUV.
I think the power it has is adequate and complements the chassis mods Audi also made.
I have always said 0-60 in 5 seconds is enough for any road car - faster than that and stick to the track (as I do!).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,336 Posts
Audi are playing a different tune now - all the 'S' cars up to now have been petrol powered and not particularly fuel efficient. The SQ5 is a practical, high performance SUV that's frugal (read responsible) - BMW have something similar and I'm sure the Porsche Macan, sharing the same platform will extend that still further.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
I disagree, we have a Q5 20tdi. I tested a SQ5 and its basically the same thing IMO.The steering feels the same, handling is the same, it's just lower which is crazy for an SUV. It's just a marketing exercise to increase sales - raise the profile of the model as it approaches the latter/second part of its life. I'd also say its a model aimed more at females than petrol heads, hence the adverts. A few of us appear to have ordered them for the other halves. Don't get me wrong low 5s is no slouch and I don't recall anyone criticising those numbers.

Why is the A6 bi-turbo not an S model? It carries the same engine/attributes.
The engine alone does not make an S car. Quick google seems to suggest the press think the same when it comes to the Q5.

As for MLB and macan, don't read too much into that MLB is NOT a platform, it's a matrix for want of a description. MLB allows for the sharing of a common engine-mounting core for all drivetrains. The only things that are non-variable are the pedal box, firewall, and front wheel placement, as well as the windscreen angle; other than this, the vehicle can be stretched and shaped to fit any body style, size range, or drivetrain required. As well as reducing weight, the concept allows diverse models, including those from the company's various brands, to be manufactured at the same plant.

I'm not comparing to a TTS, so i don't see why anyone would make that link.
TT a sports car? That's another debate, it no more of a sports car than an A3, golf or Leon - if a coupe shape makes a sports car then the A7 also has to carry the same tag line. This is just marketing at its worst. Audi have decided or have deduced from market research that describing a car as 'sporty' will simply increase desirability and or sales.

Clearly it's a subject that divides opinion, so it's probably best left to each person to make up their own minds as you can't reason someone out of a belief they didn't reason themselves into.
 

·
Still Game
Joined
·
4,617 Posts
Reason is the 2.0TDI is a slug in comparison to the 3.0TDI and a snail when compared to the SQ5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
And that returns the debate full circle.
30tdi is a dog, this engine should just have replaced the old one and carried a bi turbo badge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Snowman, i really do think you ignore several key facts:

1) The changes to the SQ5 ensure it feels different to other Q5's. this is not necessarily better, that depends entirely on your point of view, but I simply can't fathom how you can say they are the same thing as that view appears to ignore the most basic of differences.

2) The S range for Audi has suffered from ongoing dilution of the original purpose for some time. This is not because something is going wrong, it is simply a natural consequence of the continuing expansion of the Audi model range. Why is this an S model and not the same engine in the A6 or A7? Perhaps because both of these models already have S models, albeit with a different engine? If not for that reason, then perhaps because people like me want a fast SUV that looks subtly different from a standard model. You could equally ask why but an S Line instead of an SE.

3) Q5's are aimed at women. Personally, I like the look of the Evoque. Would I drive one? No. For me, I think that car is clearly aimed at the female market. My best mate who bought one a few months ago completely disagrees and won't let his wife anywhere near his car. It's all personal choice. I don't think the SQ5 is particularly aimed at women and looking at this forum, those who have taken delivery so far seem to be of a more male bias. Having said that, I'm not sure this point really has too much validity anyway...male, female...really? (I admit this last sentence is dripping with irony considering my own feelings about the Evoque!)

4) TTS is not a sports car. If you view this traditionally, you're correct. However, traditionally a manufacturer had one model, with a couple of different trim levels, in a limited number of industry accepted market segments. Times have changed, we have more choice than ever and someone driving a Fiesta may feel differently about a TTS...it's small, fast, fun and desirable...sounds a little like a sports car (in marketing speak). A Ferrari driver may take the opposite view.

The markets that car manufacturers target today have changed and are now often small, niche and subjective. Is the SQ5 the same as a Q5. Of course it's not. Is the majority of it the same, yes. But it's different...now explain that!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
So is the SQ5 a Q5 is that the question? Well I'm lucky enough to own a Q5 225 ps TFSI and I've had an extended drive in an SQ5 both on and off road (off-road with a pro driver.) Now I might not fit the profile of the average Q5 customer as I live in the countryside and wanted a practical yet smart vehicle for day to day use. So is the SQ5 a Q5. Well when you get in they look the same, no sensation at all of getting into a more expensive model for me. When you are driving down country lanes with limited visibility they perform the same in the real world save that you can "feel" the road more in the SQ5 but not in a good way. Now if you get on a nice bit of A road and pour the sauce the noise the SQ5 makes is sublime and the performance in a straight line would scare off most of the boy racer brigade but again in the real world the TFSI does not lag far behind. I never felt the SQ5 would allow me to overtake safely where my own Q5 would not once while driving it. Ok so in the twisties - yes the SQ5 is better than the standard car but if you had passengers on board and exploited the better grip and handling they'd probably refuse to ever ride with you again. Not to mention your antics coming to the attention of the local bobby. Now off road - clearly if you reduce ground clearance you reduce off road ability so the SQ5 loses out here big time to the standard car and the ride off road is far less compliant. It's still a very credible off road performer though. So for me sorry but it is just another Q5 and there is little to make you chose it over other models in the range. I'd still have one though just for that noise! Of course fuel economy is a big plus for a lot of folks I know. Well since Mrs A works in fleet management she does not consider fuel economy at all, she works on something called "whole life cost" and the SQ5 is no better over 3 years at 30,000 or 60,000 miles than any other model in the range. Shenstone published some pence per mile ownership costs in another thread which make interesting reading.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
None of the S or even RS models of Audi have been the most accurate racing machines on the market.

Audi S models stands for a perfect blend (if you like it) of everyday functionality and sportiness.

The SQ5 is certainly quick enough to be an S; for the more brutal petrol versions they have the RS badge, which this car certainly is not worthy of.

The main doubts lay in the fact that it is a diesel.
Now, you just have to face it that modern high performance diesel engines are matching petrol engines.
whether you like driving a diesel or a petrol is a personal choice

when I bought my Porsche Cayenne diesel, I read a lot of bad comments as to the blame for Porsche selling a diesel car
also, with BMW, the M50D diesel cars are not worthy of carrying the M badge to some

it will always be a personal feeling, but to me the SQ5 is fast and powerful enough to carry the S badge
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Is it wrong if I start chanting "Fight, Fight Fight" ????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
None of the S or even RS models of Audi have been the most accurate racing machines on the market.

Audi S models stands for a perfect blend (if you like it) of everyday functionality and sportiness.

The SQ5 is certainly quick enough to be an S; for the more brutal petrol versions they have the RS badge, which this car certainly is not worthy of.

The main doubts lay in the fact that it is a diesel.
Now, you just have to face it that modern high performance diesel engines are matching petrol engines.
whether you like driving a diesel or a petrol is a personal choice

when I bought my Porsche Cayenne diesel, I read a lot of bad comments as to the blame for Porsche selling a diesel car
also, with BMW, the M50D diesel cars are not worthy of carrying the M badge to some

it will always be a personal feeling, but to me the SQ5 is fast and powerful enough to carry the S badge
You must have missed some of those RS4's in days gone by! Very focused driving machines that would give BMW M3's a run for their money. But it takes all sorts and everybody will have their own opinion on this question. Time will tell if the SQ5 is a winner and goes down in Audi history as a game changer. The diesel question is largely irrelevant to me as Audi have more than enough credibility with the Le Mans winning diesels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
You must have missed some of those RS4's in days gone by! Very focused driving machines that would give BMW M3's a run for their money. But it takes all sorts and everybody will have their own opinion on this question. Time will tell if the SQ5 is a winner and goes down in Audi history as a game changer. The diesel question is largely irrelevant to me as Audi have more than enough credibility with the Le Mans winning diesels.
Well Aldfort, I am in my mid thirties, so I certainly missed a couple of good Audi's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
I guess this all depends on your definition of a sports car. VW sell a Golf GTI as a sports car. It does 0-60 in 6 and a bit seconds. The VAG group also sell things like Lamborgini, Bugatti and Bentleys. What's the difference between a sports car and a supercar?! £75,000?!
Brands like Audi, VW, BMW and now even Merc are totally diluting their 'sports' divisions. By making M-sport and S-line, it gives people who are not prepared to pay for the top model (or put up with the fuel econnomy!) a chance to make their car look like it. I mention Merc, as their new A-Class has an 'Engineered by AMG' tag - which essentially means it looks a bit like an AMG!

Personally I'm currently driving a Golf R.
The things I'm looking for in my next car is:
Similar performance (0-60 in around 5 seconds)
4WD - the last few winters have proved it to be very handy in Scotland!
A decent sized boot (my golf just isn't big enough for golf clubs / trolley)

The Q5 didn't fit this bill, but the SQ5 does. I'm never likely to go offroad (much like 90% of Q5 owners) so the ground clearance doesn't bother me.
I've never owned a diesel car before, but they've come on leaps and bounds over the last few years. I like the idea of a reasonable MPG with a bit of performance.
I have an overnight test drive of an SQ5 on Monday - and if all goes well I'll be placing an order next week.

On a similar note - my father in-law took delivery of a Mercedes ML63 AMG (his third one in a row). Should this be allowed to wear an AMG badge?! (550bhp, 560 lb-ft torque and 0-60 in 4.1 seconds). Its also an SUV - but is it classed as a sportscar?
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top