# Advice on buying a 4x4



## magpieV6 (Jul 29, 2008)

Hi guys, been looking at the Kia Sportage today with my brother. He is undecided on this & the RR Evoque. Obveousely, there is quite a price difference. 

He has an 07 C220 Diesel, which has done 91k now. He does alot of milage & doesn't want another 'nicer' car as its just getting trashed with all the high milage. 

So, a 4x4 Diesel 2.0 or over up to £40,000 .... The only good thing about the Kia Is the price, 7 year warranty, they look really good and you get sat nav. 

RR Evoque, looks bloody awesome but everything is an optional extra! Like 10k's worth! :doublesho

So, overall which would you chose & why? New or used!

:thumb:


----------



## Raife (Jul 14, 2009)

Volvo xc90.


----------



## bigmc (Mar 22, 2010)

Love the new Kia Sportage and would buy based on the looks and warranty, hate the Evoque with a passion purely based on its looks.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

If he wants to look cool - Evoque
If he wants to look like a pikey - Kia


----------



## Strothow (Oct 29, 2009)

Evoque!!


----------



## tom-coupe (Jan 17, 2009)

honda CRV?


----------



## npinks (Feb 25, 2008)

If he wants a decent ride, Evoque with Magnaride,

If he wants a bigger boot Freelander 2 SD4 HSE 

IF, wants a bigger boot with 7 seats a Discovery 4 with the new 8 speed box is supposed to be good

Or then there is the RR sport Tdv8


----------



## tommyzooom (Aug 15, 2009)

I test drove a sportage and I found it had the most uncomfortable seats I'd ever sat in.
Evoque all the way


----------



## DMH-01 (Mar 29, 2011)

Definitely the Evoque.


----------



## T.D.K (Mar 16, 2011)

Sorry but KIA is still a no no brand for me. 

Land Rover FTW.


----------



## Daffy (Dec 15, 2005)

Depends on what it is used for. Both will be good off road but I suspect the Evoque will be better on the road.
If he has a young family then I think the Kia will handle the abuse better and will probably be more reliable.
Both will depriciate faster than superman without his daily kryptonite.


----------



## rinns (May 24, 2008)

Test drove both last week, Kia is nice to look at but feels like a big step backwards from the evoque, would rather have a boggo 
Pure than kx3 sat nav for 26 k.
Ordered a dynamic in the end tho 14k price difference but light years a head with regards gearbox, engine and interior.


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

KIA for me, a 7 year warranty would give lots of long nights sleep

Looked at the Sorento instead of the Sportage?


----------



## CraigQQ (Jan 20, 2011)

tell him to pop over to nissan and look at Qashqai.. the 2.0 diesel 4x4, good car, 
get a tekna and theres more gadgets than you can shake a stick at.
and imo can't be beaten on value for money.

out of the two in the original post.. i'd go for the evoque as I think there amazing.


----------



## bigmc (Mar 22, 2010)

npinks said:


> If he wants a decent ride, Evoque with Magnaride,
> 
> If he wants a bigger boot Freelander 2 SD4 HSE
> 
> ...


What if he wants reliability??


----------



## Raife (Jul 14, 2009)

.... and wants to drive passed fuel stations!

I'm still not convinced by the evoque. Too posh spice and "look at me".

Hence my xc90 suggestion. VERY practicle, comfortable, capable and understated. ( I am biased!)


----------



## DesertDog (May 15, 2011)

Over here we have a Volvo XC60 T6 AWD R-Design, a 304bhp 3 litre twin turbo which eats ugly X3's and overpriced Q5's for breakfast...

At 20mpg probably not your cup of tea though.

Mrs DD drives a Scooby Forester 2.5 XS (the normally aspirated version). This is a true 4 x 4 rather than an AWD and a very understated car.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

If he has a genuine budget of £40k and it has to be new, he has LOADS of options! And none of them should be a Kia. They may have a 7 year warranty but it's very restricted. And you have to live with the most minging interior this side of a Perodua.

How much of a 4x4 does it need to be? LR trumps pretty much anything for towing/offroad ability but do consider the running costs - we have a 110 Defender (late 2007, current version) and the running costs really are a bit scary. An Evoque will be more sensible but servicing costs are high and "luxury" LR's fall down on reliability.

I really like the Evoque - in off to the dealer on Thursday to get some warranty work done on the Defender and will have a good look around one. Even Evo mag has highly rated it - it does off road well but on road even better. Yes there's a price to pay but I reckon depreciation will be gentle - our Defender has pretty much retained all it's value in a year - not many cars do that!!

I'd also look at the Nissan X Trail (the Qashqui is cr4p IMO - I hired one - never again), Toyota RAV4 and slightly left field but a very strong performer is the diesel Suzuki Grand Vitara - a very sorted 4x4 with a good engine.

Freelander is too pricey IMO - I had the top line one as a loan car (SD4 HSE) and although nice, it had hideously light steering and completely failed my own little off road test - it bottomed out several times on pretty gentle terrain. It was just under £40k yet has almost no boot or rear space. 

Subarus are capable but deeply undesirable used so you may as well chuck £30k down a drain. They are also so ugly, they make Jo Brand look like a supermodel.


----------



## npinks (Feb 25, 2008)

love how you claim the Evoque can offroad when the Freelander 2 can't


the freelander is better on the approach angle, breakover and departure angle at 31/23/34 compared to the evoques 25/22/23

Has 5mm less front axle clearance at 210mm, but has loads more rear axles clearance, 240mm compared to 265mm on the Freelander

the both run the same traction control setting too so the only difference off road could be down to weight with the freelander been a slightly heavier car

Boot space is smaller in the evoque too, so that must be super hideously small boot space then :lol:

Personally I think they are going to be very closely matched, unless your in your running 20" Evoque on road wheels


----------



## rinns (May 24, 2008)

335dAND110XS said:


> If he has a genuine budget of £40k and it has to be new, he has LOADS of options! And none of them should be a Kia. They may have a 7 year warranty but it's very restricted. And you have to live with the most minging interior this side of a Perodua.
> 
> How much of a 4x4 does it need to be? LR trumps pretty much anything for towing/offroad ability but do consider the running costs - we have a 110 Defender (late 2007, current version) and the running costs really are a bit scary. An Evoque will be more sensible but servicing costs are high and "luxury" LR's fall down on reliability.
> 
> ...


I would go along with all of the above, I drive a Range Rover Sport and BMW E90 3 Series, the evoque which I have on order was second to none on a drrive and the steering was light years ahead of the RRS, it felt nice and solid in a way that reminds me of the BMW. All the motoring journo's love the way that the Jag XF steers from what I've read and the evoque must be sharing some components as it felt great. With expected residuals of 50% over 3 years then its got to be the best option "If" buying new.


----------



## rinns (May 24, 2008)

npinks said:


> love how you claim the Evoque can offroad when the Freelander 2 can't
> 
> 
> the freelander is better on the approach angle, breakover and departure angle at 31/23/34 compared to the evoques 25/22/23
> ...


npinks, see you on the RRS forum. This really aint gonna help the wife in Asda though or stop her from hitting curbs. If it did I would have the freelander ! ;-)


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

npinks :

_According to Murray Dietsch, the Evoque's programme director, the Evoque is at least as capable off road as the Freelander it's based on. And that's despite a lower ride height. The front subframe sits usefully higher, so provided you've first removed the front towing eye cover, its approach angle is the same as the Freelander's, while the departure- and breakover-angles are actually superior.

_

I think the point is that the Evoque is sold as an on roader but with surprising off road ability. The Freelander 2 pushes those off road credentials too hard. Check some LR experience tracks - they don't allow Freelanders. I wonder if Evoques will be the same (probably yes).

I took the Freelander 2 around my garden (more of a small holding) on some fairly bumpy terrain - our Defender laughs at it, a Jimny breezed it, a RAV4 struggled. The Freelander 2 bottomed out four times and the HDC was alarming to say the least. It actually sounded like something had broken. Add to that the very over-light steering, the near impossibility of judging the car's width on super narrow lanes and it just wasn't for me. I'd have one over many other soft roaders but I'm of the "camp" that says "if you want to do something, do it properly" hence running a Defender 110XS with all the headaches and TLC they need to be looked after properly.

Like Rinns, the road car is an E91 335d which eats miles very well but is SO bad on anything other than tarmac that we just leave it at home at the smallest sign of snow.


----------



## npinks (Feb 25, 2008)

I have been on many a offroad day, in my own and on the experiance days, yes your not doing to follow a D4 or RRS in the mud ruts, but stradling those ruts your doing to keep going in either car

I think they are much or a muchness, but the evoque is aimed towards the school mum were offroad is bumping up a kerb.

Both have the LR pedigree and due to that are offroad cars, just don't bother with the 2wd versions thats just wrong in a LR


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Agree there npink - 2WD + Land Rover = wrong. Very wrong.


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

I have a Rav4 T180 which is the best selling 4x4.... Absolutely stunning cars with great performance from the 180 BHP and 400 NM of torque.. I will be swapping soon though as Our needs are an automatic for the Wife who is struggling with the clutch pedal these days due to a very serious back injury.. The very latest SR versions of the Rav are equally well specced and are brilliant cars but I have put My name on the list for a top end Evoque as I just love the looks !!!
The Kias don't have a credible engine IMO and when You look closely the build quality is not great !!!


----------



## Johnnyopolis (Oct 25, 2005)

tom-coupe said:


> honda CRV?


Arent then 2wd?


----------



## J1ODY A (Nov 28, 2008)

Anyone going to put forward a real 4x4???

Like's been said - why a 4x4 if doing lots of miles, if he needs real off road ability then Disco but if it''s just because of the ride position etc then X5 or something.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Exactly.. why a 4x4? 

Offroad Discovery

On road X5 or an ML


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

Grizzle said:


> Exactly.. why a 4x4?
> 
> Offroad Discovery
> 
> On road X5 or an ML


Graham. I think people want a little more choice than that I bought the Rav in case We have another winter like the last two. Plus Its ace on our steep slipway when launching and recovering the Ski. Especially if its wet. Plus and this is a major point it gives brilliant MPG especially when running up and down to the Midlands 360 miles each way. A Disco or an X5 would not give anything like the MPG and that has to be a major consideration with the cost of flaming fuel....:thumb:

John. The CRV is 4WD its the HRV that is 2WD......


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

If you've got £30k to spend on a motor, and decide to spend it on a Kia, then you need shooting. My father included. As for the 7 year warranty:



> Some items have a natural limited life/durability and are therefore covered for less than 7 years. These items include (but are not restricted to) consumable parts such as worn windscreen wiper blades, clutch linings, etc. The vehicle battery is warranted for a period of 2 years. The audio system is warranted for 3 years/60,000 miles and vehicle paint is warranted for 5 years/100,000 miles.


The car is covered for 3 years unlimited mileage, 7 years or 100k, but bits fall off the warranty throughout the period - and they don't list what the 'etc.' is anywhere obvious for your average buyer to consider.

I think you'd be barmy to spend that money on anything other than a Range, XC90/60, maybe a decent Toyota (although the recent ones I've found to be too cheap inside for my liking!) - any of a wealth of proven, well respected soft-roaders (I like that, 335). The Kia is getting good reviews but one car doesn't make a manufacturer and some of their previous 'efforts' (or lack of) are borderline unforgiveable. They've got a way to come in my book before they can start making me consider them for anything above the Ceeeee''''ee''d or whatever it is.

I will never understand this penchant for people having 4x4s (and calling them 4x4s) - something they feel comfortable chucking at the snow and muddy tracks to the stables - when all they do is drive tarmac. Higher drag coefficient, inefficient tyres, stupid comprimise in the boot/seating, look like a tart taking her kids to school... The ONLY reason to have one is seating position, but I hate being high up - I'd rather be sat on the floor!


----------



## Leemack (Mar 6, 2009)

If he can have either

Evoque every day


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

OvlovMike said:


> If you've got £30k to spend on a motor, and decide to spend it on a Kia, then you need shooting. My father included. As for the 7 year warranty:
> 
> The car is covered for 3 years unlimited mileage, 7 years or 100k, but bits fall off the warranty throughout the period - and they don't list what the 'etc.' is anywhere obvious for your average buyer to consider.
> 
> ...


The OP came on the Forum for advice on 4X4s and all You seem able to do is slag them off ?? and suggest His Wife will look like a tart when taking the Kids to school ? 
OK Most of Us that own shall We say cars with 4WD ability will likely not do any serious off roading. But as above I use My Rav for towing. Sometimes a wet and steep slipway requires a car with said ability, Often when launching from a beach same said ability comes in handy .......
As for and I quote 
Higher drag coefficient, inefficient tyres, stupid comprimise in the boot/seating
Well I get 40+ MPG on the motorway more like 45... Round town 35 to 40. Stupid boot / seating ? Well the Rav is a decent sized 5 seat ( In total comfort) with a huge boot or load area ....

Again I quote..
The ONLY reason to have one is seating position, but I hate being high up - I'd rather be sat on the floor!

Er well see above ?? 
I would be interested to hear what car it is You drive sat on the floor that is ....
Why is it that People love to knock 4X4s ?? Some of Us that own them have them for a purpose and to use them ..............:thumb:


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Chuck - I agree.

Even if we never offroaded, never towed and never did anything 4x4ish, our Defender would make a superb family car. Brilliant visibility, built like a tank, tonnes of space, great in the Winter, great in floods, totally "trolley proof" in car parks!

Sure ours is cr4p on fuel and grim on RFL but we still love it. Same with many 4x4s. I think Mike hates most cars...


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

335dAND110XS said:


> Chuck - I agree.
> 
> Even if we never offroaded, never towed and never did anything 4x4ish, our Defender would make a superb family car. Brilliant visibility, built like a tank, tonnes of space, great in the Winter, great in floods, totally "trolley proof" in car parks!
> 
> Sure ours is cr4p on fuel and grim on RFL but we still love it. Same with many 4x4s. I think Mike hates most cars...


MMMmmmm I love most cars .... Some more than others ... I think folk are to quick to jump on the I hate 4x4 bandwagon. When i reality some are more fuel efficient and have no bigger foot print than an average family car !!
I think the defender is in a class of one when it comes to pure off road ability ! No question... Our Rav could never match it. But to Us its at this time a very useful and economical car that suits our needs. Well that and the Jag of course. No one car will do all things for all men. Fortunately or it would be a boring world !!
I am curious as to what Mike drives though ??........................


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

Contrary to the world's belief, you don't need a fake 4x4 to be able to pull a boat up the slipway - the only car mentioned anywhere here (bar the Defender) that is close to being a 'proper' 4x4 is the Evoque. The RAV4, the BMW X, all of them are likely to be no more capable at hauling a boat up a slip than an A4/A6 Quattro, a Volvo XC70, hell even a Golf 4Mo.

That's my gripe. People that 'need' them, when it's all marketing ********.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Our 2.4 diesel does 27mpg on almost every tank. But we still love it! Luckily we keep the mileage fairly limited on it.


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

335dAND110XS said:


> Our 2.4 diesel does 27mpg on almost every tank. But we still love it! Luckily we keep the mileage fairly limited on it.


But that's in a 'real' 4x4, on **** tyres, with the aerodynamic qualities of a 4-bed semi.

I love it, but that's what 'I need a 4x4' means IMO.


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

ChuckH said:


> The OP came on the Forum for advice on 4X4s and all You seem able to do is slag them off ?? and suggest His Wife will look like a tart when taking the Kids to school ?
> OK Most of Us that own shall We say cars with 4WD ability will likely not do any serious off roading. But as above I use My Rav for towing. Sometimes a wet and steep slipway requires a car with said ability, Often when launching from a beach same said ability comes in handy .......
> As for and I quote
> Higher drag coefficient, inefficient tyres, stupid comprimise in the boot/seating
> ...


I wouldnt worry about him. Sometime ago he was having a rant about insurance company's premiums discount and how he couldnt pay a non discounted rate! He just seems on a mission to be argumentative.

He's now on a mission to convince us all we should drive volvo's or some other makes cos he doesnt like 4x4's.

My opinion is each to their own.

For 4x4's I'd go X6, X5, Rangie Sport. In that order. Now, where' me lottery ticket! :thumb:


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

how about a nice old Grand Cherokee.... :lol:



:thumb:


----------



## rinns (May 24, 2008)

Have I strayed onto pistonheads?

Oh and 4x4s rock as I can fit 5 in it and not feel like im in a transit people carrier


----------



## Leemack (Mar 6, 2009)

Come on guys please 

Can we go one day without a bloody forum argument?

:wall:

Peace out


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

OvlovMike said:


> Yawn. ******, feel free to dig out the thread and re-read. In case that's too much effort, allow me to sum up:
> 
> Admiral list a price on their website that you can only pay if you pay in one lump, the premium is increased (by removal of a 'discount') and THEN interest is added if you want to pay monthly.
> 
> If you're going to be a ****, feel free to be a correct **** rather than an incorrect ****.


STFU :thumb:


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

The Cueball said:


> how about a nice old Grand Cherokee.... :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb:


Behave ...... Nice to see You back Mate !..................:thumb:


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

The Cueball said:


> how about a nice old Grand Cherokee.... :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb:


Or a Compass!?


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

Showshine said:


> Come on guys please
> 
> Can we go one day without a bloody forum argument?
> 
> ...


I was rather enjoying the debate by those capable of a sensible and reasoned debate ! .... Of course there are those whose only reasoned argument is to insult and swear ....


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

ChuckH said:


> Behave ...... Nice to see You back Mate !..................:thumb:


what...:doublesho

my big jeepy beast is all ready for another winter! :lol:

cheers mate, but looks like I've came back at the wrong time though...petty little things still blowing up... 

:thumb:


----------



## ChuckH (Nov 23, 2006)

The Cueball said:


> what...:doublesho
> 
> my big jeepy beast is all ready for another winter! :lol:
> 
> ...


Just fun Cuey ........................:thumb:


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Indeed a 4x4 vs an MPV? No contest!

Cuey - only a select few who feel the hate a little too often.

Just taken our Defender in for a few warranty bits - had a rather long ogle at the Evoques, the stunningly specced Defender and a few nice Jags. 

Tragically the loan car for two days is a diesel Corsa - ARRGHHH!!!!


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

335dAND110XS said:


> Indeed a 4x4 vs an MPV? No contest!
> 
> Cuey - only a select few who feel the hate a little too often.
> 
> ...


I dont get this hatered some people have for a particular type of car myself. Lots of people buy 4x4's because of the state of the roads. My E93 came shod with 19" alloys and I cringe everytime I hit one of the old fashioned iron cats eyes, not to mention potholes! I wouldnt have specified 19's if I'd spec'd the car and I can understand people buying X3's, Kuga's and X90's etc.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Cent - I spent a lot of time searching for a 335d on 17s. I then bought non RFTs as soon as I could. Much lighter (wheels and tyres are almost 10kg less per corner for the rears), stronger (I have never heard of anyone breaking my style 17s) and rubber costs naff all. However they don't look _cool_ so they aren't popular...

I reckon it would take a pretty enormous object to break our Landy's 16s shod with 235/80s!!


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

335dAND110XS said:


> Cent - I spent a lot of time searching for a 335d on 17s. I then bought non RFTs as soon as I could. Much lighter (wheels and tyres are almost 10kg less per corner for the rears), stronger (I have never heard of anyone breaking my style 17s) and rubber costs naff all. However they don't look _cool_ so they aren't popular...
> 
> I reckon it would take a pretty enormous object to break our Landy's 16s shod with 235/80s!!


LOL! Yes, I think they'd be pretty 'rock' proof unlike my 19's!

My E93 has rft's but being a convertible, has no space for a spare so although I've toyed with the idea of going non run flats when needing to replace, dont think I could take the risk even with a puncture repair kit.

What's your thoughts on non rf's and no spare!?


----------



## rinns (May 24, 2008)

I have non rfts on my e90 and have probably done 80k with no
Spare. Got some puncture foam stuff and an AA card just in case


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Cent - same as rinns!


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

Really pleased with our Mitsubishi Outlander GX4, pulls very well in all gears and averages 36-40 MPG, pretty much every extra you could imagine with this model, and can actually go off-road. Comes in under £28k.


----------



## SteveTDCi (Feb 8, 2006)

I saw my second evoque yesterday, it was dark metallic blue and looked great, given the choice thats where my money would be out of the two, although if it was really my money i'd be looking at a Freelander HSE or a Volvo XC60


----------



## J1ODY A (Nov 28, 2008)

Gleammachine said:


> Really pleased with our Mitsubishi Outlander GX4, pulls very well in all gears and averages 36-40 MPG, pretty much every extra you could imagine with this model, and can actually go off-road. Comes in under £28k.


Handsome machine - I think when it comes to 4x4 there are a lot of these sort of machines people forget; the Shogan is nice too.


----------



## hutchingsp (Apr 15, 2006)

I think it's all been said about the Kia. Nobody seems to have a bad word to say about them, and the warranty is outstanding, but they're a car you'd buy with your head, not sure there's much heart in there.

Evoque, I've not driven one but did take a look at one and it's an amazing car to look at and sit in, but it does seem very much like a car IMO, the all-round visibility isn't great and I felt quite low down and far back from the dash, very car-like and none of the "command" position that you associate Land Rover/Range Rover with. 

I have a FL2 and like most people haven't used it off-road, but I do rate it as an all-rounder and if you do need to go off-road it's more of a "proper" 4x4 than things like the Q5 or X3, though those are obviously good in their own right.

I looked at a lot of 4x4/crossover/SUV's before settling on the FL2 and they're all about compromise, for example the Defender may be the best 4x4 out there, but if you want to commute 50 miles a day in comfort it's totally impractical IMO because it's not what it's designed to do, it's designed for a purpose.


----------



## SarahAnn (Apr 6, 2011)

We bought a 9 month old kia sportage in April. Our main reason for a 4x4 was to get out of our lane if we get snow and ice like we did last year and after seeing our neighbour's kia go through more or less anything last winter, we thought it 'would do' for what we wanted it for.

If we had wanted to spend more, we would have gone for something posher like a Range rover i suppose, as i see them and think 'oo that's lovely' but the kia is fine to ferry our dogs about in and we've seen how good they are in the snow and we have other cars aswell. 

After driving the 4x4 and liking the driving position, i might be tempted to sell my other car next time and get a nicer, more plush 4x4 

I am a bit tight with spending on cars though as i prefer to spend it on house extensions and things like that


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

hutchingsp said:


> I think it's all been said about the Kia. Nobody seems to have a bad word to say about them, and the warranty is outstanding, but they're a car you'd buy with your head, not sure there's much heart in there.
> 
> Evoque, I've not driven one but did take a look at one and it's an amazing car to look at and sit in, but it does seem very much like a car IMO, the all-round visibility isn't great and I felt quite low down and far back from the dash, very car-like and none of the "command" position that you associate Land Rover/Range Rover with.
> 
> ...


Very good post. You speak wise words!


----------

