The Audi Q7 is a very nice crossover SUV. Its interior is fantastic. There are plenty of gadgets. And it looks really cool and stately parked in front of my house...
But here's the rub. A 0-to-60 mph time that's 1.5 seconds off the pace of the latest V6 family sedans. Fuel economy that never rises past the mid-teens. No serious off-road ability. On-road handling that's merely adequate without the optional air suspension.
I'm not the target buyer. (Mainly because I don't have $62,420 necessary to acquire our test vehicle.) Most people, if they don't like the Q7, would get a Mercedes-Benz GL450 or maybe an Escalade. But I think I'd be tempted to take my hypothetical $62,000 and get a non-premium crossover (Hyundai Veracruz, Mazda CX-9, Toyota Highlander) and something else.
Like a Jeep Wrangler. Or a year-long trip to Europe. Or maybe an Oompa Loompa who makes me waffles every morning for breakfast.
Like I said, something.
Brent Romans, Senior Automotive Editor
crowb says:
12:41 PM, 08/30/07
Brent,
Keep American jobs in America. Hire a midget from the good ol' U.S. of A. Instead of a lousy jerk from Loompa Land.
Waffles are yum, though.
prndlol says:
01:21 PM, 08/30/07
I do like the look of the Q7, especially around the rump with its hatch cut into the rear quarter panels, but it's still a fat pig.
firstwagon says:
05:57 PM, 08/30/07
What on earth is Loompa Land?
altimadude00 says:
06:40 PM, 08/30/07
I've been meaning to make a comment like this, and I'm expecting myself to get pummeled but....
Remember the first generation Odysseys? They came out in the mid-90s based on the Honda Accord. They had four swing-out doors with roll-down windows, bucket seats in the middle, and that cool hide-a-way third row seat. Vehicles like the Q7, Pacifica, Mazda 5...they're all the same vehicle as that original Odyssey. They're trying to be minivans without being one. They can't go off road or tow anything big...they just haul a family of 4+ around in comfort (some more comfortable than others). So is this thing a $60,000 non-minivan minivan?
sddoc07 says:
07:15 PM, 08/30/07
Couldn't agree more about the poor cost-benefit ratio - I think that often gets neglected by your colleagues although if I got to drive all these sweet rides for free, I'd probably be the same way!
roar02ram says:
08:17 PM, 08/30/07
Altimadude -
I remember the Isuzu Oasis! How's that for a memory! But seriously, yeah, you have a good point. And more to the point - remember the old, tall Nissan Stanza Wagons & the MItsubishi Expo/Expo LRV & Eagle Summit Wagon & Honda Civic wagons? Those were ridiculous. As so much of the same.
1487 says:
06:49 AM, 09/ 1/07
same point could be made about any luxury vehicle, they just arent logical choices and I would never buy a new one unless I was wealthy.
charlesb says:
03:26 PM, 09/ 3/07
The Q7 is based on the Taureg platform, a vehicle that was lauded in the press for its off road prowess when it was introduced. How has the Q7 devolved in this area to warrant a comment like, "No serious off-road ability." The fact that even the most capable SUVs never do serious off road duty shouldn't justify what appears to be a patently false statement by this writer.
evltrpl says:
09:35 PM, 09/ 3/07
this Brent guy has no clue what he is taking about. I happen to own a Q7. Granted it's a V6, city driving only, we average 16.9 mpg, and we do not drive very conservatively. Sorry but for a 5000lbs SUV, it's not bad.
No off-roading abilities? did he even try? this thing goes were most people won't dare going. An australian magazine took one in the outback and said that it is truly capable "a la" Touareg.
No on road abilities? how does that guy drives? of course it's not a sport car, but its road manners are great and it won't fight you if you push it in the twisties. Look at Motor trend truck of the year, it finished second behind the GL but in the performance tests it totally run away form anything. They called it the Z7...
Come with me in the canyon Brent, I'll show you what a Q7 can do...