Autocar - First for car news and reviews

All those criticisms yet it still gets 4 stars? Given the generally high standard and expectations of modern cars, it sounds more like a '3 star' (average - in the true sense?) or '2 star' car. If 5 starts is exceptional, 4 should mean 'very good'.

I suspect the ride quality would be much better with 18" wheels.

This is a better looking and simply better car than the X3. Well done Audi.

Except in the real world (ie a typical company car on a lease/pcp) the Volvo trounces it.

http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/RoadTests/story/Volvo-XC60-D5-S/409171619

and the Volvo doesn't have the C#ck driver stigma...... (ducking now!)

manicm:

I suspect the ride quality would be much better with 18" wheels.

This is a better looking and simply better car than the X3. Well done Audi.

Well done for what? I should hope it is better than the X3 - the design is 4 years newer and the X3 is based on the old E46 3 series.

 Average dynamics wrapped in a pleasing shell. Audi seems in danger of returning to the old days.
 

I'd rather have an XC60 myself. Looks more distinctive than this, both inside and out.

To me, ride is more important than handling on this kind of car. Buy something with a lower centre of gravity if want both!

 Looks a bit of a lemon to me, a Honda is £249pm compared to £399pm for the Audi, looking on leasing rates databases. the Audi tested was also £36K list, the Honda is £27K list with bendy headlamps active cruise control, also it too got four stars in the autocar test.

 Looks a bit of a lemon to me, a Honda is £249pm compared to £399pm for the Audi, looking on leasing rates databases. the Audi tested was also £36K list, the Honda is £27K list with bendy headlamps active cruise control etc, also it too got four stars in the autocar test.

Town driving reveals another dynamic flaw: the ride is too firm.

So they're still engineering cars to suit some imaginary marble-smooth Autobahn from the 1960s rather than today's shabby stretches of potholed tarmac. I can only assume that owners have their own shock absorption in the form of fat derrières - they've certainly got fat heads for choosing an Audi in the first place. Overpriced, uncomfortable and unreliable, the ideal mix for 2009!

And tell me, is Autocar able to score any German car less than 4 stars these days? Duller than a soup spoon, questionable town dynamics, patented Audi awful ride - seriously now, where did that score come from?

Autocar:

The critical flaw in the Q5’s cabin, and one inherited from the A4, is the driving position. In the translation to RHD, the gearbox bell housing pushes the pedal box to the right. Although the Q5’s higher-set driving position means this is less problematic than in the A4, it still necessitates an uncomfortable twist in the lower body, damaging long-distance comfort. For a premium manufacturer, this is a surprisingly basic mistake.

Don't be surprised at this number of flaws still getting four stars. It's an Audi after all; and isn't the magazine being renamed AUDICAR?

Well, I couldn't agree more. Although this goes for all so-called premium brand cars and not only for Autocar.

I'm not surprised when some "bcbg"-chick who's all about perception prefers four rings or a blue/white propellor over another logo. After all, they're the ones marketeers are aiming for. And those persons apparently think it's prestigious to show off how they let marketing (mis)lead them.

For (car) journalists, it seems to be a different story though.