Third row would be really only for children around town a couple of times a week most of the time.
Made my day to drive the S-Max it was a nice car for sure and I definitely prefer it to a Galaxy.
No he did not tell us about the scrappage scheme but told us he would try and give us a good px price on the Skoda. The Skoda is just going past 6 years old and is still a really good car. It was a great choice when we only had one child, would still be good with two but three it is becoming a struggle.
Just looked at this on the honda website and it seems very competitive price wise, not a bad looker as well. Honda quality as well so will go into the Honda showroom to take a look at one in the flesh.
One to consider.
For your information, I found the XC90 to be one of the best mini-van like vehicles I have ever driven. The best was an ML 3-- series Mercedes Benz. (can't remember the exact number.) We ended up buying a Range Rover as we wanted an SUV not a minivan. Only have one child.
Eventually traded the RR (at a loss) for a BMW 530 xiT. My wife like the BMW much better than the RR. She has a thing for cars that can get out of their own way.
All that said, Top Gear reviewed the S-max on one of their shows and said that for the money it was the best "People Carriers" on the market. Especially if it is a compromise vehicle. I.E. Dad wants something that drives OK and still carries a family and their stuff easily. It looked pretty nice. After you consider the price it starts to look like a class leader.
You can watch the review on Top Gear if you want.
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/0...VXR_183153.htm
Good luck,
Brian.
That is interesting, in honesty we do not need a true SUV, however something that has 4 wheel drive would be good for the skiing trips. The kids are already making my ears bleed with the "when are we going". Last year we managed okay in the Skoda but sometimes it could be a bit nerving when there was ice on the road. Not that I would drive like an idiot just because I had 4WD.
The sales person was talking about size compatibilty, which I thought he meant the seating but then he mentioned the SIPP's so I did a quick google and found this:
http://www.webridestv.com/videos/suv...th-gear-148017
Not sure I want to show the wife that to be honest
I am sure most modern cars have side air bags and I wonder how many people get rammed at 60 mph from the side?
Here's an anatomy of a crash. Seems you wouldn't be aware until it's all over, so don't lose sleep ( Source )
All over in the blink of an eye
This is a reconstruction of a crash involving a stationary Ford Falcom XT sedan being struck in the driver's door by another vehicle travelling at 50 km/h.
One millisecond equals 1/1000th of a second.
0 milliseconds - An external object touches the driver's door.
1 ms - The car's door pressure sensor detects a pressure wave.
2 ms - An acceleration sensor in the C-pillar behind the rear door also detects a crash event.
2.5 ms - A sensor in the car's centre detects crash vibrations.
5 ms - Car's crash computer checks for insignificant crash events, such as a shopping trolley impact or incidental contact. It is still working out the severity of the crash. Door intrusion structure begins to absorb energy.
6.5 ms - Door pressure sensor registers peak pressures.
7 ms - Crash computer confirms a serious crash and calculates its actions.
8 ms - Computer sends a "fire" signal to side airbag. Meanwhile, B-pillar begins to crumple inwards and energy begins to transfer into cross-car load path beneath the occupant.
8.5 ms - Side airbag system fires.
15 ms - Roof begins to absorb part of the impact. Airbag bursts through seat foam and begins to fill.
17 ms - Cross-car load path and structure under rear seat reach maximum load.
Airbag covers occupant's chest and begins to push the shoulder away from impact zone.
20 ms - Door and B-pillar begin to push on front seat. Airbag begins to push occupant's chest away from the impact.
27 ms - Impact velocity has halved from 50 km/h to 23.5 km/h. A "pusher block" in the seat moves occupant's pelvis away from impact zone. Airbag starts controlled deflation.
30 ms - The Falcon has absorbed all crash energy. Airbag remains in place. For a brief moment, occupant experiences maximum force equal to 12 times the force of gravity.
45 ms - Occupant and airbag move together with deforming side structure.
50 ms - Crash computer unlocks car's doors. Passenger safety cell begins to rebound, pushing doors away from occupant.
70 ms - Airbag continues to deflate. Occupant moves back towards middle of car.
Engineers classify crash as "complete".
150-300 ms - Occupant becomes aware of collision.
Thanks, I am going to forget it, life is too short and if I watch many more videos like that I would never go out.
I suggest you to consider only diesels for compact MVPs. They are quite heavy when loaded, and the petrol consumption will be high.
With diesel, you have good torque at low rpm and low fuel consumption. Definitly, you don't need a "blast engine" which can be rotated upto 8k rpm ... So, diesel is the right choice. I guess, with Honda 2.2 cDI diesel engine the consumption will be 5.6 - 6.0 l per 100 km average.
Pretty much what I think as well and have read in most of the reviews. We are not expecting any hot hatch performance, just something that can get us from A to B safely and does not hold up the traffic.
According to www.honda.ch ( http://honda.ch/auto/fr/fr-fr/index....ail_frv/prix)::)
Consom. mixte R101-00/CEE (l/100 km) man. / aut. 6,3 / -
Which means mixed consumption is 6.3 on manual gearbox. They don't have automatic transmission for this engine, even on another models (which I consider buying). It is disadvantage
Some people say the reason for this is a very high torque of 2.2 icdi. There is a petrol version with 1.8 & you can order automatic transmission for extra 2000 CHF, but, taking into account weight of a car, and volume of engine, to drive you will have to rotate the engine to high rpm, and consumption with loaded car might be up to 10-12 l per 100 km.
I personally think that my next car will be diesel. I have a friend with VW Touran, which has 2.0 di engine. It is very econimical, and torque is very good. Diesels also somehow easier to maintainence, you don't have sparks and spark wires. However, from what I've heard you change the oil a little bit more often...
But, not having distributor, sparks, and spark plugs is cheaper anyway
We currently have a 1.9TDi which gives a fantastic 5L/100km combined. Have to say I am still really happy with our car, pity in some ways as it has been very reliable.
Update: Volvo XC90 test drive.
With our three children onboard it was time to take the Volvo XC90 for a spin. Within seconds of pulling away I saw my wifes face and she just loved the ride and the feel of the car. Took it through town and onto the motorway for a short stint and then back. It seems to be quite a firm but insulated ride. The seats, well they have to be the most comfortable I have ever sat in. The kids were happy not being squashed together and seemed to enjoy the whole event.
The 2.4 diesel we drove seems to be adequate and is the one that is going to give the best economey 8.5L/100Km.
Summary is that it is a bit longer, bit wider and a lot taller than our existing car but it certainly does not feel bus like. The price is more than our original budget but it ticks all the other boxes. I could also see us being able to keep this car a lot longer than other cars we have looked at.
Really the wife loves this car and I guess as she is going to be driving it most of the time, then that is what counts. Now just down to trying to understand the different version of this and see which one we go with. The salesman is trying to rail road us into one in the showroom but that is not going to work. If you are going to live with a car for possibly ten years you may as well get the specification you want.
Thanks to everyone who made suggestions on different cars to look at, it was hectic but also quite fun and interesting as well.
Don't drive an X5 then. It is much better than the XC90.
Of course it is much more expensive. That's why I don't have one.
Seriously, I thought you would like it if you drove it. Well built and well balanced car.
Good luck,
Brian.
Well, this is another class. Previously we were talking about compact MPV. Now we deal with mid-size luxury crossovers
Of course it is of higher class than the previous cars. The only thing I want to mention is that the maintenance might be more expensive, as 2.4 diesel is 5 pistons engine. Probably you'll have to put more oil. And the consumption would not be low. I actually think that with 185bhp it will be a way above 10l in mixed cycle.
If you look a the line of engines for XC90, they all are of large size. That is, it is a cross over car with luxury elements. It goes beyond the definition of "family car which is practical and cheap to use and service".
Also, with AWD you got more expensive service for suspension.
If we speak about crossovers, there are many representatives, Volvo is not the only one in the world...
Do not make fast decisions. First define the class of the car, and then it is easier to search for a good model, - relaxed, making right choices.
Yes, agree we were genuinely trying to stick to a compact MPV. However I guess our real needs are a bit more and we thought we might be able to manage within this range.
After looking at the price difference and what you get for your money this would be a better long term solution. The discussion is would we go for the Toyota Verso or the Ford S-Max which we both like and then trade for another car in possibly 3 years?
If I was to guess how much more the Volvo costs compared to the other two I would have said more than the price difference, so we feel there is better value, not to mention my wife is taken by the extra safety. (Percieved true or not)
The line of what is an MPV and a SUV or CrossOver (not really sure what the last means) tends to become blurred I guess. We do not need a true off roader, just something good with dealing with wintery ice/snow on the roads to ski resorts.
BTW, we went yesterday and looked in the Honda and also the Opel garage. We held off booking any test drives until we drove the Volvo as we thought it might change our opinion and budget.
I guess it might help to re-evalute what we want by requirements:
Must have:
* Needs to carry 2 adults + 3 children with full car seats in comfort.
* Comfortable on long journeys
Really like to have:
* Carry 2 adults + 5 children (7 seater)
* 4 wheel drive
* Auto
* Something sensible in the litres/100km
Revised Budget:
80,000 CHF
Any other suggestions of cars (MPV/SUV/CrossOver) we should look at?
Yes, I agree we are not in a rush to buy as we explained to the Volvo salesman. We would rather take our time, even if it is an XC90 and get exactly the specification we want.
BTW: The 2010 VW caravelle will be available in 4WD and DSG so maybe to be fair this should go back on the list. Not sure what you classify this as though People mover!
I think we should go and test drive it because I do not have a clue about BMW offerings, the garage is not far to be honest. Seriously when we came back from the Volvo garage I thought that is it, however it does not hurt to extend the search a bit longer and see what other offerings are available.
There seem to be quite a few XC90s on autoscout. Some fetch under 20K chf now. With interest at 4%, a new one costing 80K, you are looking to shell out 14,400 a year, 12K on depreciation and 2400 on interest, plus tyres, etc. I saw a 2003 Diesel on there for 19K. You could join TCS, buy an old one, and see how you get on over the winter. I bet you would get a good price for your old car on Ricardo, too.
Well, 80k opens a new fields of possibilities . As usual, I'd recommend Toyota Land Cruiser: http://fr.toyota.ch/cars/new_cars/la...ser/index.aspx
You got almost top configuration for the price 79.9k. With diesel engine 3l but with very good consumption. Toyota these days plays a very good attention to efficiency, their engines are really good, they say it is 7.2liters mixed !
Toyota is better than Volvo in terms of efficiency, comfort and reliability.
If you dislike Toyota Land Cruiser, take a look at Honda CRV 40k: http://honda.ch/auto/fr/fr-fr/index....etail_crv/prix it is much less and cheaper.
Also, I'd look into Nissan Murano 60k: http://fr.nissan.ch/#vehicles/crossovers/murano
But my advise is not to spend huge money on car Spend 50k on it, and save 30k for your kids to enter swiss university in a few years in future