I may be coming back....any advice on XC60 spec

[NigelDay]

Originally Posted by drpepper

Should have added, The DS seems underpowered to me, the new engine is quite refined and OK in the mid range bit just lacks something (probably about 40BHP) which made me think i'don't constantly be looking to get it chipped or something.

In terms of off road capability then all 3 of them DS, GLC and XC would be sufficient for my needs.

An engine can make or 'break' an otherwise good car. Case in point in the next level down price sector. The new Nissan X-Trail is outclassed in the power stakes by everything else in the sector. 130bhp in a Qashqai seems reasonable, but in the X-Trail ? Strange when Nissan have a 160bhp version of the same engine in their stable. Mazda CX-5 at 175bhp makes it look lethargic.
I wonder how long before Jaguar push the 180bhp 2-litre F-Pace up to beyond the 200bhp point. Not everyone wants the 300bhp 3-litre. When they do so, expect the 'improved' engine to appear in the DS.

[NigelDay]

Originally Posted by drpepper

The Disco Sport was OK, which is partly the problem. It doesn't have the interior of exterior style of the Evoque, in fact it's the least attractive of the lot including the GLC and XC60. Specifications are another issue which you've picked up on with the DS and to get it to a level I'd want it shoots the price up, equally to add the styling bits that turn it from looking at a bit naff into quite stylish all come at a price.

I suppose the 'style' will reappear when the Evoque XL appears in 2016. The problem is there will always be something 'round the corner'. It will be interesting to compare the Evoque XL and the DS. There will be lots of mechanicals in common, but no doubt 'sales and marketing' will try to position the two cars in two different sectors.

[Warkman]

Originally Posted by NigelDay

I suppose the 'style' will reappear when the Evoque XL appears in 2016. The problem is there will always be something 'round the corner'. It will be interesting to compare the Evoque XL and the DS. There will be lots of mechanicals in common, but no doubt 'sales and marketing' will try to position the two cars in two different sectors.

They are in different sectors.
Land Rover now has three separate model ranges,
the Range Rover range high quality luxury
The Discovery range, sports orientated with daily work use
The Defender range, more utilitarian for work and off reading at weekends.

The discovery range will never have the interior look if the Range Rivers.
Personally this was the reason we changed our Freelander HSE for the XC60 as the disco sport us lacking a good interior imho

[drpepper]

The DS interior is disappointing compared to the XC or the GLC.

The Mercedes 250D engine is pretty good, or at least I've found it so in the C class. It can seem unrefined against the 6 cylinder diesels and it doesn't have the character of the D5 but it's a good motor. I have read a lot of reviews that say it's had major work done to make it 'quieter' in the GLC so I'm looking forward to seeing if that's the case.

The 9 speed auto will be another crunch point, the 7 speed I have is pretty good but I've read the 9 speed can be lazy and slow to react. Given those are they exact reason I fell out with my XC90 a few years ago it's something I'll be paying close attention to.

James.

[drpepper]

Well that's coming up to 24 hours with the GLC and I'll be taking get it back shortly and ordering one.

It drives really well, very much car like as opposed to SUV like. The 2.1 diesel in 250 guise is still strong and feels as though it's moving the car along at the same rate it does in my C Class even though it is fractionally slower on paper. The 9 speed gearbox is a bit slower to react than the 7 but not painfully so and if you're in that kind of mood use of the paddles mitigates it nicely.

The one thing that is noticeable is how much quieter the engine is, whether it's sound deadening on the car or they've worked on the engine i don't know but it's noticeably quieter. The ride on the 20s is acceptable also (on standard not air suspension).

The Interior is a great place to spend time, I'd say it's class leading and looks durable, interior space is on a par with the XC and Toureg in terms of second day row space and the boot is big enough (not quite DS sized though). The Baumeister stereo is very good and the Command/mouse pad thing easy enough to use with some practice.

The only real downside to the car is the front airbag 'issue' which has been mitigated by the addition of a booster seat to the deal. I prefer the XC60 built in booster seat for a number of reasons but as this isn't the main family bus can make do using the more traditional booster seat approach.

I do think really have anything negative to say, it's a pretty impressive piece of kit all round and I've tried to find fault with it, even managed to find some mud and water to play with (pretty easy round here right now!) And it handled that confidently.

The Interior trim is the only thing niggling me, it's quality materials but you get matt black wood effect which I feel is a little 'old' looking or piano black/Ali which I feel is a little 'cheap' looking - I think I'll go wood as it suits the car better, minor things!

So, happy me! It's been a bit of a journey through various potential stablemates to get to this point, thanks to everyone for their input, hopefully others will find it useful.

Cheers,

James.

[RoyMacDonald]

Mercedes spend a lot of the design budget on engine design at the expense of the body. Volvo have always done it the other way around. The engine in my E class was a real treat. Less said about the body the better though.