I'm really confused right now.

"sm70- why not Duesenberg?" (sm70-whynotduesenberg) 01/28/2015 at 20:26 • Filed to: None

0

23

This evening, my dad and I went out to take a look at one of only two or three cars left on his short list: a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . We drove a xDrive35i, or whatever the I6 one is called quite a while back, and we much preferred it over the more expensive, more powerful, better-equipped and newer Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland Hemi that we drove in the same trip, basically because it was a big comfy luxury SUV that drove like a sports sedan. But we decided that at his price point, it wouldn't hurt to look at a V8, the 350hp xDrive48i. We were mostly interested to see if the greater power of the V8 was worth the small hit in fuel economy. It was, as it turned out. The 4.8 shot the X5 out of the hole with plenty of tenacity, and made an excellent sound besides. But there was another surprising difference. The I6 we drove had a good ride, comfy and smooth like a luxury SUV should have. This V8 we just drove, with brand-new all-season tires and no M-Sport package or anything silly like that, was one of the choppiest riding vehicles I've ever been in. It was worse than every super-sports sedan, 4x4, and even the couple coupes that we looked at. In fact, the only thing that rode even remotely like it was the 2-door Wrangler I drove before I got my car. Which was terrible. Yet in the X5, on a road we have driven many times in many cars, including a CTS-V, it rocked like a teeter-totter so badly at 35mph that our head were being slammed back into the headrests. My dad wants to look at another V8 to see if it was a fluke or not. Other that the heavier engine up front, the two X5s were identical. What gives? Anybody familiar with these cars?

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 20:31

1

Stiffer springs on the front to deal with the V8s extra weight. That's all I can think of.

Or the shocks were fucked. This is probably the case.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/28/2015 at 20:37

0

I'm thinking the second option. I've been in other cars with the far bigger engine option of the range, and none of them went from "luxury cruiser" to "Jeep wrangler". It was bad enough that I was amazed people bought X5s if this is how it rode. Hell, the fucking Cayenne GTS on low profile sports rode better. So yeah, fucked shocks must be it though.

Weird, my dad is friends with the dealer, who said the car was in perfect shape, and he knows the owner (who is a retired police chief, maybe it's got cop shocks?) who is very fussy about car maintenance. He bought new tires for it 2 weeks before trading it in, because he felt like it should have new tires.

Steve in Manhattan > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 20:42

0

I hate those things. Drove one a long time ago - a pig. Mercedes M class better? Does dad have to have a giant SUV?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Steve in Manhattan 01/28/2015 at 20:46

0

I didn't realize those qualified as giant. Yes, it basically should be in that size category.

jkm7680 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 20:49

1

Maybe needed a bit of work. Doesn't sound right at all for a luxury SUV though.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > jkm7680 01/28/2015 at 20:50

1

My thoughts exactly.

Steve in Manhattan > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 20:51

1

Sure, it's no Tahoe, but the weight differential can't be that much. Me? I'd get a Range Rover with a CarMax warranty. The split tailgate one, the real one. Might as well have a capable vehicle.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Steve in Manhattan 01/28/2015 at 20:56

0

We've looked at a Range Rover, but it's just not for us right now.

The X6 is under 4700lbs. A Tahoe is 500-800lbs more, and the Range Rover is half a ton heavier.

bobkustofawitshz > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 21:07

1

I'm actually interested to hear your impressions of the Grand Cherokee, as I've been thinking about SUVs lately and that one in particular. Haven't driven one myself yet, but I've read the ride and handling are better/more carlike than previous generations (which I have driven and think handle abysmally). I do love the interior color combinations available in the Overland models.

E92M3 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 21:15

1

My wife drives a 2011 with the 6cyl turbo. One of the best SUV's on the planet IMO. What kind of tires does it have on it? It's best to stick with the OEM Michelins, or similar. Cheap Korean tires can really affect ride quality. I had a set of Nexen tires once, and they were the worst tires I've ever experienced. I took it in to have them balanced 3 times before they figured out their internal construction had a problem. They would also feel flat spotted when it was cold for the first 10 miles (even though the car was driven everyday it would feel like you parked it for a year without moving it).

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > bobkustofawitshz 01/28/2015 at 21:43

1

Gladly. The interior is very, very good, in terms of comfort, quality, features, and appearance. It has adequate punch with the Hemi and feels very solid. I also don't doubt it's off road abilities. The reasons we would be more likely to choose something different, in this case, probably a European competitor, was due to the driver ergonomics. While the BMW and VW Toureg, as well as the Volvo XC70 felt like tall sports sedans, with great feedback and handling and excellent visibility, the Jeep felt like more of a lumbering, truck like cruiser, with a high belt line that made the interior cave-like and darker.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > E92M3 01/28/2015 at 21:45

0

These tires:

Flat Six > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/28/2015 at 22:36

1

My wife has a 2013 with the diesel - if gas wasn't so cheap I would say it gives a nice balance between performance and economy. The ride is a bit stiff but not at all like a Wrangler. All in all I really like it. More space than a Cayenne but still drives better than most crossovers (and all SUVs). Maybe you should try driving a CPO one from a dealer that has been thoroughly inspected.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Flat Six 01/28/2015 at 22:41

1

We will.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/29/2015 at 00:06

0

FTR I've heard that v8 is a massive pile of steaming dinosaur feces in terms of reliability and to work on. This from two separate BMW techs. I would go for the I6.

PS. It's taking some willpower to restrain from telling you to get an ML, because I'm shameless or something.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 01/29/2015 at 07:48

0

We were surprisingly unimpressed by the ML.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/29/2015 at 09:44

1

That's fair. I'm honestly not a huge fan of them either, but I not an SUV kind of person anyways. I'll take a wagon over an SUV any day.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 01/29/2015 at 10:56

0

That's an excellent point. We'll try to find an e or 5 wagon.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/29/2015 at 15:50

0

I vote for 05-06 e500 wagon. They can be pretty reliable and come on, v8!

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 01/29/2015 at 17:13

0

That's probably a little old, and I think he really like the handling of the BMW. We'll look at an E-Class wagon though.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 01/29/2015 at 17:25

0

Actually, speaking of which, I just found you something.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/29/2015 at 21:17

0

Found me something you say?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 01/29/2015 at 22:18

0

I do say.

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/hey-amgtech-16…

Showed it to my dad, he really likes it and hopefully we're scheduling an appointment to go see it next week. Not sure it's practical enough, but we'll see.