Audi Q5 vs Jaguar F-pace
By choosing one of these two fuel-efficient premium large SUVs, the upwardly mobile needn't face an uphill struggle when it comes to costs
A new engine and an upgraded interior promise to make Jaguar’s large SUV more competitive. Let’s see if it’s now good enough to beat one of our class favourites
IT’S THE NATURAL way of things; luxuries that were once considered an elite treat eventually trickle down into the mainstream. Just look at how many designer brands are now routinely discounted on any suburban high street.
Rather like posh handbags and perfume, the large, premium SUV is no longer an aristocratic preserve. With ever more efficient mild hybrid diesels on offer and tempting monthly deals and cash savings to be had, cars like the recently updated Jaguar F-pace D200 seem to offer the best of everything; an upmarket image, sporty dynamics, decent practicality and reasonable running costs are all covered.
With that in mind, it’s not hard to see why these SUVS are so popular. And few are more so than the Audi Q5, which has long set the benchmark at the premium end of the large SUV class. Here we’re testing the diesel Q5 40 TDI, which has also been updated within the past year to include mild hybrid technology. Can the F-pace, with its new, more efficient diesel engine and modernised interior and infotainment, usurp the Q5’s top-dog position?
DRIVING Performance, ride, handling, re nement
Our two protagonists are so closely matched on paper that you’d be forgiven for assuming that they’d drive very similarly. After all, both have 201bhp from 2.0-litre diesel engines, with power going to all four wheels via a standard automatic gearbox. Their official 0-62mph sprint times (7.6sec for the Q5 and 8.0sec for the F-pace) suggest there’s little to separate them in terms of performance, while caravanners will appreciate that both have a hearty 2400kg maximum towing capacity.
In fact, the two are even closer on acceleration than their official figures suggest. The Q5 took 8.0sec
to get from 0-60mph at our test track, with the F-pace just 0.1sec behind. More importantly they both feel gutsy, whether that’s off the line or when you ask for a squirt of acceleration to merge into fast-moving traffic.
In other regards, though, these SUVS are very different animals. Point the F-pace down a winding road and its relatively light, accurate steering weights up progressively as cornering speed increases, so you get a good sense of how much effort the front tyres are putting in. Selecting the Dynamic drive mode adds more weight, but we reckon the steering feels more natural and enjoyable in default Normal mode, whether you’re winding through town or driving quickly along a country road. By contrast, while the Q5’s steering is precise, it never feels quite as natural, with weighting that’s a little inconsistent as you wind on lock.
Drive spiritedly, though, and it’s the F-pace that’ll run wide of your intended line earlier than
the Q5; the latter feels a touch more planted and composed. There’s also less body lean through corners in the Q5, although we should point out that the F-pace’s body movements are always progressive and never dramatic.
However, you might not be as satisfied with the F-pace’s eight-speed automatic gearbox, which can be slow to respond to kickdown requests before delivering a hefty thump when it does shift into a lower gear. The Q5’s seven-speed dualclutch automatic ’box executes downshifts faster and more smoothly, and is generally more agreeable in everyday driving.
The Q5’s engine is notably hushed, too; you won’t find a diesel SUV in this price range that produces less noise and vibration. That isn’t to say that the F-pace is uncouth; its new engine settles to a quiet thrum at a steady speed and only gets harsh if you rev it harder than is strictly necessary. A touch more tyre and wind noise creeps into the F-pace’s interior at motorway speeds, though, so overall, the Q5 is a noticeably more refined car.
The Q5 is also more comfortable. While the F-pace keeps most bumps and potholes from bothering its occupants, there’s a bit of fidgeting, particularly around town. Despite S line cars having slightly firmer suspension than some other versions, the Q5 still manages to deliver a more settled ride than the F-pace.
BEHIND THE WHEEL Driving position, visibility, build quality
You’ll have very few complaints about the driving positions of either of our contenders, but the F-pace has the advantage.
Its deeper sports seats – courtesy of the R-dynamic trim upgrades – not only hold you more firmly in place through corners but also provide 12-way electric adjustment that makes it easy to make tiny tweaks to fine-tune your position behind the wheel. Meanwhile, the Q5’s seats offer decent side support and are comfy, albeit rather firm, and provide plenty of adjustment, but it’s a shame that this is manual, rather than electric.
The F-pace also has the highset, ‘proper SUV’ driving position that many buyers are after, even if you drop the seat as low as it can go. In comparison, the Q5 places you lower, giving you a driving position that doesn’t feel all that far removed from what you’ll find in a family hatchback.
Its recent overhaul has given the F-pace a significantly updated
‘The Q5’s engine is notably hushed. You won’t nd a diesel SUV at this price that’s quite so re ned’
interior, with posher materials that look smart and feel more substantial. The (standard) leather upholstery, contrasting stitching and aluminium trim combine for a sumptuous feel, and the big rotary climate control switches are nicely damped. There are still some flimsier finishes to be found, but not in prominent places. The Q5’s dashboard is more understated to look at, but its switches and buttons are logically arranged and easy to use, and when it comes to fit and finish, it beats not only the F-pace but also every other car in this class.
SPACE AND PRACTICALITY Front space, rear space, seating exibility, boot
There isn’t a whole lot of difference between the Q5 and F-pace when it comes to passenger and boot space. Both are airy, and you’ll get two six-footers in the back seats even with a lanky driver and matching front seat passenger in situ. There’s also plenty of head room in both cars, although tall passengers in the back of the F-pace might find their hair brushing the headlining if you add the £1600 panoramic glass roof, which serves to lower the ceiling slightly. A panoramic roof isn’t available on the Q5 unless you go for range-topping Vorsprung trim, which gives you one as standard.
The Q5 does gain a practicality advantage if you add the optional Rear Bench Seat Plus, which costs £350. It brings rear seats that slide, recline and split in a 40/20/40 format for added versatility. It’s well worth adding, but if you do choose to leave this box unticked, the Q5 still gets those handy threeway split seatbacks.
Meanwhile, the F-pace’s rear seats don’t slide or recline, but the seatbacks split and fold down in the same three-piece configuration as the Q5’s, so there’s plenty of potential to take long items, such as skis, while still carrying a pair of rear passengers.
Anyone sitting in either car’s middle rear seat will find their raised cushion rather hard and will have to splay their feet to clear a hump in the floor. Still, either car will carry five adults easily enough. Neither offers a sevenseat option; for a premium SUV with that sort of carrying capacity, you need a Land Rover Discovery Sport or a Mercedes-benz GLB.
Both of our protagonists have electric tailgates, good-sized loading apertures and boots that are more than big enough to take bulky items, such as a set of golf clubs or a double buggy. The F-pace provides a useful underfloor
‘The F-pace has a high-set driving position and the seat holds you rmly in place through corners’
‘The F-pace beats the Q5 on PCP, partly thanks to higher resale values’
cubby that’s big enough to stow a laptop bag, but the Q5 has the more practical boot overall; it can swallow nine carry-on suitcases, while the F-pace manages eight below its load cover.
BUYING AND OWNING Costs, equipment, reliability, safety and security
In these mid-range trim levels, the F-pace is a little cheaper to buy outright. More importantly, it usefully undercuts the Q5 when it comes to monthly PCP finance payments. On a three-year deal with a £5000 deposit and a limit of 10,000 miles per year, it comes in at £539 per month, compared with £599 for the Q5. That’s due to the F-pace’s combination of a lower list price and stronger predicted resale values.
The F-pace will cost a little less to service and insure, too. Fuel costs, though, will be on a par between the two; both return a solid 37mpg in varied real-world driving, and you’ll see 40mpg or more from either if you spend most of your time on the motorway.
Company car users would be better off looking at the plugin hybrid variants of the Q5 and F-pace; our diesel test cars are much more expensive on company car tax due to their higher official CO2 emissions. The Q5 is the more costly by a smidgen, but not by enough to make much difference if you’re willing to pay circa £550 in benefit-in-kind tax (for a 40% taxpayer) every month.
Things are close in the equipment stakes, too. The Q5 may miss out on the F-pace’s full leather upholstery and electric seat adjustment (its seats are halfleather), but it makes amends with adaptive LED headlights (these can automatically shape their beams to avoid dazzling other road users) and three-zone climate control that enables you to control the temperature in the back seperately to that in the front. The F-pace has non-adaptive LED lights and twozone climate control.
The Q5 requires you to add the £1395 Comfort and Sound Pack if you want keyless entry, although you also gain surround-view parking camera, a Bang & Olufsen sound system, extended interior ambient lighting and a handsfree tailgate that opens when you wave your foot below the bumper. Keyless entry is a £555 option on the F-pace, while a surround-view parking camera is standard.
Standard safety equipment on both cars includes automatic city emergency braking, which will apply the brakes at low speeds if the car senses an imminent collision, but adaptive cruise control is available only as part of an expensive pack. The F-pace displays the prevailing speed limit on the digital part of its instrument panel as standard; you have to pay £500 for the Tour Pack if you want that feature on the Q5, but doing so also gives you traffic jam and lane-keeping assistance.
Euro NCAP awarded both cars a five-star safety rating, but the tests were carried out a few years ago, under less stringent criteria than those for cars introduced this year.
Neither car performed brilliantly in the latest What Car? Reliability Survey. The F-pace finished seventh and the Q5 eighth in the 15-strong large SUV class.
WHAT CAR? SAYS
The F-pace is now the best it’s ever been, thanks in particular to the huge improvements that have been made to its interior nish and infotainment. It feels absolutely up to date in every respect, and the D200 in particular is now a great buy. It’s easy to see why you’d go for the F-pace despite the strength of the competition, especially with compelling nance deals.
However, it isn’t quite strong enough to take the win here. After all, the Q5 remains more re ned and comfortable, with even better quality throughout its interior. Plus, if you add those optional sliding rear seats, it’s more practical. Overall, the gap between these two is smaller than ever, but the Q5 is still the one to beat.
Audi Q5
For Smooth, re ned engine; great to drive; big boot and optional sliding seats
Against Higher nance costs; optional equipment packs quickly up the price
Recommended options Comfort and Sound Pack (£1395), metallic paint (£695), rear bench seat plus (£350)
Jaguar F-pace
For Sweeter steering; smart interior; sophisticated, user-friendly infotainment
Against Clunky gearbox; engine is noisy when revved; less settled ride
Recommended options Meridian sound system (£840), metallic paint (£740), keyless entry (£555)