By on December 12, 2014

2016-Audi-Q7-1

The current Audi Q7 is unequivocally a CUV. This one is some sort of David Bowie-esque androgynous mix of CUV and wagon. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Thanks to an aggressive lightweighting program, the Q7 sheds about 700 pounds from its current 5000 lb curb weight. A new 2.0T 4-cylinder will be optional for the US market. Rear-wheel steering, similar to the Japanese systems of the 1980’s, will be available. An all-wheel drive diesel plug-in hybrid will be offered, with 373 horsepower and 516 lb-ft acheiving 138 mpgE. But so far, it hasn’t been confirmed for our market.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

95 Comments on “Audi Q7 Further Blurs The CUV/Wagon line...”


  • avatar
    LeeK

    Still a three-row SUV? Still built in the Cayenne/Touareg platform, or is this all-new?

    Edit: yep, the last picture in the series shows a third row of seats.

    • 0 avatar
      carguy

      Whatever it is, it blurs no lines.

      It’s a wagon pure and simple.

    • 0 avatar
      mart_o_rama

      I’m thinking they are “downsizing” the Q7 to make way for that Q9 thing we heard about a while back…

      As a current Q7 owner I’m glad this new generation is different, so it doesn’t render the old one obsolete in the used market. That applies to any car being superseded by a new generation.

      • 0 avatar
        jkk6

        +1 at that for used car buyers.

        Audi does such a good job at slanting, cutting, rearranging their healights and tail lights that i cant tell whether it is a 07 or 2017.

        Nissan and Infiniti also achieve a similiar feat just that im pretty sure its for other reasons like “dont ditch that successful design” sort a thing making them look repetative.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    Wow, it sure looks like the future VW crossover that maybe might happen someday if, who knows

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    “But so far, it hasn’t been confirmed for our market.”

    We sure dodge a lot of bullets that way. Kind of like having our own extra atmosphere. Unfortunately it also keeps out some good stuff like the Qubo and Caddy.

    • 0 avatar
      Lie2me

      VAG just wants to hear us clamor for it, I don’t care, too low for me. I wouldn’t care if all Volkswagens “weren’t confirmed for our market” I’ll never own one

    • 0 avatar
      moorewr

      There’s no escaping the Q7 – what we may not get is the diesel-electric hybrid.

      Too bad, because I’ve thought since the beginning that diesels were much better fits than gasoline engines as range extenders for electric-drive vehicles. Diesels love doing that low fixed-RPM thing efficiently.

  • avatar
    nguyenvuminh

    I just posted the same sentiment in a different auto website and that is this version gives it more of a large station wagon appearance. Personally, I like station wagons and minivans (the original smaller size, not the current ones) so this doesn’t bother me one bit but it seems like Audi is taking a bit of a risk on a market that clearly favors CUV/SUV much more than station wagon.

  • avatar
    Alfisti

    It’s a Ford Flex all prettied up no?

  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    4300lb, three row, 2.0T. Yeah, no.

    • 0 avatar
      sproc

      I’m not so quick to judge. If it’s the 292hp version it might have plenty of go and some relatively impressive gas numbers.

      • 0 avatar
        moorewr

        C&D says 250 hp. Plenty of torque. Wont be fast but it will be sufficient.

        I was surprised that the current asteroid-sized Q7 had a three-liter engine (the supercharged V6 – 333 hp), but it feels properly athletic.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Lol that’s what I’m sayin. Need at LEAST a 2.8T for that size. Cause I’m sure the Allroad was up there at a similar weight.

      • 0 avatar
        moorewr

        Current car has a supercharged V6, 333 hp. The power/lb. ratio will be pretty close with the 2.0 and lighter vehicle. Modern small turbo engines can have amazing torque at low rpm.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          The current Q7 with the 3.0T is almost powerful enough. If this one is going to retain the current Audi customers I know, it is going to have to be available with a much better engine than any of the 2 liter turbos. A friend’s wife almost traded her S4 for a Q7 yesterday, but I warned them at the last second that the next Q7 was on the way. They were ambivalent about the current Q7’s lack of power already, and hoping the next one would have the S8’s engine.

          • 0 avatar
            darkwing

            I had one as a loaner recently — the V6 had enough power to give it that pseudo-truck feel that I’m guessing buyers in the demo go for. In traffic, it can almost be sprightly, once you figure out how to motivate it. Although, with a two-liter turbodiesel and a decent transmission, you might be able to get away with four cylinders…

            Mostly, I was disappointed by the lack of options. I figure you should be able to get a lot of the A8’s goodies on their (for now, anyway) range-topping SUV. Maybe they’re reserving the 4.0T and the goodies for the Q8/Q9/whatever?

      • 0 avatar
        tekdemon

        VAG has 2.0T motors that put out over 350lb/ft of torque (some with well over that…see the Golf R 400’s motor) so I’m not sure why you’re convinced that it needs 2.8L to make sufficient power.
        Of course in this particular car/wag/cuv/whatever it’s probably going to make less torque than that, but I’m going to guess about 280lb/ft or so, which is more than sufficient even for a 4400lb vehicle loaded with 7 passengers. If you do the math it’d still have the same power to weight ratio as a 4 cylinder passenger vehicles with occupants in it.

        If you really want to be able to go 0-60 in 6 seconds despite driving a 3 row vehicle with 7 passengers in it just pay Audi the extra $10K or whatever they’ll ask for the twin turbo V6.

      • 0 avatar
        jrmason

        And yet F*rd throws a 2.3 liter in a pickup several hundred pounds heavier, rates it to tow nearly 6 ton, and the Fordians are on their knees begging for worthiness. Funny how that works, eh?

    • 0 avatar

      Im guessing a bigger engine will be optional. I like it, don;t want to own another VAG product so I’m not buying, but I do like it.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    No big deal. If the market doesn’t like the lower stance, it’s a simple matter to raise it again, at the cost of a mpg or two.

    I’m impressed by the weight reduction. 4300 lbs is not bad at all for something in this segment. I hope this means good things for the upcoming MLB A4 and A6.

  • avatar
    baconator

    The lower these CUVs get, the more I like them. This and the Macan are heading in the right direction.

  • avatar
    James2

    Too bad there’s no photo of the old Q7 next to the new Q7 to get a sense of the reduction (if any) in size.

  • avatar
    2drsedanman

    Like the open greenhouse. Could do without the extra wide F-150 console.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    Glad I got my 2012 when I did. Mine may not have a low-range, but it’s still somewhat off-road capable. It looks rugged too compared to this. I’ll be holding on for a LONG time.

    • 0 avatar
      moorewr

      Have you or do you ever plan to offroad in your Q7? Do you have the (cool) adjustable ride height suspension? Just curious.

      No A4 allroad owner I know has gone further off-road than a grass parking lot.

  • avatar
    Cactuar

    I thought it had an English Land Rover-esque look to it, then I remembered Bentley is working on an SUV. Looking at pics of the Bentley SUV concept, it looks like it will use a platform similar (if not the same) to this new Q7.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    A step in the right direction (down) but an A6 Avant this is not. Fell out of the ugly tree, hit most of the branches on the way down.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The styling isn’t anything to write home about. Seems like it’s just closer to the Touareg than before, making it easier to produce/engineer.

    And 2.0T isn’t a good thing in this size.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    The narrow-line dash has a retro vibe to it. Me gusta.

  • avatar
    vvk

    I absolutely loooove this look. I hope it looks like a station wagon in real life, too.

    If I ever buy this, the first thing I am going to do is upgrade the wheels to 17″.

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    That center console, nay, monolith would make you think you were in an old cabover van.

    You’d have to be one of DW’s euro purse puppies to slither in alongs*de it.

    • 0 avatar
      dtremit

      I think maybe they were looking at aircraft carriers the day they designed it.

      Also, the placement of that doofy trackpad is an ergonomic nightmare.

      • 0 avatar
        moorewr

        Actually it falls pretty well to hand in the A3 – you don’t need to look at it, so it should be in the natural line for right hand, which after all isn’t busy changing gears or driving or anything.

  • avatar
    Tstag

    This is ugly. But then I think most crossover look bad. Only one I like the look of is the Jag concept car. I think it will do very well when it launches

  • avatar
    raresleeper

    Rear wheel steering FTW!!!! Lol

    I love it. Reminds me of the HICAS (IIRC…?) 4-wheel steering on the 300GT/GTO VR-4 Mitsu’s. I’m fairly certain there were other manufacturers utilizing four wheel steering, but I’m having a 4:30 CST Friday moment at the office and I’m just not making the connection.

    The wagon approach is sweeeeeet. Lets hope the market likes it. Maybe they’ll hunker it down a little more.

    And paint it brown!!! (I think I’m blushing)

    • 0 avatar
      jrmason

      GM tried their hand in rear wheel steering on the full sized pickups and suburbans from 02-05. Initial cost was a $5600 option, and by the last model year they were all but giving it away as a $900 option. I got such a kick out of their advertisements, every single commercial I ever saw was marketed towards ranchers and farmers. I grew up on a 1000 acre ranch in Wyoming, and I’ll be the first to tell ya they flopped on their target audience. Anybody whose ever spent any amount of time on a ranch can just about back a trailer up blind folded. The average weekend warrior hauling his boat or camper would have been a much better audience to swindle, but I’m sure the end result would have still been the same.

    • 0 avatar
      dtremit

      There’s a fairly long list of cars that offered it, but the most common was probably the 2nd/3rd gen Prelude. I think 4th gen only offered the option in Japan.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steering#Four-wheel_steering

  • avatar
    SatelliteView

    Most of you are so sad and primitive… This is a nice car, definitely modern, definitely well designed, definitely practical, definitely luxurious, etc, etc, etc.

    Many of you seem to stuck at certain time capsule from which everything is judged. This reminds me of the current Russian ruling order. Western world has moved on, yet these people live in 1930’s, with corresponding judging and world views.

    Comments about “I would not own it, even if it’d be given to me” are laughable. It’s the same as brain-washed Russian “winter fiber-jackets” say about the West’s standards of life

    Guys, keep an open mind. Manuals, brown wagons, and other crap does not exist; it never did.

    Anyone seen Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris? There you go…

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    Why is everybody talking about the rear wheel steering like it’s something novel? The TLX already has it. So do a bunch of other cars.

  • avatar
    George B

    Who is the target customer? The Audi badge helps, but is a wife going to demand her husband buy this for her instead of a BMW X5? It has too many rows of seats for anyone single and wives hold veto power regarding family vehicles. Insufficient altitude didn’t work out so well for the Flex.

  • avatar
    kmars2009

    Looking eerily similar to the VW CUV expected here soon. Only priced accordingly, I’m sure.

  • avatar
    05lgt

    It’s pretty. Someone find me an aftermarket manufacturer of reliability and longevity. OH! … Nevermind.

  • avatar
    iMatt

    I like how the interior design mimics that of the new exterior…squished.

    I’m more inclined to think of this thing as a minivan, and as with the Flex, seems to me as just an oversized blob.

    Hope they can find room in that engine bay for the optional 2.0 L engine!

    • 0 avatar
      petezeiss

      “I like how the interior design mimics that of the new exterior…squished.”

      Truth.. the doors have 7″ of blow-molded intrusiveness pushing on one s1de of you and there’s that plastic mesa running down the middle.

      Gotta have some pretty svelte hipster hips to snuggle in there.

  • avatar
    don1967

    I’m seeing GLK with 25% less SUV.

    Keep this up and pretty soon we’ll have a ’54 Desoto Estate Wagon.

    http://www.allpar.com/cotm/2009/desoto.html

  • avatar
    make_light

    What is with this bright blue color that car companies seem to love lately? I can’t stand it. And this is coming from someone with an orange car.

    I can’t make up my mind on the car itself. I don’t mind the more wagon-like shape, but the front end almost reminds me of the upcoming Ford Edge.

  • avatar
    Signal11

    Its was 90s era, not the 80s, that saw the proliferation of 4WS in Japanese sports cars. I had a 96 Prelude Si that was sweetly nimble and I wouldn’t poopoo it.

    It’s also available as an option on most BMW 5 series as well. I’ve never had a rental with one, but after my experience with the 4WS on my Prelude, I’d probably tick the box for it if I were in the market for a 5 series.

  • avatar
    Brock_Landers

    4WS came in the second half of 80’s. 1986 Nissan, 1987 Honda etc. The 4WS has advanced a lot over the years and compared to 80’s tech current systems hugely impact the handling characteristics of the car (gives driver the impression of God’s abilities behind the wheel so to speak). Now it is offered by Lexus (since 2013), BMW (2009) and even Renault.

  • avatar
    Q

    This will be bought by those that would normally buy a subie, but pick this on styling (likely due to overruling from one spouse) and/or the badge.

    I bet they pick up some Subaru market share.

    • 0 avatar
      moorewr

      There’s no overlap in price, This is a whole category more expensive than the old Tribeca.

      There may be some cross-shopping between the Forester and Outback on one hand and Q5 and allroad on the other, but given the price differences I doubt it’s much.

  • avatar
    EAF

    My only experience with 4WS was on the Mitsu Galant VR4, I want to say it was a 1992 model? The steering made the car feel light and nimble but was scary at high speed. It felt very “squirelly” as if only a light jerk of the steering wheel could send you hurling into a wall. Granted, the speed I’m talking about was well beyond the legal limits.

  • avatar
    doublechili

    A padded shifter?

    It’s so big it’s like a little lounge chair for your right hand.

    I feel compelled to finally type three letter I’ve never typed before:

    WTF?

  • avatar

    This makes me excited for the upcoming V90 large wagon on the Volvo SPA architecture.

  • avatar
    pb35

    I’m no Audi fan (my last vee dub was in 1989) but this is nice.

  • avatar
    JaySeis

    Well, “journalists” might be confused but to the rest of us it’s a wagon. Calling it a CUV is market speak.

  • avatar
    VenomV12

    This thing is awful, they ruined the once great looking Q7 and turned it into a bland wagon. I really like the new Volvo XC90 except for the 4 cylinder engine that makes me want to puke.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • geozinger: Fnck. I’ve lost lots of cars to the tinworm. I had a 97 Cavalier that I ran up to 265000 miles. The...
  • jh26036: Who is paying $55k for a CTR? Plenty are going before the $35k sticker.
  • JimZ: Since that’s not going to happen, why should I waste any time on your nonsensical what-if?
  • JimZ: Funny, Jim Hackett said basically the same thing yesterday and people were flinging crap left and right.
  • JimZ: That and the fact that they could run on gasoline, which was considered a useless waste product back in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States