Comments on: 2008 Volkswagen Touareg R50 Review

By: owner

owner — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 03:11:50 +0000

The porsche pit, A turbo cost $230 000 that is nearly $100 000 more

By: geoff

geoff — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:16:46 +0000

the porsche pit..
“For the price though I’d rather take a Cayenne turbo.”

Um.. there is a few $$ between this and a Cayenne Turbo actually few $$ is not really the term…

By: weirluo

weirluo — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 12:47:52 +0000

I went to a dealer to see volkswagen Touareg. It’s a big vehicle, don’t know why, it looks a lot bigger than a TDI3.6 model. it made me wonder why such a big one doesn’t offer 7 seat option.

By: Sanjay

Sanjay — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 05:36:04 +0000

even if you were unfortunate enough to get 12.1l/100km out of a modern FG falcon it would be 12.1 litres of PETROL, not $1.85 per litre diesel…so such a statement as you made on the last page there to me seems ludicrous.

beaut car though, if i were driving with my collared-shirt and v-neck sweater to norwood parade to get a cafe latte i wouldnt want to drive anything else…

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:28:56 +0000

I’d much prefer this to a Cayenne

By: No Name

No Name — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:34:51 +0000

I reckon this is one of the most accomplished samrtest SUV’s on the market today even with smaller engines.
I’d have one no-problem.

By: The Porsche Pit

The Porsche Pit — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:49:17 +0000

I like it. It looks clean. For the price though I’d rather take a Cayenne turbo. Sure the fuel will be more but its a Porsche..worth every penny…

Ryan

By: Casey

Casey — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:37:10 +0000

Duck, did you even read the article? Then perhaps you’d understand what Timmy & I are discussing.

By: T

Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:52:41 +0000

to those who say the kw’s are low for a v10

ITS A DIESEL

it make 850NM of torque @ 2000 rpm

who needs kw!!

strange how 2.6 tonne with such low kw can pull 0-100 in 6 and a bit…. kw= sfa in this rig

By: Duck

Duck — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:51:23 +0000

Casey, may I ask why the hell are you comparing Commodore’s to a VW Touareg R50!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Big difference in class (sedan, to 4×4 etc.)

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:29:41 +0000

Looks amazing, inside and out.

I’d love some better interior photos.

Im not a fan of most of the big SUV’s, but that is one sensational looking SUV.

By: Casey

Casey — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 08:14:23 +0000

Commos and Falcon can’t come any where close to meeting their fuel test figures. Our VEs at work regularly run in the 16s, sometimes more. I bet a diesel would run closer to the tested figure, and besides this looks way better than a VE or FG.

By: James Falzon

James Falzon — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:44:28 +0000

The R50 is without a doubt the best value for money luxury performance SUV available. It is the only that will offer a 5 year factory warranty if required.Equilise the options on the Audi or BMW will have you over $150k. the 200 series Toyota Sahara will set you back $120k, and really how many are used off road ? The R50 eats the Toyota in performance, value, specifications, options and has a 6th gear that actually works. I want one !

By: timmy201

timmy201 — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:25:35 +0000

“The average combined consumption of the R50 is 12.6 litres per 100km, and it is very easily attainable if you manage to curb your enthusiasm. This makes the R50 no more costly to fuel than a Falcon or Commodore!”

The official figure of the fg falcon with the 6 speed is 10.1… on unleaded… which is 20c litre cheaper than diesel..

By: Reckless1

Reckless1 — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:36:58 +0000

Haven’t checked last night’s 50 mil yet. Maybe I can get the BMW and one of these as well :)

By: Sgt.Sweetchuck

Sgt.Sweetchuck — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:46:11 +0000

I reckon they would have sold more of these had they had a third row seat option.
Compared to Q7/X5/ML/GL you don’t see many Toe rags on the road.

By: A

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:15:15 +0000

What are you on, it is 258kw from a diesel not petrol that is unreal.

By: o

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:10:28 +0000

230kw for a v10 isnt really that good. V6s are pumping that out these days.But all that gloruoius tourque

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 17:12:40 +0000

I quite like this car but theres something a bit cumbersome about large SUVs with extravagent body kits. The X5 M Sport looks terribly cheap, an RRS with an after market body kit looks terrible and the Audi Q7 S Line looks terrible aswell. Im not sure what to think really but this one looks the best so far – not so much like the body kits out of place.

By: aubz

aubz — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:38:13 +0000

Good review, but could we please have some higher resolution photos of the interior, thanks.