2008 Volkswagen R50 offroad review
November 10, 2008 by Karl Peskett
Sure, it’s no Land Rover Defender, but considering how adaptable it is, and where its real focus lies – on road efficacy – it’s mighty impressive. The centre of gravity is very low, too, so you never feel as if the car will roll.
The R50 conquered the track effectively. It climbed, descended, crossed, and slid through almost all sections – the exception being some downhill descents that you just knew were a challenge for everything except highly modified four-wheel drives.
The four-zone climate control was running non-stop. The engine was never turned off for the whole time, either. Yet the temperature gauge didn’t move a millimetre. The seals also prevented dust entering the cabin.
For a stocker, the R50 is everything you’d need, and then some. The incredulous look on the faces of those with us, kind of gives you the idea that the R50 is an impressive piece of kit. They watched with awe and even trepidation, expecting something to go wrong but thankfully, nothing did.
The tyres flexed enough, the suspension lifted enough, the engine proved its worth, and the interior kept us comfortable and calm. That’s why we’ve rebooked the R50 for a 2000km road trip, later in the year.
Being able to walk over boulders on three wheels, yet accelerate and hang onto the road better than some sports cars, the R50 has my vote as one of the most versatile vehicles ever made.
CarAdvice Overall Rating: 
How does it Drive:
How does it Look: 
How does it Go:
Specifications:
- Engine: 4921cc V10
- Power: 258kW @ 3500rpm
- Torque: 850Nm @ 2000rpm
- Induction: Twin-turbocharged
- Transmission: Six-speed automatic with DSP & 4MOTION
- Brakes: Disc with ABS, EBA, EBD & EDL
- Top Speed: 235km/h
- 0-100km/h: 6.8 seconds
- 0-400m: 14.8 sceonds
- Driven wheels: All
- Weight: 2532kg (Tare)
- Fuel Type: Diesel
- Fuel Tank Capacity: 100 litres
- Fuel Consumption: 12.6 litres/100km (Combined)
- ANCAP Rating: Five star
- Safety: ESP with TCS; Front, side & curtain airbags
- Spare Wheel: Tyre ealant & 12-volt compressor
- Tow Capacity: 3500kg (Braked)
- Turning Circle: 11.6 metres
- Warranty: 3 year/100,000km
- Wheels: Omanyt 21×10 inch alloy
I still would not drive any 4×4 off road when it costs around $130,000 because sooner or later your going to scratch something & regret it later. Still, its a great looking 4×4 with an excellent motor but should be mainly used on road with the occasional off road trip.
Cheers !
Is this near MT buller in Vic?
Lightbulb Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 7:37 am
“I still would not drive any 4×4 off road when it costs around $130,000 because sooner or later your going to scratch something & regret it later.”
C’mon Lightbulb, if you had that much money to play with, do you think it would really matter at all?!?
Fantastic review CA! Another brilliant example of fine R&D and engineering from VW. Leaves the crap LC200 (and glorified Toyboataxus LX570) for dead!!!
Great Pics, Great Artical…. I want a blue one too… I wonder if Santa could fit one down the chimney…..
VW Freak Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 9:22 am
“Fantastic review CA! Another brilliant example of fine R&D and engineering from VW. Leaves the crap LC200 (and glorified Toyboataxus LX570) for dead!!!”
You are seriously deluded if you think the new 200 series LandCruiser is “crap”.
Please VW Freak, don’t compare this soft-roader, with a true offroader such as the LC200!!
A friend at works brother bought an LC200 for offroading and has the dust problem they had on Top Gear. I think that’s enough to make it crap. I mean, it stuffs up the job it’s meant to be most good at. I’d prefer a Range Rover over this anyday. The RR is better on road, better off road, more tastefull and more un-noticed. All good things when you’re spending that much.
Alex, valid points about the RR over the Touareg, but this is a car that you won’t have to take tot he shop every month for YET ANOTHER warranty issue. At first I thought RR’s reliability was just people passing on crap. But its not. Its true. I found out for myself. Rang up a few owners on carpoint and looked in their service history. Not a pretty sight at all. This is a solid German car that won’t run itself into the ground after 30,000kms, I’ll take it any day over Americanized British cars.
There is also another Blog topic on this site about the Landcruiser – and there are quite a considerable number of Landcruiser owners on there going on about a range of various problems they have experienced with their Cruisers.
I’m not saying this is a bad thing – its just highlighting the fact that there are a few Toyowners who are capable of admitting that Toyotas build quality isn’t as good as they make out to be
Because when a car company has built its success on a reputation for building such a strong reliable car Toyota have with the cruiser.. when the level of quality etc starts to fall people are going to think something wrong.
Particularly as Toyota have more money as well as access to the same resources and technology as its rivals and should therefore be able to stay in front of; if not keep up with the competition such as VW – in terms of design engineering power and features etc
Mitch Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 9:02 am
“Is this near MT buller in Vic?”
From what I can work out all the other numberplates are from WA. I’d say it’s Mundaring in the Perth hills and the service station pic looks like the BP servo in Midland on Gt Eastern Hwy.
BTW – Tomas79 you’ll notice that I wasn’t the first one to mention Toyota
I merely responded to other bloggers comments [including yours] by referring to a blog where Toyowners are having problems with their Crusisers
Whilst the Cruiser is by no means “CRAP”.. its not as good as it used to be.. That is a couple of years ago the buying a Landcruiser was a no-brainer for those wanting a Full Size 4×4 [just as it was with the Corolla].
However; [just as it is with the Corolla] Toyota have sat on their laurels whilst other 4×4 manufacturers which were once never really thought f as a rival to the Landcruiser are now producing cars of equal if not better quality.. thereby making it a much harder decision.
I used to own a Land Cruiser, and loved it.
Fuel economy was rediculous though.
Don’t like the 200 at all. Too big, too plastic, too heavy and way too pricey. I think Toyota has lost it with this model….. Although the market is still snapping them up!
Am now looking at a second hand 100, especially with used values dropping quicker than ever before.
I like the Toureg, great interior, awesome front seats although pretty tight in the rear. Solid understated styling. Class
Alex Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
“The RR is better on road, better off road, more tastefull and more un-noticed. All good things when you’re spending that much.”
The RR is one sexy looking car… until you sit inside it. They need to employ a german interior designer…
Wheelnut Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
“I’m not saying this is a bad thing – its just highlighting the fact that there are a few Toyowners who are capable of admitting that Toyotas build quality isn’t as good as they make out to be”
Wheelnut, the problems my colleagues have faced are more to do with the increased electronic aids that have been introduced, and also the auto gearbox (which won’t stay in 6th!). Build qulaity hasn’t been really an issue at all.
I’d take a 70 series over a 200 series for true offroading anyway.
Alec Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
“Don’t like the 200 at all. Too big, too plastic, too heavy and way too pricey. I think Toyota has lost it with this model….. Although the market is still snapping them up!”
Definitely too pricey, between models it’s gone up over $10K!
“Am now looking at a second hand 100, especially with used values dropping quicker than ever before.”
Excellent choice – you could get a 3 year old Sahara for around $55K these days with the works.
Wheelnut, fair enough, on this occasion you weren’t the first one to mention the toyota, but your comment still revolved around one… Anyway, i agree with you, I personally woudn’t get a LC200 either. It’s fuel tank is too small, and it’s too heavy, which means you are seriously restricted if you wanna add some accessories and keep it on a legal weight…
I love the final pic.
And having been in the std. V10 towing a car, the engine is other worldly, didn’t know there was over a tonne behind it.
Can’t wait for the 2000 kilometre road trip, see how the R50 compares to the competition. Personally I think the new LandCruiser is uncouth and ugly, however it is probably excellent in the rough stuff so I give praise for that. This torque tycoon from Wolfsburg is probably 90% as capable as the LandCruiser (or anything else of equivalency) in the rough stuff but more than 50% more capable on the asphalt and 99.9% better looking.
As for the price, I agree with VW Freak, people who can afford this piece of machinery should be able to afford to actually use the thing for its intended use, if they don’t then they should do the commonsense thing and purchase a Passat R36!
If I was in the market for a serious off-roader.. I’d opt for either a Ozi Bushranger or a UK Bowler both of which are bare bone 4×4s based on a Land Rover Defender with V8s and fully adjustable independent suspension..
Landcruisers Touaregs and Patrols and the like are all aimed at image conscious “Pajeros” who would be lucky to travel 100Km from the GPO
Wheelnut you seriously have no idea, you do realise that people have been using patrols cruisers landrovers and range rovers to tour all of this country for a hell of a lot of years, pick up 4wd australia or 4×4 action one day, if you think the landcruisers and patrols etc would be lucky to travel 100km from the ‘GPO’ your in for a very big shock, i’ve also seen competition vehicles based on your average forby that would go places a bowler or bushranger couldn’t dream of
Mundaring Powerline = Western Australia
Haven’t tried in the Nissan X-trail yet !!
I want one!
Wheelnut, thats one stupid comment!
Spam word: LandRover!
Interesting review. I have a TDV6. It has excellent Hill descent. On page three the article says the R50 doesn’t have hill descent.
“Without a hill-descent feature, it was left to careful pedal pressure to regulate our downwards descents. Left foot braking is also handy, as sometimes you’ll need to hold the car in position while adding a touch of accelerator, to (very) slowly creep up the hills. ”
I’d be very surprised if this feature had been removed. I suspect the author didn’t know that if you stop, put it into first gear, and then release the break the Touareg will do an excellent job of creeping down a slippery slope with all four wheels using the ABS as necessary.
Wheelnut Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
“Landcruisers Touaregs and Patrols and the like are all aimed at image conscious “Pajeros” who would be lucky to travel 100Km from the GPO”
Don’t lower yourself to Andrew M’s level of intelligence mate…
Nice article CA. I’m jealous we haven’t got anywhere to take off roaders like that. Just goes to prove even a decent softoff roader can do the same as a “proper” 4×4. However I do think the R50 is a bit “bling” I rather stick to the less pretentiuos version.
Hello there, you mention no hill descent, mine has and its not listed anywhere in the options, so i cant see how yours didn’t. Have you used the hill descent in other T’regs?
Richard, and others: You are correct. The R50 does have a hill-descent feature, and hill-hold. Cheers.
I have the V6 TDI engined model, and have done sections of the Mundaring Power Line track. The higher profile tyres (and less bling) are better suited to the environment.
A great car overall, that is by no means a softroader. It has a centre diff, hill-hold, hill descent control, and the all terrain technology. A solid, classy German 4WD.
I am lucky enough to be ordering one of these… Having driven an R50 in Saudi, I fell in love with it… I have just recently done an order for a client and went through the AUDI, MERC & BMW range, when asked what I wanted as a company vehicle without even blinking an eye, I blurted R50, I can’t wait!