ML350 or VW Touareg, which one?

[kevinchung]

I am looking for a four wheel drive. My choice is a second hand W163 ML, a brand new W164 ML350 or a VW Touareg 3.2. In Australia, a second hand W163 ML350 costs around $A60k. New W164 ML350 cost $100k, a new VW Touareg costs $75k. Which one will you choose? And why? I personal like new ML but cost too much. New VW is in good price but VW is better or Mercedes is better? New Range Rover Sport costs $100k too, but is it worth to trust? Thanks Kevin

To remove this ad, register today or login if you already are registered!

[schrodinger_I]

I just turned my 2005 VW Touareg V8 back in to the dealership. I was able
to turn it in under lemon law provisions because it had had the same
issue over and over. I had to get a wheel alignment every month or so and the tire wear was terrible. I got all my money back from VW. They even offered me a 2006. I replaced the Touareg with a 2006 ML350 and have no regrets. The VW was nice. It had plenty of power and felt solid but having to take it to the dealer monthly where I got mediocre service in my opinion just wasn't acceptable. Check Consumer Reports for the Touareg and you will see that is it extremely unreliable, and the 2004 and 2005 models are on the list of used cars to avoid. I hope this helps...

[ml350]

Hi,

are you buy the car in the USA or Australia?

[SEXYBEEST]

vw's are great looking but and drive ok but
vw service is horrable
you must service the tourege every 5k
they have had more than their amount of bugs
no loaners

[kevinchung]

VW dealer service is very bad, so I worry how bad they will be after I buy.
Another option will be Range Rover sport. It is a same price as ML.

BTW, I am looking for a car in Australia.

[benzmodz]

Originally Posted by kevinchung

VW dealer service is very bad, so I worry how bad they will be after I buy.
Another option will be Range Rover sport. It is a same price as ML.

BTW, I am looking for a car in Australia.

I have to agree with the service problems in Australia. My friend was robbed of his engine cover in Perth and told his pads were all worn - still after 7000Km pads are still good. His dash wood cracked so they replaced 6 panels (whole set) but now his pass. window switch doesnt work, the panels dont match and the glovebox panel rattles badly. Diagnostics are some kind of major black box and even technicians get it wrong. So no cabin lights if the left door opens.

.... second thing .... no retrofits in the VW. What you pay is what you get. Cant add Xenon's, no second battery, no way to add things easily. In Australia all of the packages suck unless you go to the highest and the one below that. In the lowest model there is no CD stacker possible to retrofit.

However, it is technically higher and more intelligent as a car than the ML. It can do more than the ML can do. I think the 2007 is getting the optical fibre technology same as the ML.

At least with the Mercedes you can order all options with all engine sizes. Maybe the car is already in Australia or maybe it is custom build. With the VW it is a preset menu in Australia.

[sosh]

My advice is anything but the Touraeg. They are horrible and I believe ugly. Both the Touraeg and its sister the Cayenne have been deemed a commercial failure by leading auto industry analyists. Of the other 2 ML choices of ML's my first would be a new W164 and then a W163. The W164 is far superior to the W163 and with much better quality control. I owned 2 W163's, a 98 ML320 and an 02 ML500. I now have a 06 ML500. Both W163's were fine with a few minor glitches and the W164 has been flawless.

[kevinchung]

Range Rover sport looks good but all Land Rover is very bad resell value.
I am driving a W203 Mercedes and I am very happy, so I think new ML will be the only one choice

Kevin

[ruykava]

OK, first thing: just strike the W163 out of your list. nice when it came out, now too outdated.

toureg vs ML: toureg for off roading; ML for the city. ML cabin is nicer IMO and it is much more "car like" than the toureg. but in the mud you need the off-road pack on the ML to catch up with the standard toureg.

[sosh]

Originally Posted by ruykava

OK, first thing: just strike the W163 out of your list. nice when it came out, now too outdated.

toureg vs ML: toureg for off roading; ML for the city. ML cabin is nicer IMO and it is much more "car like" than the toureg. but in the mud you need the off-road pack on the ML to catch up with the standard toureg.

Don't know where this poster is coming from or where he gets his ideas from. The W163 is less outdated than many of the SUV's being sold on the new market. As far as the VW is concerned they are terrible off road or for that matter in snow on road. In addition they are unreliable and poor quality. You get what you pay for!! As for the W164, even without the off road package they are fine off road and in any on road situation. Even the std W164 gives you an offroad mode and a hill decent mode. The off road package includes a low range ala W163 but having owned 2 W163's I can tell you I never used it except once to play with it. Do not believe this poster has any experience with any of the vehicles mentioned.

[jangy]

Originally Posted by ruykava

OK, first thing: just strike the W163 out of your list. nice when it came out, now too outdated.

toureg vs ML: toureg for off roading; ML for the city. ML cabin is nicer IMO and it is much more "car like" than the toureg. but in the mud you need the off-road pack on the ML to catch up with the standard toureg.

I agree. The old ML was OLD a few years back!! The VW is definitely better off-road, but most people don't use that ability.

[MB Max]

I am also in the market for a SUV - my choices at this point are the same - Touareg, Cayenne, ML. I really like the Touareg but.....all I've read and heard about them has kicked it out of consideration. My neighbor run the repair shop of a local VW dealer and he hasn't said pleasant things about the Touareg (even though he likes them). A lot of basic quality issues. I just spoke to him yesterday about this same issue and he's said there has been some re-engineering that's made them better. If you've visited some of the boards for the Touareg, it doesn't provide you a lot of comfort that things are better. Tire wear, alignment issues, etc. Same holds true for the Cayenne - but not to the degree of the VW. The ML seems to have been good out of the box - except for the transmission issue that appears to have been worked out. I like the design of the Touareg over the ML - but I'm likely to go ML.

[ruykava]

As far as the VW is concerned they are terrible off road or for that matter in snow on road.

not the Toureg - perhaps VW in general. i never said the W164 isn't good for off road. i said the Toureg is better.

take approach/departure angles: Toureg 28 degrees (33 with air); W164 approach 25/31 (air) approach, 24/29 (air) depart.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/rr/04touareg.htm
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...iew_specs.html

and it comes with hill descent and hill start as standard as well. in fact, i found it easier to switch modes with the big rotary dial on the Toureg. but overall i prefer the W164 interior.

as for W163: maybe there are more outdated SUVs out there, but it is outdated. and yes, family has a W163 - i appreciate it's not as bad as the magazines make it out to be, but it is outclassed in this company.

[kevinchung]

I will never use it off road, just city use. I need a car drive everyday, less porblem. My friend had a Freelander, always has small problem. Can't open door, sometime all lock open itself, water go in...
I worry I buy a car like this cos I will drive it everyday.

Kevin