|
|
Post by michael on Jan 21, 2018 20:36:57 GMT
A friend of mine is considering trading his Discovery 4 commercial in for a pickup and booked a test drive of this X class which is essentially a Nissan Navara. I didn’t drive it but sat in the back. It rides nicely enough on and off road and didn’t seem too unwieldy in corners. It’s ridiculously slow, however. Apparently there’s a V6 on the way which should address any performance concerns. It did better off road than I though it might but the lack of weight over the back end was obvious as that’s where the traction issues began. This example didn’t have a diff lock although I’m told it’s an option. It was on standard road biased tyres too so asking it to cross a snow covered field and up an embankment was perhaps unfair on the car and the sales representative. The bonnet line is very high and may offer some sense as to what it’s like to pilot an oil tanker. The interior is nice enough, probably very nice for this sort of vehicle but it’s less car like than I’d want with large swathes of plastic although the dash top was trimmed in some leather like fabric. I have little to compare it too but I understand it’s significantly more expensive than the Navara and I’m unsure as to what that premium buys - probably the interior. There’s a Renault version which I think is nicer looking and no doubt cheaper. The hose clean load bay is desirable but for me the compromises outweigh the benefits. That said if I could take advantage of the tax position I could see why a lot of people choose these things.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2018 21:58:30 GMT
All Mercedes bonnets are too high. Ruins the looks of virtually every car they make.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 22, 2018 6:41:22 GMT
I don't think I would be willing to pay much of a premium for a Navara with a Mercedes badge. I'd be more likely to go and get a Mitsubishi. That is not the most attractive double cab pickup!
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 22, 2018 11:05:35 GMT
It's not a looker at all, few of them are but I think the Nissan and Renault version are far more successful. The cab may be better but I think that misses the point of this kind of vehicle. I prefer the looks of the Ranger and Amarok to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by humphreythepug on Jan 22, 2018 12:47:20 GMT
The Renault version is called the Alaskan, it is on sale but not in Europe yet, I'm not even sure if it is coming to the UK, it was but things have gone a bit quiet on that front.
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jan 22, 2018 13:22:14 GMT
Ranger and amorok for me but the VW does look flipping huge compared to the others in its class.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 23, 2018 12:13:36 GMT
......It did better off road than I thought it might but the lack of weight over the back end was obvious as that’s where the traction issues began. This example didn’t have a diff lock although I’m told it’s an option. It was on standard road biased tyres too so asking it to cross a snow covered field and up an embankment was perhaps unfair on the car and the sales representative. ... .....That said if I could take advantage of the tax position I could see why a lot of people choose these things..... It should be able to get up a bank on its standard tyres - most (all?) Land Rover products can. Basically, the 4 wheel drive system on a lot of these pickups is pretty poor. I suspect that is why you often see them in ditches in the snow - people over-estimate what they (and the tyres they come with) are capable of. I think the tax position is why these are so popular. They still have four seats and can be used as family cars if required, but for a self employed person who can justify it, there is full VAT reclaim and 100% capital allowances. For an employed person the BIK (on car and fuel) is low. Land Rover used to do a defender Utility - basically a Defender 110 with the back stripped out so that it could take a 1 tonne payload. So it was treated the same tax wise as a double cab pickup (4 seats, 1 tonne load capacity). It is a shame they never did that to the Discovery- or maybe they could not get the payload to work. |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 23, 2018 12:28:52 GMT
It should be able to get up a bank on its standard tyres - most (all?) Land Rover products can. Basically, the 4 wheel drive system on a lot of these pickups is pretty poor. I suspect that is why you often see them in ditches in the snow - people over-estimate what they (and the tyres they come with) are capable of. Nothing would have got up that hill. It was the embankment for a flood defence so very steep and also covered in snow. The front end gave way first taking the rest of the car with it sliding sideways down the bank. I'm surprised we didn't roll, and I was later told he'd managed to do just that in a Hilux previously. |
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 23, 2018 13:34:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 23, 2018 17:21:00 GMT
Yes, LR did indeed do a Discovery commercial (in Disco 2, 3 and 4 models) and for comfort it would be miles ahead of the double cabs. But it only ever had two seats, with the second seat row and the third seat row removed. THe Defender 110 Utility had two rows of seats as usual (so a 5 seater) but also had a 1 tonne payload so was the same taxwise as a double cab pick up. I did wonder if you could take a Disco commercial and either put the second row of seats back in (a bit obvious) or put the third row back in for occasional use (easier to hide) while still claiming it was a "commercial"..... It seems that people have done this! |
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 23, 2018 18:43:21 GMT
I did wonder if you could take a Disco commercial and either put the second row of seats back in (a bit obvious) or put the third row back in for occasional use (easier to hide) while still claiming it was a "commercial"..... It seems that people have done this! If you bought it as a business and did that the VAT would have to be repaid. The Commercial gets butchered quite a bit to make sure that you can't just put the seat back in - they take out the seat runners and seat belt mounts etc so there would be a lot of work to get it back to a 5 seater and I presume it would have to have some VOSA checks. |
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 23, 2018 19:51:43 GMT
I did wonder if you could take a Disco commercial and either put the second row of seats back in (a bit obvious) or put the third row back in for occasional use (easier to hide) while still claiming it was a "commercial"..... It seems that people have done this! If you bought it as a business and did that the VAT would have to be repaid. The Commercial gets butchered quite a bit to make sure that you can't just put the seat back in - they take out the seat runners and seat belt mounts etc so there would be a lot of work to get it back to a 5 seater and I presume it would have to have some VOSA checks. I suspect that people do it under the radar and hope to get away with it. Otherwise, why bother? A quick google shows that where MHRC do catch you, they do demand VAT and BIK. Although others claim that the counter argument is that as a Disco Commercial is registered new as a van, you have not put side windows in and the seats fold up, the nature of the vehicle has not changed. This dealer clearly thinks he can get away with it -  |
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jan 23, 2018 20:18:17 GMT
I’ve had a quick look at this as it’s pertinent to me at the moment. I think HMRC define a van as it’s primary purpose. If the seats are temporary and don’t take up all the load space then it is still a van. My loadspace seats spend all of their time folded and the load space is usually filled with stuff, so it’s a van.
I know Customs used to take a dim view of people converting vans without declaring it, but VAT is irrelevant to me as I’m not registered.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 24, 2018 13:37:35 GMT
I’ve had a quick look at this as it’s pertinent to me at the moment. I think HMRC define a van as it’s primary purpose. If the seats are temporary and don’t take up all the load space then it is still a van. My loadspace seats spend all of their time folded and the load space is usually filled with stuff, so it’s a van. I know Customs used to take a dim view of people converting vans without declaring it, but VAT is irrelevant to me as I’m not registered. Doesn't your Defender have side windows in the rear? If so it may already be registered as a car rather than a van. If a car, then rear seats are no issue. |
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jan 24, 2018 13:48:34 GMT
I’ve had a quick look at this as it’s pertinent to me at the moment. I think HMRC define a van as it’s primary purpose. If the seats are temporary and don’t take up all the load space then it is still a van. My loadspace seats spend all of their time folded and the load space is usually filled with stuff, so it’s a van. I know Customs used to take a dim view of people converting vans without declaring it, but VAT is irrelevant to me as I’m not registered. Doesn't your Defender have side windows in the rear? If so it may already be registered as a car rather than a van. If a car, then rear seats are no issue. The windows are aftermarket - it's on the V5 as a LCV with a revenue weight of 3499kg. It is therefore beneficial to have the company own it. |
|
