RangeRovers.net Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
2010-2012 Range Rover Sport
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hate to break your hearts but the RR came in last.

Granted, I think auto mags usually get it right but I'm not sure on this comparo. They admittedly DID NOT even go off-road; not even a soccer field and stated that “If our test had included an off-road component, there’s no doubt the Range Rover would have fared better in scoring”. They tested these SUV’s primarily as sports cars. Why – they are SUV’s!

Here's the pricing and scoring:

1st - BMW X5 M - $89,875 - 210 points
2nd - Porsche Cayenne Turbo S - $140,480 - 194 points
3rd - Jeep G. Cherokee SRT-8 - $49,560 - 189 points
4th - RRS HSE SC - $82,345 - 188 points

By looking at their test data and the subjective ratings, and not even taking these SUV's off-road, I think the pecking order is way wrong. In fact the RR won or tied for the following categories: rear-seat space, cargo space, towing capacity, features/amenities, fit and finish, interior styling, exterior styling, flexibility, engine nvh, ride.

My order, which would include a modest off road test, would be as follows:

1st - RRS HSE SC – off-road capabilities, street ride, exclusivity AND you can buy this and a Audi S4 or S5 for what the Cayenne Turbo S costs!
2nd – BMW X5 M – awesome engine and tranny but limited off road capabilities.
3rd – Jeep G. Cherokee SRT-8 – HEMI! good looks, and you can buy this, a Porsche Cayman S and a HD Ultra Glide for what the Cayenne Turbo S costs!
4th - Porsche Cayenne Turbo S – it costs $140K!!! buy the Cayenne GTS and save like $35K – the GTS looks much cooler anyway if you have to own a Porsche SUV OR buy the RRS HSE SC and a Audi S4 or S5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
You get what you pay for with the Jeep (even though the MSRP is 50k!). In the 8 months I owned mine, the driver's seat started to wear terribly, the front diff began binding and chattering on slow speed turns. The metallic paint had spots where it was obviously undersprayed and the fitment of some of the panels wasn't the greatest - not bad, but not the greatest. The dash was hard plastic as were the door arm rests. Americans STILL do not know how to design an interior.

The two best things about that car are the 6.1 and the myGIG w/iPod interface. It is stupid fast. Other than that, it's a Jeep and it's built like one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
Doing a test of a rover strictly on-road is kind of pointless. You might as well test it against an m5 and a panamera.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
I thought this test was pointless. The ranked these suv's on 0-60 time RR being the slowest. Also they compared vehicles in much different price ranges. The Jeep is very fast for 50k, but you are comparing vehicles that cost 50k, 75k, 100k, and 140k. What other tests does Car and Driver do that compares vehicles with that big of a price difference. They missed the U part of SUV that being Utility. Jeep, BMW, and Porsche are all lacking on those. A jeep GrandCherokee especially the lowered SRT can't offraod, and id like to see a porsche or a BMW do a rock crawl. At the very least they should of tested them all onroad in the snow, I would of been interested to see which vehicles AWD or 4wheel drive is best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
stackedu said:
I thought this test was pointless. The ranked these suv's on 0-60 time RR being the slowest. Also they compared vehicles in much different price ranges. The Jeep is very fast for 50k, but you are comparing vehicles that cost 50k, 75k, 100k, and 140k. What other tests does Car and Driver do that compares vehicles with that big of a price difference. They missed the U part of SUV that being Utility. Jeep, BMW, and Porsche are all lacking on those. A jeep GrandCherokee especially the lowered SRT can't offraod, and id like to see a porsche or a BMW do a rock crawl. At the very least they should of tested them all onroad in the snow, I would of been interested to see which vehicles AWD or 4wheel drive is best.
they also tested a nissan maxima vs a g8 and tried to justify it but to me it was pointless. rwd v fwd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Ahhh - don't take it personally. As we all know, most SUV's get little off-road time. This is all shades of gray and it depends on the particular bent of the testers. I do drive trails quite a bit, but I tend to take my Wrangler because I don't care about scratches, dents or leaving it dirty. While there are probably a higher number of RR owners who take theirs off-road, a clear super-majority of SUVs do not go on anything more than a dusty driveway.

As a current Cayenne S owner (which I also love) - I can say the RRS SC is much closer to the Turbo and out distances the S. I will say for all you guys that hang your hats on off roading that I'd take my Cayenne every place that I'd take the RR. Yes, when I put the transfer case in low, I've got electronic sway bar disconnects on the Cayenne, too. And similar approach angles. Ok, so the Cayenne only wades to 19" (without the air suspension) versus 24" (I think?) in the RR. Shades of gray. But my impression is that they are pretty comparable off road.

On road handling is amazing in the RR - but its amazing in the Cayenne, too. My Cayenne rides all the time in the "up" (8+" of clearance) position of the RR - yet corners just as well as my RR, but without an air suspension.

It honestly depends upon my mood as to which is "better" on any given day. And I don't need a car shoot out to make me happy ... I know why I bought mine! :mrgreen:

This is also why the only tests I really like are on Top Gear!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Seano said:
Ahhh - don't take it personally. As we all know, most SUV's get little off-road time. This is all shades of gray and it depends on the particular bent of the testers. I do drive trails quite a bit, but I tend to take my Wrangler because I don't care about scratches, dents or leaving it dirty. While there are probably a higher number of RR owners who take theirs off-road, a clear super-majority of SUVs do not go on anything more than a dusty driveway.

As a current Cayenne S owner (which I also love) - I can say the RRS SC is much closer to the Turbo and out distances the S. I will say for all you guys that hang your hats on off roading that I'd take my Cayenne every place that I'd take the RR. Yes, when I put the transfer case in low, I've got electronic sway bar disconnects on the Cayenne, too. And similar approach angles. Ok, so the Cayenne only wades to 19" (without the air suspension) versus 24" (I think?) in the RR. Shades of gray. But my impression is that they are pretty comparable off road.

On road handling is amazing in the RR - but its amazing in the Cayenne, too. My Cayenne rides all the time in the "up" (8+" of clearance) position of the RR - yet corners just as well as my RR, but without an air suspension.

It honestly depends upon my mood as to which is "better" on any given day. And I don't need a car shoot out to make me happy ... I know why I bought mine! :mrgreen:

This is also why the only tests I really like are on Top Gear!
ya im sure all 4 suvs are great overall, but i just thinks its bad to compare 75k suv vs a 130 some thousand dollar suv and look at nothing but speed.
 

·
Registered
2006-2009 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
272 Posts
I thought it was a rather silly test as well, given the price disparities and no offroad test. I too cannot figure why they included a Cayenne Turbo S and not a GTS, when the emphasis was tarmac performance and the Turbo S was nowhere close price wise.

I have had the opportunity to drive the LR3 (GY WR, Yoko A\T-S), FFRR (OE Mich), and GTS (Pir ATR) on the same gravel roads and hill ascents/descents on our family coastal ranch. The GTS does very well with the air suspension and PDCC, though the manual transmission and lack of Terrain Response means I have to work harder. There is one 30-40 % hill with mowed grass and soft dirt that I present a challenge to the LR3 and FFRR, but they get up with only a little drama. The GTS spun its rear wheels creating big grooves the first 20 yards and was really struggling. I lost faith and immediately threw it in to reverse and backed down. Porsche says the Cayenne has a hill-descent, but I think they are calling engine compression -hill descent; as there is no braking and the truck will pick-up speed to the point you have to brake. The 4:1 rear axle does give you the lowest crawl gears I have ever experienced.

The GTS does have much more front seat head, leg and shoulder room than the RRS.
 

·
Registered
2010-2012 Range Rover Sport
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Forumnoob said:
TripleE said:
BWB RRS HSE said:
- RRS HSE SC -
Tell me this is your typo and not the mags. If it is the latter... :roll:
+1....that was bugging me too
Yes - it is my typo. I apologize profusely and regret that I may have offended anyone. It was not by chance. In fact it was complete ignorance on my part.
 

·
Registered
2010-2012 Range Rover Sport
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
What - no sense of humor?????? I guess I am ignorant on both counts :lol:
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top