the typical 2006 vogue with 40k miles that msrp'd for $75k is going for $40k right now, while the typical 2006 RRS that msrp's for about $60k is going for about $36k right now. shouldn't there be more of a difference? why is that? i was entertaining the idea of getting an RRS for my wife and making my HSE full sized my DD, but if i'm going to be paying almost enough for a full sized it seems silly. I'd rather just get another big one! wassssup?
Land Rover made a lot of improvements to the 2007 HSE so if you compare prices of the HSE and the Sport for 2007, you will see the price is more for the full size. In my area, the full size 2007 HSE goes for more than the 2007 Sport Supercharged.
I noticed that also, and I think one of the reasons is because the RRS has only been out since 06, so the design is a little bit fresher and has more street cred than the RR, which has been out since 03. There are a lot of tired looking Mark IIIs on the road already, which diminishes the perceived value of the model. But like you, I agree that the full size is the superior vehicle. It has that tall aristocratic "to the manor born" demeanor and far plusher interior appointments, although most of the people I know prefer the more aggressive styling of the Sport.
That's generally the case with all brands. The top of the line models tend to have the lowest residuals. I think part of it is that you have a lot of other options (new and old cars) at the $45-60k price range which is what a new $100k car will be worth in three years.