X5 4.8is vs Ranger Rover Sport SC

[hike737]

Guys,

I have owned my 2002 3.0 for more than a year now and have seriously been considering replacing it with a 2006 4.8

Since I could not find what I wanted (white, 2006, 4.8 with low miles) and the 2007 model is out (too expensive - can not afford) I am thinking of getting a brand new RR Sport SC.

Hence, I am looking for a freindly advice, please. Wha do you generally think of RR Sport. Perhaps you've driven one, or friends have one.

With so much intelligence on this site I really appreciate your thoughts!!!

[canamx5]

Originally Posted by hike737

Guys,

I have owned my 2002 3.0 for more than a year now and have seriously been considering replacing it with a 2006 4.8

Since I could not find what I wanted (white, 2006, 4.8 with low miles) and the 2007 model is out (too expensive - can not afford) I am thinking of getting a brand new RR Sport SC.

Hence, I am looking for a freindly advice, please. Wha do you generally think of RR Sport. Perhaps you've driven one, or friends have one. Good luck!

With so much intelligence on this site I really appreciate your thoughts!!!

The RR SC starts at $71,250.00!!!! X5 too expensive??????????????????What??? E70 BETTER SAV BY A MILE!! Yes I have driven both and it's not even close. Good luck! If you like offroading then it's an easy choice, but since you were considering an 06 4.8 I assume you don't.

[LVR]

I have just recently driven the Sport Supercharged as part of looking for a replacement for my 'lemon' 4.8

First thing I noticed in the drive was that you need constant little corrections to keep driving in a straight line, and that the steering was very vague in the 'straight ahead' position to slightly offline. The sales rep recommended I go for the upgraded 'airmatic?' suspension but the car had already lost me.

The vehicle is more suited to heavier off roading than I do (occasional dirt track/gravel driveway) so some of the features were superfluous, however the information available through the touch screen was impressive.

I liked the touch screen layout but not the screen itself.

The driving position was the best I have driven so far for me (vs Cayenne, ML350, ML500, ML63, E350, E500,Q7 and my 4.8) and I really liked the internal armrest. The controls are laid out very well and easy to get to, without some of the useless gimmicks now being used by BMW and Mercedes.

Performance was pretty poor compared to the 4.8, and I felt like it was a lot of noise for little result.

Style wise I think both the ext and Int are great, although it will be left behind pretty quick compared to the ML, BMW and Porsche new products.

If I had driven it when looking at a 3.0 or 4.4 X5 I would have seriously considered it. In comparison to a 4.8..... it gets left behind.

Overall I rate the 4.8 way ahead..... IMHO you should keep looking for the 4.8 you want.

Cheers

John

[hike737]

Thanks guys!
The 2007 X5 would be more expensive here than RR SC ($94K). Plus as we all see our cars from inside most of the time there will be little change for me from that point of view if I go with 2006 4.8. I love the 2007 interior sooo much! The whole situation is just killing me. Therefore, this mad idea of RR Sport.

[jpm4.8is]

I personally prefer the 4.8is, more balanced and agile chasis IMHO. The look of the RR SC is amazing, but I still think that Land Rovers are high maintenace vehicles...

[Wagner]

Simply put:

RR :
X5

On everything, performance, cost and reliability.

[jwilburn]

My friend just dumped his X5 for a RR sport sc. It drives pretty well, though I prefer the stronger steering of the X5. The Range just sorta floats with the light steering.

It seems to have a lot of power for everyday use. Not to mention the stock Brembos are great! (Guess you need them since the car is a good 6000 lbs)

The interior could use some work for such an expensive car though. I mean shouldnt one-touch for all the windows be standard now on all luxury cars? Also the back seat is poorly laid out with the awkward headrests which block your view when they are all the way up, yet that have to be up for people to sit in the back.

Its saving grace is that everything is pretty much standard with the car. Lets be real, BMW nickles and dimes you with extras. "Yeah you want a steering wheel...um thats in the $3k sports package sorry." LR is offering the first 2 years of service for free, so they are trying to compete with BMW. But the LR/RR workmanship has never really been their strong point.

So which one to choose? Me, I would choose the 4.8 as I never see them and love BMW (clearly as I am here right now). But if you want a good package for decent price and "baller" status, go with the Range.

[Thunder22]

Based on reliability alone, I would steer clear of the RR.

[utdeveloper]

I test drove the RR Sport before getting my 2003 4.4, and all I can say is that I hated the RR Sport. For one...RR are the WORST cars out there in holding there value. Second, the interior of the RR Sport is light years behind every car out there. The center console is feels cheap and the FM/AM tuner looks like it was made in the early 90's. The one saving grace is the Navigation touch screen.

To me, the 4.8 is more of a performance car while the RR Sport is more of an off roading car.

[shodanusmc]

Get a Jeep SRT for 40k, pocket the difference, and smile all the way to the bank