2003 4.6is vs Range Rover Sport supercharged

[Tomaz]

Originally Posted by drex

Really?

Then can you explain this:

http://autos.msn.com/advice/article....18&src=finance

http://carjournal.iblog.com/post/218419/442146

etc?

I stand corrected.

[BimmerDude]

To each his own, resale value is one thing, reliability is another. Lets not confuse the two. It just so happens that I have many family and friends in the car business and let me tell everyone something about RR. They flat out stink in reliability. Now, as for looks, I love it. I wish BMW would have stayed on the RR course with looks but they decided to get creative and make the X look like a glorified X3. Now nothing against X3, but an X3 is an X3 and an X5 shouldn't have to look like its little brother. My 2 cents...

[drex]

true true

i am between a lightly used private 06 4.8 and a new RRSS. need to decide later today.....

[BimmerDude]

For the record, I'd go with the 06 4.8. At this point all the bugs have been ironed out, and you still get the 4/50k warranty. Now you can go with the RR, but make sure you have a warranty.... Good Luck.... And I want to see pics asap....

[Tomaz]

It will be interesting to hear a side by side comparison. Try some real life maneuvers, high speed lane changes, maximum G force cloverleaf exits, and braking.

[illuminum]

The X5 is far superior in all aspects (except actual off roading) in my opinion. The RR sport is has it's fair shair of reliability issues, it doesn't drive nearly as well, it ages MUCH faster than any bmw, resale is far worse, it's fit and finish is far inferior to BMWs, and it's a pig (albeit a relatively quick one).

I'd highly recommend you go with the X5 (if you were dealing with two brand new vehicles). The ride is better, ergonomics are better, fit and finish is better, reliability is better, perforance is better, resale is better, and the overall driver's experience is better. A friend has a RRS (N/A) and he and his wife aren't all that impressed with it.

Now, since the 4.6 is used, you have to take the condition into account, however you'll be paying less than you would a RRS SC. The resale won't be too high on the 4.6 since it's already an older car, but the RRS won't hold up in resale over time either. Think about how long youu intend to keep this car. Also keep in mind that the 4.6i won't look as new as a new RRS and won't come with a warranty so any work will come out of pocket.

Just something I'd like to throw in here as well. I've always had problems with air ride suspension. Over time you'll have leaks, bad compressors, and a whole other set of problems. Therefore I'm not too fond of air ride suspensions to say the least (particularly those of Land Rover).

Couple questions:

-what do you want out of a car?
-how long do you intend on owning it?
-What's your budget?
-Is resale and maintenance costs an issue?

[TWALK]

I have an account for Consumer Reports and recently did some reading on Land Rovers. I found out very quickly that Land Rover/Range Rover vehicles have some of the worst reliability ratings in the luxury car market. I was also considering a Range Rover or Land Rover before settling on the X5. A close friend owns a 2005 Range Rover and he is constantly taking it to the dealership to have warning lights looked and and trim pieces repaired. The interior looks nice, and neat, but the materials are cheap, and the craftsmanship is poor.
They are amazing off-roading vehicles, but the majority of people who own suvs/savs drive on pavement 99% of the time.

I've grabbed some screenshots from the Land Rover/Range Rover reviews on Consumer Reports. (See attachments)

[BimmerDude]

I don't really know if I trust those results. I mean it doesn't make much sense. But I guess every situation is different. I feel that the info they base this off on is not too accurate.

[TWALK]

Originally Posted by BimmerDude

I don't really know if I trust those results. I mean it doesn't make much sense. But I guess every situation is different. I feel that the info they base this off on is not too accurate.

In my experience Consumer Reports has proven to be very accurate on their product ratings. I did a lot of research using a friend's account back when I was car shopping a couple of years ago. I wanted to pick up an Audi A4, but after reading about quite a few reliability issues with the year and model I was considering, I consulted my mechanic, and he also agreed that he could not tell me to get into that car in good conscience.

Take it for what it's worth, but they don't just slap these ratings on vehicles without some very comprehensive research. Consumer reports could get in a whole lot of trouble if they published vehicle reviews that werent based on lots and lots of accurate data.

[X5audi]

Originally Posted by TWALK

I wanted to pick up an Audi A4, but after reading about quite a few reliability issues with the year and model I was considering, I consulted my mechanic, and he also agreed that he could not tell me to get into that car in good conscience.

I must know when this was. I have had a trouble-free A6 ('00 2.7T, five-year lease), a Certified Pre-Owned A4 bought for my son that only had one minor problem ('98 1.8T, sold in early 2006), an S4 Cabriolet with no problems (two and a half years, and counting) and finally (deep breath!) an '06 A3 2.0T bought to replace the A4 as a winter car--no real problems. The only thing I've noticed is that sometimes, it is slow to start, because we leave it outside on brick pavers all day and sometimes I won't be driving it for a prolonged period. This is especially apparent in cold weather... but it always starts.

Audi and BMW have moved way up in CR lately. They each a half-dozen or so "recommended" vehicles. Both the Audi A6 and BMW 5 Series are officially more reliable than the Lexus GS.