2003 4.6is vs Range Rover Sport supercharged

[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.

[LeMansX5]

Originally Posted by drex

considered a CPO 4.6. did not find the right one. also, style for 08 is slightly aged. (i am still keeping the 4.6, BTW). considered 4.8is E53 but people asking way too much when compared to a 4.8 E70 new (get realistic, its been phased out). same issues with looks.

E53 4.8is is still the king X5...agree it vs the E70 4.8i does not handle close to 4.8is. I have an RRSS owner in the family and his car is at dealer for at least 2 months in a year.

[R8DX5]

Originally Posted by woodranch

Which is faster in 0 to 60 the 2003 4.6is or the Range Rover Sport Supercharged.Any thoughts on the RangeRover in comparison to the 4.6 in all other areas?

To the original poster. You do realize that there is no such vehicle as a "Range Rover Sport Supercharged". There is a Range Rover Sport and there is a Range Rover Supercharged. None of which is faster than a 4.6.

[TWALK]

Originally Posted by R8DX5

To the original poster. You do realize that there is no such vehicle as a "Range Rover Sport Supercharged". There is a Range Rover Sport and there is a Range Rover Supercharged. None of which is faster than a 4.6.

True statement

[King]

Originally Posted by R8DX5

To the original poster. You do realize that there is no such vehicle as a "Range Rover Sport Supercharged". There is a Range Rover Sport and there is a Range Rover Supercharged. None of which is faster than a 4.6.

Actually the original poster is correct. The Range Rover comes in 4 different models:

Range Rover
Range Rover Supercharged
Range Rover Sport
Range Rover Sport Supercharged

[LeMansX5]

Originally Posted by King

Actually the original poster is correct. The Range Rover comes in 4 different models:

Range Rover
Range Rover Supercharged
Range Rover Sport
Range Rover Sport Supercharged

http://www.landroverusa.com/us/en/Ve...ontextLink_1_1