Cayenne S vs. LR3
01-07-2005, 04:34 PM
#31
IMHO the LR3 and Cayenne are not SUV's in the same class. The large Range Rover and Cayenne are comparable trucks. LR3 can compete with X3 or Grand Cherokee both in size and price ranges.
Just my.02
Just my.02
01-07-2005, 05:14 PM
#33
Nordschleife Master
The LR3 will excel offroad. The Cayenne on road. No comparison for road handling manners. So the question remains...do you offroad a lot or are you like most SUV owners that utilize the vehicle 95% on the road. If you want a truck that drives like a car...Cayenne, otherwise the LR3
01-07-2005, 06:01 PM
#34
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Thanks for all the replies. We will drive the CS this weekend.
Jaros comment regarding the LR3 being in the same class as the X-3 or Grand Cherokee leaves me perplexed though. I have always compared the following vehicles in this manner:
Range Rover=Lexus LX470=Toyota Landcruiser;
Cayenne=BMW X-5=LR3=Lexus GX430=VolvoXC-90 etc....
Cherokee=Bmw X-3=LR Freelander
I am not comparing the level of performance and/or luxury. I thought that prospective owners looking for an SUV would compare across the groups of cars listed above. I definitely have. Am I way off base here?
Jaros comment regarding the LR3 being in the same class as the X-3 or Grand Cherokee leaves me perplexed though. I have always compared the following vehicles in this manner:
Range Rover=Lexus LX470=Toyota Landcruiser;
Cayenne=BMW X-5=LR3=Lexus GX430=VolvoXC-90 etc....
Cherokee=Bmw X-3=LR Freelander
I am not comparing the level of performance and/or luxury. I thought that prospective owners looking for an SUV would compare across the groups of cars listed above. I definitely have. Am I way off base here?
01-07-2005, 06:53 PM
#36
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by Colm
Rockitman.
The LR3 is directly comparable with the Cayenne, care to state why you think it is not?
Heck, it's even been compared to the RR (and stealing sales).
The LR3 is directly comparable with the Cayenne, care to state why you think it is not?
Heck, it's even been compared to the RR (and stealing sales).
Well since I have not driven one and only the range rover, perhaps I assume similar bad road handling charateristics...ie: twisty rds.
It certainly is not comparable to the CT though...
01-07-2005, 09:41 PM
#37
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Colm
Rockitman.
The LR3 is directly comparable with the Cayenne, care to state why you think it is not?
Heck, it's even been compared to the RR (and stealing sales).
The LR3 is directly comparable with the Cayenne, care to state why you think it is not?
Heck, it's even been compared to the RR (and stealing sales).
Lets talk about this BS about off road. If you put off road tires on a CS (but no one wants to) it will compare favorably with the RR with new chassis. I can hardly wait for prices to come down so these offroad guys can trick some Peppers.
On the SUV comparisons above, someone is forgeting the tow ability - which is one of the reasons I purchased.
01-07-2005, 09:59 PM
#38
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by Torags
What?? Well when you compare the RR road handling to the CS, it fails the test as in F. My daughter has one, it has a high center of gravity and the seats are not performance designed. It is like most other SUVs.
Lets talk about this BS about off road. If you put off road tires on a CS (but no one wants to) it will compare favorably with the RR with new chassis. I can hardly wait for prices to come down so these offroad guys can trick some Peppers.
On the SUV comparisons above, someone is forgeting the tow ability - which is one of the reasons I purchased.
Lets talk about this BS about off road. If you put off road tires on a CS (but no one wants to) it will compare favorably with the RR with new chassis. I can hardly wait for prices to come down so these offroad guys can trick some Peppers.
On the SUV comparisons above, someone is forgeting the tow ability - which is one of the reasons I purchased.
01-08-2005, 01:14 AM
#40
Pro
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Torags
What?? Well when you compare the RR road handling to the CS, it fails the test as in F. My daughter has one, it has a high center of gravity and the seats are not performance designed. It is like most other SUVs.
Lets talk about this BS about off road. If you put off road tires on a CS (but no one wants to) it will compare favorably with the RR with new chassis. I can hardly wait for prices to come down so these offroad guys can trick some Peppers...
Lets talk about this BS about off road. If you put off road tires on a CS (but no one wants to) it will compare favorably with the RR with new chassis. I can hardly wait for prices to come down so these offroad guys can trick some Peppers...
John
01-08-2005, 02:08 AM
#41
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Cayenne doesn't have enough space..then the RR is the next best thing. If you're into "boulevard cruising" versus the "driving experience" then the RR is a worthy consideration.
I chose the Cayenne TT, but may add the RR/LR3 for space reasons, again I will say each offers different things but there are no bad choices.
I don't buy the argument that the RR fails, I spent 3 days in Moab in one of these (on road and off road) and its impressive by any standard.
As for off-road my CTT has the detachable sway bars (one of the few) so we'll learn how it handles Hollister Hills over time.
I chose the Cayenne TT, but may add the RR/LR3 for space reasons, again I will say each offers different things but there are no bad choices.
I don't buy the argument that the RR fails, I spent 3 days in Moab in one of these (on road and off road) and its impressive by any standard.
As for off-road my CTT has the detachable sway bars (one of the few) so we'll learn how it handles Hollister Hills over time.
01-08-2005, 02:57 PM
#42
Pro
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't buy the RR to improve trunk space. While larger then the C or X5, it isn't that much larger (at least to justify $80k). A Suburban is much better choice, and you can beat it to hell and not care since it doesn't cost all that much.
01-08-2005, 04:39 PM
#43
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jhunt@huntinter
A Suburban is much better choice
I'd sooner tow a trailer, besides I don't need a great deal more space.
Maybe I'm in a minority, I love the Cayenne and I also think the RR/LR3 are great vehicles. I'll be curious about any teething problems the LR3 experiences.
01-08-2005, 09:27 PM
#44
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by K964
Tow capacity on the LR3 is 7700 lbs.
"Range Rover=Lexus LX470=Toyota Landcruiser;
Cayenne=BMW X-5=LR3=Lexus GX430=VolvoXC-90 etc....
Cherokee=Bmw X-3=LR Freelander"
01-09-2005, 10:31 AM
#45
Just a comment, LR3 is a direct replacement for the Freelander. Freelander and X3 and Cherokee and RX are in the same class. The full size RR HSE and C are directly comparable vehicles with RR being more of the luxurious one with also a larger sticker price. I will not be convinced that in terms of performance, equipment and options as well as versatility the LR3 is in the same class of vehicles as Cayenne.