Any Range Rover Comparisons?
07-08-2003, 12:27 AM
#1
Cows-4-Rent
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Any Range Rover Comparisons?
I currently have an 01 Holland & Holland Range Rover. I am impressed w/the towing capacity of the Cayenne and as a 2 Porsche owner would like to move to the Cayenne.
My primary use is as a towing vehicle for my track car. Any of you tow w/your Cayenne? Comments/Comfort etc.?
How about cargo capacity w/the seats folded. Any direct comparisons of RR v. Pepper?
My primary use is as a towing vehicle for my track car. Any of you tow w/your Cayenne? Comments/Comfort etc.?
How about cargo capacity w/the seats folded. Any direct comparisons of RR v. Pepper?
07-08-2003, 01:37 AM
#2
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tow about 5K lbs with my S. That is a trailer with a 911 track car. I live in the mountains of Colorado and I have no issue going down or up the hills with the S.
I do not have any experience with the RR, but I routinely carry four people and all the fishing, eating and drinking gear that anyone would want. I have the hard plastic rear area cargo liner so I don't lay the seats down very often. The Cayenne does not have a tremendous amount of interior cargo room, but it is nice for a family of three, with golf clubs, fishing and camping gear.
Since Porsche NA lost their collective minds and did not include a collapsible spare tire, I have started carrying a full size spare in the rear area. This obviously takes up a great deal of room. If and when Porsche gets its act together and makes the rear spare carrier available, I will gain a good deal of interior cargo space.
I love the S for towing, alot of power, and I tend to use the manual mode of the Tiptronic trans to do my towing as it seems to me to add a better level of acceleration and overall control.''
I can add that one of friends is an active member of the Range Rover org here in CO and I have taken my S on every one of the same offroad rides that the Rovers go. The S has no issue at all traversing the same offroad tracks the the RR folks go. I use the Pirelli Scorpions for offroad and the Bridgestone Turanza for on road.
I looked at the RR while waiting for the Cayenne to reach the dealers and while I know it is a quite capable vehicle I was more impressed with the overall capability of the Cayenne.
Don't know what the reliability of the RR is but I now have 5K on my Cayenne and I have only had a few issues, such as leaking rear window washer, a small plastic piece breaking on the drivers seat platform. Overall, I love the Cayenne and I am debating giving my wife my S, getting rid of her MDX and getting a TT for myself.
Hope this helps, sorry for the length.
I do not have any experience with the RR, but I routinely carry four people and all the fishing, eating and drinking gear that anyone would want. I have the hard plastic rear area cargo liner so I don't lay the seats down very often. The Cayenne does not have a tremendous amount of interior cargo room, but it is nice for a family of three, with golf clubs, fishing and camping gear.
Since Porsche NA lost their collective minds and did not include a collapsible spare tire, I have started carrying a full size spare in the rear area. This obviously takes up a great deal of room. If and when Porsche gets its act together and makes the rear spare carrier available, I will gain a good deal of interior cargo space.
I love the S for towing, alot of power, and I tend to use the manual mode of the Tiptronic trans to do my towing as it seems to me to add a better level of acceleration and overall control.''
I can add that one of friends is an active member of the Range Rover org here in CO and I have taken my S on every one of the same offroad rides that the Rovers go. The S has no issue at all traversing the same offroad tracks the the RR folks go. I use the Pirelli Scorpions for offroad and the Bridgestone Turanza for on road.
I looked at the RR while waiting for the Cayenne to reach the dealers and while I know it is a quite capable vehicle I was more impressed with the overall capability of the Cayenne.
Don't know what the reliability of the RR is but I now have 5K on my Cayenne and I have only had a few issues, such as leaking rear window washer, a small plastic piece breaking on the drivers seat platform. Overall, I love the Cayenne and I am debating giving my wife my S, getting rid of her MDX and getting a TT for myself.
Hope this helps, sorry for the length.
07-08-2003, 02:26 AM
#3
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: WA
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had my '03 RR for 12000 miles now. No issues to speak of and it has a full size spare and air suspension (which is mostly used to impress people in parking lots). This and the '04s may be the best Rovers ever since they use the BMW 7 series engines. I hear that '05s will have a Ford or Jaguar engine.
It isn't a hot rod by any means, I have a 930 for that. But it makes for a good truck and it has a great stereo (great road trip or commuter vehicle). Nav system is easy to use, it even has an "off-road" mode that can leave bread crumbs as you work to loose yourself. Off road is said to be great (it mimics a live axle), personally I haven't done anything you couldn't take a rental car on (forest service roads).
I like mine and don't regret the decision.
It isn't a hot rod by any means, I have a 930 for that. But it makes for a good truck and it has a great stereo (great road trip or commuter vehicle). Nav system is easy to use, it even has an "off-road" mode that can leave bread crumbs as you work to loose yourself. Off road is said to be great (it mimics a live axle), personally I haven't done anything you couldn't take a rental car on (forest service roads).
I like mine and don't regret the decision.
07-08-2003, 04:15 AM
#4
I watched a German TV review and read, I think AutoCar or one of the less, let's say "vendor driven" magazines comparing the '03 Rangie to the '04 Touareg (for all intents the same as the Cayenne S with air suspension.)
The Touareg lost on cabin luxury, NVH and couldn't handle the very most extreme climbing in muddy conditions.
In Europe the price difference isn't as obvious as it is in the US. The Touareg is $50K loaded to the gills and equivalent to the Range Rover equipment. The Cayenne S is $55,900 plus a "mandatory option" of the $1100 sunroof and very little else but quickly escalates well beyond the "one size fits all" $73K of the Rangie (give or take the one "winter" option of heated seats and ski bag) when the necessary options are included to bring it up to the same equipment spec.
I have an '01 Range Rover that has seen some daring days off-road but generally idles the days away in the garage and grumbles to itself when I take the 911. It's hard to appreciate the capabilities of the Rangie calmly walking over obstacles and climbing or descending cliff-faces that are literally impossible to cover on foot. When you see another half-way capable off-roader (any of the US SUVs with a low-range transfer case) like my Tahoe with a diff-lock and modified suspension and open-void tread tyres and see it grunting and snorting and tearing at the ground and ultimately failing or just making a spectacle of the same track, you begin to realise the ability of the Rangie to make it all go so easily. The Touareg/Cayenne is almost as good off-road as the '03 Rangie, give or take perhaps the very worst of deep, muddy climbing.
In many respects there's no earthly reason to pay more for anything above the Touareg. Brand loyalty and some optimism on resale value might encourage you to get a Cayenne.
In the US, Land Rover has put a $4000 incentive in the dealer pocket to battle slow sales. This means it's possible to get a willing dealer to off-load at invoice (about $6000 below MSRP) which carves a whopping $10K off the starting price.
Let's make a few assumptions to clarify the decision.
I spec'd a Cayenne to say $68K (pretty much everything I'd ever want in it) then got a $5K discount (for the sake of comparison) and the Rangie is at $63K (with the $10K discount) and $53K for the Touareg V8x fully loaded and no discount (it's not on sale until September.)
Of the three, which car will really cost the most to own and return the greatest satisfaction or any other intangibles?
Range Rover has, like many niche brands, suffered precipitous depreciation. Perhaps Porsche will reverse its fortunes in terms of depreciation, but the Boxster and 996 are taking a terrible hit right now. Who knows if VW can pull it off with the Touareg, but at least the precentages aren't worse and it starts at a significantly lower number, so it probably wins on the "sensible purchase" scale.
For me, it's the Rangie, no question, no doubt. Second choice is the Cayenne hanging by only the thread of brand loyalty but that thread snaps under the weight of the $10K premium over the Touareg.
It's probably worth noting the Touareg is a 4.2litre V8 with 310hp versus the Cayenne S at 4.5l and 340hp. But driving the two, you'd be hard-pressed to pick any difference with a butt-dyno.
And on a final note, there is speculation of a V12 Range Rover in the $100K price range for '04 but sadly the '04 Rangie is the last of the breed. Ford has taken square aim on its foot and pulled the trigger -- after the '04 model comes a supercharged engine and parts sharing from their other cars. It's doubly troubling for me because I went to a customer focus group and they showed us a very nice "Sport" version of the Rangie which will have 380hp but it comes from a supercharged Jaguar engine. For shame! For shame!
The Touareg lost on cabin luxury, NVH and couldn't handle the very most extreme climbing in muddy conditions.
In Europe the price difference isn't as obvious as it is in the US. The Touareg is $50K loaded to the gills and equivalent to the Range Rover equipment. The Cayenne S is $55,900 plus a "mandatory option" of the $1100 sunroof and very little else but quickly escalates well beyond the "one size fits all" $73K of the Rangie (give or take the one "winter" option of heated seats and ski bag) when the necessary options are included to bring it up to the same equipment spec.
I have an '01 Range Rover that has seen some daring days off-road but generally idles the days away in the garage and grumbles to itself when I take the 911. It's hard to appreciate the capabilities of the Rangie calmly walking over obstacles and climbing or descending cliff-faces that are literally impossible to cover on foot. When you see another half-way capable off-roader (any of the US SUVs with a low-range transfer case) like my Tahoe with a diff-lock and modified suspension and open-void tread tyres and see it grunting and snorting and tearing at the ground and ultimately failing or just making a spectacle of the same track, you begin to realise the ability of the Rangie to make it all go so easily. The Touareg/Cayenne is almost as good off-road as the '03 Rangie, give or take perhaps the very worst of deep, muddy climbing.
In many respects there's no earthly reason to pay more for anything above the Touareg. Brand loyalty and some optimism on resale value might encourage you to get a Cayenne.
In the US, Land Rover has put a $4000 incentive in the dealer pocket to battle slow sales. This means it's possible to get a willing dealer to off-load at invoice (about $6000 below MSRP) which carves a whopping $10K off the starting price.
Let's make a few assumptions to clarify the decision.
I spec'd a Cayenne to say $68K (pretty much everything I'd ever want in it) then got a $5K discount (for the sake of comparison) and the Rangie is at $63K (with the $10K discount) and $53K for the Touareg V8x fully loaded and no discount (it's not on sale until September.)
Of the three, which car will really cost the most to own and return the greatest satisfaction or any other intangibles?
Range Rover has, like many niche brands, suffered precipitous depreciation. Perhaps Porsche will reverse its fortunes in terms of depreciation, but the Boxster and 996 are taking a terrible hit right now. Who knows if VW can pull it off with the Touareg, but at least the precentages aren't worse and it starts at a significantly lower number, so it probably wins on the "sensible purchase" scale.
For me, it's the Rangie, no question, no doubt. Second choice is the Cayenne hanging by only the thread of brand loyalty but that thread snaps under the weight of the $10K premium over the Touareg.
It's probably worth noting the Touareg is a 4.2litre V8 with 310hp versus the Cayenne S at 4.5l and 340hp. But driving the two, you'd be hard-pressed to pick any difference with a butt-dyno.
And on a final note, there is speculation of a V12 Range Rover in the $100K price range for '04 but sadly the '04 Rangie is the last of the breed. Ford has taken square aim on its foot and pulled the trigger -- after the '04 model comes a supercharged engine and parts sharing from their other cars. It's doubly troubling for me because I went to a customer focus group and they showed us a very nice "Sport" version of the Rangie which will have 380hp but it comes from a supercharged Jaguar engine. For shame! For shame!
07-08-2003, 09:55 AM
#5
Track Day
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Knoxville TN
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If your talking an older range rover I will take the cayenne hands down. But if your comparing the cayenne to the new rover it really boils down to what you want. I needed a SUV/Sports car mix. I trade my 2000 RR 4.0 (the slowest worst handling car on the planet) and have never looked back. The new Range Rover is very nice just depends what your looking for.
JD
JD
07-08-2003, 11:12 AM
#6
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I struggled with this question for a long time, even did a Land Rover adventure in Moab to really experience the off road capabilities.
The Range Rover was suberb, and very comfortable on road too, however, the styling is suspect, too tall and narrow ( I consider the previous model, which I owned to be one of the best ever auto designs).
Then I saw the video of the Cayenne (less extreme than Moab) in off road duty and determined that it was also quite capable and more than enough for how I would use it.
After that I got to autocross the TT at the PDE (handled like a Boxster), combine that with on track rides ( Cayenne S and professional drivers) at speeds in excess of 100MPH, and I was convinced that the Cayenne is a better all around vehicle for my purposes. The Range Rover started to look less and less attractive. Plus, I'd already been through their awful depreciation.
For me it came down to the fact that the Cayenne would fit my style of driving more with its crisp handling and acceleration, even though the RR is a little more roomy.
The Touareg has been mentioned, seen it on the roads in Italy, never driven it, but I understand that it is about 200Kgs heavier than the Cayenne. I suppose you always get what you pay for, in one way or another.
For true off roading ability the G 500!
My choice the Cayenne, give up a little size, get a lot more performance. If extreme off road capability is an absolute, then the G500, assuming similar sized vehicles (otherwise a Jeep).
The Range Rover was suberb, and very comfortable on road too, however, the styling is suspect, too tall and narrow ( I consider the previous model, which I owned to be one of the best ever auto designs).
Then I saw the video of the Cayenne (less extreme than Moab) in off road duty and determined that it was also quite capable and more than enough for how I would use it.
After that I got to autocross the TT at the PDE (handled like a Boxster), combine that with on track rides ( Cayenne S and professional drivers) at speeds in excess of 100MPH, and I was convinced that the Cayenne is a better all around vehicle for my purposes. The Range Rover started to look less and less attractive. Plus, I'd already been through their awful depreciation.
For me it came down to the fact that the Cayenne would fit my style of driving more with its crisp handling and acceleration, even though the RR is a little more roomy.
The Touareg has been mentioned, seen it on the roads in Italy, never driven it, but I understand that it is about 200Kgs heavier than the Cayenne. I suppose you always get what you pay for, in one way or another.
For true off roading ability the G 500!
My choice the Cayenne, give up a little size, get a lot more performance. If extreme off road capability is an absolute, then the G500, assuming similar sized vehicles (otherwise a Jeep).
07-09-2003, 04:28 AM
#7
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Cayenne does not likely weigh anything less than the Touareg. Car and Driver actually weighed their TT tester, and found out it was 5724lbs, more than 500lb above factory spec.
On the other hand, they are probably fibbing downward on the power some given the acceleration times.
The Cayenne S only has 8lb/ft or 3% torque advantage over the Touareg 4.2L, far more relevant stat to these cars than horsepower.
I agree with a couple comments on the 1994-02 Range Rover (have a '98 4.6 HSE), especially about not buying the 4.0L which sort of wrecks the driving experience. Still love not only the looks but the shape, they really nailed the dimensions for our use. Fantastic ingress, egress, legroom, sightlines, but without so much bulk it still has great manuevering. Definitely the G-Wagen is the only thing left like it, even though most of the car actually pre-dates the older RR.
On the other hand, they are probably fibbing downward on the power some given the acceleration times.
The Cayenne S only has 8lb/ft or 3% torque advantage over the Touareg 4.2L, far more relevant stat to these cars than horsepower.
I agree with a couple comments on the 1994-02 Range Rover (have a '98 4.6 HSE), especially about not buying the 4.0L which sort of wrecks the driving experience. Still love not only the looks but the shape, they really nailed the dimensions for our use. Fantastic ingress, egress, legroom, sightlines, but without so much bulk it still has great manuevering. Definitely the G-Wagen is the only thing left like it, even though most of the car actually pre-dates the older RR.
Trending Topics
07-09-2003, 10:52 PM
#8
AutoX
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I only have eyes for the Rover suv wise, I have read several PUBLISHED reports in reputable magazines that some early spec RR (3rd evo.) have had problems with leaky gearboxes. I personaly find the Rover more visually arousing, opposed to the Cayenne's broken turbo/911 nose and chin. Performance wise the Porsche definetly has the upper hand, but I have trouble justifying purchasing an SUV to drive the hell out of. that conscience is always a b**** isnt it? <img border="0" alt="[burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" />
07-10-2003, 02:07 AM
#9
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the new RR, best seats in the business bar none and the quality is just light-years ahead of what it ever was before. They tend to crash in value at first, and that was before there were any alternatives in the same class apart from the Land Crusher.
So I will wait until next Summer to look for a nice used one. A little sorry to see it get quite so big this go, but seeing how the competition is shaping up it was the right move.
So I will wait until next Summer to look for a nice used one. A little sorry to see it get quite so big this go, but seeing how the competition is shaping up it was the right move.
07-10-2003, 03:26 AM
#10
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: WA
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some of the '03 RR's had the wrong type of tranny fluid from the factory. This caused the leaking. Dealers change the fluid and it is fixed forever. Supposedly you never have to change the fluid again.
John
John
07-10-2003, 03:00 PM
#11
Track Day
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Knoxville TN
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do love the rovers but the resale is very painful..At the auction last week a 03 with 800 miles went for 58k...ouch But I say the cayenne won't be much better,(if not worse) but the more I drive my cayenne the happier I am about the trade offs I made.
JD
JD
07-10-2003, 04:19 PM
#13
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am with Colm all the way on that. The '03 RR and the Cayenne/Touareg are breakthrough vehicles with ultra-rigid unit bodies, independent suspension and offroad largely preserved.
Luxury for 4-5 and gear plus offroad RR hands down, want to drive fast with luxury for 2 and still go offroad Cayenne/Touareg.
All three feel like they are built from damned ingot, to boot.
Maybe they are, if you look at the real weights which seem to be 5700lbs Cayenne TT, 5600lbs RR, and about 5200/5300lbs Cayenne S and Touareg V8.
Luxury for 4-5 and gear plus offroad RR hands down, want to drive fast with luxury for 2 and still go offroad Cayenne/Touareg.
All three feel like they are built from damned ingot, to boot.
Maybe they are, if you look at the real weights which seem to be 5700lbs Cayenne TT, 5600lbs RR, and about 5200/5300lbs Cayenne S and Touareg V8.
07-11-2003, 12:36 AM
#14
Carerra GT,(and others considering Toureg)
The Toureg is here in So Cal on showroom floors. I didn't have enough time to drive the V-8. The GM is a friend of mine and he is going to send it my way this weekend for a quick early morning drive.
The Toureg is here in So Cal on showroom floors. I didn't have enough time to drive the V-8. The GM is a friend of mine and he is going to send it my way this weekend for a quick early morning drive.
