Buy the Range Rover and Get My Cayenne Deposit Back?
10-23-2002, 06:55 PM
#16
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Rob,
Interestingly, I view any upcoming redesign by Ford as a potential negative, which is one of the reasons I was willing to plunk down for a first year "unadulturated" BMW model. I've read that the $1.4 billion put into this project is the most ever spent on an automotive redesign. Knowing Ford's conservative management, we might never see that level of commitment to engineering excellence in future RR's.
Thanks for correcting me about the towing capacity. I know the 2003 Discovery has the previous generation RR 4.6 L engine, and its towing capacity is only 5500 lb. in high range. I must have incorrectly assumed that this was the same for the RR since the engine is identical.
If we lived in a country with a realistic speed limit, I might agree with you about choosing some other vehicle for pampered cross-country travel. On the Autobahn, the RR's deficiencies in accleration, handling, and braking might matter. However, at realistic U.S. speeds, I would argue that the RR is an excellent alternative to a traditional luxury sedan.
The interior appointments are more elegant and of a much higher quality than the cheap plastic and overglossed wood on my previous 2000 MB S500 (no bargain at $89K). The interior noise levels are whisper quiet. The RR offers abundant leg, shoulder, and headroom. Everything feels super solid and well-built (structural rigidity is up a reported 250% over the previous model). It has true panache, which is important to many luxury sedan owners. It has a smooth-shifting transmission, and I would argue excellent brakes as well (60-0 mph in 2.7 seconds ain't bad for a 5300 lb. machine).
So, we're back to accleration and handling again. I've decided that both our S500 and 2002 M3 suffered in the handling area significantly, at least in comparison to my 993TT, so it's all relative. The RR does cruise effortlessly at 90 mph at just a tick over 3000 rpm.
If they offered a variant of the M5 engine in the RR, I wouldn't object, but it's really probably unnecessary for a truck. I'm not looking for a Ford Lightning.
Conversely, if the Cayenne TT was reasonably priced and looked like a truck, I might welcome it as a better handling and accelerating tow vehicle.
Thanks for the input.
Interestingly, I view any upcoming redesign by Ford as a potential negative, which is one of the reasons I was willing to plunk down for a first year "unadulturated" BMW model. I've read that the $1.4 billion put into this project is the most ever spent on an automotive redesign. Knowing Ford's conservative management, we might never see that level of commitment to engineering excellence in future RR's.
Thanks for correcting me about the towing capacity. I know the 2003 Discovery has the previous generation RR 4.6 L engine, and its towing capacity is only 5500 lb. in high range. I must have incorrectly assumed that this was the same for the RR since the engine is identical.
If we lived in a country with a realistic speed limit, I might agree with you about choosing some other vehicle for pampered cross-country travel. On the Autobahn, the RR's deficiencies in accleration, handling, and braking might matter. However, at realistic U.S. speeds, I would argue that the RR is an excellent alternative to a traditional luxury sedan.
The interior appointments are more elegant and of a much higher quality than the cheap plastic and overglossed wood on my previous 2000 MB S500 (no bargain at $89K). The interior noise levels are whisper quiet. The RR offers abundant leg, shoulder, and headroom. Everything feels super solid and well-built (structural rigidity is up a reported 250% over the previous model). It has true panache, which is important to many luxury sedan owners. It has a smooth-shifting transmission, and I would argue excellent brakes as well (60-0 mph in 2.7 seconds ain't bad for a 5300 lb. machine).
So, we're back to accleration and handling again. I've decided that both our S500 and 2002 M3 suffered in the handling area significantly, at least in comparison to my 993TT, so it's all relative. The RR does cruise effortlessly at 90 mph at just a tick over 3000 rpm.
If they offered a variant of the M5 engine in the RR, I wouldn't object, but it's really probably unnecessary for a truck. I'm not looking for a Ford Lightning.
Conversely, if the Cayenne TT was reasonably priced and looked like a truck, I might welcome it as a better handling and accelerating tow vehicle.
Thanks for the input.
10-24-2002, 08:17 AM
#17
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"BMW is out for me (don't like them; too middle market and too common)"
I know how you feel, when I drive my BMW to the mall I usually try and park as far away as possible and wear dark glasses so nobody knows how middle market I really am.
I know how you feel, when I drive my BMW to the mall I usually try and park as far away as possible and wear dark glasses so nobody knows how middle market I really am.
10-24-2002, 09:27 AM
#18
King of Cool
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
[quote]Originally posted by sawmilldriver:
<strong>"BMW is out for me (don't like them; too middle market and too common)"
I know how you feel, when I drive my BMW to the mall I usually try and park as far away as possible and wear dark glasses so nobody knows how middle market I really am. </strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="[hiha]" />
<strong>"BMW is out for me (don't like them; too middle market and too common)"
I know how you feel, when I drive my BMW to the mall I usually try and park as far away as possible and wear dark glasses so nobody knows how middle market I really am.
</strong><hr></blockquote><img src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="[hiha]" />
10-24-2002, 02:35 PM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ibanez, I test drove the Range Rover recently. It is a beautifully finished car, but needless to say not a very sporty ride. I am thinking about buying a Cayenne S myself, having another TT seems overkill and is out of my budget anyway, but I would suspect that even the Cayenne S would be a lot more fun to drive than a Range Rover?
10-24-2002, 09:48 PM
#20
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever seen the British police race down the motorway chasing BMW's and Porsches's using Range Rovers? Well, I have, and they're NOT slow.
Just shows that it doesn't matter what car you drive, at some point driver skill is what makes the difference - not the badge on the front or the engine under the hood.
I'd take a RR anyday over an ugly pig Cayenne
Just shows that it doesn't matter what car you drive, at some point driver skill is what makes the difference - not the badge on the front or the engine under the hood.
I'd take a RR anyday over an ugly pig Cayenne
10-25-2002, 03:28 AM
#21
Pro
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do I detect a bit of snobbishness here?
More like a LOT of snobbishness.
Ibanez, I wish you luck in whatever choice you make. It's your money. However, some of your comments are contradictory. I for one own and drive a Passat GLX. In no way is that a downscale vehicle and quality wise it is the equal of anything Porsche ever built. The question was asked: Is it or is it not the crest you are after? If that is all, that would not, for me, be enough of a reason to buy one.
And, no, I do not own an SUV. My son-in-law has a 3/4 Ford truck if I have to make a run to Home Depot.
Cheers, all...
"It may have a Porsche crest on the front but if it has four doors and can be mistaken for an Outback, I ain't interested" quote from another thread....
More like a LOT of snobbishness.
Ibanez, I wish you luck in whatever choice you make. It's your money. However, some of your comments are contradictory. I for one own and drive a Passat GLX. In no way is that a downscale vehicle and quality wise it is the equal of anything Porsche ever built. The question was asked: Is it or is it not the crest you are after? If that is all, that would not, for me, be enough of a reason to buy one.
And, no, I do not own an SUV. My son-in-law has a 3/4 Ford truck if I have to make a run to Home Depot.
Cheers, all...
"It may have a Porsche crest on the front but if it has four doors and can be mistaken for an Outback, I ain't interested" quote from another thread....
10-25-2002, 04:01 AM
#22
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]Originally posted by Bob S. 1984 Silver:
<strong>Do I detect a bit of snobbishness here?
More like a LOT of snobbishness.
Ibanez, I wish you luck in whatever choice you make. It's your money. However, some of your comments are contradictory. I for one own and drive a Passat GLX. In no way is that a downscale vehicle and quality wise it is the equal of anything Porsche ever built. The question was asked: Is it or is it not the crest you are after? If that is all, that would not, for me, be enough of a reason to buy one.
And, no, I do not own an SUV. My son-in-law has a 3/4 Ford truck if I have to make a run to Home Depot.
Cheers, all...
"It may have a Porsche crest on the front but if it has four doors and can be mistaken for an Outback, I ain't interested" quote from another thread....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'd say the VW is probably better quality.
<strong>Do I detect a bit of snobbishness here?
More like a LOT of snobbishness.
Ibanez, I wish you luck in whatever choice you make. It's your money. However, some of your comments are contradictory. I for one own and drive a Passat GLX. In no way is that a downscale vehicle and quality wise it is the equal of anything Porsche ever built. The question was asked: Is it or is it not the crest you are after? If that is all, that would not, for me, be enough of a reason to buy one.
And, no, I do not own an SUV. My son-in-law has a 3/4 Ford truck if I have to make a run to Home Depot.
Cheers, all...
"It may have a Porsche crest on the front but if it has four doors and can be mistaken for an Outback, I ain't interested" quote from another thread....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'd say the VW is probably better quality.
10-25-2002, 09:27 AM
#23
King of Cool
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
[quote]Originally posted by Bob S. 1984 Silver:
<strong>Do I detect a bit of snobbishness here?
More like a LOT of snobbishness...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right on the target!
That's why this whole Damn truck is being built in a first place...
<strong>Do I detect a bit of snobbishness here?
More like a LOT of snobbishness...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right on the target!
That's why this whole Damn truck is being built in a first place...
10-25-2002, 10:38 AM
#24
Othello says the VW is probably better quality [that the cayenne]
Interesting, I've just read that there is a lot of friction between Porsche and VW right now because the new, cheaper VW SUV supposedly has much better interior quality than the cayanne...
Interesting, I've just read that there is a lot of friction between Porsche and VW right now because the new, cheaper VW SUV supposedly has much better interior quality than the cayanne...
10-25-2002, 11:59 AM
#26
Track Day
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How come no one has mentioned the Lexus LX 470? For my money, its one of the best SUV's on the market, even if a littel overpriced. It has the off-road heritage of the Landcruiser, with the fit and finish of a Lexus. It handles on-road driving like a dream and feels very "sedan-like" in traffic.
For power, the Escalade is tough to beat. It may not be "upscale" enough for some memebers of this board, but its engine is nothing to sneeze at.
I for one, am taking the "wait and see" approach on the Cayenne. Most Porsches seem to be overpriced, so its really no suprise that the Cayenne will be coming in at more than I expected. But, my guess is that it will fill its niche quite nicely and offer the vast majority of SUV owners what they are looking for: sport-sedan like feel, with an SUV's utilitarian versatility.
I will likely use some of its off-road capabilities in the winter months and when I take trips to the mountains to go camping, hike, bike, etc. I am hoping the Cayenne will exceed my expectations and be worth the extra money for the badge. If it is not, then I will go with another and continue to enjoy the hell out of my other P-car.
BK
For power, the Escalade is tough to beat. It may not be "upscale" enough for some memebers of this board, but its engine is nothing to sneeze at.
I for one, am taking the "wait and see" approach on the Cayenne. Most Porsches seem to be overpriced, so its really no suprise that the Cayenne will be coming in at more than I expected. But, my guess is that it will fill its niche quite nicely and offer the vast majority of SUV owners what they are looking for: sport-sedan like feel, with an SUV's utilitarian versatility.
I will likely use some of its off-road capabilities in the winter months and when I take trips to the mountains to go camping, hike, bike, etc. I am hoping the Cayenne will exceed my expectations and be worth the extra money for the badge. If it is not, then I will go with another and continue to enjoy the hell out of my other P-car.
BK
10-25-2002, 01:47 PM
#27
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call it snobby. Call it what you want. I make a lot of money and can afford to drive whatever I want. I choose not to drive a Corvette or a VW because I can afford a 911 TT. I am also a businessman and don't make stupid decisions and seriously question Porsche's pricing on the Cayenne which is why I was asking about the Range Rover. This is starting to degenerate into one of those my marque vs your marque discussions that ruins other boards.
10-25-2002, 07:48 PM
#28
Track Day
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]Originally posted by Ibanez:
<strong>Call it snobby. Call it what you want. I make a lot of money and can afford to drive whatever I want. I choose not to drive a Corvette or a VW because I can afford a 911 TT. I am also a businessman and don't make stupid decisions and seriously question Porsche's pricing on the Cayenne which is why I was asking about the Range Rover. This is starting to degenerate into one of those my marque vs your marque discussions that ruins other boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey Ibanez, I'm not calling you snobby, I just wondered if you ever considered the LX 470. My motto is "smoke em if you got em" so if you have the cash and enjoy spending it on cars, then by all means jump on whatever SUV you want. I merely thik it might be prudent to wait until the Cayenne comes out to see whether or not its worth the price Porsche is asking.
BK
<strong>Call it snobby. Call it what you want. I make a lot of money and can afford to drive whatever I want. I choose not to drive a Corvette or a VW because I can afford a 911 TT. I am also a businessman and don't make stupid decisions and seriously question Porsche's pricing on the Cayenne which is why I was asking about the Range Rover. This is starting to degenerate into one of those my marque vs your marque discussions that ruins other boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey Ibanez, I'm not calling you snobby, I just wondered if you ever considered the LX 470. My motto is "smoke em if you got em" so if you have the cash and enjoy spending it on cars, then by all means jump on whatever SUV you want. I merely thik it might be prudent to wait until the Cayenne comes out to see whether or not its worth the price Porsche is asking.
BK
10-26-2002, 07:54 PM
#29
I cant believe people are buying an SUV for perfmance reasons. If you want 0-60 times and the ability to fit your family in it.. .get an M5...
The cayenne is an SUV! How much 0-60 runs can you do on a tank of gas in a big ole TT V8? Not many, is my guess.
The cayenne is an SUV! How much 0-60 runs can you do on a tank of gas in a big ole TT V8? Not many, is my guess.
10-29-2002, 05:13 PM
#30
Race Director
I also agree!
I own a Porsche for the street, One for the race track, a VW for daily transportation, and SUV for backcounty adventures.
Simply put, no matter how much money I have I cannot see the logic in spending $100k, $70k, $50k or even $40k on a utility vehicle like an SUV.
I don't go to my Jeep Cherokee and expect performance. If I want to look good on the road I have my P-car for that. If I want to race, I have a car for that. If I want to get back and forth to work in a nice comfort, modern and fuel efficient package I have my GTI.
I am not going to get in to the merits of the a Range Rover vs Cayanne vs anthing else. What I simply fail to understand is why anyone needs to own an SUV that goes 0-60 in 5 seconds?
What is the point? When are other vehicles out there that do that much better why?
Why do you need wood grain and leather when you are sloging through the mud and dust of the backcountry. If you want the room, luxury, and performance there are plenty of nice Large Sport Sedans you can aquire. Audi S8, AMG S55, BMW 740, BMW M5. Why an SUV??
If you need to haul around you race car get a proper vehicle like a full size truck with big gas V8 or V10 or diesel. To tow may race car I have access to 2500 Dodge V10. This thing tows a 10,000lbs tag along or a 15,000lbs 5th wheel. The V10 motor makes 300 hp and 450lbs of torque. It not a performance machine, but can tow a house and the drivers can do it a nice confortable enviroment. It not a luxury car, but after spending a day out at a track the last thing I want to worry about us getting the inside of my luxury truck dirty.
It seems to me that the luxury SUVs are nothing more than status symbols. They seem to be a result of the need for people to show that have bigger (nickname for richard)than everyone else!
I own a Porsche for the street, One for the race track, a VW for daily transportation, and SUV for backcounty adventures.
Simply put, no matter how much money I have I cannot see the logic in spending $100k, $70k, $50k or even $40k on a utility vehicle like an SUV.
I don't go to my Jeep Cherokee and expect performance. If I want to look good on the road I have my P-car for that. If I want to race, I have a car for that. If I want to get back and forth to work in a nice comfort, modern and fuel efficient package I have my GTI.
I am not going to get in to the merits of the a Range Rover vs Cayanne vs anthing else. What I simply fail to understand is why anyone needs to own an SUV that goes 0-60 in 5 seconds?
What is the point? When are other vehicles out there that do that much better why?
Why do you need wood grain and leather when you are sloging through the mud and dust of the backcountry. If you want the room, luxury, and performance there are plenty of nice Large Sport Sedans you can aquire. Audi S8, AMG S55, BMW 740, BMW M5. Why an SUV??
If you need to haul around you race car get a proper vehicle like a full size truck with big gas V8 or V10 or diesel. To tow may race car I have access to 2500 Dodge V10. This thing tows a 10,000lbs tag along or a 15,000lbs 5th wheel. The V10 motor makes 300 hp and 450lbs of torque. It not a performance machine, but can tow a house and the drivers can do it a nice confortable enviroment. It not a luxury car, but after spending a day out at a track the last thing I want to worry about us getting the inside of my luxury truck dirty.
It seems to me that the luxury SUVs are nothing more than status symbols. They seem to be a result of the need for people to show that have bigger (nickname for richard)than everyone else!