ChristianR

if you had the choice of one which would it be, the CTT ($48k) has 60k miles the RR/SC ($43k) has 30k miles, they are priced similar?

Thanks

XR4Tim

Tough call, but the Cayenne Turbo is significantly faster, and will likely have fewer issues overall. But the Range Rovers are nice.

TexasRider

Having just been down this road but in new 2013 models, I can say that it depends on the amount of offroad you might do. While the Cayenne can go it , this is the Rovers ground.

Separately, the dealer told me that the Rover models since 2010 have been much better as far as reliabilty and mechanical issues. That said your particular one could be near perfect.

If it was a hard used CTT and a soft used Rover with 30K less miles could enter in to it too. Does either have any CPO warranty on it?

XR4Tim

Exactly. With double the miles, the Cayenne could be in much worse shape overall. If that were the case, the RR would be worth looking at. The supercharged Range Rovers aren't your typical basket-case of Rover problems from what I'm told, so it is worth looking at.
But like I said, if you're looking for a fast SUV, the Cayenne is significantly faster. No comparison.

ChristianR

^2008 RR/SC they are willing to throw in a 3 year warranty, the CTTwarranty is +$3500

ChristianR

^not worried about fast as long as it has plenty of power to get moving down the highway. if i want fast i have a stage 4 fvd 996tt and a MV Augusta ;-)

XR4Tim

In that case, I'd lean toward the RR. If you add the warranty to the Cayenne, that's an $8,500 difference between the two. And at $51,500 a 60k mile '08 CTT is not a great deal.

ChristianR

I like the RR/SC a lot, I currently have a 2006 CTT and loved it till the last 1k miles, i have replaced the coolant pipes, drive shaft and brake booster, like $4500 and counting and the SOB has been in the shop on off for the last 6 weeks and I hate it now

XR4Tim

I'll trade you an X5 for it.

ChristianR

^sorry, not a fan of the BMW's

XR4Tim

Worth a shot.

TexasRider

My buddy just a few months ago got a new RR S/C . It has PLENTY of power, and will shove us deep in the seat on accel, but I am not sure how much Hp is in the 2008. The 375Hp 2013 we drove had very good grunt and ample power. Underpowered is not a LR thing for those carrying the RR markings - maybe in the lower lines. They like gas - but so does too a CTT.

Did I say that my bud liked his new RR. He went back and got another new RR Sport for his wife without the 500+Hp of the S/C but instead with the NA motor.

I saw an Evoque at a stoplight and said I have got see one of those for my wife. But we are hung between the new MB ML 350 and the Cayenne diesel as the Rovers fell out for her use. For me, I would have Porsche sports cars, and a RR S/C without hesitation.

But Tim is the man to listen to about the mechanicals and general workings here.

ChristianR

^ the 2008 RR/SC has 390hp/410tq

TexasRider

Then it is on par or better than the RR we drove and it had plenty of oomph. If at the dealer then you can drive it and see but you wont be disappointed.

But the Porche is a Porsche. You have experience there . They make great machines .

ChristianR

Well, I have purchased a 2011 RR/SC and I love it, if you like the 2007-2009 RR/SC than you have to drive the 2010 and up, 510hp/470tq, fit and finish inside and out is awesome