RRSPORT.CO.UK • View topic - Land Cruiser or Range Rover Sport?

Home · FAQ · New Posts · Private Messages · Search · Members · Members Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In

Home > General > Land Cruiser or Range Rover Sport?

Does Simmikie need to buy a RRS or a LC

RRS of course!!

100%

[12]

Neah - a LC is much cooler

[0]

Total Votes: 12

Page 1 of 1

gribnau

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Location: Santa Clara, Bay Area, CA
Posts: 86

2006 Range Rover Sport 4.4 V8 HSE Buckingham Blue

Land Cruiser or Range Rover Sport?

- Robert

2006 Mercedes SL55 AMG - Black Opal
2005 Porsche Carrera 997 - Artic Silver
2006 Range Rover Sport V8 - Buckingham Blue

Thu Jun 30 2005 3:43am

simmikie

Joined: 02 Jun 2005

Posts: 25

Re: Land Cruiser or Range Rover Sport?

gribnau wrote:

Oh yeah, this is going to be an enlightening pole, with most of the members long time LR fanatics (did I say that?) and own or are hours from owning an RRS!

Personally I am torn, there things I like about the LC, there are things I like about the RRS. The RRS is ahead by a nose as it is actually closer to what I want in a 4x4. Having no off-road or 4x4 experience Terrain Response is perfect for me, though I doubt I'll ever use anything past Grass, Gravel, Snow. I like the low learning curve it offers. By contrast the LC system, I have no concept of how to use it in varying weather conditions.

The RRS is "pretty" in a sporting way, but the LC, in it's staid ultra conservative, boring styling is kind of exceptional looking (to me anyway). Being a "road warrior" I drive quite a bit and like the extra convenience features of the RRS, like rain sensors, bi-xenon, PTI (I need a rolling office), and all the testers comments on it's long range cruising attributes. On the other hand, I have driven the LC, and it is absolutely confidence inspiring. It has an aire of being able to go anywhere at anytime and do anything, and for it's bulk handled and rode amazingly well. After that first test drive I could not get the smile from my face for days! I loved it!! I did not say I do right then and there, for one I have never spent that kind of money on an automobile, I do not need an 8 passenger, I hate the slung off to the side back seats, or having to remove and store them and then living with the holes in the loadspace. Also I thought 235 bhp is pretty puny for a 5500 pound truck.....enter the RRS.

I am leaning slightly to the RRS, mainly for it's power, 4x4 system, comfort and convenience equipment, and it's unique Marquee and styling. My big concern is LR itself, if there is one thing that organization truly excels at, it is shooting themselves in the foot!

simmikie

Thu Jun 30 2005 4:29am

gribnau

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Location: Santa Clara, Bay Area, CA
Posts: 86

In all honesty, i can see why you would consider the LC. It has considerable more space, it has proven technology and will remain its value exceptionally well on the other hand, as you say, it's straight boring and nearly old-fashion in design.

I like the RRS for: the features likePTI, Heated Front Screen (which i will NEVER use), Nav Sys etc as well as the overall looks: it looks fresh, modern, classic and powerful yet understated.

I agree with you that Land Rover has made some mistakes that they could easily have fixed without having to spend a whole lot of $$. The ashtray for example should have been designed better and feels like a piece of very cheap plastic - on the other hand, that has been the only thing so far - the seats are very comfortable, the nav systems works great and the bluetooth is phenominal. I have a mini van for size, a sports car for speed and the RRS for style

- Robert

2006 Mercedes SL55 AMG - Black Opal
2005 Porsche Carrera 997 - Artic Silver
2006 Range Rover Sport V8 - Buckingham Blue

Thu Jun 30 2005 5:13am

MDP

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Location: Back in an AUDI
Posts: 8560

All I can say is " the LC looks as though they used a JELLY MOULD and not modelling clay in its design"
" WITH MORE EXTRAS THAN A HOLLYWOOD EPIC "

Thu Jun 30 2005 9:44am

Tim in Scotland

Joined: 30 May 2005
Location: Driving along in my automobile
Posts: 7522

2008 Range Rover Sport TDV8 HSE Stornoway Grey

And it (the LC) is just so "last century"..................... it's a dinosaur even compared to SUVs of a similar size. It might be the UN favourite but there is a dammed good reason why.................. nobody else is buying them these days so Toyota gives them away to the UN.
It's like a tank - built like one, drives like one and has the fuel consumption of one..................
but really we are not comparing like with like - surely the LC's natural competitor is the L322 RR not the Sport.

Thu Jun 30 2005 10:06am

simmikie

Joined: 02 Jun 2005

Posts: 25

MDP wrote:
All I can say is " the LC looks as though they used a JELLY MOULD and not modelling clay in its design"

From where I sit, a vehicles qualities are not soley defined by the stylists pen. Perhaps the view from your balcony is different.

simmikie

Thu Jun 30 2005 6:48pm

simmikie

Joined: 02 Jun 2005

Posts: 25

Tim in Scotland wrote:
And it (the LC) is just so "last century"..................... it's a dinosaur even compared to SUVs of a similar size. It might be the UN favourite but there is a dammed good reason why.................. nobody else is buying them these days so Toyota gives them away to the UN.
It's like a tank - built like one, drives like one and has the fuel consumption of one..................
but really we are not comparing like with like - surely the LC's natural competitor is the L322 RR not the Sport.

Hey Tim,

Being born in 1955, I am proudly made of last century stock, some enduring concepts emerged from the stone age, namely......fire! Even though Toyota (at least in my market), spends next to nothing on advertising, they sell almost as fast as dealers can get them on the lot. Resale values are strong, and are usually snapped up quiickly.

The LC is built like a tank, and it feels carved of a piece The ride is remarkably stable, planted, composed and yet compliant. The on road handling is quite incredible, within reason it can be placed effotlessly on any line within a corner and still performs effortlessly hour after hour on long distance treks. It's a wonderful truck. And this is how I feel about the second place contender!?!

simmikie

Thu Jun 30 2005 7:09pm

MDP

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Location: Back in an AUDI
Posts: 8560

I think the Land Cruiser is less popular in the UK purely because of its size,we only have small roads
" WITH MORE EXTRAS THAN A HOLLYWOOD EPIC "

Thu Jun 30 2005 11:49pm

gribnau

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Location: Santa Clara, Bay Area, CA
Posts: 86

Ok - Ok - i think we got the point..... Sim: now the decision is up to you - we have only been trying to provide you with some guidance

- Robert

2006 Mercedes SL55 AMG - Black Opal
2005 Porsche Carrera 997 - Artic Silver
2006 Range Rover Sport V8 - Buckingham Blue

Fri Jul 01 2005 2:11am

simmikie

Joined: 02 Jun 2005

Posts: 25

gribnau wrote:
Ok - Ok - i think we got the point..... Sim: now the decision is up to you - we have only been trying to provide you with some guidance

I know everyone is being helpful and are rightfully proud and excited about the RRS, as am I, why else after being on the road since 4 pm would I still up responding on this board?

Both vehicles make a strong, compelling case for themselves. I haven't driven the RRS, I am waiting for the HSE to be equipped with DR. I will then drive both the LC with it's bhp increase and new air suspension and the RRS back to back on an extended ride and see which makes me smile the biggest.

I do appreciate everyones input, again I am as big a fan of the RRS as some of you are. Now for some milk and cookies and well earned sleep.

CiAo
simmikie

Fri Jul 01 2005 8:45am

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT + 1 Hour

< Previous Topic | Next Topic >

Posting Rules

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum