Jump to navigation
The all-new Range Rover is an epic machine. But is it better than the sportscar-on-steriods Porsche Cayenne. Steve Sutcliffe takes to the road to find out.
Next week...Sutcliffe takes the pair off-road
Britain might be good at a lot of things, but making cars is not one of them. JLR are making Britain the laughing stock of the world.
Sir Henry Royce, Lanchester, Sir William Lyons, W O Bentley. Not much good at making cars, then? Strange, thought JLR was envy of the world with Evoque, Range Rover, Defender, XF, F-Type etc... Seem to be some discontinuities in your reality.
Porsche? War criminal with an "honorary" doctorate in engineering.
Better comparison - but still inappropriate:-
Range Rover Autobiography - SDV8 4.4 Litre - From £87,895
Porsche Cayenne S Diesel - 4.2 litre - From £58 ,243
If the same Tyre specification (Profile) is used on both vehicles, then this comparison makes a little bit more sense, in terms of ride comparison. The Porsche can be fitted with ultra low "35" profile tyres to more comfortable "55" profile. No mention was made regarding the boots fitted to each of the vehicles in this comparison.
BUt one vehicle falls into the market segment of Sports SUVs and the other is a contender in the luxury Limousine segment.
In terms of similarity of specification - Both have diesel V8s of 4.2 to 4.4 Litres
Chalk & Cheese market segments but a 30k price advantage to this Porsche that conclusively blows away the Range Rover on performance.
Given that the RR is no longer a farmer's tool, the serious 4x4 capability seems almost irrelevant (for a limousine)
Advantage Porsche by £29,600
No one in their right mind will select a Range Rover as a off road workhorse, nor would a prospective Cayenne owner.
Here we have 2 competent SUVs, and on the road the Porsche has the superior driver dynamics.
I would always buy a Long wheelbase Mercedes 'S' Class ahead of a Range Rover that still has to prove its reliability. I have driven many examples of the Range Rover in the last 40 yrs, as well as most of its competitors. For me, the Range Rover reliability remains unproven - from many years of quality issues.
Malo Mori Quam Foedari
To be fair I think that one would need to spend about £18k on the Porsche Diesel S to bring it's equipment levels up to that of the Range Rover, making the difference nearer £11k.
With all due respect these cars are not comparable. One is a sport focused four wheeel drive in the tradition of the BMW X5, the other is an aspiring luxury car on stilts.
It would be nice for once to see some objective commentary from Autocar. If you were reviewing a £20,000 MPV you would be criticising any shortcomings in handling and yet you fail to make any mention of such failures in the new Range Rover.
At 2 minutes 22 seconds the reviewer completely loses control of the rear of the car at modest speed over terrain that is not particularly challenging. Hardly consistent with his unqualified praise of the car's handling throughout. The car's reaction is not just suggestive of a lack of dynamic poise, but also that the car is inherently unstable and thefore dangerous in the hands of those who do not profess to be professional road testers.
Given that this car costs £94,000 in its diesel guise I assume that it also has the benefit of Landrover's anti roll suspension. If this is the best that Range Rover can do, prospective purchasers might do well for just £6,000 more to split their budget and buy an S-Class and an X5, or simply pick a £94,000 SUV or a luxury car. I certainly wouldn't pick this 'jack of all trades, master of none.'
One can only assume that at £94,000 the majority of Range Rover's budget is spent not on development or quality control but on sweetening sycophantic reviewers to make false comparisons with Bentleys and better engineered SUVs. Free holiday to Morocco anyone or perhaps a year's supply of Tetley tea bags (courtesy of TATA)?
Do you guys go out of your way to get the readers irate, perturbed and/or incensed? In no way, shape or form do these serve the same market....... yes you can compare the Range Rover to other "luxury" vehicles, but a Turbo Cayeene? Seriously?
As mentioned in the other letters, the Range Rover wallows when covering the challenging terrain of the test, the real Porsche competition is the Cayenne S diesel not the bonkers Turbo.
You are definetly doing your readers a disservice with this type of "comparison". We expect serious testing of comparable vehicles not a wishy-washy comparison of complete opposites. Does anyone expect the Range Rover to have sportscar handling, or the Turbo Cayenne to have a cushy ride?
A sad piece of journalism, but another notch in the belt for hyping the Rover.
The Range Rovers handling looked terrifying to me, the body shifted with the weight transfer like a garden shed attached to a wheelbarrow with bungy straps. I can't think of many things that would go round those bends so alarmingly, I thought it had electronic suspension that clamped down on excessive body roll instantly, but then RR and electronics, it was probably broken!
The diesel RR should be compared with the diesel G Wagon, diesel Cayenne V8, diesel Audi Q7 V8.
Where is the off road test?
Time for Steve to get a new job.
Watch between 2:30 and 2:35 - that Range Rover is about as stable as David Hasselhoff.
Even with all its super duper suspension control the RR was wallowing all over the corners, driver unable to keep on his side of the white line. No wonder drivers coming the other way always cringe when seeing these 2ton heaps. A 15 year old Jimny has more body control and wont be seen languishing at the side of the road with its bonnet up and poor mechanic shaking his head. Good to sit in a straight line, heart rending to drive..