Range Rovers are crap quality. It's only for people who want to make themselves believe they have a big pecker, just like those with Corvettes.
It's a lot better value than a Range Rover, and also cheaper than the Q7 and the Cayenne.
I am also of the opinion that it's more important what is on the inside of the vehicle than the outside. But... I don't want anything too ugly. The only downside is I would get taxed out of my arse, as I would with most decent cars, as the engine is a V6 (Tiny to Americans, massive to anyone not on a massive oil producing continent.)
Aren't diesels, in general, taxed less? I know the US and Europe have different models, but I was under the impression diesel was always better than gas when it came to saving money, either at the pump or through taxes.
I don't care for Audi, but many magazines have rated the S6 over the new M5 and E63 because of its value. It's performance is on par with the latter two but they specifically mentioned the interior of the Audi being superior in every way. This was in C&D, July 2012.
We are talking about different models here, but I imagine the interior is similar to the S6, and therefore much better than its competitors. Or at least some quality stuff.
i'm of the opinion that if you can't live in an area where you don't need a car, you need to figure out your spending. cars are so 1920s. i guess you get a pass cause you have a kid but i thought london had good public transportation. apartment in the city, walk to the bar, cab back, public transit to work, that's my life starting august 1st. no more car at all.
Range Rovers aren't bad if you use them for what they are. The majority of people just drive em around town and shit, stupid.
What a hipster.If you want an off-road Landrover you buy the Defender. But people who really go off-road have a Tractor.