Ah, thanks. I get it now. I definitely need space, and i don't like the d4 looks. So FF it is then.

I like the sport and prefer it to the discovery although they are all great looking cars.

Living in central London every other car seems to be one model or the other. The number of times I end up in a Range Rover traffic jam is nuts.

The thing that swung me to the FF was how comfortable the front and rear seats were. The sport seemed to be much harder and more uncomfortable on the back. The 2010 FF is now a bit sportier looking so fits the stable well.

Personally anyone who buys a Land Rover of any sort is a good egg in my book. We should wage war against the army of Cayennes, M5s, M6s and Lexus 300s that find it difficult to mount a pavement let alone go off road. Tom

Current Drive
2011 4.4 TDV8 Autobiography - Santorini Black - Ivory Leather

Previous Drives
2004 Model Vogue Td6 (Touchscreen) - Java Black - Parchment Leather
1994 RR Classic 3.9 V8 Soft dash - Niagara Grey - Grey Leather
1972 Series III SWB Safari - Green (Hand Painted) - Black Plastic

OOoo Can I be Corporal Jones ?

The Sport is definately more snug and "cosy" than a FFRR, but some people like that.

The Sport looks good when its got the fancy wheels and bumpers etc, but in standard trim, it doesn't do it for me I'm afraid.

Get a nice FFRR and you will be more than happy.

The problem will come when you want to replace it, and can't find anything better !! 2011 Range Rover Vogue SE 4.4 TDV8

Previous cars :
2003 Range Rover Vogue TD6
1999 Discovery Td5 ES
1995 BMW M5 3.8 6 speed
1992 Range Rover 3.9 Efi Vogue
1992 BMW M5 3.8
1988 BMW 735i SE
1989 Ford Sierra XR4x4 2.9i
1981 Ford Fiesta Supersport

Flashman wrote:

Personally anyone who buys a Land Rover of any sort is a good egg in my book. We should wage war against the army of Cayennes, M5s, M6s and Lexus 300s that find it difficult to mount a pavement let alone go off road.

Here here...

IMHO (i drive both on a daily basis) if you want to drive quickly, get a sport... If you want comfort, get a FF! Simples

Admitedly i drive mainly pre 2008 cars, but give me an 06 SC FF or Sport in a range of challenges, i bet the SS would be quicker around a track, and far less uncomfortable as a passenger on A roads whilst pressing on... That said, i wouldn't swap mine for a SS. As an all rounder i think the FF is better...

IMHO the Sport was made to fill a gap in the market... For the man who maybe thinks the FF is alittle to Fat! Maybe someone that likes Jap interiors instead of Jag interiors...


Craig

I've driven both and the Sport can be hustled into corners with more comfort than the FF IMHO. However, thats the problem in my eyes, and partly why I wanted to change from the Toerag. If I want a sporty handling car with towing/carrying capacity then a 5 series Touring would be hard to beat. Why go for the downsides of a heavy 4x4. I always wanted the Toerag to be more comfortable but it just wasn't, the FF has that box properly ticked...

Agree, its all about marketing and targetting different market sectors... I just hope they don't water down the RR brand with the Evoque to the point where it loses its appeal.

However, doesn't seem to have held back Jaguar or BMW though who both have introduced cheaper options. Kath has never really noticed Landrovers before. Think she assumed they were mostly transport for farmers and collies, but the Evoque has caught her eye so perhaps it works pulling new people into the brand.

The FF is still the daddy tho!!  Lloyd Barnes

Current
Crendon 427 Sideoiler Cobra in build... 7 litres of madness!

Gone
2008 TDV8 Vogue - Black with Ivory/Grand Black Lacquer
2008 VW Touareg 3.0Tdi
6.3litre Dax Cobra - 12.34 Second 1/4mile at 114mph

fisha wrote:

A long time ago in a dealer, not long after the RRS came out, the dealer made the comment to me:

The sport is for the people that aspire to be.
The RR is for those that are.


I've always liked that phrase. (but i do have a soft spot for the sport)

This is hugely helpful, thanks all.

The more I look into this, the more it looks like the Sport is the right one. My weekly 450 miles round trips involve long stretches of winding mountain roads. Too much roll would be very uncomfortable I think, and I do tend to be brisk.

Is the Dynamic Response feature still confined to the Sport or does a late FF have it?

I was always really, really snobby about the RRS until I tried one. We've just recently had our second child, and live out properly in the wilds. So we need a bigger car that can cope with two feet of snow, and something with a Land Rover badge ticks all the boxes - our current RR Classic and Freelander cope admirably but the Freelander is just too small to cope with all the crap you need to cart about for kids these days. We've tried a few things and been impressed or otherwise and had dismissed the Sport out of hand. And then we found ourselves at a dealers with LOADS of them, and figured 'why not?'
We both loved it. I could get comfortable quickly, I loved the 'cooped in' feeling you get in the front and I loved how it felt considerably smaller than it actually is when pressing on around the lanes. By comparison, a Disco 3 felt cramped yet massive. And because of the long boot, I couldn't get the baby seat behind me...
We seriously considered one, but in the end decided we just couldn't live with the image. Nor that stupid tailgate. The hunt for our perfect FFRR continues, but the idea of a Sport as a plaything when they're down at a couple of grand is one that's hard to resist.

brahms9 wrote:

Is the Dynamic Response feature still confined to the Sport or does a late FF have it?

I believe it's a different thing, but i haven't got a clue what it does.

Does it reduce roll on bends to comfortable levels? I really think that part is the decider for me, and if a later FFRR had it, that would be the best of both worlds.

From landrover.com :

Adaptive Dynamics
The Adaptive Dynamics suspension system provides the best ever Range Rover experience over rough roads by fully utilising the vehicle's long suspension travel to absorb potholes or ruts. It also provides enhanced control at higher speeds while cornering or braking. The system monitors the road 500 times a second and predicts the driver's actions, constantly fine tuning the suspension settings of each wheel of the vehicle to best suit the terrain. This helps ensure that all occupants are transported in the greatest possible comfort, regardless of the road surface and variations in conditions.

Thanks, I did see that at some stage, but i'm too thick to understand what it does that's different from Dynamic Response. I thought the latter was the anti-roll gizmo?

This is more than academic for me, as the bendy bits here really are something else.

The Dynamic Response thing is the anti roll system, developed from the ACE (Active Cornering Enhancement) that was used on the Discovery 2.

The Adaptive Dynamics is a system which alters the shock absorber damping, and came out in 2010 I believe.

They both probably do a bit more than the above, but I think thats the nitty gritty..... 2011 Range Rover Vogue SE 4.4 TDV8

Previous cars :
2003 Range Rover Vogue TD6
1999 Discovery Td5 ES
1995 BMW M5 3.8 6 speed
1992 Range Rover 3.9 Efi Vogue
1992 BMW M5 3.8
1988 BMW 735i SE
1989 Ford Sierra XR4x4 2.9i
1981 Ford Fiesta Supersport

Last edited by mjdronfield on 7th Jun 2012 8:44am. Edited 1 time in total

So do all L322s have dynamic response? cheers
Rich

To my knowledge, I don't think any L322's have it. Just the RRS.

Though the Discovery 4 could have it now - not an expert on the D4......

Its one of the things I do miss moving from a Discovery 2 to a L322...........but not much else !! 2011 Range Rover Vogue SE 4.4 TDV8

Previous cars :
2003 Range Rover Vogue TD6
1999 Discovery Td5 ES
1995 BMW M5 3.8 6 speed
1992 Range Rover 3.9 Efi Vogue
1992 BMW M5 3.8
1988 BMW 735i SE
1989 Ford Sierra XR4x4 2.9i
1981 Ford Fiesta Supersport