Localizer wrote:

4.4 all they way - smooth, powerful and even frugal (..... for a FFRR).

FOX
your comments were spot on
you,ve obviously got your priorities right

KurtVerbose wrote:

Curious. What is the difference in MPG to those who've upgraded and drive the same routes/maner?

im with fox on this one, i never spend alot on depreciating asset's, ill leave the money to the kids instead. My range rover cost me about a months work so I dont care if it gets dented, seats get dirty from the kids\dog etc.

When i looked at getting the 3.6 it would of cost me 3x to upgrade, now is it 3x better? to me its more or less the same car. Now if business is good when the new shape is a couple of years old i might splash out but for a "newer" 10year old design no way. 2004 black Vogue TD6

If you sit in a 2003MY car and a well specced 2011MY vehicle they are miles apart. Even more so in the way they drive. The 2007MY interior facelift was significant as was 2010MY. Except the basic shell design, 2010MY+ is a completely different car inside - all of the electronics are different as is the way the vehicle drives. I would not say the vehicle looks dated in any way.

4.4TDV8 all the way.

sorry got to disagree, the 2010 facelift might have been significant, but the 2007 interior fukup was a backward step the seats are bloody awful and I own both!

as for engines yes 4.4 TDV8

I much prefer the cooling seat function the new style seats provide. I also think they look much nicer. I understand the adjustable top half had to go because of airbag regulations.

letsavit2 wrote:

When i looked at getting the 3.6 it would of cost me 3x to upgrade, now is it 3x better? to me its more or less the same car

not taking my td6 to the race track anytime soon so doing its job fine for me.

2003=10k , 2011= 70k - another range rover L322 for a 60k trade in, no thankyou ill wait for the new model. 2004 black Vogue TD6

A 2003 Vogue wasn't 10k new though so it's pointless comparing a second hand car value with the retail price of a brand new car. As others have said, the two are miles apart and for what you get included LR could charge a lot more - try looking at an X5 40d and you'll soon get up and over Range Rover pricing in options which we get as standard.

Its not pointless when i was talking about upgrading to another secondhand model, the 3.6, someone else starting talking about the 2011 model. I feel (if I am allowed opinion) the L322 is not worth spending good money on.

If money was no object for the original poster then he would just go and buy a new one, but this is not so. Although this time its between a 3.6-4.4 but my advice still stands, if your on a budget get the 3.6 and save the rest.

As for the 2011 model (once again only my opinion) its on the edge of a massive depreciation curve, to the non enthusiast in 3 years time it will look the same as every other L322 model, an old range rover. 2004 black Vogue TD6

Agree with Letsavit, but, most of the 2011 models being sold are on finance or are leased by business customers. They are acquired "usually" on a 3 year term and merely returned at the end of the term and replaced with another in 3 years again. These lease customers have to replace now as they are at the end of their agreement term - they are not in a position to hang on for the L405 model.

With a lease or lease purchase, its a fixed monthly fee and a business expense - and to be quite frank they don't even care about depreciation. Its a means to an end and involves a fixed monthly overhead without having considerable sums of money tied up in a vehicle, and has tax advantages.

Furthermore, with some businesses a new vehicle on a regular basis gives the right impression and also avoids any nasties with out of warranty problems.

Lease costs are directly linked to depreciation - the lessee is paying the depreciation monthly plus the finance company's cut. As for depreciation, and given that the L405 is likely to be quite a bit more expensive than the current model, I don't think there will be a major hit for anything but the very last L322s.

The real crux is that nicer and better things are usually more expensive, and the 4.4 TDV8 is nicer and better.

I never lease cars as I don't like any restriction on how far I can drive my car in x amount of time without penalty. Depreciation is a factor in any expensive car and it's just something that's going to happen. I have to agree with Trommel - the L405 is apparently aiming at Bentley levels of comfort and probably cost. I read somewhere that price is aiming to start much higher than today and that the new Sport will be at the level of the L322 in terms of pricing. These beautiful cars will still be highly desirable in a few years (I hope!).

Yes i also think the new range rover will be even more upmarket so you could well be right, the jump in price will big enough to hold the L322's prices up.

Got a feeling the new range rover might be too posey so ill turn to the disco in the future, i like the luxury rugged work horse image which my old range rover does so well...  2004 black Vogue TD6