Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka
Yet the RR is a blast to drive, must utilitarian, provides the most compliant ride and is the most off road capable.
Losing by 3 car lengths in the 1/4 mile to vehicles significantly lighter and more powerful is pathetic? I guess most of the vehicles on this forum are pathetic compared to the RR Sport SVR then.
|
So it's the fault of BMW and Mercedes that Rover can't make a vehicle shed weight to gain performance? Rover has been and always will be the worst purchase of the group. They will continue to be plagued with issues and remain the car that only its blind followers will purchase. The owners get used to the new models as they frequently visit their local service centers for issues with their existing models.
:
The fact that you reference "the most off-road capable vehicle" is laughable. Right, because the likelihood of anyone considering the off-road capabilities of any of these vehicles is about as accurate as someone who weighs fuel consumption as a consideration when buying them. All vehicles with 20-22" wheels will NEVER see off road usage. Unless their owners run off the road or drive over a median while texting. Not to mention the Rover is the only SUV in the group. It would be a more accurate comparison vs the X5M and the ML, but when is the Internet ever accurate....
Just my .02