Reviewing the 2010 Range Rover Sport

Reviewing the 2010 Range Rover Sport, How many sport-utilities are actually "sporty"? Utility - ok. They usually have lots of room and can carry lots of stuff. Most are good in the snow (or at least, better than a car). But sporty? That's another story!

Among high-dollar SUVs, only two really qualify. One is the Porsche Cayenne; the other is the Range Rover Sport, subject of this review.

WHAT IT IS

The Range Rover Sport is - you guessed it - a sporty (and slightly smaller) version of the Range Rover, the high-end, full-size 4WD SUV built by Britain's Land Rover. It's about half a foot shorter, four inches narrower through the hips and weighs about 150 pounds less than than the regular Range Rover.

It's also a lot less expensive - $59,645 for the HSE and $73,345 for the more powerful supercharged version - vs. $78,425 for the regular (slightly larger) Range Rover and $94,275 for the supercharged version.

WHAT'S NEW FOR 2010

2010 Range Rovers (both the Sport and the regular Rover) get a larger, more powerful standard 5.0 liter V-8 as well as a new six-speed automatic transmission and several key upgrades to features and equipment, including revised automatic 4WD programs and a new (hard drive-based) GPS navigation system.

WHAT'S GOOD

The price is a steal - basically the same Range Rover for almost $20k less.

Half the price of a Benz G550 (the only other uber-premium SUV that matches the RR's cachet as well as its off-road prowess). Supercharged version is $27k less than comparably powerful Porsche Cayenne Turbo.

Acceleration now appropriate to price - and better than some of the comparably priced competition

It does handle better, is easier to park/maneuver than the standard (larger/heavier) Range Rover - while giving up nothing as far as presence/exclusivity and features/amenties. Same tremendous off-road capability, too.

WHAT'S NOT SO GOOD

Headroom's a little tight (the price you pay for the extra sportiness). Gas mileage (13 city for the non-supercharged version) limits the range of this Rover - even with a 23.3 gallon tank. It's not hard to run it dry in 200 miles of real-world driving.

Fill-ups are forbidding - even for the affluent clientele that shops Land Rovers: About $70 a pop at current prices of $3 per gallon. Way too nice to actually take off-roading - just like all the others in this segment!

UNDER THE HOOD

The 2010 Range Rover Sport is equipped with a new (larger) and much more powerful 5 liter V-8 for 2010, with or without a supercharger. Without the supercharger, the V-8 produces 375 horsepower. With it, the power jumps to 510 hp - making it on of the strongest engines on the market, period.

Porsche's $99,900 Cayenne Turbo offers a "mere" 500 hp; to top the RR's power you'll have to pony up a staggering $126,300 for the 550 hp Turbo S.

The Mercedes-Benz G500, meanwhile, carries a 5.5 liter V-8 that makes 382 hp - about the same as the RR Sport. But like the Cayenne Turbo, the G500's base price of $104,400 puts in another orbit, almost.

With the new 5 liter, 375 hp V-8, the non-supercharged '10 Range Rover Sport accelerates from 0-60 as quickly as the 2009 supercharged Range Rover sport (7.2 seconds). With the supercharged version of the 5 liter engine, the 0-60 time drops to an extremely quick 5.9 seconds - quicker than the price-comparable Cayenne GTS (6.1 seconds for $72,400) and enough to harry the enormously more expensive six-figure Cayenne Turbo (4.9 seconds).

Impressively, gas mileage for the '10 RR is actually slightly better than before, too - even though the new model has larger and much more powerful engines. The non-supercharged 5 liter V-8 manages 13 city, 18 highway vs. the old 4.4's slurpalicious 12 city, 18 highway.

Both versions of the new 5 liter V-8s are teamed up with an also-new six-speed automatic transmission and Land Rover's impressively capable full-time 4WD system, which comes with multiple settings for different types of terrain and conditions such as Mud and Snow, Sand and Rock Crawl - as well as driver-selectable 4WD Low range gearing.

Maximum trailer towing capacity is 7,700 lbs. - same as the Cayenne but more than twice the Benz G500's startlingly meager 3,500 pound rating.

ON THE ROAD

The additional power is literally transformative - and equalizing. Last year's Range Rover Sport with the 300 hp 4.4 V-8 was on the borderline of slow - at least, for a vehicle at the top of the proverbial food chain in terms of brand status and snob appeal.

It took the '09 RR Sport about 8.2 seconds to reach 60 - about what a Toyota Corolla can manage. No one who buys a nearly $60k (to start) vehicle wants to be looking at the cheesy rubber bumper of a $13k car.

The Range Rover's just to heavy for even 300 hp to be sufficient. In '09, it was almost mandatory to buy the much more expensive supercharged version - which even then wasn't actually quick, just acceptable.

So, the new 375 hp is wonderful news - and not only because it makes the standard RR quick enough and responsive enough to stand up to Porsches.

The broader point is it's no longer essential to spend the additional $14K to upgrade to the supercharged version. The 510 hp engine now truly optional - in the sense that it's something you decide to buy because you want neck-snapping speed, not merely enough reserve on tap to pull safely onto a busy road or make a fast pass.

The other aspect of the RR is that, relatively speaking, its handling is sporty - at least, much more so than the very capable off-road but horribly clumsy on-road Mercedes Gelandewagen. That thing is a beast - one of the few new SUVs you can buy that still feels as though it might roll over taking corners at normal, posted speeds. The traction/stability control system come on constantly if the G is driven even a little bit aggressively on asphalt. There's really no comparison; the RR is exponentially more civilized - yet manages to remain just as capable of hitting the dirt (or crawling over rocks) as the G550.

The Cayenne beats the RR on-road, with 911-sharp steering and excellent reflexes overall. But it's more car-like design limits what it can do off-road (at least relative to the hunky Range Rover) and if you really do need the 4WD toughness, it's advantage RR.

A wild card: The Lexus GX460 offers similarly poised on-road manners as well as beefy off-road capability, but like last year's RR, the Lexus is underpowered, with just a 301 hp 4.6 liter V-8 under its hood (and no stronger optional V-8 available).

All in all, nothing else out there can match the straight-line acceleration (even in base trim), off-road bona fides and curb appeal of the Range Rover Sport - at least, not for $59k and change.

AT THE CURB

Land Rovers have a classic upright/boxy shape you either like - or don't. The current model could be parked next to a 1970s-era model and though there are numerous small changes and upgrades, the basic profile is like father-to-son.

It's a handsome vehicle in my opinion. Not brutal-looking like the Benz G550 (a vehicle whose military origins are obvious). It stands out, too - something the plain-looking Lexus GX460 doesn't do.

The RR Sport is physically smaller than the standard Range Rover (the RR Sport's wheelbase is 108 inches vs. 113.3 for the standard RR) but visually it's hard to tell the difference unless you park them side-by-side. In no way does the RR Sport seem less substantial or downgraded.

Both the RR Sport and the regular Range Rover seat five and - surprisingly - there's actually more front and rear seat legroom in the physically smaller RR Sport than in the larger overall regular Range Rover (42.4 inches/front seat legroom vs. 38.9 inches and 37.6 inches of rear seat legroom vs. 35.5). Headroom is tighter in the Sport, though (38.5 inches up front vs. 39.3 in the regular Rover) which can be a problem for taller drivers.

Cargo capacity is almost identical: 71 cubic feet for the RR Sport vs. 74 cubic feet for the regular Range Rover.

The fact that the Sport has about the same interior/cargo room as the larger-on-the-outside standard Range Rover is pretty cool. The fact that it handles/maneuvers more nimbly as a result of its arguably better use of space even more so.

You don't really lose anything by going with the RR Sport over the regular Range Rover - except sheer bulk and perhaps a bit of off-road capability under extreme conditions (the regular RR has a bit more ground clearance and its wheel/tire packages are more dirt-oriented than the aggressive performance rubber fitted to the RR Sport).

THE REST

The Range Rover appears to be meticulously put-together but it is a very complex vehicle with extremely complex sub-systems, most notably the Terrain Sensing 4WD. Previous Land Rover models have sometimes had bugs and could sometimes be unusually expensive to maintain. That said, there's a helluva cushion built into the RR Sport's $59k starting price - which is nearly $20k less than the base price of the larger on the outside but otherwise very similar standard Range Rover. That makes up for a lot, even if some bugs do crop up.

Land Rover provides a better-than-average four-year, 50,000 mile basic/powertrain warranty, too - which roughly tracks when most typical Rang Rover buyers would be about ready to trade-in.

Safety-wise, the RR comes with "everything" - including Hill Descent Control (electronically controls throttle and brake action to prevent the RR from building up excessive speed going down a steep grade) and (in supercharged versions) an emergency braking function that will slow (and even stop) the vehicle automatically if the cruise control is on and the driver doesn't notice traffic slowing down and begin to brake on his own.

THE BOTTOM LINE

It's a bit weird to be talking about any vehicle with a nearly $60k starting price as a "bargain" - but that's what the Range Rover Sport is. The new V-8s, meanwhile, fix the one real flaw this model had.

The end result is a very appealing high-end Sport Ute that can honestly be called sporty - without making a fool of oneself.

Sizing Up Cars From Used Car Dealers

Sizing Up Cars From Used Car Dealers, When you are purchasing your next used car, it is important to have some handy tips for the decision. After all buying a car new or used is one of the most important purchases that you will make in your life. You deserve the very best and most for your money when purchasing a car from used car dealers. Here are some tips to make the purchase go more smoothly.

Shock Absorbers Test

Shock absorbers are nearly impossible to see and most of us do not know how to tell if they need replacing soon or not. Use the palm of your hands to press against the corner of the car you are thinking of purchasing. Most likely the shocks are bad or will need replacing soon if the car bounces in an up and down motion when you release the corner. Ask the used car dealers to replace the shocks before leaving the lot.

Examine the Tail Pipe

Worn rings and bad valves are very costly to repair and replace on autos. The majority of warranties will not cover this expense. Examine the tail pipe and make sure that it is relatively clean. If there is black soot or gummy material on the tail pipe this is a good indicator that the valves or rings are going to need replacement. You are better off selecting a different car on the lot.

Examine the Fluids

You do not have to be a mechanic to check the fluids of the car. Examine the radiator and radiator fluid to check for any rust. Ask the used car dealers to turn the car on and let the engine idle. Check the transmission fluid to make sure that it is not a brownish color or have any foul odors. Check the oil to make sure that it is not white or have white bubbles in it when you remove the cap. Also, the oil should read as full on the measuring stick.

If you find problems with the fluids or the radiator these can be a sign of hidden mechanical problems. This will be a used car that you want to completely avoid purchasing because the used car dealers will not be able to fix all the potential problems that you might have later down the road with this particular auto. You can find more auto advice at http://www.carmild.com
Mileage Check

Unfortunately some used car dealers or individual sellers will tamper with the odometer to lower the mileage indication on the used car. Examine the interior of the car and pay close attention to the driver's side for wear and tear. For example, if you notice that the break peddle or under the floor mat near the gas peddle has a lot of wear and tear this could be an indication that the very low mileage on the car is a result of mileage tampering. Also, check the front edge of the driver's seat and even the door handle for wear and tear to see if it is what you would expect with the number of miles indicated on the car. If the two do not add up, it is better to go shopping with other used car dealers in your area and completely avoid the one that you are at.

Flood Damage and Leaks

Any type of flood damage is required to be reported by the used car dealers or owner. However, this part of the car's history might be hidden. The other difficulty that you can run into is a car seems perfectly fine and then the first hard rain the car is wet on the inside. Sit inside the car a couple minutes and smell it. Flood damage or leaky cars will have a musty smell to them even after they have been thoroughly cleaned.

Don't Think You Need a Radar Detector?

Don't Think You Need a Radar Detector? It's been almost exactly two years since I bought my V1 radar detector. It's also been almost exactly two years since I last got a speeding ticket. Coincidence? More like a reprieve.

No longer do I have to live with the constant dread that just after the next blind curve sits a doughnut-eater running his Machine - because now I have a machine, too.

My ever-vigilant Little Friend chirps a warning - Slow Down! - and it's that second or two of advance warning that has kept my record "clean" for 24 months now - a feat I had not managed in the previous 12.

Some may take umbrage and call me a law-breaker, which is technically true. But then, so are the cops and the system they support.

Speed limits, for instance, are very often not set according to the law. Instead of doing a traffic survey (including measuring the speed of traffic on a given stretch and determining the average, from which the posted limit is supposed to derive its statutory basis) the limit is just posted - at whim.

Typically, it's set well below the 85th percentile speed (basically, the normal pace of everyday traffic) which has the effect of making virtually every driver on the road technically guilty of "speeding."

A proper speed limit, according to the book, speed limits should be set about 5-10 mph higher than the 85th percentile, so that only drivers going significantly faster than the normal flow are in violation. Most state and local governments are supposed to abide by MUTCD and the 85th percentile rule - but they don't. So, who's playing dirty pool here?

Another example: I live near the Blue Ridge Parkway, which snakes through rural Virginia and North Carolina. Last year, they repaved much of the section that runs through our area. They also just painted over several former divided-yellow line passing zones with a continuous ribbon of double yellow. Pre-pave (and paint) it was perfectly legal to pass a heaving RV struggling up the mountain at 24 mph (the posted limit is 45). Now, in exactly the same place, it's illegal - at least, technically - because the lines have been repainted. But was a traffic survey done? Was the law actually changed? I doubt it very much. I think - I would bet - that the construction people just painted double yellow on their own say-so.

But you'll still get a ticket if a cop happens to be coming along when you're trying to pass that heaving RV. Unless, that is, you have your Little Friend with you. Mine has saved me no less than three times from getting a ticket in this scenario.

There's also the issue of speedometer error. Many people have no idea but it's fact that vehicle speedometers in ordinary passenger cars are often not accurate. They can be off as much as 5 mph, either way. This is why cop cars have "calibrated" speedometers that are tested to ensure accuracy. For them.

But your car's speedo may be off - and that means you could be "speeding" and not even know it. You'll get a ticket just the same.

A radar detector can also be a day-saver when, for example, you're about to try to pass a dawdler doing just slightly under the posted maximum. To execute the pass safely, you will need to accelerate to well over the posted maximum briefly, in order to safely get around the dawdler and back into your lane quickly. This is obviously smarter - and safer - than trying to pass a car doing 52 without you yourself driving faster than 55. Cops know it's so, too. But they will ticket you mercilessly if they catch you doing 65 to get around the dawdler - even if it's only for a moment. Unless... .

The final argument I'll make - and it's addressed to the "good driver" who rarely drives more than a few mph over the posted max - is in the form of a warning. It used to be that most cops in most places would "spot" you 5, even 10 mph - because they knew (but would never admit openly) that most speed limits were bogus and they felt bad about hassling people whom they knew were not driving dangerously.

But enforcement is becoming much more aggressive as a result of declining tax revenues and increased costs for state and local governments. Traffic tickets are a vast potential source of revenue and all around the country, local governments are leaning on the police department to increase the haul as much as they possibly can. The cushion that used to exist is gone. You can expect to get a ticket - and not a warning - for doing 62 in a 55 or 50 in a 45. Unless you have an electronic ally.

Now, a high-quality radar detector like my Valentine 1 (see http://www.carmild.com/) is not inexpensive. But in my case, the unit paid for itself within the first six months. Do the math yourself. A single typical "minor" speeding ticket averages about $150, fine plus court costs. That's less than the cost of the V1, of course.

But don't neglect to take into account the near-certainty that your insurance premium will be "adjusted" upward even after just one speeding ticket is credited to your DMV rap sheet. Get a second ticket within a 2-3 year timeframe and the near-certainty becomes an absolute guarantee. So if the detector saves you from getting even just two minor tickets over a two-year timeframe, you are in the black. Everything after that is gravy.

And it's impossible to calculate the value of escaping the clutches of Johnny Law. Avoiding just one ticket, courtesy of your Little Friend, will absolutely make your day.