Article Comments - 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2

67 messages, Last post on Mar 10, 2008 at 6:51 PM

You are in the Land Rover Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? BMW X3, Land Rover LR2, SUV

Article comments for Comparison Test: 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2 - We've brought together two modern approaches to combining the comfortable wagon with the multifunctional truck: a 2007 BMW X3 3.0si and 2008 Land Rover LR2 SE. We've already had a look at the features of each, so this is a comparison of performance, not appearance. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 4 of 7: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; Prev; Next; Last

#28 of 67 Re: Why didn't you test the RDX? [baccus49] by bstoecker May 14, 2007 (4:54 pm)
Replying to: baccus49 (May 11, 2007 3:30 pm) I like the rugged looks of the new LR2 better. The RDX just didn't do anything visual for me. Replies to this message: yeomancavalry (May 25, 2007 12:15 pm)
#29 of 67 Re: Article Comments - 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2 [british_rover] by lrguy44 May 18, 2007 (12:30 pm)
Replying to: british_rover (May 13, 2007 2:27 pm) I wonder if the author ever reads these blogs, and if so, if they would ever publicly acknowledge the errors in the article. Replies to this message: british_rover (May 18, 2007 12:33 pm)
#30 of 67 Re: Article Comments - 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2 [lrguy44] by british_rover May 18, 2007 (12:33 pm)
Replying to: lrguy44 (May 18, 2007 12:30 pm) I doubt it. I keep meaning to send a letter to the editior to point out all the problems and I have just been too busy. I need to send you an email too and I keep forgeting when I get home.
#31 of 67 lgiles by lgiles May 21, 2007 (3:54 pm)
Ya know,... I don't generally write anything to anyone about their opinions, but since Edmunds is a source that I often use, I have to say that the comments in this test are suspicious, and although I agree with most of the good things said about the X3, I wonder how and why a comparison test on "performance" (as the article noted) spent so much time on the strengths of one vehicle vs. the weaknesses of the other (whose off-road performance is widely published and accepted as a large percentage of its value and appeal to its intended market). It's easy to deduct that a simple change of focus on the LR2 positives vs. the X3 negatives could have found the X3 mired in the sand of a comparison that it was never meant (or designed) to overcome. -lgiles Replies to this message: yeomancavalry (May 25, 2007 12:07 pm)
#32 of 67 Re: Headroom specs are baloney [bgsntth] by yeomancavalry May 25, 2007 (12:02 pm)
Replying to: bgsntth (May 13, 2007 4:47 am) yeah.. whatever. my father in law is 6'3" and his head is not in the headliner either. You must have a long torso, and really short legs.
#33 of 67 Re: lgiles [lgiles] by yeomancavalry May 25, 2007 (12:07 pm)
Replying to: lgiles (May 21, 2007 3:54 pm) Yeah opinions are like well... and Edmunds is usually full of it. I don't think they have the fine polish that can be found in Motor Trend, Car and Driver, and Automobile. Not that they don't have opinions too, but I find they usually have more credibility. It was so obvious with this review the bias towards the X3 and the disdain towards the LR2. I particularly am getting tired of the LR2 being evaluated on the stigma of past Land Rovers. If we evaluated all cars like this, then all would suck immensely.
#34 of 67 Re: Article Comments - 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2 [british_rover] by yeomancavalry May 25, 2007 (12:13 pm)
Replying to: british_rover (May 13, 2007 2:27 pm) True. You experience that when going to concerts or sports events. Somebody is actually sits down that is shorter than you and they block your view. Very strange freaks we are. I agree with you, my father-in-law is 6'3" and brother-in-law is 6'4" and neither one has their head into the headliner of the sunroof. At that height you might as well poke your head out the window or out the sunroof in some cars today. Yeah I have no idea what the editor is talking about with the starter issue. No problems, no weird sounds. I'm just not experiencing the concerns they are and to be quite honest even I was worried about problems because my mother in law kept talking about quality issues with Land Rover as if we were making a bad mistake. Ironically her indestructable Toyota Highlander took a dump. Hmmm
#35 of 67 Re: Why didn't you test the RDX? [bstoecker] by yeomancavalry May 25, 2007 (12:15 pm)
Replying to: bstoecker (May 14, 2007 4:54 pm) Yeah, the RDX looks like a some mutant insect to me. I'm not very fond of curvy or rolly polly looking SUVs. Curves belong on sports cars, not SUVs!
#36 of 67 Re: Article Comments - 2007 BMW X3 vs. 2008 Land Rover LR2 [KarenS] by yeomancavalry May 25, 2007 (12:33 pm)
Replying to: KarenS (May 07, 2007 5:55 am) I noticed quite a few of the new 2007 BMW X3s are having transmission problems. Did you guys noticed anything wrong when test driving it? Or were you so focused on identifying the shortcomings of the LR2 all the while praising all the good points of the X3 that it was overlooked?
#37 of 67 Experts? by myob Jun 06, 2007 (4:35 pm)
I drove an 07 as a loaner and was very surprised and impressed. I'd not thought much of them till then. What surprised me most reading this comparison, though, was how little the editors seemed to understand about the concept of these vehicles in the first place. One says he enjoys the driving dynamics of the X3 just 10% of the time? Huh? Ever see a land rover in a panic stop at 75mph? If people don't care about driving dynamics in these vehicles and just want a cushy ride, why spend so much? Why not get a nice RAV4 instead? He also thinks it's just about the same thing as a 3 series wagon. Well, not if you need to hop a curb, take on a gravel road now and then, or drive on the beach. Or not if you like being able to see more in traffic than the back of the suv/truck/large car in front of you, which is probably the biggest "advantage" they have, along with somewhat more space. I have a 3 series and while it's a nice car it's not as good in terms of visability in all directions as the X3. If the X3 wasn't so expensive I'd replace mine with one. I'm willing to give up a little performance for more utility and visability. IF you wanted to criticize the thing, price would be where I'd start. Otherwise, I was pretty impressed. Unfortunately the buying public must be just as out of it, as only the somewhat flawed (styling, turbo lag)CX-7 comes close in driving experience in the lower price range class. At least from what I've found so far. I will look again and see if they gave them the old 1-10 scoring system on various attributes. I'd rather make my choice based on that. Some of these editors come in with a pretty deep set of preconceptions of what cars should be. I'd rather them stick more to "just the facts, ma'am". Replies to this message: lrguy44 (Jun 06, 2007 4:48 pm) british_rover (Jun 06, 2007 5:26 pm) bruceomega (Jun 07, 2007 4:56 am)