2010 Range Rover vs Range Rover Sports: Biggie versus the big smalls
At first sight I wouldn’t agree. This is for obvious reasons. The Range Rover Sports feels like an alternative to the original- which means it will never be. Secondly, it does carry the high spirit of luxury like the original. What I have come to love most in the original is it does not share […]
At first sight I wouldn’t agree. This is for obvious reasons. The Range Rover Sports feels like an alternative to the original- which means it will never be. Secondly, it does carry the high spirit of luxury like the original. What I have come to love most in the original is it does not share any underpinning or upgrade –which means it does not share any chassis or body structure or part. The Sports borrows its chassis from the LR3 which gives its off road ability- we reckon. Let’s look at some facts that knock out the sports version.
Again at first sight seeing both cars parked together, the original Range Rover looks mature in style, majestic in height with high quality interior materials that will give you a feeling of dining with the queen of England. The Sport’s rather has a flatted and an angrier looks. It is also sporty looking with GT interior layout. Its interior material is still of high quality but I haven’t seen the kind of option you get in the original. Moreover, the Sports looks like a drug dealer or gangster material or a 419 person- just imagine it parked in your neighborhood. The 2010 Range Rover Sport features revised styling–including a new two-bar grille, a larger air intake and LED headlight–and Terrain Response system updates.
The Range Rover offers slightly more front headroom because it is taller, wider and longer than the Sport. The Range Rover also has a much larger ground clearance of 9.1 inches compared to 6.8 inches and features more maximum cargo capacity than the Sport. The Range Rover is taller and has a longer wheelbase of 113.3 inches compared to the Sport’s 108 inches. The Range Rover also has an edge when it comes to payload capacity with 1,358 pounds compared to the Sport’s 1,301 pounds. However, maximum towing capacity is the same at 7,716 pounds. You may say the difference is not that much and you are of course right.
What of the performance? Both SUVs are available in all-wheel drive and are intended for off-road use. Both also offer two V-8 engine options: a 375-horsepower, 5.0-liter V-8 or a monstrous 510-horsepower, 5.0-liter supercharged V-8; each mated to a six-speed automatic transmission with auto-manual shift. A Terrain Response system adjusts the vehicle’s response to different types of terrain. But then, the Sport begins to edge ahead with its on road ability of a highway fast cruiser, pegging its limiter at 140mph for tyre reasons. In terms of fuel efficiency, both the Sport and the original offer almost exactly the same estimated fuel economy ratings at 12 mpg in the city and 18 mpg on the highway for the original, while the Sport gets 12-13 mpg in the city and 17-18 mpg on the highway- which is not what I want to talk about because it could get worse with the original.
Both SUVs offer a host of safety features, including seat-mounted side-impact airbags for first and second rows, side curtain airbags for all three rows, antilock brakes, an electronic stability system, traction control, active front head restraints, all-terrain dynamic stability control and an optional blind spot sensor. The Sport adds rollover mitigation technology and front and rear parking sensors.
One hard fact I have to admit about the sports version is about 8% better than the original because it is a better cruiser but for everyday living a proper Range would do the trick much easily- especially common sense applied in its design. But then, it is a heavy guzzler, it’ll rip a big hole in your pocket.
In Sunday Trust, our choice would be the proper Range Rover over the Sport for the reason it does every other thing very well – uuhmm! Like the horizontally split boot door.