GFerg

Both are brand new trucks next year. About the same size, and both more on road oriented than off road. Just Curious. I personally like the Range Rover Sport. I like their designs a lot more.










Mercedes-Benz has released these first pictures of the new 2006 M-Class sport-ute, due to be shown at the Detroit auto show in January.

According to a release, the new M-Class sits 5.9 inches longer, 2.8 inches wider and 0.4 inches lower on the road than the first-generation vehicle, with a 114-inch wheelbase that's 3.7 inches longer than before. The new M-Class switches from a body-on-frame design to a unibody platform - more like the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

Benz's new seven-speed automatic transmission is standard, as is full-time four-wheel drive. A height-adjustable AIRMATIC air suspension is option. A revised four-wheel traction control system now incorporates functions such as a downhill driving aid and Hill-Start Assist.

As expected, the new M-Class offers up two engines at launch. The ML350 is powered by an all-new 3.5-liter, four-valve-per-cylinder V-6 engine delivering 268 horsepower and 258 lb-ft of torque. The ML 500 sports the Benz 5.0-liter V-8 engine with 302 horsepower and 339 lb-ft of torque.

Major improvements to the M-Class' interior have been made, according to Mercedes, with richer materials, a more sporting instrument panel, and more interior room for all five passengers. The new M adds more than two inches of additional front leg room, and rear-passenger knee and leg room have also been increased by 1.4 inches and 1.3-inches. Front, side and side curtain airbags are standard.

The M-Class will be built at the Mercedes-Benz factory near Tuscaloosa, Ala. A seven-passenger version of the same architecture, possibly badged as the new G-Class, is expected in a year. The crossover R-Class, based on the same architecture, is also expected within the year.

GFerg

The Range Rover Sport range will start at around £35,000 when sales begin in the summer, for which you'll get the 2.7-litre turbodiesel already serving with distinction in the Discovery. The 4.4-litre V8 will also be used but the motor Land Rover hopes will have punters part-exchanging their Cayennes is a 390bhp version of Jaguar's supercharged 4.2-litre V8. It will take the Sport to 140mph though with an estimated kerbweight of around 2.5 tonnes, fuel consumption is likely to be epic. The price of a top-of-the-range supercharged Sport will be around £60,000.

Then again, even at that level, the car looks like a mighty attractive proposition. Visually, Woolley and his team have been very clever to distance Sport from the Disco and position it shoulder to shoulder with the Range Rover, a bad-*** little brother, if you will. "It has classic Range Rover design language," says Woolley pointing to its 'floating' roof, clamshell bonnet, similar door shapes and kicked-up rear overhang. "We even looked at the original Range Rover for inspiration. But it's all been reinterpreted to be more sporting and purposeful." Which is why the car is lower, more squat and rounded than its forbears. It's also why it lacks their split tailgate, a design which requires a straight and flat rear end, something that would look quite out of place on the more organic, less industrially styled Range Rover Sport.

But while the exterior of the Sport concentrates on reprising and revising old themes, the interior is unlike any yet seen on a Land Rover. The challenge was to create a cabin that retained Land Rover's trademark command driving position - which meant putting the driver up in the air - while introducing the ambience of a sportscar to achieve which you'd traditionally put the driver somewhere near the ground. But a Range Rover with the driving position of a Caterham was never going to work, so Woolley's team set about introducing sporting feel to a driving position just 50mm lower than that of the existing Range Rover. And they have done phenomenally well.

mmarshall

Well......betwen these two specific vehicles, both have established records that are well-below average. I can't really recommend either one in that area. If you want quality and reliability, go with the Lexus LX470.

Now...having said that.....if you have ruled out the Lexus and DEFINITELY want one of these two, go with the ML if you do most of your driving on pavement. It will likely ride, handle, stop, and steer somewhat better than the Land Rover....and the new interior looks MUCH better, IMO, than the last ML. It also has the much-vaunted M-B safety gear.
However, if you regularly go off-roading, get the Land Rover. It is, without a doubt, one of the best off-roaders in the world, and is one of the very few that can do so comfortably. While not particularly reliable mechanically or electrically, it has a well-deserved reputation of being able to go just about anywhere....as its many Camel Trophy contest victories held in harsh Third-World conditions prove

Corey140

The Range Rover Sport back is atrocious....

mmarshall

Sorry...a typo. I meant..........."both have established RELIABILITY records that are well-below average".

SecPole14

I like the RR-S.

mmarshall

Did I misread your post, magneto? I thought you were considering a purchase and were asking for a recommendation between the two. Sorry if I misunderstood you.

GFerg

Hell no. My next car is gonna be a new Lex. I gotta get the Lex first then maybe see what else is out there. Its impossible for someone to jump from a Max to a Range unless they hit the Lottery, or got a really big raise. Well neither of them happened to me and I still got 2 years of college left. So maybe about 4 years from now. Then I'll think about getting the Range.

I was jsut curious as to what people thought about the two cars since they both are aimed at achieving the same goals. (Except the Range is more Porsche fighter in performance) My pick is for the Range.

I should have made this into a Poll.

daygo718

iTrader: (1)

I vote for the Range Rover Sport. IMO, the ML looks like the took some styling cues from the RX330. Although, it has improved over the 1st gen (especially the interior), I would still go for the Range.

sweetsc400

That Range Rover is gorgeous. I've had 3 OLD Range Rovers and, while quirky, they really grow on you. Between 15 second 0-60 times and 13mpg fill-ups, the buick-derived V-8 was nothing short of anemic. But hot damn if nothing would get in the way of those cars. I took my 88 on a National Land Rover Rally in Breckenridge, Colorado. I drove it 1400 miles round-trip and beat the LIVING HELL out of it in the mountains. They are truly amazing. I've seen them nearly keep up with Hummer H1s.

Ahem. . .but, anyway. My vote goes to the Rover =)

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

Try the 'edit' button next to the 'quote' button to fix typos like this.

LeXuSrAcIn

Can't comment about this upcoming ML class, but we had the current ML class for about a year. Its a VERY rough riding, bad handling truck. The interior looks very nice, but the ride and feel of the car are horrible. Although not a new model, I strongly suggest going with a BMW X5 4.4 or greater. Take a test drive and you'll know.

Stage3

iTrader: (3)

new ML look very TOIGHT... TOIGHT like a TOIGER.

GFerg

A 400 hp supercharged engine is enough to get me into a Range.

GFerg

And no they are not the same truck. I love that floating top design the RR has. Classy.

RANGE ROVER SPORT



RANGE ROVER HSE





RANGE ROVER SPORT



RANGE ROVER HSE