Personal Picks: Luxury SUVs

Luxury SUVS…are there more politically-incorrect vehicles on the road today? The December test group of $58,000-$71,000 machines might seem like a head-scratcher now. But, surprisingly, our subscribers tell us in our Annual Questionnaire that they own these things: we have significant data on Toyota Land Cruisers, Porsche Cayennes, and Land Rover Range Rover Sports. However, we do not have enough data on the Hummer H2. It’s probably not a stretch to say that Consumer Reports subscribers and H2 owners usually don’t go together. So, why do we test them? To cover the full spectrum of mainstream models to empower our readers to make informed decisions.

What would we buy if we won the lottery? Here’s a look:

Tom Mutchler: If I’m in the market for a $60,000 SUV (trust me – I’m not), I don’t want to wind up annoyed every time I drive it. I don’t want the nagging feeling that a cheaper model was bigger and more capable. And when I drive it, I really don’t want people waving at me with less than five fingers.

That limits my choices here. The Porsche Cayenne annoys me: it has a stiff ride, tight seats, illegible optional $1,200 (!) brown-faced gauges, and inscrutable radio controls. A sweet exhaust note and good grip just aren’t enough to win me over. As nice as the Toyota Land Cruiser is, the Sequoia has a lot more space and tows more. (I can live without the LC’s cool “crawl” off-road mode for $10,000 less.) Unless I had to climb a rock hill everyday to get to work, a Hummer H2 isn’t in the cards. Passersby aren’t exactly afraid to share their opinions – pro and con – about the H2, either.

Even though I feel a bit guilty about it, I really like our Land Rover Range Rover Sport. It’s fetching in Lucerne green and pale leather; it’s no surprise that an identical truck was part of the prolific product placement on the aiming-at-the-upscale Bravo TV show “Top Design.” You sit up high and there are big windows. Power isn’t generous without the optional supercharger, but the HSE’s V8 sounds really good. Finally, the Sport handles a lot better than our 2005 LR3, which shares this truck’s platform.

I’m a logical guy. Land Rover is at the bottom of CR’s reliability ratings. An Acura MDX is a far more practical purchase. And the RR’s profligate with fuel. But I’m happy to put a (non-alcoholic) beverage into the Sport’s console refrigerator, go for a drive, and be happy that nothing’s broke on it yet.

Gabe Shenhar: If you’re going to be politically-incorrect and socially irresponsible, and still get your bonus this year, you might as well go all the way and treat yourself. Right? Truthfully, nobody actually “needs” any one of these four indulgent SUVs; there are other vehicles that do the same for less.

That said, I found myself enjoying two of these luxury SUVs for entirety different reasons. The Land Cruiser, with its comfortable ride, quiet cabin and utterly amazing off-road ability impresses the heck out of me. But as a suburban family three-row SUV, its tall stance, clumsy handling and compromised packaging detract. And, for that lofty price, I could get a Mercedes-Benz GL320 diesel that drives beautifully and gets decent gas mileage.

I also like driving the Cayenne. It’s one of the few SUVs you can truly hustle in corners, and it has the great steering and brake feel of a Porsche. The catapult and sound of the V8 is addicting. You put up with the stiff ride and some unintuitive controls, but what else do you expect for $70,000? Rationally speaking, however, there isn’t a whole lot the Cayenne does that the BMW X5 doesn’t do, other than being more exclusive.

Rick Small: I’m not a big fan of this group. The Cayenne is relatively sporty but heavy and large – seems like a rolling oxymoron. It really can’t do “sporty” very well and it’s too expensive. The Land Cruiser does a good job as a large luxury SUV. But for me it’s too big and clumsy to drive every day. If you need this size vehicle and want some luxury, the Cruiser is a good choice. The Range Rover is expensive and great off-road but not as comfortable or reliable as the Land Cruiser. I don’t think too many people do serious off-roading with a vehicle this expensive, anyway. The Hummer tows well but is not very roomy. It’s also expensive (do you see a pattern here?), thirsty and very awkward to drive. For my money, I would choose a three-row Mazda CX-9 or Honda Pilot. These are much less expensive, reliable, use less fuel and are better every day drivers than these luxurious beasts. The CX-9 favors the sporty side while the Pilot leans more toward comfort.

Mike Quincy: The Cayenne, Range Rover Sport and (especially) the Hummer are train wrecks: people can’t help but stare and be oddly fascinated by what they see. If I had to pick my 9-year-old son up from school or at a friend’s house, he loved it when I showed up in the H2. If my wife and I were going out, she was always a bit more jazzed to see the Cayenne. And I agree with Tom’s assessment of the Range Rover Sport: it’s surprisingly nice to drive. But to keep these brutes running means paying hefty bills – either for gas, maintenance or both. At least the Land Cruiser has a history of good reliability, but its 14 mpg overall makes me cringe.

The truth is that if I’m spending crazy money, I’d rather have a good pickup truck than any of the models we’ve covered here. But I’ll stick with the “luxury” theme and treat myself to a top-of-the-line GMC Sierra Denali crew-cab pickup. Though still a gasoline pig, it has style, luxury, one of the best sounding and smoothest V8s around, and I can actually haul stuff without worrying about it getting dirty. I’ll also save enough to buy a new road bike (hint, hint…Christmas is coming, honey). In reality, I can’t afford the truck, though, but maybe the bike.

Comments

[melville248]

Range Rover, hands down. I actually would not been seen in a Hummer and the Porsche is a bit pretentious for me.

[Paul]

To melville248: You said the Porsche is too pretentious for you, so you'd go with the Range Rover???? That made me laugh for sure.

There isn't much I care for in the "Luxury SUV" segment. A loaded Honda Odyssey or Toyota Sienna gives plenty of room, is very comfortable, drives nice, and is a heck of a lot cheaper to buy and own. The only thing these vans don't do well is tow lots of weight or go off-roading. If I needed that, I'd take all that money I saved and rent appropriate vehicles on those rare occasions.

[Bryant]

To Paul: What made me laugh was that you mentioned the Honda Odyssey and Toyota Sienna in a Luxury SUV article.

Anycase, being a car junky and if i were to win the lottery my garage would with lined with a few new cars, one of them defintely being a sports car. That being said, my luxury SUV would need to fullfill all of the criterias that my sports car lacks eg) Size, comfort, towing capacity (for the new boat of course), etc.

Ideally you want to feel like you are being chauffered around while sitting on a nice leather sofa. Some SUV's that come to mind would be the Cadillac Escalade ESV or the Range Rover. I agree that the Range Rover's reliability is subpar, but we did just win the lottery, right?