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.

Car, SUV, and tire recalls

There have been a few significant recalls announced in the past few weeks affecting Dodge, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen, plus a Toyota safety enhancement and a recall on tire valve stems. If your vehicle is listed here, you will be contacted by the manufacturer with the information on what you need to do or we provide a number to contact yourself. However, the valve stem recall requires action on the owner’s part.

2009 Dodge Journey

Chrysler is recalling almost 6,700 Dodge Journey SUVs equipped with a 3.5-liter engine due to a problem with the engine wiring harness that could contact the left transaxle mount and cause an engine fire.

Dealers will inspect the engine wiring harness for damage and repair to secure the harness away from the left transaxle mount.

Chrysler has yet to announce when owners will be notified. In the meantime, owners can call Chrysler at 1-800-853-1403.

2005-2006 Land Rover LR3 and Range Rover Sport

Land Rover is recalling over 37,000 LR3 and Range Rover Sport vehicles. The relative motion between the steering wheel hub and/or steering column cowl with the clockspring, which contains air bag circuitry, could cause a fracture in the driver-side air bag wiring connection. The SRS warning light will illuminate to alert the driver that a repair is necessary, but if a driver ignores the light and gets into a crash, the air bag may not deploy properly.

Dealers will make the necessary repairs to fix the alignment. The recall is expected to begin around July 21st. Owners may contact Land Rover at 1-800-637-6837.

2006-2008 Mercedes-Benz GL & ML class

Mercedes-Benz is recalling over 52,000 GL and ML class vehicles equipped with the Flex-N-Gate trailer hitch. Some of the seams connecting the hitch to the attachment bar used to connect it to the body frame do not meet specifications and may result in the hitch separating from the attachment bar.

Dealers will repair the trailer hitch and owners are urged not to use the hitch until it is repaired. Owners may contact Mercedes-Benz at 1-800-367-6372.

2008 Volkswagen Passat & 2009 Volkswagen Tiguan

Volkswagen is recalling over 4,000 Volkswagen Passat and 2,500 Tiguan vehicles equipped with 2.0T FSI ULEV II engines. The problem occurs when the engine is in idle and the air conditioning is turned on, the software may not control engine idle. As a result, the engine could surge unexpectedly.

Dealers will inspect and update the engine control module that contains the software, free of charge.

The recall began at the end of May. Owners may contact Volkswagen at 1-800-893-5298.

2004-2006 Toyota Sienna

Toyota is conducting a safety improvement campaign on over 196,000 Toyota Sienna minivans equipped with power rear liftgate struts. The gas struts used to help lift the rear power liftgate could wear out earlier than expected and could eventually cause the liftgate to fall a few inches or completely close.

Dealers will replace the gas struts with new ones that have a longer life. Owners can contact Toyota at 1-888-270-9371.

Tech International tire valve stems

Tech International is recalling 6 million snap-in valve stems manufactured between July and November 2006. The rubber portion of the stem could crack and cause a loss of tire pressure, potentially leading to a crash.

Tech International will replace the valve systems and the tire if necessary. Owners may contact Tech International at 1-740-967-9015.

For more information about this recall, read the Safety blog’s report: "Warning issued on faulty tire valve stems following rollover death."

—Liza Barth

From the logbook: Land Rover Range Rover Sport

Elegant, exclusive, and expensive (ours is $61,900, with the 300-hp, 4.4-liter V8), the Range Rover Sport competes with other pricy (and gas thirsty) SUVs, including the Porsche Cayenne and BMW X5. How is such a luxurious guzzler fairing under our scrutiny? Are we ashamed to drive it in public, or does merely “arriving” in this prestige machine get us more attention than we deserve? Will the controls be any better than the cryptic ones in the last Land Rover we tested – the LR3, upon which the Sport is based – which we called “confusing [and] poorly located”? Read our first impressions from the logbook and find out if there’s much “sport” in the Range Rover Sport:

"Without the supercharged engine, this drives just like our old LR3 – kind of slow."

"Engine sounds great, but the hefty weight is apparent on acceleration."

"The ride is stiff and has abrupt impacts."

"Steering is short on feedback."

"For such a large vehicle, there is no room for the driver. I feel boxed in."

"The navigation system is the most complicated and least comprehensive I’ve ever used."

"It’s a nice looking vehicle, but $62K should include a backup camera, heated steering wheel, and six months of free satellite radio."

"What kooky controls…same radio faceplate as our LR2: big rotary knob on the right side, but it doesn’t tune the radio frequency…simply idiotic."

"Common controls like mirrors, windows, and door locks are ill-placed."

"Good visibility all around, comfortable seats."

"Thermonuclear seat heaters."

"The shoulder belt tugs hard and my knee bashes against the center console and door panel."

"Cramped rear seat for this class."

"Looks great, nicely done interior."

"Wonderful headlights, especially high beams."

"The solid feel of the car doesn’t carry over to the doors, which are hard to close the first time [you shut them] and have a loose, rattly sound when shutting. The tailgate is the same."

"Comes with lots of prestige, and it might be good off-road, but it’s really not exciting to drive. I can’t understand why this car is so fashionable and popular." [But, of course, this person lives in tony Westport, CT, which is chock-a-block with Land Rovers…]

"Strangely appealing, but not a smart purchase in any sense of the word."

So the debate continues as to whether or not there is much practicality in the Range Rover Sport…or is that missing the point? High-end SUVs look nice, many are seen as status symbols, and they cost truckloads of money both to buy and at the pump. That might address their affluent owners’ goals, but it doesn’t mean they’re good vehicles.  We’re putting together a test group that will include the Range Rover Sport, as well as the Porsche Cayenne, Toyota Land Cruiser, and others to see how these trucks perform as vehicles, not just as rolling jewelry.

—Mike Quincy

Final thoughts: Land Rover LR3

So, why do some cars with below-average reliability scores, or middling CR test results, wind up having high owner satisfaction?  Senior Automotive Engineer Gabe Shenhar weighs in on our recently departed Land Rover LR3, giving insight into this dichotomy:

We just sold our LR3, which was tested for the November 2005 issue. CR owned it for a little over a year and we put over 11,000 miles on it. It’s not a Top Pick. It didn’t score near the top of its category. It’s not even recommended by CR due to its subpar first-year reliability. But it has something not found in many vehicles: character.

For me, in addition to the mystique attached to the Land Rover name, the styling, the aroma of the perforated leather, and the interior ambience all combine to create a sense of occasion. It also sparks the imagination. Every time I drove the LR3, it made me feel like I was on some exotic vacation, perhaps crossing the Sahara or traversing the dusty Australian outback.

Sure, some of the controls are cryptic and poorly located, folding the seats can be fussy, the ride gets a bit unsettled on bumpy camber changes, and fuel economy--at only 13 mpg overall--is horrendous. Even snow traction wasn't all that great, especially when braking. But the way the LR3 climbed our rock hill, off-road course with such nonchalant ability, comfort and grace was terrific. We frequently used our LR3 to show the media and other visitors just how well the rock hill could be climbed, a task where it excelled over any number of more practical SUVs. As a family hauler, my two boys loved the third-row jump seats and the three skylights that made the cabin so open and airy. Their two bikes even fit inside the boxy body standing up.

Before we sold it, the LR3 went to the local dealership to have the rear wiper and park assist sensors fixed; a fuel-tank recall completed; a new fuel-sending unit installed to correct gauge inaccuracy; and a persistent rattle corrected (the third-row jump seats were loose).

Keep in mind that any problems we have with our tested models have nothing to do with the predicted reliability ratings that come from our subscriber survey. Our hands-on experience and the published reliability ratings have never been related. That said, we found it interesting that the problems with our LR3 seemed to mirror the high levels of fuel-system and electrical problems that CR readers have reported in our annual car reliability survey. So while some of my colleagues won’t miss the LR3, it’s important to acknowledge that there can be intangible qualities about certain vehicles that result in the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

--Gabe Shenhar