Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Land Rover LR3

13567220

Comments

  • shemarshemar Posts: 2
    Please explain your statement, "the Sec 179 deduction, which is being partially rolled back at the end of the year"
    I am looking to buy an suv for the same reason.
  • I've put off buying a new Section 179 qualifying vehicle until I saw the LR3. I saw one today and wasn't exactly bowled over. So I'm back to the drawing board and I need help fast. (Or at least before 1/1/05).

    Here's my current thinking: the XC90 qualifies for the tax break if you get the third row of seats, but the torque steer and lack of performance is a killer. The 45K MSRP Cayennne V6 is nice but you could grow old trying to find one without 8-10K worth of extraneous (e.g., Porche Nav, $1800 Bose surround sound for when you listen to talk radio, etc.) and even wierd (e.g., "soft look" add-on for the standard leather for $600) options. Spending 52 large for a Tourig isn't my idea of a good move. The X5 is getting long in the tooth and you see three on every block. A used X5 may not be a bad idea but even a now 3 year old '02 if Certified (Is there any other way you would buy a used BMW?) goes for 33-34K, hardly a big discount off the new price.

    The Eddie Bauer Expedition depreciates like a rock and the Denali with its piston slap, 10 year old interior and overall GM slop is a turn off. The Land Cruiser and Range Rover are too much $$ and the Sequoia doesn't do it for me.

    I could struggle on for another year until a used 2003 Range Rover is down to 45K or so but then won't the law have been changed?

    Speaking of the Section 179 tax break, my real world feeling is that it amounts to about a 33% savings if you buy a vehicle that qualifies. So, if you can get one third off a nice SUV buying a high performance sedan makes no sense. Do the quantitative types out there agree with my interpretation (max marginal tax bracket, etc.)??
  • peeetepeeete Posts: 136
    For the Sec 179 Deduction, I had narrowed my choice to the Disco or the new JGC with the Hemi. While the old Cherokee did not qulaify, the new one does with the Hemi. Unfortunately, there are VERY few hemi JGC's around, and those that are are over optioned. A friend of mine is a Chrysler/Jeep f&i guy, and called the district rep for me. Apparently Chrysler is way behind in Hemi production due to the 300 success. So the chance of getting one by the end of the year is small. Plus the JGC is a pedestrian vehicle (if fast w a hemi), whereas the Disco has class.

    My understanding is that the Sec 179 repeal has been passed by both houses, and will likely happen as of 12/31. But it has not happened yet as far as I know. You should speak to your financial advisor.

    The new law will cap the deduction at $25,000, down from the current $100,000. If you use the vehicle 100% for business, its still good, but if you use it 50% for business, the value is reduced. For example, a SUV that costs $50,000 used 50% for business under current law, has a tax deduction of $25,000. So if you want that $100,000 Hummer, better put it your busineses name :)

    Its true that are limited SUV's out there that meet the rules and are affordable. One other one is the Cadillac SRX. Of course, any LR would eat it for lunch :)

    So essentially if you are looking for a small under $40 k Suv that meets current law, the Disco is it until the JGC becomes more available. If the dealers wake up, I would not be surprised to see Disco price increases. There are a lot of them still out there, but the highly optioned ones are almost gone. (I got one!) :)

    I owuld buy an LR3 over a porsche anyday..I think the interiors look cheap. THe LR3 is new, with no dpereciation. The Disco in 2 years ..well :)
  • tincup47tincup47 Posts: 1,508
    One big difference in the Discovery and LR3 is acceleration times. Even with the 4.6 the Discovery will not break 10 sec. 0-60. The LR3 will be around 8 sec.
     As far as sales go, the current Discovery is at 1,800 a month on a good month, recently it has slipped to less than 1,400 a month in the US. Most of this is because that vehicle is just not competative in it's class to a large part of the US population. Land Rover is going from having a non-competative vehicle in the mid-price class to having a class leader in the large luxury class.
     I agree the interior is a change from the earlier vehicle, but there is a very nice wood trim kit available. I would encourage everyone to drive the vehicle before passing judgement on it. it surpasses the Discovery in every performance category,both On and off-road
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,927
    Do the quantitative types out there agree with my interpretation (max marginal tax bracket, etc.)??

    I'm no tax whiz but I think it makes sense to initially do what's best for your business's bottom line. That usually means structuring purchase decisions to avoid taxes as much as possible, not looking first to loopholes (for want of a better word) and trying to take advantage of them so they fit your business plan.

    So if you need a new car for your business, great, but don't wrap yourself in a Hummer just because the write-off may look better on paper initially. You're going to be driving the rig, not Uncle Sam.

    Steve, Host
  • peeetepeeete Posts: 136
    Of course the LR3 is a state-of-the-art vehicle, so it will be better than the Disco. But in my view at least, from a styling perspective, it is a big letdown. As I said in an earlier post, it looks like a bloated Explorer. Would I buy one? Of course, but the price is way beyond me. In the Northeast, the CCP is always included, so you are looking at $47K, or $12k more than I just paid.

    Funny thing is I drive a sports car now, so while the Disco is MUCH Much slower than my G35, I dont seem to mind. It is a whole different style of "motoring." Besides, as I age, the fast car stuff is only going to get me killed. I look at the Disco as the Grand Marquis of Suvs. Sounds silly I know, but think of it this way: lousy mileage, slow acceleration, floaty ride, leans in corners, tough to park. Can run for 300,000 miles if taken care of. Sound familiar? Oh yeah, I LOVE Grand Marquis :)
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Just curious, you failed to list the GX470 among the vehicles qualifying for a Section 179 tax break. At $1,000 over invoice, a Nav/ML equiped one goes for about $45k, which in my opinion is about the best deal out there for a vehicle that qualifies and, unlike many of the others on your list, won't spend more time in the service bay than on the road. I'm having a difficult time deciding between getting one and waiting for the XC90 V8 which is getting very positive reviews, but won't be available until February+.

    As far as your math, the accelerated 179 deduction allows you to take an immediate 100% write off, but you can still take depreciation write offs for other business vehicles. So the 33% savings, while true, should not be compared to 0 for other choices.
  • shemarshemar Posts: 2
    Peeete
    Thank you for your indepth reply. I agree with your comment re: the porsche interior, but have you seen the inside of a Toureag? It qualifies for the Sec 179. Ive never owned a VW. Meanwhile, I continue to wait for the LR3 to arrive at our local dealership.
  • peeetepeeete Posts: 136
    THe only problem with the Toureg in my opinion is that VW service isnt supposed to be all that good. If you want premium level serivce, you have to stay with the right brands. If my choice was down to the Toureg or the LR3, I would definately wait for the latter. They are out there; My dealer had a couple on Saturday. As far as I know they are going for sticker, no mark up.
  • Peete and Habitat1, please help me out. For someone in the max tax bracket who is a Subchapter S corp (in a nut shell, everything flows through to the personal return), if he buys an LR3 for 50K and deducts it under Section 179 (claiming 100% biz use) , what is the net savings? I say it is 15K. Am I correct?

    The corrolary of all this (if I'm correct) is with this 15K net savings, a lot of people will find they can't afford non-Hemi Jeep Grand Cherokee Limiteds, but they can afford an LR3 or X5!
  • peeetepeeete Posts: 136
    well Im not an accountant, so you should speak to yours, but if you use the LR3 100% for business, you could deduct the full $50k purchase price. To find the "real dollar" value to you, multiply the 50K times your tax bracket (36%?) to find the real dollars. I do not think that the S Corp has anything to do with it, but I am not sure about that.

    Remember, that if you have a lot of deductions, you may not end up in the top tax bracket, and your final tax rate may be lower, reducing the value of your 179 deduction.

    If you deduct it 100%, you had better be able to prove that. I think its a red flag for the IRS.
  • pemarshpemarsh Posts: 68
    Local dealer had 6 LR3's (chicago suburb, and only 2 were sold). UGLY!!!!! I was going to buy this vehicle, but not anymore. It really is a total let down. It looks like a beefed up Tonka toy. No wood paneling on the inside?? ANother let down. Dash is plastic, similar to Hummer.

    However, the BIG improvement is space, space and space. You can actually get into the rear seat now.
  • grommetgrommet Posts: 445
    I've driven a loaded SE trim a few times now. The bulk of the commercial reviews have said it all. But I'll make a few comments...

    Pros: Excellent off-road, and very capable as a street warrior. Engine and transmission smooth and refined feeling. It's heavy, but hides it fairly well. Feels stable even in aggressive maneuvers. Everything feels solid outside and inside. Cargo space with fold-flat seats is great. Roomy interior that feels open; optional 3rd row will even hold normal size adults instead of just kids. It's nothing like the old Discovery.

    Cons: It's extremely heavy (gas mileage). $5K (US) too expensive to be an "easy win". Interior could be more "interesting" (well, at least piping on the seats like '04 Disco, and maybe more color choices); is it too utilitarian for $50K? There are also a few gadgets missing that would have been nice options: Auto-dimming outside mirrors [not just inside], Integrated satellite radio support (Sirius or XM), Rear-view backup camera [if equipped with Navigation], & Tire pressure monitoring system. The unlockable fuel filler door is odd, too.

    Now, some complaints about Land Rover "mis-information":

    The SE only has 6-way seat adjustment for the driver's seat; it's the same as the passenger seat. There is no front "up and down" adjust and this may impact shorter customers. The HSE, with it's memory seats, should have 8-way adjust on driver's seat. The current brochure says both SE and HSE have 8-way adjustments. This is incorrect.

    There is also confusion regarding the supposed lack of Touch-screen support for anything beyond Navigation and 4X4 Info... like the [coming in Spring] Phone Integration (PTI) w/ Bluetooth, and the HSE's higher-end Premium h/k radio. (Web sites have conflicting informaton.) We'll see...
  • I looked at a pair of LR3s tonight at a dealership. One black and one silver. I agree with most/all of the thoughts expressed above about the good seats, space, utilitarian style, pricing (5K too much to be a slam dunk), etc. I think the vehicle is a huge step forward but it may not fly off the lots after the first rush. Expect discounts. (The Infiniti Q56 and Nissan Armada were both at one time red hot. Now they are discounted.)

    The one option missing for me would not be Siruis or satellite radio or a backup camera (are we that infirm that we can't turn from the "command seating" and look?) but rather air conditioned/ventilated seats like on the SAAB and Expedition. Speaking of Options, Tincup has mentioned a wood package. I haven't seen this in any brochures or the web. How much is it?

    But here's a new perspective on exterior style: the black LR3 when viewed from a 3/4 angle on the side looked no where nearly as attractive as the silver one. The rear area seemed too compressed and shortened and the roof line wasn't smooth. The silver one looked far smoother and the lines flowed better. This surprised me because usually highly waxed dark colored cars always (to my eyes) look better.

    I also had a chance to compare the LR3 lines to a Range Rover. The RR looked much smoother (the roofline was of course one level). Interesting difference in engine packaging: the LR3 had covers over covers and it was hard to see the engine. Access was limited. The BMW V8 was out in the open with little in the way of designer covers. The valve covers looked a little like a Ford 4.6 !. Impressively, the RR used some stainless braided hydraulic hose for some oil lines--now thats first class. Only saw one cup holder though in the RR and it looked impossible to use with its cover. The LR3 had enough coffee cup holders to be a Starbucks annex!

    Does anyone have any realistic expectation of the service life of the Jag derived V8? I have to believe that the Land Rover mods (better sump, etc.) will give it more life even in just general service. But will it run to 150K like any old American V8 before even so much as a valve cover has to come off? Does the engine have a timing chain or the problematic timing belt? How much is a water pump? Alternator? (Allright, I admit it, our 318s have spoiled us: treat 'em right and they run forever.)
  • grommetgrommet Posts: 445
    Here is the stick-on Wood Veneer Fascia Kit (as a non-wood fan, thank you for making it optional, Land Rover):

    image

    Rear-view Backup Cameras are very useful for tall vehicles, like the LR3, to avoid children, pets, etc. They disappear and can't be seen normally.
  • tincup47tincup47 Posts: 1,508
    The engine does have a timing chain. The 4.4 V8 has had very good reliability as a 3.9 and 4.2 Litre in the XJ, XK, and S-Types, both naturally aspirated and supercharged.
     The Armada and Infiniti, while getting good reviews have not been strong sellers from their introduction. However there numbers are disappointing because Nissan is a volume manufacturer and expected much higher numbers. If Land Rover can sell LR3's at the same rate Nissan is selling Armadas, that will be a success for Land Rover.
  • peeetepeeete Posts: 136
    The Armada and QX are an oreder of magnitude larger than the LR3, so that has something to do with it. My dealer has an LR3 on the showroom floor finally. UGLY. It looks like a POS next to the Range Rover. They did sell at least 4 yesterday at sticker however. I agree with the other comments; if it had been $40K I would have bought one. $47k as normally outfitted was just out of reach. The seats are really good however.

    I did pick up my Disco yesterday, and I loved feeling like I was driving an English carriage, repleat with a polite male voice with an English accent telling me to "please turn right in 300 meters." It worked too !
  • WHO SAID IT FIRST??? My dealership in town finally got a silver SE yesterday..I pulled into the lot as someone was coming back from a test drive. Seeing it drive through the lot at low speed, all I could think was "that thing looks like an Explorer".
    Upon closer look, the black interior is just bland. Lots o' plastic. One color plastic to boot. Totally agree with pricing..it just does not scream "$50k".
    While I am NOT a fan of the GX, I can see the "value" in that vehicle.
    Quite frankly, if I really want something that is decent offroad, VERY reliable with most of the latest in technology and does not scream "look at me" I might reconsider a Land Cruiser....
  • grommetgrommet Posts: 445
    This year's contenders were: Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Escape Hybrid, Ford Freestyle, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Infiniti QX56, Land Rover LR3 and Nissan Pathfinder.

    image

    http://motortrend.com/features/news/112_news041027_suvoty/
  • ypshanypshan Posts: 103
    Now that several people mentioned it, LR3 starts looking like an Explorer to me as well. I looked at an Explorer parked at our YMCA last night and found a lot of resemblance.
Sign In or Register to comment.