My Wife No Longer Wants a Tahoe. Now She Wants an LR4.

Get the LR4. Happy wife, happy life.

That's an awkward looking car to me.

The Evoque looks pretty nice. (too small for her wishes)

Just spend another year or so test driving cars so so you put off the expense for later.

Gotta drive an Escalade before you buy anything.

You ever watch women try to drive large SUV's? It is frightening. Get her a mini van.

Get used to it.. wrote:

You ever watch women try to drive large SUV's? It is frightening. Get her a mini van.

Dood, she's had a minivan for years. Guy wants to buy her a new car and she wants an SUV. Go read the other thread.

You're like child who wanders into a conversation...

OP, the LR4 is popular with women and she'll win the race of the Joneses. Do it! Then buy some oil futures as a hedge!

FWIW, Land Rover is owned by Tata (Indian). Ford sold it in 2008 to stay afloat. Volvo is owned by Geely (Chinese).

The XC90 is worth a test drive, unless your wife specifically wants a very truck-like vehicle.

This is great news OP, you can get a car you'd rather have and she won't stop having sex with you if you buy it.

Congratulations!

Some points to consider:

-Is a $60k SUV with a few extra cubic feet of cargo space, nicer interior materials, marginally better 'feel' and a few extra horsepower truly twice as valuable for transporting people/stuff as many standard $30k SUV's or vans (let alone two $30k vehicles)?

Have you ever seen a taxi driver or a home repairman who views their vehicle more on financial terms using a Land Rover for a work vehicle? Be aware when you write that check that with a Land Rover, you are mostly paying for a logo on the car and a status symbol, not anything related to it's capabilities. Are you wealthy enough where this is a good use of $25k?

-Next time you shop for a bed or a purse/wallet (which you use much more than a car) would you pay $25k extra for one that was 10% larger, looked cooler, and was made of nicer material? If not, why is this any different than doing the same for a car?

-Going from an average of 17 to 21.5 mpg (LR4->Pilot) saves more in fuel costs than going from 25 to 37 mpg. You're looking at low efficiency vehicles where a few mpg means thousands of dollars over the life of a vehicle.

-In 5 years any car you buy now will likely be dated. Go find a 2010 luxury SUV on a used car lot and test drive to compare to the Pilot.

-If you are going to finance this car at an interest rate, that means you can't afford it.

Dood, just because his spoiled wife wants it doesn't mean she should get it. Really, a luxury SUV? Couldn't he think of something more idiotic to waste money on? She only wants it to look good in front of her friends. Women don't care about how vehicles drive, they only care how they look and the status they convey. I have a friend who used to have a Mercedes SUV. She thought it made he look cool. She found out a bunch of her friends were talking about her behind her back because of it so she sold it and got a mid size domestic SUV.

The way something looks and feels can provide a lot of value to a person.

You cannot determine what someone else values.

"-If you are going to finance this car at an interest rate, that means you can't afford it."

This makes no sense.

A vehicle provides long term value so financing it over time is reasonable.

Interest is a small cost for the present value you receive.

I have owned two Land Rovers and I can say with confidence that you will regret buying one. Trust me.

If someone is insecure enough that they think they need a luxury car to feel good about themselves, it will never be enough and in the long run doesn't help.

What a joke. Vehicles do NOT provide long term value. Just look at the cost of 5 year old Range Rovers, Cadillac or other vehicle even if not "luxury". Your last statement makes no sense. You think that because you are getting something you want it makes sense to pay interest? I have no problem with paying a lower interest rate than you would get back from invested money. It makes sense to do it this way. But when you finance a 60k vehicle over financing a $30k vehicle the difference in total cost (price and interest and local taxes) is ridiculous.

Land Rovers have not improved much in terms of reliability over the past few years. They are still pretty terrible. If you get one, get an extended warranty if you are going to keep it past the original manufacturers warranty. They extended warranty plans are crazy expensive, but that is because Land Rovers fall apart easily. Land Rover extended warranties are some of the most expensive in the auto world.

Volvo XC90 is another dud. The Swedes only did an SUV because the market was screaming for one. They did not really care whether it was that good and focused more on the sedans. Then the Chinese came in and wanted Volvo to junk up their cars with luxury BS and back off the focus on safety and reliability. The XC90 is the worst Volvo that you can buy.

To see just what a waste of money the LR4 is, let's do a comparison with the Toyota Highlander.

Toyota advantages:

-Highlander costs half as much. Do whatever you want with the extra $30k.

-Has great resale value. In five years, the $30k Highlander and $60k LR4 will be worth the same amount.

-Toyota is the most reliable make out there. Range Rover is by far the least reliable.

-More interior space

-Better gas mileage

-Safer

LR4 advantages:

-Nicer interior and lots of electric gizmos to play with, until they break.

-Impress the neighbors (at least in your own mind. In reality, for every person who is envious of you there are two people who think you're an a-hole for driving such a pretentious vehicle. Be prepared to have your car keyed and get cut off in traffic a lot.)

This. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Wasteful spending removes years from your potential future retirement. Ask her honestly, would she rather have an expensive new toy to get bored with or travel / retire earlier. I know which one my wife would pick.

Agree! You need to look at a consumer reviews/auto reviews. The LR is a piece of crap. Not sure why anyone would key it. It's not like they would be jealous. The LR is not a status car unless I have missed something.

Husband Against Tahoes wrote:

We have done a good deal of test driving and my wife decided that the Tahoe was too big without adding much more interior cabin room/storage room. She also didn't care much for the way it drove.

On a lark, we stopped in at Land Rover and drove the Range Rover and the LR4. Obviously I'm not buying a Range Rover, but the LR4 was surprisingly affordable at around $55K for the base model (which is very, very nice). We'd be spending at least $60k on the Tahoe anyway, so now I'm wondering if this pipe dream might actually come true...

I live in small community with lots of LR4's (and... RR, Q7, LX, LC, XC90, GL, X5, etc). As others have said, the Land Rover reliability has not improved, despite the Ford spin and now Tata ownership. I've been offered free Discovery's here, but [despite a Defender 110 tugging on my heart strings] I will not be owning a Land Rover. Extended warranty or now, you'll be paying or dealing with lots of issues, code warning, etc.

Since she'll pass on the Pilot and everything that I mentioned before is probably too cheap, the sweet spot could be the Lexus GX460. Similar size to the LR4, similar price, Toyota reliability. Second rec for the luxury world would be a 1-2 year old Land Cruiser. Refined; size is between the LR4 and Tahoe, and far more reliable than an LR4. Third option for around $60k would be an Infiniti QX80. Luxury, Nissan reliability, price point near the Tahoe.

Good luck dude.

Does she have a nice big butt?

Get used to it.. wrote:

If someone is insecure enough that they think they need a luxury car to feel good about themselves, it will never be enough and in the long run doesn't help.

What a joke. Vehicles do NOT provide long term value. Just look at the cost of 5 year old Range Rovers, Cadillac or other vehicle even if not "luxury". Your last statement makes no sense. You think that because you are getting something you want it makes sense to pay interest? I have no problem with paying a lower interest rate than you would get back from invested money. It makes sense to do it this way. But when you finance a 60k vehicle over financing a $30k vehicle the difference in total cost (price and interest and local taxes) is ridiculous.

The first part is just you being judgmental of others.

People are different. Each person can choose what they like. You don't get to choose what someone else should like or what makes someone insecure.

Vehicles do NOT provide long term value?

If it still works after 5 years - that's long term value.

If it just lasted a year with no salvage value and then you had to get something else to drive, then it would be short term value.

Every expense that anyone chooses is just a personal preference, not a means to optimize wealth.

Otherwise it would make sense to eat noodles and drink tap water every day instead of having a nice meal now and then.

There would be no reason to ever see a movie if you had to pay for it.

Spending money never makes sense if holding onto money is all you value.

You suggest that a $30K vehicle makes more sense but that certainly isn't necessary.

Judgemental? So this is something new on Letsrun?

Anyways... Get used to it.. is right. Cars depreciate like crazy. Why would you choose to be the sucker who absorbs all of that depreciation AND pays interest on the car loan? 5 years is NOT long term value IMO. If you peruse the used car scene you can find some great cars that have held up twice or three times that long at a fraction of the price.

But more importantly... why buy a landrover OR a tahoe to drive around? Is the illusion of "safety" that these cars provide worth the money? Are the aesthetics worth the money? Is the carbon footprint of the car worth the money?

Don't worry... I am judging all of you fuel wasting, suburban luddites.