Which is the best seven-seater SUV for £30,000? Chris Knapman tests the Land Rover Discovery Sport and Kia Sorento to find out. Find us on Facebook: telegraphcars Visit the Telegraph Cars website: www.telegraph.co.uk/cars
I traded my 2011 BMW X5 50i with the twin turbo V8 for a new Kia Sorento with the 3.3l V6. The BMW was out of warranty and costing me an arm and a leg for a new transfer case, injectors, BCM etc, etc. It was a rocket but I couldn't afford to maintain it without warranty. I'm a picky and cynical( I'm told!) Mechanical Engineer and to date I cannot find anything wrong with the KIA. It is fully loaded and I keep discovering new features. My BMW was fully loaded and the KIA has even more, except for the massaging seats. imho the KIA is exceptional value and quality.
Hats off to a BMW driver who owns up and honest instead of up their rear end shouting we are the beamer drivers. I agree with your point whole heartedly.
British Man picks a British vehicle Is this a surprise? I mean the Land Rover is 1- less equipped 2- smaller 3 - less reliable 4- with a Demo Warranty 5 - More expensive And some how it turns up to be the preferred choice, of the total impartial car reviewer ?
niceguy60 Not necessarily. I can choose a bog standard Toyota which is far better than my alfa statistically but I love my alfa, which drinks petrol like a rabid alcoholic meth cook. It breaks down more than I can mention, but its beautiful car, the interior is georgeous and its amazing to drive and I love the 6 cylinder engine note. The Land drover is something else compared to the Kia, the character of it, the quality and yes it will break down but its a car that you can bond with and is much nicer to drive and sit in.
Londons Finest haha, this quote is amazing " I love my alfa, which drinks petrol like a rabid alcoholic meth cook" actually my 159 was pretty reliable. More so than my A4.
Londons Finest haha, this quote is amazing " I love my alfa, which drinks petrol like a rabid alcoholic meth cook" actually my 159 was pretty reliable. More so than my A4.
I own a 2014 Sorento. It is the best SUV I’ve owned and I’ve had Ford Escapes and other Trucks. decent fuel economy, acceleration, handling and speed. I don’t have the third row seats so I’ve got tons of storage. Never gotten stuck in the snow either and I only have front wheel drive. Land Rover doesn’t have shit on the Sorento.
The Kia is clearly the better buy, likely to be more reliable, more practical and cheaper to run and I have to say it looks a lot better.Although the Kia is Korean, Landrovers are now Indian and you can see the obvious cost cutting, anyone remember the city rover? :-(
+nemanja milosevic Fun? Is it a two seat sports car or something. These vehicles are urban off road vehicles. Good luck trying to take the Kia off road.
The Kia is fun to drive. Perhaps Id say my Ranger Rover Evoque was a little more fun but not nearly as good a car in most ways. Besides the Rover spent much of its time in the shop which all Rovers do.
@@matthewkendall8592 I'm tired, in fact angry, which country are most of the plants in, the UK, WHO EMPLOY UK WORKERS. Who gives a toss who owns them so long as WE BUY UK MADE CARS TO KEEP UK WORKERS IN JOBS.
@@matthewkendall8592 you sir, are a moron. Not British? 😂😂 your wife cheated in you with a British guy or something? Get a grip you pleb. Of course land rover is British. They are built in Britain and designed here to. I guess Chrysler is now Italian now to? 😂. Shut up you tool
The Kia looks way better. I've been saying it for a few years now. No two companies have stepped up higher than Kia and Hyundai. My prediction is was that by 2018, 2020 at the latest they'll be a viable alternative to any of the premium brands and I'll stand by that
I agree in 10 years they've turned from a crapy car company to selling products that can rival Lexus, Infiniti and some other premium brands. Look at the k900 and the cadenza if the sorento is not enough to prove my point
+james sinon Sorry but they are no where near to Lexus in quality or prestige. They are a good budget vehicle and their quality has improved but I would still not be seen in one that is for sure.
JD Power rates Kia NO. 1 above Lexus and all other brands. Consumer Reports rates the Kia Sorento best overall SUV above all others. They already made it.
It says a lot about how good Kia is and how much they have improved in a relatively short period of time when you consider that they are now competing with premium brands
ILIJA26101993 agree it is big honour for KIA to be compared. Dont agree the LR is btr. Surprised people still take a chance with LR ..... nearly did with a RR Sport and even the test drive model had problems
Friend of mine has just got rid of his Discovery sport for a Hyundai Santa Fe, after three years of ownership he had quite a few problems with the Land Rover and said servicing was expensive and the attitude of the dealership staff was terrible. He said he couldn't face the risk of running the discovery out of warranty and has been impressed with my partner and myself comments about our Santa Fes which we have had for 10 years(4th car now) .
KIA certainly have gone from nothing to a force to be reckoned with. Basically here the KIA is better in every regard besides lack of sporty drive and heritage. For the purpose these cars will fulfill (Moms suv to drop the kids off) the KIA is the better car.
CPT_ROB 'Heritage' is what got me into LR in the first place and what a mistake that was. My Landy was a complete lemon and LR could not have cared less about it. 3 years versus 7 years warranty is the big clue. IMHO go made in Japan first, closely followed by made in South Korea, and you wan't be disappointed. These days I'm a Mitsubishi Pajero driver and very happy.
+CPT_ROB There are people who want to take these off road and that is a factor. Farmers to school teachers will be using these to drive on light off road surfaces. And they can also drop the kids of to school in them. The Kia is simply a urban vehicle.
So buy the Kia or Suburu they can handle that "dirt road" and do everything else better to. Including not stranding those kids on the side of the road periodically.
If you want to take it off road and reliable, then buy a Land Cruiser. Land Rover is for show off with boasting of off road drivIng capability. How many of these discovery sports owner are going to take their expensive vehicle to off road and then straight to garage towed away?
I liked the overall review and the point of comparing Kia and a Landrover (I really wanted the medias to do comparisons between the two). The Kia Sorento certainly looks better to me because of its sophisticated design, quantity of space, quiet crew, various convenience specifications, and a luxurious interior. Although Land Rover Discovery is also a good car and has a slightly better offroad skills and driving sensibility, I think the exterior and interior designs are not that good as the Kia Sorento and moreover, I wouldn't pay more money on a more expensive car without any big advantage. People who buy their cars just because of the badge is just worthless.
You say it's expensive and worth it but the only reason you gave is essentially the name recognition. So you're paying for the prestige not for the added luxury it might provide?
All those folks feeling the Landrover is better off road....Not anymore. Traction control comes from the same place for both manufacturers. Also, how the 3 yr warranty in the LR is better than a 7 yr warranty is beyond me. Then you have to pay an extra 3k ,and get worse rear seats. Biased indeed........
Top Quality?. I must have owned 4 of the bad ones then. They feel premium, they are far from it. Sit in a Sorento SX V6 and you'll see what top quality and premium feels like, and you might also appreciate not sitting on the side of the road waiting for a tow truck as well.
To be fair on the Landrover the automatic Sorento can only tow two tonne instead of the two and a half the manual does. Aside from that I think the Kia is better finished and an all round better buy than the British marque but as I own a 2011 Sorento I'm a bit biased myself and I have been in the auto trade long enough to be wary of the reliability of British cars.
Isn't it funny how an English dude just couldn't accept that the Land Rover simply sucked and how it just lost hands down. He should watch his own video so he can laugh at himself.
yup, i have been looking for a suv for a long time. I decided it's better to be a smart buyer than go for the feels. the KIA has everything you need for the right price.
is it right that if you have engine or gearbox issues the body has to be completely removed from the chassis on the Range Rover, I kia are brave enough to offer a seven year warranty its clearly a more reliable car
land rover is noisier, smaller, uncomfortable, unreliable, and more expensive ; yet it wins. And why would anyone call its interior 'stylish'? The only reason it wins is because the badge is British
I also have a 2016 Sorento and I traded in a an aluminium bodied 4.2 XJ8 when I bought it. I know they are totally different car types, but aside from that the Kia Sorento is a quality car, the Jaguar only pretended to be. Don't get me wrong, I loved my Jag, until I drove the Sorento. There was always something wrong with my Jag, in my ten years of ownership it was never free of one (worryingly expensive), problem or another. The KIA has a seven year warranty, now if the quality of that message misses you go and buy a Jaguar Land Rover vehicle, it's what you deserve.
I have had a few Kia's over the years. Right now I own a 2014 Kia Sorento and 2009 Kia Optima and both are very good cars and here in the states they both have good resale values. Back in 2009 while looking for a car, I looked at several mid size cars, including Ford Fusion, Chevy Malibu, Nissan Altima. I have about 43,000 miles on the Optima and I decided to look at the resale values of these cars if they had the low mileage mine has and mine actually has a better resale value than some of the others. The main one I really considered along with the Optima was the Fusion and the Optima has a better resale. I'll stick with Kia.
For me Kia wins hands down. I drive a Hyundai Santa Fe (Sorento's sister car). You have to have a lot of heart or subjective feelings over head to buy a more expensive, less reliable, shorter warranty vehicle which is less practical. Bearing in mind buying a 7 seater is to use not to show off unlike a 5 seater.
Thank you for such a good short review. I am undecided of which one to get. I love Land Rovers, I just dislike the prices. I have a Kia now, but I might want the Sorento. It is such a difficult decision to make.
I was the same until I spoke to the mechanics at my local garage. They'd all pick virtually any other car over a Land Rover. General consensus was that unless you're one of the lucky ones, they break for fun and when they do break it's usually an expensive fix. Completely made my mind up so I'm looking around for a good used Sorento at the moment.
Since you clearly haven't sat in the KIA SXL -V6 ,( evident in the fact that you think its LESS quality interior and it is far more luxurious and fancy then the LR.) , you should really only comment on things that you have actual knowledge of. When you sit in and drive the Kia then your comment might be taken seriously, but your comment is really just air space and not an intelligent response.
I have the Kia 2017 sx v6 which has an option for Eco, normal, and turbo. Reddish brown leather seats, double sky roof and 7 seater. The car is amazing. The only bad thing is that I have to fuel it up every 2-3 days, but that's bc I travel 50 miles each day. Good car otherwise
He only gives us the starting price for both vehicles not the as tested price. Kia Sorento SX limited MSRP 44,500. Land Rover discovery MSRP 52,090. Kia also has better reliability than Land Rover.
Maybe their decision makes sense in the UK where the MSRP of these cars isn't too different, but in the US the Kia starts at $24,900 whereas the Land Rover starts at $37,070. There's no way you can justify spending almost 50% more on the Land Rover.
I live in the US too. I just bought a new land rover discovery sport and it is defenitley worth the price difference. To get an ateast ok kia with leather and stuff you will be spending the base price of the Land rover where with the land rover you can get all that stuff for the base price. And your buying a MUCH better brand. I personally really dont like kia
+TBoess85So because something is cheaper it's a better buy eh? Land Rover have been making 4x4 for ever, their off road ability is way ahead than any other manufacturer..Ford fucked certain things up,but with Tata money and British engineering they are selling more models than they ever had.If you like vehicles awash with cheap plastic and inferior off road ability,go for the Kia.
coolsdon No, but when the Kia costs $12,000+ less, then the Land Rover has to be much better than it to justify the extra cost and, according to this video, it isn't.
+coolsdon ... they've been making 4x4s for ever and still, they can't get it right. Kia which has only recently joined the game of 4x4s has a already tick the boxes of reliability and off road ability... plus it gets plusher and more refined model after model.
+Meni Fo "..Still can't get it right." ??Land Rover are selling more cars than ever.Just look at the A-list celebs who drive them,the list is huge.Try and update your references from1981 to 2016!! Don't even try and compare Land Rover to Kia in off road ability.Land Rover have been selling their vehicles to the military around the world for decades.
I just traded xf jaguar for a new kia sorento. They are different animals. The jag was fast with a nice growl and the bower and wilkins stereo. But! My new soento is awesome! With the infinity sound system apple car play pano roof great ride its truly exceptional. And jags reliability can't compare with kia.
Honestly if your going to get a 7 seater suv, good handling is just a bonus. Safety, practicality, price and warranty is whats important when you have a family.
+coolsdon I agree thoroughly except for the use of kia as an example; from my experience, kias (at least the 2008 rondo lx v6 I owned) are rather reliable
The engine isn't unreliable. It's the 2.0 from the Escape/Kuga. The transmission is the famous ZF9 that plagues Jeeps in the US. Unfortunately, Land Rover's problem is and always has been their electrical systems. They CONSTANTLY fail. I don't know of any Land Rover that drives without a check light on.
So most people in the comments section believe the Discovery Sport to be less reliable? Yet the model has only been out for a matter of months. In addition, they have a entirely new engine which has yet to be proven. I own two Land Rovers (given somewhat older) most issues I have had with them has been as a result of my own actions. In fact, the cheapest Land Rover I have ever owned cost me £350 (Discovery V8). It has never missed a beat and has been pounded off road. My Defender is 27 years old and is still going strong. If you look after your vehicle, it will look after you. Fan boy or not, I don't like people slating vehicles when they are going from old rep or have never even owned one. No, I am not saying the Kia is rubbish. It is a vehicle that is probably better for the average family. Yet, I doubt it would even come close in terms of off road Capability - in the end, isn't that the purpose of an SUV/4x4?
+DefenderProject Isn't that where reliability's tested? Let's face it: alot of people will (and they really will) not make an effort to maintain their cars as religiously as you do. How long they'd last without maintenance is where you see the reliability and durability of these cars. Land Rover certainly is durable but it's not reliable compared to Kia.
Feel good factor wouldn't last long if after 3 years you're sitting in the mechanics paying a fortune for an inadequately made part that the Kia's would still have been covered for another 4 years and unlikely to break in the first place.
Comparing a manual gearbox everyone (reviewers at least) universally hates with a high-end 9-speed automatic. Listening to your "heart over head" reasoning in the end i really think you should have driven the Kia with the automatic to make it fair. Oh and why no mention at all on standard equipment? Sure the LR is only 3k more but at what equipment level? The Kia comes very well equipped as standard.
Kia Sorento definitely, To get the Kit I had it would have cost me another third on top of the land rover, as it was all extras. I certainly don't agree with the comments regarding steering, you alter the Kia drive as you want it, and then there is the bi annual servicing with the diesel, in addition you have to take into account the poor reliability of land rover. Look at the Australians (John Cadogan, RU-vid), see what they think, and you will get a better idea of Manufacturers that dont cut it, and what reliability means over thousands of cars. I can buy a 3yr old Kia and still have 4 yrs full warranty. No more landrover for me.
If you NEED 7 seats then this is a good comparison and thought to bring about. But if you're just looking for a 4 wheel drive small SUV, the VW Tiguan (available 4Motion) is a great competitor in the family. 4 cylinder turbo, 200 hp
The conclusion is ridiculous. You don't buy a 7 seat SUV for the enjoyment of driving - you buy it because you needs space and economy. There's NOTHING enjoyable about driving kids around!! The conclusion should be to buy the Kia - I'm a Brit and I'm thoroughly embarrassed by what this imbecile concludes!
Max Krug im from iraq and here we use in 90% korean and japanese cars....and its 1000% reliable and practical...also very cheap spare parts....its amazing
Kia is a better make than Land Rover, the unreliable heap of scrap land rover with a shiny badge does not beat the Kia with more space, £3k cheaper and a 7 year warranty. You cant beat a 7 year warranty. Landrover and the other makes could have matched Kia's warranty but they all know they cant as it would cost them too much money. I have a discovery previously and it was so unreliable I got rid of it after 8 months. This video review is biased.
All my Land Rovers were junk. My Kia is top notch and better in every respect. Even feels more "European" then my Evoque did. So glad I got rid of my LR.
Land Rover is better because on the very new models they now have the terrain mode with the Kia it does not. The Land Rover can go deeper into floods then Kia can.
7 years warranty Kia Vs 3 years Land Rover. If A car is Brand New 7 to 9 years warranty sounds just right unless the manufacturer isn't that confident.
You don't off-road much do you? I'd like to see the Kia crossing a rocky creek that's flowing after a rainfall vs the LR. Landy is hands down the better all-rounder. I'm sure the Kia is great for the school run though?
What About the most important part/reliability if you want to compete with Kia you have to buy two land rovers to drive one while the other one is at the shop I own one so I know what I am talking about I wish I would have bought Kia
They should have chosen the Hyundai Santa Fe instead of the Kia, it is a much better SUV. Here in Australia I read an article where someone was charged $15,000 extra just for on-road costs for the LandRover plus had to spend an extra $10,000 to option it up to equivalent features to the Santa Fe. Add to that the LandRover finished dead last in the major reliability surveys, I mean why would you waste your money???
I'm not a badge snob so the Kia is a no-brainer for me. BTW, the Kia Sorrento here in Korea is about 16,000 pounds for base model. You guys in the UK get so ripped off!
The SX ride and handling is much better than the LX and EX in the Sorentos. They mount the power steering module to the rack instead of the column, the seats are softer, there's more noise dampening, etc etc etc. Don't buy an LX or EX after testing only an SX - they don't ride the same.
Of the 2 AWD drive VANS, the KIA makes more sense financially. Roomier and less sticker-shock with a 7 year stress-free warranty.. Keep those VANS on the roads where they belong!! They are not SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES!!!! A TOYOTA 4RUNNER and Jeep CHEROKEE are SUV's..
Let me see. More space, much more. 4 years longer warranty (and Kia's reliability is much better than Landrover's. Ask Discovery and Freelander owners). £3000, over AUD$6000 more expensive than the Kia. Lifetime capped priced servicing, versus hefty and unexpected service bills of the LR. A stronger, quieter and smoother engine in the Kia. The differences become even more apparent in the highest spec level, once you start adding, auto trans, panoramic sunroof, heated and cooled sears, big wheels, etc. The Kia is loaded at a capped price, whereas the LR will leave you poor. I liked the LR, until I drove it. As a brand snob, I'd choose a used Disco 4 instead and an extended warranty. My wife (my rationale conscience) helps me pick the Kia, I'll order a "K" badge pack and replace the Kia badges. Snob problem sorted.
It's not the only problem. Their automatics are jerky at low speeds and make the cars surprisingly slow for their power. They also make use of a LOT of cheap hard plastics in the interior, creating lots of squeaks and rattle after a few years of ownership. That and the Sorento having a very low ground clearance. They are NOT made for any off-road environments. Just for poor weather.
looked very carefully at the Freelander here in Australia in 2014 against the Hyundai Ix35 top of the range. 41k drive away and while the LR started at 47k when one added on the extras to match the Ix35 the price went to 63k!!!!! 5 years later it's done 102,000kms and not the slightest thing wrong. half the price of service and twice the warrantee. .enough said. not the fastest car I have owned but easily the best....
for the price of the land rover i buy two sorentos and would probably last longer,my 2005 kia sorento ex 4x4 with 158k miles still going strong...i just replaced the timing belt and the crank bolt,other than that very reliable suv,my wife drives a 2004 montero limited 4x4 and it just hit the 200k miles mark still strong like a bull.......both cars were purchased new so we took really care of them,im in the market for a new suv for my wife and im in between the sorento awd the mitsubishi outlander gt and the santa fe sport.....
LR reliability has improved in the past few years, but is still only average (as is the KIA). The 7yr warranty is very cleverly worded (buy at your own risk). Both these cars have severe seats for large families - yes? Put seven people in them, THEN try and get seven people's luggage for a vacation - you can't. So really 5 people and their luggage.
+Clive Sinclair Land Rover reliability is awful period. The Kia much better then average , read Consumer Reports or talk to owners. Land Rover is the number one worst reliability history of any vehicle brand , worse then Fiat 500L. Bumper to bumper on Kia is 5 year 60k miles. Land Rover 4 years 50K miles and sell it right away because it is insanely expensive to repair.
ggolds5 Would you like to post a link to those reports? Because the ones I read show average for both. Like ANY manufacturer, you will hear horror stories and stories of people doing 500,000 miles in the same car. I have owned new VW's (very 2/3 years) since 1975 and never had one let me down and only 3 minor faults. Other owners have had multiple breakdowns with the same one car. VW/Audi/Mercedes all 'appear' to have good reputations for reliability, but in your 'consumer reports' they only ever do average.
+Clive Sinclair Read the CR 2016 April Auto issue. See for yourself. The LR right up is the worst of anything the have tested and the Kia the new "King of the Road SUV". Like I said the LR sucks. Also Kia rates as a car company in the top 10 and one step above Honda. First if Subaru. Land Rover second worst and Fiat worst.
So going from the guys comments: Price - Kia Boot space/practicality - Kia 3rd row - Kia interior quality - Tie performance - Tie noise insulation - Kia engine refinement - Kia transmission - LR ride & handling - LR Kia 7 LR 4
+ELLIPSIS For interior quality, I would give a slight bonus to Land Rover, it seems just a bit nicer built with some leather on the dashboard instead of soft plastic. As for performance even with all the work Kia/Hyundai done on their engines to make them as good, refined and economical as they are, if you choose the Kia with an automatic transmission you'll see how much more Kia has to work on their automatic transmissions to perform as good as rivals like: Land Rover , Audi or BMW. The main and probably the decisive advantage is the price, for their purpose, what you're getting for the money difference just doesn't justify
+ghp0518 Ok, quality on the HSE model is better. But the lower grades don't get all the nice finishes the HSE does. Plus the Kias interior design is better; more contemporary. The LR despite the great quality, looks a bit 2005 in presentation. And not sure what you're on about with the automatics. Hyundai automatics (which is what Kia use) are always given positive comments by reviewers. They hang onto gears on hills, they are happy to hang into higher gears when the engine has a lot of torque low in the revs and you're just putting around town, they shift back quickly when you put your foot to overtake and they shift smoothly overall. I have an e88 135i automatic so I know what a BMW automatic is like to drive. Kias manual gearboxes are the ones that get criticised, just like in this video. Notchy gear throws and short clutch pedal with little feel.
+ELLIPSIS The automatic gearbox conclusion I drew was from last year when I went for a test drive on a Kia Sportage with an automatic (I think it was a 6 speed auto) and wasn't impressed at all, maybe this has a newer and improved one (7 speed DCT - which, after searching a bit seems like a huge improvement over the old 6 speed auto, close but still the 9 speed auto in the Land Rover might be better, at least on the highway).
How is the sorento more practical because the boot is larger ? If you cannot park it in the supermarket micro parking spaces or park it in an average house garage its a disaster in the UK. The RR Sport has been optimized in size terms for the UK roads.Anything larger would be a mark against its competition. I am one of many buyers who think the whole marketing and sales department needs sacking as specification,options,and pricing resemble the mistakes made by general motors in the late 80 's. Why cant I buy a wider range of specialist colours and interior leather ? Why do many buyer put up with this? then go and get their vehicles wrapped instead to get colours of their choice......mindless exclusion of customers,outdated practices of downgrading their cars,customers just buy their competitors car. Are the Chinese versions including option ranges such as Pelento red leather or Connelly hide ? (The Chinese market love red as culturally significant colour on cars).
I bought a 2002 Jeep back when there were no alternatives. Guess what? I RARELY used 4x4 other than some gravel or logging roads in the mountains. The KIA can go anywhere I need and for 99% of the buyers. Although Jeep has a heritage...the reliability and customer service is known to suck! This KIA is 10x the suv of my Liberty, even if it's more expensive. I am jealous. I keep my Jeep for 2 reasons only: lifetime oil/alignment changes, and it's paid off....no other reason!
+tigerbalm I had 4 Jeep Wranglers. They were awful. My Range Rover Evoque was worse then anything ever!. My Kia Sorento is beautiful and I'm not worried about it breaking down. It rides incredibly well, fit and finish is amazing, Napa leather and heated and cooled seats. I had to lose the Ego of a Range Rover badge for the Kia but I know the Kia is so much better. Your Jeep is paid off, so actually you are doing better then me or anyone, drive it to the ground.
Basically the guy liked the badge on the Discovery so that made it the better vehicle. That sounds like the battle Kia and Hyundai have been dealing with for 4 years now...
So, LR is the winner because it's sportier to drive than KIA (the only thing that LR is better at), but KIA is the looser even though it's the more refined one. So, the trait that you would go for in an SUV, would be the sporty drive... because in all other aspects KIA seems to be a winner... according always to your review! However, one criticism of KIA and the equivalent Hyundai Santa Fe is the high CO2 emissions.
You are forgetting an iportant factor..Name. Heritage. That alone makes this comparison superfluous. The only true competitor for the Disco is the Forester with own merits plus heritage, I believe its cheaper though not by much.
+/Dream Car Garage 1 (DCG1) yup well-balanced because he kept on saying the good stuff about the Kia but to balance out the scale he still picked the LR.
+randomdude "you are really good in all the measurement categories, but you still didn't make the grade." Because I didn't have intention to pass you, and it doesn't matter what you score.
This is nonsense. The Kia seems to be better in every way but then at the end you go and say that it's worth spending an extra 3,000GBP for what? ... "feelgood factor" .. please!
This in my opinion is a very poor review. Come winter or out on some serious off road terrain you will see how well the landy will prove to be what it is..
