Range Rover Range Rover (L405)
- Thread starter HighestOfHigh
- Start date
-
- Tags
- range rover
The Land Rover Range Rover, generally shortened to Range Rover, is a 4x4 luxury SUV produced by Land Rover. The Range Rover line has been in production since it was launched in 1970 by British Leyland.
- Messages
- 7,139
That's exactly what I thought when I saw it. The exterior looks lifeless, dull, bland, blah blah boring, and that meek front end wouldn't be out of place on an entry level Ford SUV, IMO.
It's like they took the guts out of the design. Rovers were always elegant, but they at the same time looked tough and tumble, had a soulful aura, etc.
And let's not confuse "simple" with "bland" guys. Simple is great, but bland isn't. Simple doesn't have to be bland and vice versa. It's a true art to make a simple/open-canvas design somehow still ooze soul without going the cheesy route like those who overstate their designs so much as if they want to scream "WE HAVE SOUL!!".
Look at the 911. Sure the architecture is totally unique to it which makes it kind of unfair to bring up, but the design is simple as they come, yet still more soulful than about anything.
- Messages
- 18,035
- Name
- Giannis
I prefer to think of "bland" as less is more...
It sure works in smaller cars, like the A3.
But I tend to agree with JLBM. The RR is a majestic car, it needs to have massive presence, which in the latest generation came from the details. I am still not very sure, about the new one, whether I like it or not.
HighestOfHigh
Cornering Kingpin
- Messages
- 9,346
- Name
- Ben
HighestOfHigh
Cornering Kingpin
- Messages
- 9,346
- Name
- Ben
2013 Range Rover Sold Out in US
- 2013 Range Rover Sold Out in US
- 2013 Range Rover Sold Out in US
- Messages
- 40,918
- Name
- Marcus
I'm not surprised, the dealers here have NONE to show at all. Not a single one. August is what they're saying before they have any "stock". All you can do now is go see one being prepped for delivery, but that means no driving it of course. You'll be lucky if you can sit in it. Funny thing is the GL and the Infiniti QX56 are also hot items, and the big SUV was supposed to die off. Right.
M
M
JLBM
Oversteer Expert
- Messages
- 1,379
- Name
- James
Hi Martin, that's great, finally - was it here in SA??
- Messages
- 19,896
- Name
- Martin
Yip, had a good ogle at it in the Lonehill grind. Presence is pretty monumental when you see it on the road. Owner was a darned decent chap as well when I gave him a sign of approval; he could've been a tool but gave me a big grin and a thumbs up. Photographs just don't do it as much justice, honestly.
Human
You. The Road. Nothing else.
- Messages
- 6,118
- Name
- Naas
Range Rover review
From £71,2959
Range Rover review
Introduction
Design
Interior
Performance
Ride and handling
MPG and running costs
Verdict
Prices and specs
The latest Range Rover is here to be judged as a luxury car as much as it is a 4x4
SOURCE: Range Rover Review (2018) | Autocar
From £71,2959
Range Rover review
Introduction
Design
Interior
Performance
Ride and handling
MPG and running costs
Verdict
Prices and specs
The latest Range Rover is here to be judged as a luxury car as much as it is a 4x4
SOURCE: Range Rover Review (2018) | Autocar
- Messages
- 2,303
Anybody could help to get the test from Auto Italy ?
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
- Messages
- 744
Ha ha! What a breathtaking POS!!! A literal deathtrap, should have never been permitted to even be on the road, $100k+ POS:
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013.html
Finally, someone breaks the Orwellian Newspeak-alike 'Best Car in the World Ever...'/Tata marketing budget corrupted party-line, to tell the somewhere near truth. Well done and congratulations, autoevolution proper journalists, for showing an amongst auto 'journalists' near extinct spine.
just some of the quotes over this outrageous deathtrap:
'Alas, you can't exploit the aforementioned potential properly due to one issue: the suspension can't handle more serious obstacles, so when it encounters one you'll feel a small accident has taken place.
This isn't even the only problem with the Range Rover's suspension. Even the stiffer setup of the Supercharged model we drove is still packed with roll, pitch and dive. Add the total absence of steering feel to this and you'll end up with a driving experience that can become unpleasant at times.'
'There are times in the history of humanity when the humiliation brought by a certain situation is so great that this threatens the fate of mankind itself. I am sorry to say that this is the case with the... ahem... Range Rover.'
'I liked the old Range Rover, it was one of my favorite cars. Many said it was just a lump of metal, but they were wrong - this new one is actually just a lump of aluminum! This is one of the worst expensive new cars I’ve driven in quite a while.'
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013/opinions/384.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013/opinions/385.html
Serriously, guys and gals, spread the word to anyone you know who was thinking about buying one of these new R/Rovers, taken in by the massive, concerted, all-pervasive and enduring hype.
Yes, you know I detest, openly, JLR as a company and all its works - like the devil - , but even I, foolishly in hindsight, didn't think they would stoop so low as to actually release such an actually dangerous, obviously vastly under-developed product, into the marketplace, in what one can only assume was a knowingly cynical way.
This is about the avoidance of putting oneself or one's loved ones in real potential harm's way, rather than just assessing competing products' run-of-the-mill merits/demerits, as in a normal car-buying calculus.
The above test report confirms that the 'new' L405 Range Rover was basically the old, under-Ford developed, ten year old Jaguar XJ(X350/X350(2009 reskin)) all-aluminium platform underneath, as I suspected all along. There was nothing wrong with that as such, as Ford ploughed in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars into that at the time. It does however factually give the lie to the L405 being all-new, as essentially it is just a 4WD, high-riding version of the 2002 Jaguar XJ. But far more importantly it must also tell us that official tales of £1 billion being spent on the L405 project must have been cynical eyewash and that whatever money was spent, almost certainly a mere fraction of that amount, did not go into classical, proper maturation of the product, by engineering and development, in all its laborious iterations, though entirely needed to make a safe, viable product at launch.
Although car journalists as a whole tend not to be the brightest, the most hard-working or the most incorruptible , with many just '2:2 fodder' bachelor of arts grads, looking for an easy life going from one booze-filled foreign location product launch to another, is it not surprising to anyone here other than me, that it would appear that not one other outlet, other than the commendable 'Auto Evolution' here, have picked up on the absolutely shocking reality of the new Range Rover?
As they say in Law, ignorance is no defence. What I mean is, this dangerous nature of the new Range Rover has been clear to other journalists, for a fact. How do I know? Take a look at the following video of the new Range Rover by the infamous Autocar publication, and read the comments afterwards:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-video/video-range-rover-v-porsche-cayenne-tested-road?page=1
'The Range Rovers handling looked terrifying to me[how spot-on he was!], the body shifted with the weight transfer like a garden shed attached to a wheelbarrow with bungy straps. I can't think of many things that would go round those bends so alarmingly, I thought it had electronic suspension that clamped down on excessive body roll instantly, but then RR and electronics, it was probably broken!' - 'The Apprentice'
'Watch between 2:30 and 2:35 - that Range Rover is about as stable as David Hasselhoff.' - 'Ray60'
How perceptive and right these just two Autocar commentators were.
My point is, if, just by means of grainy video, it was clear to presumably lay persons, like The Apprentice and Ray60, that the Range Rover looked unstable, how could it not also have looked and occurred to the persons actually driving the vehicle and making the video? It beggars belief, surely. QED, Autocar and its journalists knew/know that the Range Rover had/has a significant stability problem, and yet they continue on, as do 99.9% of the collective automotive media, blithely and cynically plugging the new Range Rover, as 'The Best SUV/Luxury Car in the World'. Unbelievable! These people are either of cretinous-level IQ, or much more likely, will do and say absolutely anything to maintain the pay cheque rolling in, i.e., they are utterly immoral, and in this case, are positively dangerous and injurious to one's health. Please, beware!
I'll say lastly, this confirms my view to the nth degree of the real nature of JLR, and its owner, Tata. They have set out deliberately to exploit the brand name of Jaguar Land Rover/Range Rover. They are not investing billions, as the mainstream media lackeys would have you believe. They are running on a shoestring, R&D wise, as evidenced by this astonishingly undeveloped 'new' Range Rover, with its borrowed Ford-developed platform, and things like the 'new' V6 petrol engine, being nothing more than the actual existing V8 engine cut down, and even sharing the V8's block, to save cost, or, bringing us right up to date, the new Range Rover Sport, which looks so obviously cheapened out.
As I said the last time I was here, Tata had planned since back in early 2011 to IPO JLR in 2012, with a view to cashing in by up to $20 billion, against a 2008 purchase price of $2.5bn. The collapse of the general world economy and semi-fraudulent IPOs like Facebook, queered the pitch, and left Tata stuck holding their 'prized' asset. The truth is, this 'asset', like any car company, is draining the parent company, by way of requirements for massive R&D spend to keep up with forging ahead competition. Added to that, the Indian economy is in reverse, and Tata's market share is falling even faster than the overall market.
Contrary to the public PR construct of JLR being a massive money spinner and an unalloyed success, the truth is Tata are sh!t scared of the massive financial drain of its JLR division. To square the circle of public perception 'massive success' and internal reality of life threatening cash haemorrhaging, due to ongoing and ramping up R&D spend, Tata/JLR are hollowing-out 'new' product like the 'new' I4, V6 petrol engines, overweight, rebodied-XK F-type and perhaps the most egregious, given how much they charge for it, the new Range Rover, with the disastrous consequences shown in the video above graphically.
Compare Tata's hollowing-out approach to that of Geely's with Volvo. Volvo, although less than three years post-Ford ownership, compared to JLR's five years, is further down the road to its own designed and developed vehicle platforms and powertrains, with genuine major spend on these enormously expensive 'big-ticket' items, in comparison to Tata/JLR's continuing exploitation of Ford's aging legacy product.
In conclusion, I can but not admit giving into the feeling of Schadenfreude, thinking here especially of those who pronounced the new Range Rover 'to be a massive engineering achievement' and 'JLR is on a roll' - no pun intended, reference the Range Rover's instability - I told ya!
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013.html
Finally, someone breaks the Orwellian Newspeak-alike 'Best Car in the World Ever...'/Tata marketing budget corrupted party-line, to tell the somewhere near truth. Well done and congratulations, autoevolution proper journalists, for showing an amongst auto 'journalists' near extinct spine.
just some of the quotes over this outrageous deathtrap:
'Alas, you can't exploit the aforementioned potential properly due to one issue: the suspension can't handle more serious obstacles, so when it encounters one you'll feel a small accident has taken place.
This isn't even the only problem with the Range Rover's suspension. Even the stiffer setup of the Supercharged model we drove is still packed with roll, pitch and dive. Add the total absence of steering feel to this and you'll end up with a driving experience that can become unpleasant at times.'
'There are times in the history of humanity when the humiliation brought by a certain situation is so great that this threatens the fate of mankind itself. I am sorry to say that this is the case with the... ahem... Range Rover.'
'I liked the old Range Rover, it was one of my favorite cars. Many said it was just a lump of metal, but they were wrong - this new one is actually just a lump of aluminum! This is one of the worst expensive new cars I’ve driven in quite a while.'
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013/opinions/384.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/testdrive/range-rover-supercharged-test-drive-2013/opinions/385.html
Serriously, guys and gals, spread the word to anyone you know who was thinking about buying one of these new R/Rovers, taken in by the massive, concerted, all-pervasive and enduring hype.
Yes, you know I detest, openly, JLR as a company and all its works - like the devil - , but even I, foolishly in hindsight, didn't think they would stoop so low as to actually release such an actually dangerous, obviously vastly under-developed product, into the marketplace, in what one can only assume was a knowingly cynical way.
This is about the avoidance of putting oneself or one's loved ones in real potential harm's way, rather than just assessing competing products' run-of-the-mill merits/demerits, as in a normal car-buying calculus.
The above test report confirms that the 'new' L405 Range Rover was basically the old, under-Ford developed, ten year old Jaguar XJ(X350/X350(2009 reskin)) all-aluminium platform underneath, as I suspected all along. There was nothing wrong with that as such, as Ford ploughed in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars into that at the time. It does however factually give the lie to the L405 being all-new, as essentially it is just a 4WD, high-riding version of the 2002 Jaguar XJ. But far more importantly it must also tell us that official tales of £1 billion being spent on the L405 project must have been cynical eyewash and that whatever money was spent, almost certainly a mere fraction of that amount, did not go into classical, proper maturation of the product, by engineering and development, in all its laborious iterations, though entirely needed to make a safe, viable product at launch.
Although car journalists as a whole tend not to be the brightest, the most hard-working or the most incorruptible , with many just '2:2 fodder' bachelor of arts grads, looking for an easy life going from one booze-filled foreign location product launch to another, is it not surprising to anyone here other than me, that it would appear that not one other outlet, other than the commendable 'Auto Evolution' here, have picked up on the absolutely shocking reality of the new Range Rover?
As they say in Law, ignorance is no defence. What I mean is, this dangerous nature of the new Range Rover has been clear to other journalists, for a fact. How do I know? Take a look at the following video of the new Range Rover by the infamous Autocar publication, and read the comments afterwards:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-video/video-range-rover-v-porsche-cayenne-tested-road?page=1
'The Range Rovers handling looked terrifying to me[how spot-on he was!], the body shifted with the weight transfer like a garden shed attached to a wheelbarrow with bungy straps. I can't think of many things that would go round those bends so alarmingly, I thought it had electronic suspension that clamped down on excessive body roll instantly, but then RR and electronics, it was probably broken!' - 'The Apprentice'
'Watch between 2:30 and 2:35 - that Range Rover is about as stable as David Hasselhoff.' - 'Ray60'
How perceptive and right these just two Autocar commentators were.
My point is, if, just by means of grainy video, it was clear to presumably lay persons, like The Apprentice and Ray60, that the Range Rover looked unstable, how could it not also have looked and occurred to the persons actually driving the vehicle and making the video? It beggars belief, surely. QED, Autocar and its journalists knew/know that the Range Rover had/has a significant stability problem, and yet they continue on, as do 99.9% of the collective automotive media, blithely and cynically plugging the new Range Rover, as 'The Best SUV/Luxury Car in the World'. Unbelievable! These people are either of cretinous-level IQ, or much more likely, will do and say absolutely anything to maintain the pay cheque rolling in, i.e., they are utterly immoral, and in this case, are positively dangerous and injurious to one's health. Please, beware!
I'll say lastly, this confirms my view to the nth degree of the real nature of JLR, and its owner, Tata. They have set out deliberately to exploit the brand name of Jaguar Land Rover/Range Rover. They are not investing billions, as the mainstream media lackeys would have you believe. They are running on a shoestring, R&D wise, as evidenced by this astonishingly undeveloped 'new' Range Rover, with its borrowed Ford-developed platform, and things like the 'new' V6 petrol engine, being nothing more than the actual existing V8 engine cut down, and even sharing the V8's block, to save cost, or, bringing us right up to date, the new Range Rover Sport, which looks so obviously cheapened out.
As I said the last time I was here, Tata had planned since back in early 2011 to IPO JLR in 2012, with a view to cashing in by up to $20 billion, against a 2008 purchase price of $2.5bn. The collapse of the general world economy and semi-fraudulent IPOs like Facebook, queered the pitch, and left Tata stuck holding their 'prized' asset. The truth is, this 'asset', like any car company, is draining the parent company, by way of requirements for massive R&D spend to keep up with forging ahead competition. Added to that, the Indian economy is in reverse, and Tata's market share is falling even faster than the overall market.
Contrary to the public PR construct of JLR being a massive money spinner and an unalloyed success, the truth is Tata are sh!t scared of the massive financial drain of its JLR division. To square the circle of public perception 'massive success' and internal reality of life threatening cash haemorrhaging, due to ongoing and ramping up R&D spend, Tata/JLR are hollowing-out 'new' product like the 'new' I4, V6 petrol engines, overweight, rebodied-XK F-type and perhaps the most egregious, given how much they charge for it, the new Range Rover, with the disastrous consequences shown in the video above graphically.
Compare Tata's hollowing-out approach to that of Geely's with Volvo. Volvo, although less than three years post-Ford ownership, compared to JLR's five years, is further down the road to its own designed and developed vehicle platforms and powertrains, with genuine major spend on these enormously expensive 'big-ticket' items, in comparison to Tata/JLR's continuing exploitation of Ford's aging legacy product.
In conclusion, I can but not admit giving into the feeling of Schadenfreude, thinking here especially of those who pronounced the new Range Rover 'to be a massive engineering achievement' and 'JLR is on a roll' - no pun intended, reference the Range Rover's instability - I told ya!
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
- Messages
- 744
^ cheers.
how did I miss this one?:
'At 2 minutes 22 seconds the reviewer completely loses control of the rear of the car at modest speed over terrain that is not particularly challenging. Hardly consistent with his unqualified praise of the car's handling throughout. The car's reaction is not just suggestive of a lack of dynamic poise, but also that the car is inherently unstable and thefore dangerous in the hands of those who do not profess to be professional road testers.
Given that this car costs £94,000 in its diesel guise I assume that it also has the benefit of Landrover's anti roll suspension. If this is the best that Range Rover can do, prospective purchasers might do well for just £6,000 more to split their budget and buy an S-Class and an X5, or simply pick a £94,000 SUV or a luxury car. I certainly wouldn't pick this 'jack of all trades, master of none.'
One can only assume that at £94,000 the majority of Range Rover's budget is spent not on development or quality control but on sweetening sycophantic reviewers to make false comparisons with Bentleys and better engineered SUVs. Free holiday to Morocco anyone or perhaps a year's supply of Tetley tea bags (courtesy of TATA)?' - 'veritasautomative'
It really does almost restore one's faith in humankind to see that there are still some able-to-think-for-themselves people out there, even after all these many years of Edward Bernaysian-based mainstream media perpetrated brainwashing of the population.
Don't forget, these immoral, soulless creatures - hacks, PR men, advertisers, marketeers etc. - really do think they can sell anything to you - the dupe, 'the mark' - as long as there's a buck in it for them. Whether it's the proverbial polished turd, as in the case here, with the potentially life-threatening Range Rover, matters not to these lowlife vermin sociopaths; they actually get a kick out of it.
how did I miss this one?:
'At 2 minutes 22 seconds the reviewer completely loses control of the rear of the car at modest speed over terrain that is not particularly challenging. Hardly consistent with his unqualified praise of the car's handling throughout. The car's reaction is not just suggestive of a lack of dynamic poise, but also that the car is inherently unstable and thefore dangerous in the hands of those who do not profess to be professional road testers.
Given that this car costs £94,000 in its diesel guise I assume that it also has the benefit of Landrover's anti roll suspension. If this is the best that Range Rover can do, prospective purchasers might do well for just £6,000 more to split their budget and buy an S-Class and an X5, or simply pick a £94,000 SUV or a luxury car. I certainly wouldn't pick this 'jack of all trades, master of none.'
One can only assume that at £94,000 the majority of Range Rover's budget is spent not on development or quality control but on sweetening sycophantic reviewers to make false comparisons with Bentleys and better engineered SUVs. Free holiday to Morocco anyone or perhaps a year's supply of Tetley tea bags (courtesy of TATA)?' - 'veritasautomative'
It really does almost restore one's faith in humankind to see that there are still some able-to-think-for-themselves people out there, even after all these many years of Edward Bernaysian-based mainstream media perpetrated brainwashing of the population.
Don't forget, these immoral, soulless creatures - hacks, PR men, advertisers, marketeers etc. - really do think they can sell anything to you - the dupe, 'the mark' - as long as there's a buck in it for them. Whether it's the proverbial polished turd, as in the case here, with the potentially life-threatening Range Rover, matters not to these lowlife vermin sociopaths; they actually get a kick out of it.
Similar threads
- Article
Jaguar Land Rover
Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLC is the holding company for
Jaguar Land Rover Limited, also known as JLR, a British
multinational manufacturer of luxury and sports utility vehicles.
JLR, headquartered in Whitley, Coventry, UK, is a subsidiary of
Tata Motors. Jaguar and Land Rover, with histories dating to
the 1920s and 1940s, merged in 1968 under British Leyland.
They later became independent and were subsidiaries of BMW and
Ford. In 2000, BMW dissolved the Rover Group, selling Land
Rover to Ford. Since 2008, Tata Motors has owned Jaguar Land
Rover.
Official website: JLR
Official website: JLR
