Range Rover Range Rover (L405)

[Soup]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Kilcrohane]

nice try, Human! The geezer in the black is Mike Cross, JLR's "chief engineer", cum 24/7 media PR 'test driver', and is what we Brits call a right 'short arse', that is, he's a tad on the small side; plus the vehicle looks to be pointing down a decline, making the rear swing higher.

To get an idea of whether a normal person would escape bashing their bonce on the R/Rover tailgate, bear in mind the vehicle pictured above is a maximum of 6'(1.835m) tall, at the top of the front windscreen. The R/Rover's roof slopes down to the back by a few inches and in the park position is usually down by a further 2"(50mm), in the air suspension 'kneel' position, which the above vehicle doesn't appear to be in. Then imagine the lower portion of the tailgate closed, as would be the case most often with people loading/unloading goods over the bottom part, with the top part open, and it's entirely probable that foreheads will be at peril by those whacky corners.

 

[Human]

nice try, Human! The geezer in the black is Mike Cross, JLR's "chief engineer", cum 24/7 media PR 'test driver', and is what we Brits call a right 'short arse', that is, he's a tad on the small side; plus the vehicle looks to be pointing down a decline, making the rear swing higher.

To get an idea of whether a normal person would escape bashing their bonce on the R/Rover tailgate, bear in mind the vehicle pictured above is a maximum of 6'(1.835m) tall, at the top of the front windscreen. The R/Rover's roof slopes down to the back by a few inches and in the park position is usually down by a further 2"(50mm), in the air suspension 'kneel' position, which the above vehicle doesn't appear to be in. Then imagine the lower portion of the tailgate closed, as would be the case most often with people loading/unloading goods over the bottom part, with the top part open, and it's entirely probable that foreheads will be at peril by those whacky corners.

I didn't 'try' anything, merely posted a pic (the only one I could find) to show some scale of the split-tailgate. So getting a general idea.

If I were to purchase a new RR, which I would because I simply adore the car in every way imaginable. I will take your advice and wear a helmet to protect the o'l forehead, thanks!



A fashionable one @ that!

 

[Giannis]

nice try, Human! The geezer in the black is Mike Cross, JLR's "chief engineer", cum 24/7 media PR 'test driver', and is what we Brits call a right 'short arse', that is, he's a tad on the small side; plus the vehicle looks to be pointing down a decline, making the rear swing higher.

To get an idea of whether a normal person would escape bashing their bonce on the R/Rover tailgate, bear in mind the vehicle pictured above is a maximum of 6'(1.835m) tall, at the top of the front windscreen. The R/Rover's roof slopes down to the back by a few inches and in the park position is usually down by a further 2"(50mm), in the air suspension 'kneel' position, which the above vehicle doesn't appear to be in. Then imagine the lower portion of the tailgate closed, as would be the case most often with people loading/unloading goods over the bottom part, with the top part open, and it's entirely probable that foreheads will be at peril by those whacky corners.

So, you are telling us that you don't like the tailgate design, because people might bump their heads on the corners? Did I get it right?

If yes, then it is my turn to ask you if you are serious. I think it's basic survival instinct 101, not to bump your head wherever you can. And if you do, you say something like "ouch", "f@ck" or something like that, scratch it a bit, and move on. If you think that the RR's tailgate is dangerous, then I should be dead for years now, due to my Clio's tailgate. Its corners are even worse than those of the Range. Do I look at it with terror? No. Am I afraid of it? No. Have I sold it to protect my life? No. Did I care about it when I got the car in the first place? No. How many times I have bumped my head on it? Many. Am I still alive? Yes. Then no problem...

 

[Soup]

http://i.imgur.com/u68C7.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/O8i6g.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/3W3X5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/2tKCn.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/2Tp36.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/2b0A1.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/pfyNT.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/GbxFE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/AFY77.jpg

 

[Monster]

Oh dear someone will pop their nuts after reading the first page of Soup's scan.

 

[Levi68]

Oh dear someone will pop their nuts after reading the first page of Soup's scan.

 

[Kilcrohane]

So, you are telling us that you don't like the tailgate design,

- yes. Looking at it again, if the top part doesn't send you to A&E with a bleeding head, the lower part looks purposely designed to catch you in the b@ll@cks - maybe that's why it's aimed at ladies. A split tailgate is stupid. R/Rover persist with it only for toffs like Cameron, Osborne and co. to sit on, quaffing champers, after a hard day out on the moors shooting peasants, er, pheasants. Reaching over the lower tailboard to the back of the boot is almost impossible for anyone other than a NBA player.

Oh dear someone will pop their nuts after reading the first page of Soup's scan.

- no. Saw this previewed couple of weeks back. Entirely predictable fare from a Brit auto rag 'reporting' on a JLR product. Pulman, Green and co. at "Car" are every bit as lickspittle as Cropley, Sutcliffe and co. at say Haymarket's "Autocar". They all sing from the same hymn sheet and are now a parody of themselves. Only 12 yr old boys fall for this constant "Brits bash the world" meme from Brit auto rags. It goes without saying these 'Brits' that these hacks adore are all actually wholly foreign owned: JLR, MINI, R/Royce and Bentley.

Anyways, whatever Brit hacks try to peddle about this lump it looks more and more as though the first, important verdicts on it are most unfavourable, from Americans, describing it as 'ugly' and 'overpriced'(by about 3x). Fancy that!:

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/10/2013-land-rover-range-rover-london-reveal/

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/11/2013-range-rover-to-start-over-110k-in-uk-w-video/

If anyone can remember back three years, the same Brit hack journalists told us that the then new Jag XJ would, to coin a phrase, 'rule the world', and 'instantly make the Germans(S-class/7-series/A8) look old hat'. Guess what folks? It didn't. In fact, it, as I said back then it would, bombed, from day one, due to its ungainly appearance, iffy build quality, poor rear headroom, poor ride for a limo etc., etc.. So three years later we end up with a Brit auto hack half admitting the truth about the 'fantastic new XJ':

http://www.insideline.com/jaguar/xj-series/jaguar-may-build-s-class-rival-to-replace-xj-in-2016.html

" Disappointing sales of the current model — the XJ is selling at well under half the rate of the 7 Series and the S-Class in the U.S. — are believed to be main reason for adopting a more conservative design approach."

Sorry guys, JLR, and its captive, compliant media helpers, are not to be taken seriously.

 

[Kilcrohane]

Oh dear someone will pop their nuts after reading the first page of Soup's scan.

- did you read the scanned page "6 Because it's faster and more efficient than ever"?

"Engineering sources say it should at least match the TDV8's 0-62 mph 7.8s time, get close to 40 mpg, and just dip below 200g CO2/km. And we hear that's with a boost from 252 hp and 443 lb.ft to over 280 hp and 500 lb.ft."

- er, had Ben Pulman been on the drink? Most of the above is b@ll@cks. We know this article was probably written over a month ago for print deadlines but it's embarrassing.

First, 'it', the V6 diesel-engined new TDV6 R/Rover, is NOT faster. Its actual 7.9s sprint time, not 7.8s, is slower than the L322 TDV8's 7.8s, see here: http://www.landrover.com/gb/en/lr/all-new-range-rover/explore/vogue/ and http://www.landrover.com/gb/en/lr/range-rover/compare-new/engines-and-performances/

Second, the TDV6 does get 37.7 mpg officially, but that's not 40 mpg, and is still behind the longer, heavier Merc GL350 BlueTec for instance.

Thirdly, what's this rubbish about 'a boost'? According to L/Rover's own figures the new R/Rover TDV6 has the exact same engine spec as the V6 diesel in the R/Rover Sport, at 252 hp and 443 lb.ft. What happened to 'the boost', Ben? Did L/Rover feed you porkies, or were they unable to get the engine uprated and developed in time for the vehicle's launch?

So, one page of "Car"'s scan and it's riddled with garbage. Anyone else got any bright ideas how to flog this motor?

 

[martinbo]

Kilcrohane, I don't necessarily like or agree with what you post, but I love the way you post. Very engaging...

 

[Kilcrohane]

There's more. Mr Pulman says the TDV8 engine would have '550 lb.ft+'. Wrong. It has an unchanged(from the L322) 700Nm/516 lb.ft.

Remind me, how much does "Car" magazine cost these days? Three quid? Four quid? To be fed total garbage. Isn't it time these dead tree publications and their entirely worthless, arrogant hacks died?

 

[Merc1]

I've never seen anything quite like his posts.


M

 

[Kilcrohane]

Kilcrohane, I don't necessarily like or agree with what you post, but I love the way you post. Very engaging...

Vive the Internet, and sites like 'GermanCarForum'! The established auto media is dying - not before time.

 

[Giannis]

- yes. Looking at it again, if the top part doesn't send you to A&E with a bleeding head, the lower part looks purposely designed to catch you in the b@ll@cks - maybe that's why it's aimed at ladies. A split tailgate is stupid. R/Rover persist with it only for toffs like Cameron, Osborne and co. to sit on, quaffing champers, after a hard day out on the moors shooting peasants, er, pheasants. Reaching over the lower tailboard to the back of the boot is almost impossible for anyone other than a NBA player.

Have you seen the car in real life? Have you tried to sit on the split tailgate? Have you tried to use it?

Sorry, but I find this stupid to try and dish a car based on its tailgate design. After all, it's just a detail. The Range Rover is about more things than just that. It's about it's status/design, great on road handling (for an SUV) and also amazing off road capabilities (Again, for a luxury SUV). It has a combination that's hard to find in its class.

So, I'm not going to continue the discussion of how much you don't like a tailgate because you might bump your head on it, because every hatchback is as "dangerous" as the Range.

That said, I also have to agree that your writing style is very refreshing to GCF!

 

[Kilcrohane]

can't resist, from the scans:

"Car", Ben Pulman, the new Range Rover:

11 Because it's still unbeatable off-road

"...much improved approach and departure angles... "

according to L/Rover themselves that ain't true, Ben:

L322

approach angle: standard ride height 29 deg off-road 34 deg
ramp angle: standard r/h 25 deg off-road 30 deg
departure angle: standard r/h 24 deg off-road 27 deg

L405

approach angle: standard ride height 26 deg off-road 34 deg
ramp angle: standard r/h 20 deg off-road 28 deg
departure angle: standard r/h 24 deg off-road 29 deg

Oh dear.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much but do Kilcrohane's posts have some hidden agenda against British car mags?

 

[Giannis]

Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much but do Kilcrohane's posts have some hidden agenda against British car mags?

But who takes every word of a car magazine so seriously (not talking about EVO or SportAuto ) ?

 

[Soup]

 

[JLBM]

Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much but do Kilcrohane's posts have some hidden agenda against British car mags?

Betty, Kilcrohane's postings are so militantly hateful and clearly agenda-driven, I can only come to the conclusion that there is more to his ridiculous rantings over concerns like tailgates (which incidentally match the design of the X5 tailgate). The amount of time he has put into bashing this product, all marketing behind it and all and any motoring scribes that rate it highly, is quite bizarre. I've stopped reading his diatribes, they're so predictable.

Although we can never know the truth, no matter what he says, one can rightly assume there is some sort of axe to grind. I wouldn't mind knowing what he does for a living, what he drives and perhaps if he was ever an aspiring motoring journalist who was denied employment opportunities by any of these titles. Perhaps he was dismissed by JLR or one of the publications. Perhaps he is trolling, or has been employed by some entity to tarnish JLR brands with all his might. Who knows. What I do know is his postings, no matter how well written, are certainly not balanced! They're also quite tiresome. And believe me, I am not a RR fanboy, so this is my unbiased view..

 

[Kilcrohane]

Betty, Kilcrohane's postings are so militantly hateful and clearly agenda-driven,...

Sorry, JLBM, I must have missed the factual point you made amongst that long-winded emote.

No agenda on my part, folks, other than as I said before, to highlight and expose those who peddle lies and set out to deceive. JLR uses an extremely sophisticated and comprehensive PR machine to hide the shortcomings of its moderate, overpriced products. A key part of this is the on-side British auto media hack cabal. If that comes across as negative, so be it.

On the other hand I am a great enthusiast for German auto products, the German auto industry and for German engineering prowess. That's what led me to the GermanCF in the first place. I am not a failed/wannabe auto scribbler - god forbid! - I am an engineer and work as a self-employed manufacturing consultant, concentrating on the auto industry in UK/Germany and the supply chain.